PSOW Individual Decisions

Ms A, who was a tenant of Hafod Housing Association (“the Association”) complained about a delay in undertaking repairs at her home which she said was affecting her health and wellbeing. Consequently, she had also applied for a transfer although would preferably want to stay at the property. Ms A also noted a medical need for requiring a downstairs toilet to be installed, but had not heard about this either. In noting some restrictions on what the Ombudsman might achieve, as he has no role in determining offers of properties or when a transfer might be achieved, he was, nonetheless, concerned at the delay in completing identified repairs (from a survey undertaken on 21 August 2021). Having contacted the Association, the Ombudsman was satisfied that the transfer request had been registered and assessed properly and Ms A was on the appropriate active lists. As an alternative to investigation, the Ombudsman felt the matter could otherwise be resolved by the Association undertaking the following actions, which it agreed to do: (a) To apologise in writing for the delay in completing the outstanding repairs (within 1 month). (b) To offer Ms A redress of £100 for her time and trouble in raising these issues with both the Association and the Ombudsman (within 1 month). (c) To fully complete the works (including those identified by the survey conducted on 23 August 2021) within 6 weeks. (d) To progress a request to the local authority’s Occupational Therapy (OT) services for an assessment regarding the need for, and installation of, a downstairs toilet at the property within 1 month. (e) To consider the OT report and advise Ms A of the Association’s decision about installation of the downstairs toilet within 1 month of receiving the OT report.

Mr Y complained about the Housing Association’s handling of anti-social behaviour (“ASB”) and other matters relating to CCTV equipment and bin storage. The Ombudsman found that the Housing Association had given Mr Y retrospective permission to install the CCTV camera. In addition, as part of this agreement, there were obligations for Mr Y to provide evidence of appropriate use. As the Housing Association had received reports of the camera being moved, the Ombudsman was not persuaded that the Housing Association’s request for evidence of appropriate use was improper. In relation to the bin storage issue, the Housing Association agreed to undertake work to erect a fence to define the boundary between Mr Y’s and his neighbour’s property. As the Housing Association had taken action to address this issue, there was nothing further that could be achieved by this office. A suitable resolution had been proposed and a plan had been put in place to address this issue. In terms of Mr Y’s ASB complaint, new information had been provided to the Housing Association after it responded to Mr Y’s complaint. It therefore agreed to meet Mr and Mrs Y to discuss the new information and investigate the evidence according to its ASB policy. The Ombudsman considered that the action the Housing Association had agreed to take was reasonable to resolve the complaint.

Miss X complained that Hafod Housing Association had not provided a response or explanation to address her concerns about the damage caused to her grandmother’s property resulting in a gas leak at her property. The Ombudsman decided that the Authority should provide a written response to Miss X to provide an explanation, an apology and outline the pre-offered compensation. The Ombudsman considered this to be an appropriate resolution to the complaint.