Summary
Mrs C complained about the housing association on behalf of Mr A, a former tenant, regarding charges he had received for repairs required after he had left his property. He accepted that he had been asked at a pre-termination inspection to re-paint two walls but disputed the amount being requested, as he suspected that the amount was for further works that he was unaware of and had no opportunity to rectify.
Our investigation found that the association's communication with Mr A had been poor, with little information or justification given for the charges he was being asked to pay. We also found that the association's records showed that the works Mr A was being charged for were the painting of an entire room, including the ceiling and woodwork, even though only wall painting had been recorded as required on the inspection sheet signed by him and an inspector. Therefore, we upheld the complaint.
Recommendations
We recommended that the association: provide us with clarification of how the additional charge to change the locks was added to Mr A's invoice; calculate the amount payable by Mr A by determining what portion of the cost of the paint work related to two black walls; consider reducing the revised amount payable by Mr A by 50 percent in light of the administrative failures; apologise to Mr A for the failings identified; and reflect on the learning from this case to inform the review of the rechargeable repairs procedures they have advised us that they are undertaking.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201503924 as a PDF (13.81 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018