Summary: Ms X complained about the length of time the Council took to make and fit a replacement external door at her home. We found fault because the Council did not submit measurements it took for the door which then led to avoidable delays in the new door being made and fitted. Ms X suffered avoidable distress and frustration. To remedy the injustice caused by this fault, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Ms X and issue reminders to officers.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council took too long to replace an external door leading off her son’s bedroom to the rear garden of the property, after it had agreed to do so in August 2023.
2. Ms X says this has caused frustration and distress as it was the only way to exit the room externally in an emergency. She also says this meant she could not enjoy the use of her rear garden and the damp smell of the existing door affected her son.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered all the information Ms X provided and discussed this complaint with her. I have also asked the Council questions and requested information, and in turn have considered the Council’s response.
6. Ms X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have taken any comments received into consideration before reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Disrepair in temporary homeless accommodation

7. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household. This duty applies to interim and temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)

What happened

8. Ms X lives in temporary homeless accommodation in the Council’s area.
9. In the summer of 2023, Ms X contacted the Council to advise that the door leading from her son’s bedroom to the garden of their flat was waterlogged, rotten and would not close properly as it was not fit for purpose.
10. In mid-late August 2023, the Council raised an emergency work order to secure the faulty door. It sent out one of its carpenters to do this and measure for a replacement door to be made. The carpenter secured the door shut so that it could not be opened again and would therefore not cause further issues.
11. At the beginning of September 2023, Ms X contacted the Council to ask for an update on the replacement door. The Council passed Ms X’s message onto the relevant department.
12. In mid-September 2023, Ms X made a complaint to the Council.
13. At the beginning of October 2023, Ms X again contacted the Council to ask what the current position was. She said the Council had previously told her it would take four weeks to sort out a new door and that it had now been six weeks. She said that whenever she contacted the repairs team the response was that they were waiting for the new door.
14. The same day, Ms X received her stage one complaint response from the Council. This advised that the carpenter who had taken the measurements in August had not submitted them and was not currently at work to discuss it with. It advised it had made a new, second appointment for the door to be measured the following day. It also advised it could take six to eight weeks for the door to be made and fitted due to the amount of work the specialist joinery team currently had to complete.
15. Ms X escalated her complaint to stage two of the Council’s process and it responded to her at the end of October 2023. The Council apologised for the ongoing delay and advised Ms X it could still not confirm a date for the fitting. It offered Ms X £50 by way of apology. Ms X did not accept this.
16. Ms X emailed the Council back the next day to express her continued unhappiness at the delay and the offer of £50. She complained the door made the room smell damp, affected her son’s breathing and was the only means of external escape from her son's bedroom in case of an emergency. The Council replied to say there was nothing more it could do.
17. At the beginning of December 2023, Ms X advised the Ombudsman that the Council had advised the door would be fitted at the end of January 2024.
18. The door was fitted on the same day late in January that the Council had advised and nearly seven weeks after Ms X had advised us of the fitting date.

Analysis

19. After measuring for the door in August 2023, by the Council’s own timescales of six to eight weeks, the new door should have been made and fitted in mid-October 2023 at the latest.
20. The Council has confirmed the original measurements were not submitted and apologised for this. This was fault. It would have caused Ms X avoidable distress and frustration, especially as the door was her son’s only external means of escape from his bedroom in an emergency. It also caused her avoidable delay. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.
21. When Ms X chased the fitting of the new door twice in early-September 2023, the Council advised her it was waiting for the new door. The Council did not realise the measurements had never been submitted until it investigated this as part of its stage one complaint response. I am satisfied, that in the circumstances of this complaint, the Council showed a lack of oversight. This was fault. It not only neglected to submit the measurements, but then allowed things to drift by not checking the measurements had been submitted when Ms X chased for updates. It only realised the error when Ms X complained. This also contributed to Ms X’s avoidable delay. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.
22. As part of my enquiries, I asked the Council to explain any further delay after the door was re-measured in October 2023 and whether it had considered giving Ms X priority for her door to be made and fitted as quickly as possible at this time.
23. In response, the Council repeated what it had advised Ms X in its stage two response and said residents were advised it would take six to eight weeks to make and fit a new door. The Council said there was no fast-tracking and its workshop could only work by the orders it received and would always do so on a first come, first served basis.
24. The Council overlooked the fact that Ms X’s door should have been ordered and processed in mid-August 2023 and that by the time it had re-attended to measure again she had been waiting almost seven weeks already.
25. As it was, it took the Council over 16 weeks (from the second measurement date) to complete the job, which meant Ms X had now been waiting over 22 weeks since the measurements were first taken.
26. This further delay was fault. I am satisfied, that in the circumstances of this complaint, and given the error was entirely the Council’s, it should have acted more swiftly to make and fit the door after it had re-measured. If the Council was working on a first come, first served basis, I consider Ms X should have been placed in its work queue where she would have been if the measurements had been submitted in the middle of August 2023. The door would have then been made and fitted as soon as possible rather than the Council expecting Ms X to begin the wait again. This delay would have caused Ms X further distress and frustration. I have made a recommendation below to remedy this injustice.

The Council’s remedy offer

27. The Council offered Ms X £50 in its stage two complaint response.
28. In response to my enquiries, the Council increased this offer to £150 for the inconvenience caused to Ms X.
29. I do not consider this a satisfactory remedy and have made a recommendation below.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within four weeks of the date of my final decision:
• apologise to Ms X for the delay in making and fitting the replacement door;
• make a symbolic payment to Ms X of £200 for the distress caused by the identified fault;
• remind relevant officers of the need to check measurements have been submitted and that this information is checked when residents ask for updates; and
• remind relevant officers and managers they can exercise discretion to speed up repairs if the reason for delay is down to error by the Council.
31. The apology written should be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies on making an effective apology.
32. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I have now completed my investigation. I uphold this complaint with a finding of fault causing an injustice.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman