London Borough of Lambeth — case 202534720

Decision Case ID 202534720 Decision type Investigation Landlord London Borough of Lambeth Landlord type Local Authority Occupancy Leaseholder Date 18 May 2026 Background The resident reported concerns about the condition of the windows in the property in June 2024. The landlord completed repairs to the windows at the time. The resident reported similar issues in September 2024 and made a complaint about the landlord’s response to his concerns. He asked the landlord to replace the windows.

In its final complaint response, the landlord said it would replace the windows and aimed to do so by April 2025. What the complaint is about The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs to the windows. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling. Our decision (determination) There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs to the windows. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right. Summary of reasons The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs to the windows. The landlord completed interim repairs to the windows within a reasonable timeframe. Once it committed to replacing the windows, there were unreasonable delays, and its communication around this was poor. The landlord accepted failings, but did not offer proportionate redress in recognition of its errors. The landlord’s complaint handling The landlord sent its complaint responses within the timeframes set out in its complaints policy and our Complaint Handling Code (the Code).

Putting things right Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction. Orders Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set. Order What the landlord must do Due date 1 Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £550 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by errors in its response to his reports of repairs to the windows.

This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. No later than 15 June 2026 2 Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection of the windows. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date.

What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: Inspects the windows of the property and produces a written report with photographs The survey report must set out: Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue, together with reasons where it is not responsible A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective repair to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) The likely timescales to commence and complete the work Whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works No later than 29 June 2026 Recommendations Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations We recommend the landlord inspects the patio doors at the property. It should write to the resident setting out its position on what repairs it will do, and if it will replace the doors. Our investigation The complaint procedure Date What happened 11 October 2024 The resident complained about the landlord’s handling of the window repairs. He said its contactor damaged a window frame at a recent repair visit. He said the windows needed replacing due to their condition.

14 October 2024 The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response. It said it had asked its contractor to inspect the reported damage caused, the next day. It upheld the complaint and apologised. 15 October 2024 The resident asked to escalate his complaint. He said the landlord’s response did not cover his request to replace the windows. 22 November 2024 The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response. It apologised and upheld the complaint due to the “poor” service received.

It said it would replace the windows in the property, and said they were “damaged beyond repair”. It said it aimed to replace them by 2 April 2025. Referral to the Ombudsman The resident asked us to investigate his complaint. He said the landlord had not yet done the works to the windows. He also raised concerns about the condition of the patio doors. What we found and why The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed.

We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration. Complaint The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the windows Finding Maladministration In communication with us, the resident advised that the condition of the patio doors at the property is also poor. He said he wanted the landlord to replace them alongside the windows. We have seen no evidence that the resident has tried to raise his concerns about the patio doors with the landlord as a formal complaint.

We have no power to investigate complaints which the landlord has not had the chance to respond to first. Therefore, we have no power to investigate this issue. However, we have recommended that the landlord contacts the resident to inspect the doors accordingly. The resident’s lease agreement says the landlord is responsible for maintenance and upkeep of the window frames. The landlord attended within the 28 working day timeframe set out in its repairs and maintenance policy in response to both of the resident’s reports.

This was appropriate. However, the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response lacked detail about the condition of the windows and the required repairs. The landlord also failed to provide comment on its handling of the window repairs up to that point, and the resident’s concern the windows needed replacing. This lacked transparency and as a result, the resident found it necessary to escalate his complaint. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response went some way to put things right.

It confirmed it would replace the windows and set out when it hoped to complete the works. It appropriately apologised for errors in its handling of the matter but missed an opportunity to put things right. We have extended the scope of our investigation beyond the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response. This is limited to the commitment the landlord made in the response to replace the windows. The landlord’s communication about the window replacement after its final complaint response was poor.

It failed to update the resident on its progress. The evidence shows it had not replaced the windows in the timeframe committed to in its final complaint response (by April 2025). The resident was inconvenienced by the further delay, and the need to chase it about the windows in February 2026. It does not appear the landlord provided the resident with an update. When we asked the landlord about the latest position it said it the window replacement was cancelled in April 2025 and not re-raised.

It told us it arranged an inspection which was due to take place in June 2026, due to the resident’s availability. The records show its contractor cancelled the window replacement, advising it was not its responsibility. It is unclear why the landlord did not follow this up, or update the resident about the position on the repairs. It indicates the delay for the most part was avoidable. This is indicative of poor repairs management and a lack of oversight from the landlord. The landlord must inspect the windows and provide an update to the resident about any planned works now.

The landlord failed to adhere to a commitment made, and the matter is still outstanding over a year after it said it would replace the windows. We have therefore made a series of orders, with reference to our guidance on compensation, aimed at putting things right. Complaint The landlord’s complaint handling. Finding No maladministration The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process. It aims to acknowledge both stages within 5 working days. It says the resident should receive a formal response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of the complaint acknowledgement.

We have not seen whether the landlord acknowledged either of the resident’s complaints. However, it provided a formal response at both stages of the process within the timescales set out within its policy and our Complaint Handling Code. Learning Knowledge information management (record keeping) and communication The landlord’s records were adequate to enable us to complete our investigation. The landlord’s communication during the complaint were poor. Its complaint responses lacked detail about the substantive issue, and the history.

The resident was inconvenienced by the need to chase it for updates on the window replacement. It is particularly concerning the matter did not progress until we made queries during our investigation.