Special ombudsman report finds ‘extensive failures’ and ‘collapse in trust’ at giant council landlord

The case prompted the wider probe into Birmingham’s complaint-handling and compensation.

The investigation covered complaints made to the council that were brought to the ombudsman over a six-month period from 15 March 2022.

The watchdog identified 14 relevant cases, all of which concerned the council’s handling of repairs and the subsequent complaint and compensation process. 

It made 25 findings across the cases and found maladministration in 24 of them, including five findings of severe maladministration. 

Overall, the findings represented a maladministration rate of 96%. 

Birmingham’s repairs service standards say that urgent repairs should be dealt with between one and seven working days, and routine repairs should be dealt with within 30 working days. 

However, the ombudsman’s investigation found that the aims of the council’s repairs policy were not met in practice.

It found that 90% of its findings on repairs were upheld, with nine findings of maladministration and two findings of severe maladministration. 

According to the report, residents had to make multiple attempts to get repairs resolved, often over a prolonged period of time. 

It was also not clear how the council assigned categories of repair and considered resident vulnerability. 

Once the council began a repair there was also “little checking of progress and resolution”. 

Some residents faced living for years in homes that required repair, making repeated attempts to get the landlord and its contractors to act. 

In one case the resident made repeated disrepair claims for more than 10 years.

The report said this approach led to a “collapse in trust” between residents and the council. 

The ombudsman found that Birmingham had no framework in place for the record-keeping it expects of its staff and contractors. 

It said this represented a “significant weakness” in the council’s approach and was the “cause of repeated service failure”.

In one case a resident made repeated repair requests for four years. 

The council told the resident that its contractor had carried out repairs to the resident’s satisfaction, despite all evidence showing the repairs remained incomplete. 

Mr Blakeway said that record-keeping is “fundamental” to getting repairs right. 

He said that poor record-keeping, which the ombudsman’s next spotlight report will be on, is not unique to Birmingham.

He said: “I find very little resistance in the sector to the suggestion that record-keeping is not as strong as it needs to be.”

Mr Blakeway said that Birmingham’s approach to compensation stood out as particularly bad during the investigation. 

At the time of the monitoring period, the policy did not allow for compensation to be paid for distress, inconvenience, time and trouble.

It also said it could not make payments where the landlord decided there was no liability, “which is entirely false”, according to the report. 

Residents were often refused compensation and were signposted to the compensation policy or insurers when the issue should have been resolved through the complaints process. 

Mr Blakeway said: “They won’t be the only landlords, but not accepting responsibility for failures and remedying in a reasonable way was really poor and really unfair on residents.

“The complaints process should be an opportunity to put things right and identify missed opportunities. 

“But the role of the complaints process was very defensive, it was adversarial, and lacked any type of acknowledgement that the landlord had done something wrong.”

According to the report, while Birmingham has improved its complaints policy following orders from the ombudsman, “its approach still falls short of a fair and effective approach to compensation”, placing the onus on the resident to claim compensation.

In the 14 cases, the ombudsman ordered the council to pay more than £7,500 in compensation to residents. 

The investigation also found maladministration for the way in which the landlord handled the complaint in 11 of the 14 cases.

In the past 12 months, the watchdog issued six complaint-handling failure orders against the landlord for unreasonable delays in its complaint process. 

The investigation also found that there was limited learning from complaints, with the same issues repeated. 

It found “extensive and reoccurring service failures” that need to be addressed by the council. 

It also made several orders and recommendations to try to prevent the same problems happening again, including a repairs action plan and developing a framework for record-keeping. 

The council made a series of changes following the investigation, outlined in its response below.

Mr Blakeway said that if the council is to imbed the recommendations, it needs “strong leadership, the right culture, and the right governance arrangements in place”. 

He said: “It will take time, openness with residents, and really effective communication with residents.”