Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV) — case 202431081

REPORT COMPLAINT 202431081 Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV) 26 August 2025 Our approach The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings. The complaint The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of: a repair to the resident’s front door. the associated complaint.

Determination In accordance with paragraph 53.c. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress following the Ombudsman’s intervention which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily. How the complaint was resolved The resident is a tenant of the landlord who are a housing association. The resident made a formal complaint to her landlord on 6 September 2024 requesting her front door be replaced. She complained of coldness coming through the gaps in the door which was broken and the door lock was close to disrepair.

She complained of receiving a poor service as she had chased the repair but had been told the door repair had not been raised. The landlord’s stage 1 response in September 2024 stated the repair was raised and resolved in August 2024. It has a record of a separate door issue being raised on 27 August 2024 and the repair work being refused by the resident on 13 September 2024. The landlord acknowledged the resident emailed it to advise she was unhappy the door was only being repaired and not replaced.

It advised her that for a new door to be ordered an inspection was required. It apologised for confusion of comments made from staff doing survey on 9 August 2024 as they were not able to raise repairs. Its staff were only there to do a 5 yearly stock condition report. It offered £55 for its poor complaint handling. In the landlord’s stage 2 response on 16 October 2024 it agreed to replace the front door as it had now completed the door survey. It Apologised for its delay and confusion caused by its staffs comments regarding the door replacement.

It offered an additional £50 compensation for the inconvenience caused. It advised it understood her concerns around the changing weather and increased utility bills but offered no compensation for this. The landlord has replaced the door and wrote to us as it had reviewed its offer of compensation. Based on the duration of the issue (approximately five and a half months), the distress and inconvenience caused, and the confirmed need for a full door replacement, it offered a total compensation of £355 for the overall complaint.

It also offered to repay reasonable costs for increased energy bills during this period. We contacted the resident who advised the complaint would be satisfactorily resolved, if she knew how much the landlord would compensate for the increased energy usage. The landlord clarified it was offering £250 to compensate her for the energy usage (without having to produce energy bills). The resident agreed the overall total compensation of £605 satisfactorily resolved her complaint.

Paragraph 53.c. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that: “The Ombudsman may determine the investigation of a complaint immediately if satisfied that: the member has made an offer of redress following the Ombudsman’s intervention which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily. This will result in a finding of ‘resolved with intervention’.” I am therefore satisfied that, following the intervention of the Ombudsman, the landlord has now taken actions to remedy the matters raised which resolve the complaint satisfactorily.

Recommendation It is recommended that the landlord provides the resident the £605 total compensation it offered her within 4 weeks of the date of this decision.