whg own and maintain around 22,000 homes across the Midlands.
To undertake an independent objective review of the case history and events leading up to a Housing Ombudsman Service’s (HOS) determination for whg. The review also highlighted any training needs and captured service improvements that had already been implemented from learning taken from the case.
Following the HOS determination, whg asked DTP to undertake for a full review of the case history and events which led to the determination. This was whg’s first determination and they sought external assurance for their Board that lessons had been learned and that any issues identified were not systemic.
The case included elements of an historic nature, and our review went back to 2021 spanning a significant period of regulatory change in the sector. These changes, introduced by both the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) and the HOS, had implications for the complaint process.. We used our extensive sector knowledge to conduct the review alongside the requirements of the RSH’s Consumer Standards and the HOS Complaints Handling Code 2024.
Our review started with an assessment of all documentation relating to the case which included past and present policies, internal and external communications, repairs histories, technical and third-party reports, as well as evidence of customer communication. We also met with whg colleagues to discuss the case history and their roles, responsibilities in relation to the case.
From this, we produced a report that summarised our findings, distinguishing between events that occurred before the formal complaint was lodged and those that happened after the complaint was raised. This structure provided important context and clarity to the case.
Our report sets out the causes and circumstances that may have contributed to the determination and highlighted areas of learning. This helped build upon and ratify the improvements whg had already implemented. We were also provided recommendations for whg to consider and were able to support with the identification of training needs.
Following conclusion of the review and issuing of the report, we were asked to present a summary to the whg Board who had taken a keen interest in the case and were following progress closely. We were able to provide assurance that the actions taken by whg, in response to the initial complaint and the determination, were appropriate and effectively addressed any concerns. We were also able to advise that, after reviewing all available information, we believed there to be no systemic issues related to this case.
We were able to provide whg with a detailed case analysis that was independent and stood up to scrutiny. This helped ensure that whg met the requirements of the HOS orders following the determination and supported the provision of assurance to Board that whg were fulfilling its obligations in terms of appropriate HOS action.
Our review also confirmed and highlighted the changes and adaptations to its service that whg had implemented to help prevent a reoccurrence.
Robert Gilham, Corporate Director of Strategy, Assets and Transformation