Ask the Ombudsman
This form will be open to submit a question for the Ombudsman when there is an upcoming Meet the Ombudsman meeting. To submit a question to the forum you will need to register for an account via the home page.
Please note, we will not respond to questions about individual cases or landlords and cannot provide an update on a case that you have with the service.
This form will be open to submit a question for the Ombudsman when there is an upcoming Meet the Ombudsman meeting. To submit a question to the forum you will need to register for an account via the home page.
Please note, we will not respond to questions about individual cases or landlords and cannot provide an update on a case that you have with the service.
Ask the Ombudsman
Please feel free to submit a question for the Ombudsman. Where possible, we will answer the question publicly on this forum and may ask the question at any upcoming Meet the Ombudsman meeting.
Please note, we will not respond to questions about individual cases or landlords and cannot provide an update on a case that you have with the service.
We aim to respond to all questions within 15 working days, however, we may sometimes take a little longer as we need to ask experts across the organisation.
-
I would be grateful if you could clarify the following point regarding your jurisdiction under the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. If a landlord applies to the court for an access injunction in circumstances where the parties have not been able to agree on access arrangements, and the application does not concern the substance of disrepair (i.e. there is no claim or judgment about the condition of the property or the landlord’s repairing obligations), would the existence of such an injunction prevent the Ombudsman from investigating a resident’s complaint about the underlying disrepairs? Further, would the position be any different depending on whether the injunction was granted or refused, given that the court proceedings in either case have not made a determination about the disrepair itself? I am particularly concerned that access injunctions may be used as a procedural device to suggest that “the matter has been before the courts,” thereby excluding the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, even though the core issue of disrepair has not been subject to legal consideration. Could you please confirm: 1. Whether an access injunction alone affects the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to investigate disrepair complaints; and 2. Whether the outcome (granted or not granted) makes any difference to your ability to investigate. thank you mr. P
MR P asked 4 months agoThe presence of an injunction alone does not stop us investigating a case. If the complaint is about the injunction and a court has already made a judgement on that matter, we would not investigate. We can still investigate other issues (like repairs) if they meet our Scheme requirements. Read our Scheme: The Housing Ombudsman Scheme
-
a) Would Awaab's Law apply to an outbuilding that is attached to the structure of the house, which requires the social tenant to pass through to get outside, and that the social landlord is responsible for? (This has mould currently in it.) b) Also, what is classed as emergency repairs, please?
DL asked about 2 months agoYes, if the outbuilding forms part of the residential dwelling in the tenancy agreement. The government's guidance for residents was published on Monday. The guidance sets out that an emergency hazard is 'something in your home that needs to be fixed right away because it is causing or could cause serious harm to your health or safety - or the health or safety of anyone living with you'.
Awaab’s Law: Guidance for tenants in social housing - GOV.UK
-
I would like to clarify your position on the following points regarding; 1. Complaint vs Early Resolution • From your perspective, what is the difference between a landlord’s complaint process and an early resolution submission? • If a landlord cancels an active complaint without the resident’s consultation or approval, and instead sends it to the early resolution team, would this constitute a breach of your rules? • Is a landlord allowed to take this step unilaterally? 2. Concurrent Processes • If the resident and the early resolution team do not agree on the proposed resolution, would that count as a valid Stage 1 complaint response? • Should a complaint remain active and run concurrently with any early resolution attempt until the matter is genuinely settled, rather than being cancelled? 3. Upheld Repair Complaints • If a repair complaint is upheld by the landlord but the repair itself is not completed, how is that defined in your view? • It seems pointless to uphold a repair complaint if the fault remains unrectified. • Shouldn’t “upholding” a repair complaint include completing the work as part of the resolution? 4. Compensation Process • If a repair complaint is upheld, should compensation (if applicable) be offered automatically, or is it acceptable for the landlord to require the tenant to make a separate application? • what is your view on the landlord instructing the tenant to resubmit the repair request again themselves (for the fourth time in six months) and to apply separately for any compensation, despite the complaint already being upheld. M Parker
MR P asked 4 months agoHello. Thank you for your question. We cannot discuss an individual landlord's complaint handling on this platform. If your landlord is handling your complaint via an 'early resolution' process and not in line with a 2-stage complaint procedure, you can speak to the Dispute Support team for assistance with your complaint. Find out more: Contact us | Housing Ombudsman Service
In terms of upholding a complaint we will keep a complaint open until the orders we have made to a landlord have been actioned.
-
Quote from a Stage 2 response from landlord: I think it is important to explain at this point too the process when a complaint is escalated to the second stage of our process. My review has not been a complete re-investigation of the issue, rather it has been done in a manner not unlike that undertaken by the Housing Ombudsman Service, which is a review of how well the case was investigated at stage one of our process, and to make sure that nothing was missed when we responded to your complaint initially. My question: is this correct? Does the stage 2 response not have to re investigate the original complaint? If so, what is the point of the complainant escalating the complaint to the 2nd stage, or even to the ombudsman? The reviewer went on to say that he didn’t believe anything had been missed in the Stage 1 response. If that were true, surely the complainant wouldn’t have continued to Stage 2. Are the second stage review and the ombudsman’s service only in place to scrutinise the procedural details of complaint handling rather than the actual issue/concern brought by the complainant?
Aes asked 4 months agoHello. Thank you for your question. The purpose of stage 2 in the complaint handling process is for landlords to have another opportunity to put things right if a resident states they are not happy with the resolution offered at stage 1. When a resident requests to escalate a complaint, it is helpful to tell the landlord why they are not happy/ if they think the landlord has not considered or responded to anything at stage 1. Our Code sets out that the person considering the complaint at stage 2 must not be the same person that considered the complaint at stage 1. This is to allow an impartial view into the handling of the complaint at stage 1. Our role is to independently review how the complaint has been handled and how the landlord responded to the reports made to it and whether it acted fairly in the circumstances.
-
What is the Ombudsman’s view where a landlord has upheld a complaint, but then fails to take any action to address the subject matter of that complaint? For example, this might involve a relatively minor but necessary repair. Would such a failure in practice be regarded as a service failure for the purposes of the Scheme, and therefore reportable to you? Given that your current waiting times from complaint acceptance to investigation are over a year, it does not appear feasible for residents to raise such issues with you where the matter concerns minor (but still needed) repairs. Could you confirm whether referral to the Ombudsman in those circumstances remains the only available option? Finally, has the Ombudsman considered introducing a form of “fast-track” procedure for cases such as these? For instance, where a landlord has already upheld a complaint but not acted, could the Ombudsman issue a short formal notice to the landlord identifying this as a service failure, with the understanding that non-compliance would then trigger a full investigation? This would provide a proportionate and timely remedy, and act as an incentive for landlords to resolve issues without unnecessary delay. I note that under the Complaint Handling Code, landlords are expected to act on the outcomes of upheld complaints and to demonstrate that learning has taken place. Where no such action is taken, it seems inevitable that a further service failure has occurred. Mr P.
MR P asked 2 months agoHello. Thank you for your question. We will not close a complaint until there is compliance with our orders. This does not need a new complaint to resolve. If the landlord provides evidence it is going to do something, like a repair, but then does not, we can make sure the landlord complies with our order.
-
I'd like to ask when the next residents panel meeting is taking place? Thank you.
Lucinda asked 3 months agoHello
We took a short break from meetings and panel activities over the summer months. We will send an update around in the next couple of weeks with details of our next meeting and activities to take part in.
Thank you for your continued interest and support.
-
When will the repairing trust spotlight be published and sent to landlords. My chat is disappointly disabled on the meeting today and I had lots to ask Thanks
Roz asked 5 months agoHello, thank you for your question.
The Spotlight report: Repairing Trust was published on our website in May 2025.
We are aware of issues with the chat function in last week's meeting and are considering other options to ensure this does not happen again.
-
These questions relate to this morning Zoom meeting regarding the spotlight on Repairing Trust. I was unable to ask any on the chat or verbally as we ran out of time. “How should a landlord be held accountable if they pay contractors in full despite failing to apply NEC3’s KPI penalty structure?” “Does the Ombudsman consider failure to enforce a framework as a breach of the landlord’s duty under Section 19 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985?” Reappointment of Failing Contractors “How should a council be scrutinised when it awards a new framework to a contractor who has previously delivered non-compliant or unsafe work — especially where no performance audits were applied?” “Is it maladministration for a landlord to reappoint a contractor after documented complaints, without consulting affected leaseholders or applying the framework’s early warning or compensation event provisions?” Procurement Conflict of Interest “How does the Ombudsman deal with conflict of interest concerns when a senior officer holds roles in both the local authority and the regional framework governance body that selects and approves contractors?” “What safeguards are expected to prevent conflicts when the same person oversees contractor appointment and contract performance enforcement?” All these things create a mistrust and are actually happening at this moment in time within a local social housing provide. --- 🧾 4. Transparency of Charges “If leaseholders are charged for major works but the landlord cannot produce survey reports, final inspection records, or pricing verification, does that breach consultation and reasonableness duties?” “How far does the Ombudsman believe transparency should go in procurement scoring — especially when all bidders are awarded identical scores, and leaseholders are left without justification?” --- 🔥 5. Procurement Process Reforms “Is the Ombudsman aware of any cases where procurement frameworks were systemically abused to favour known underperforming contractors?” “Should the Ombudsman support a central register of contractor performance that leaseholders can access when Section 20 works are proposed?”
Roz asked 5 months agoHello Roz
Thank you for your questions. We have broken down by question to respond.
1. How should a landlord be held accountable if they pay contractors in full despite failing to apply NEC3’s KPI penalty structure? We are not placed or the right organisation to answer to this question.
2. Does the Ombudsman consider failure to enforce a framework as a breach of the landlord’s duty under Section 19 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985? We are not placed or the right organisation to answer to this question.
3. How should a council be scrutinised when it awards a new framework to a contractor who has previously delivered non-compliant or unsafe work — especially where no performance audits were applied? Procurement is not within our remit to comment on. The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman may be able to provide more in depth answers on council specific queries or complaints.
4. Is it maladministration for a landlord to reappoint a contractor after documented complaints, without consulting affected leaseholders or applying the framework’s early warning or compensation event provisions? Although we cannot comment on whether a matter is or isn’t maladministration without having reviewed any evidence, in general terms, we expect landlords to thoroughly investigate complaints about their contractor and take appropriate action. If, after investigating, the landlord believes it is appropriate to reappoint the contractor, they should be able to provide the rationale for this, including any measures they will take to improve performance. This rationale should be available to residents. We would also expect landlords to seek residents’ feedback and consult with them on their repairs and maintenance service as a matter of course.
5. How does the Ombudsman deal with conflict of interest concerns when a senior officer holds roles in both the local authority and the regional framework governance body that selects and approves contractors? We are not placed or the right organisation to answer to this question.
6.What safeguards are expected to prevent conflicts when the same person oversees contractor appointment and contract performance enforcement? We are not placed or the right organisation to answer to this question.
7. If leaseholders are charged for major works but the landlord cannot produce survey reports, final inspection records, or pricing verification, does that breach consultation and reasonableness duties? We may look at a complaint about the landlords record keeping and information provision to a resident surrounding charges.
8. How far does the Ombudsman believe transparency should go in procurement scoring — especially when all bidders are awarded identical scores, and leaseholders are left without justification? The report sets out good practice, however, we are not procurement specialists and organisations should adhere with their own policies and the procurement Act: Spotlight report: Repairing Trust
9.Is the Ombudsman aware of any cases where procurement frameworks were systemically abused to favour known underperforming contractors? We wouldn’t look at “systematic abuse of frameworks” as part of our function.
10. Should the Ombudsman support a central register of contractor performance that leaseholders can access when Section 20 works are proposed? We don’t make any recommendations on this in the report and it is not something we plan to do. The https://www.leaseholdadvicecentre.co.uk/?msclkid=7bf0db26042e1da6e70ab3b28790ea8dLeasehold Advice Centre may be able to help more with section 20 queries.
Thanks.
-
Regarding the annual tenant satisfaction surveys. I have an idea to make this better-at less cost to landlords. For example-my landlord has about 7000 properties, and hires an outside firm to carry out random telephone surveys- just 500. Not only is this inaccessible to some disabled/neurodivergent folk, but a sample size that small is not going to raise any patterns or meaningful insights. I would like to suggest a standard template-made accessible online -and known to all tenants on a set date each year-for them to simply tick a set series of boxes. Not only is this fairer for tenants-but then outside survey costs will not be borne as a form is just a few database fields which is super easy to analyse. If all tenants were given access to the online form on the ombudsman website-the data can then also be used immediately by the Ombudsman- showing an indication of increase/decrease in expected workload based on the satisfaction measures, and it would further increase knowledge of the Ombudsman and what you do for tenants. And to be frank, I don't trust social landlords at all now after so many horrible experiences-so it would be interesting to see the disparity-if any- between their own satisfaction results and that of the majority of tenants. The last few landlords I have had all carry these tenant satisfaction surveys out by phone-which will by definition exclude a lot of disabled tenants (ie-Autistic folk/folk with deafness/hearing loss) from even participating, the data will therefore already be skewed toward neurotypical and hearing tenants. Thoughts?
VJFox asked 5 months agoHello
Thank you for your suggestion.
The Regulator of Social Housing is responsible for Tenant Satisfaction Surveys. You can send your feedback to them: enquiries@rsh.gov.uk
The Ombudsman was set up to investigate individual complaints about landlords. We do not regulate or oversee landlord performance or tenant satisfaction.
-
Apparently there's no obligation on Registered Providers to inform their tenants about any consultations which are held by statutory bodies including the Housing Ombudsman. This means tenants are dependent on the goodwill of their landlord to inform them about consultations to which they are invited to participate in. Can the Ombudsman ensure Registered Providers are obligated to inform their tenants about any consultations which are held by statutory bodies.
Stephen Johnson asked 5 months agoHello. Thank you for your question.
It is not the role of the Housing Ombudsman to enforce or regulate Registered Providers to inform tenants about 3rd party consultations. You can check the government activities page for open consultations Find activities - Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government - Citizen Space
We will invite panel members to take part in any consultations we run.