The Ombudsman Files – Goodwill property repair turns into grievance

The complaint

A recent Property Ombudsman case has highlighted the importance of contractor oversight, timely communication and effective complaint handling by property management businesses after a leaseholder was awarded compensation following a prolonged dispute about a property repair.

The complaint was brought by Sally* against the property management company, QWZ*. Sally lived in an apartment and raised concerns about flooring installed by a contractor appointed by QWZ after a leak caused damage to her property.

According to the complaint, the replacement flooring was defective, poorly finished and mismatched in colour. Sally also reported concerns about exposed nails, uneven surfaces and hazardous materials left in the property creating safety risks within her home.

Sally said she repeatedly contacted QWZ in an effort to have the issues resolved. Frustrated by the lack of progress, she eventually arranged and paid for remedial works herself and sought reimbursement together with compensation for the distress, inconvenience and time spent pursuing the matter.

The investigation

QWZ explained that the original damage resulted from a leak between flats. However, replacement flooring had been arranged by QWZ and funded through the service charge account. They maintained that the flooring was not defective and argued that the issue related only to a mismatch in appearance rather than any need for replacement.

In reviewing the dispute, The Property Ombudsman considered whether the property management company had acted reasonably in overseeing the works, and in their communication with Sally.

Once QWZ had chosen to manage the flooring replacement, it was required to exercise reasonable care in doing so. Due to the lack of records they kept, the Ombudsman was not satisfied that QWZ had properly monitored the contractor’s work, maintained repair records or taken appropriate steps to investigate and respond to the leaseholder’s concerns.

The Ombudsman found no evidence that the complaint progressed through the required stages.”

The complaint handling process also came under scrutiny. Evidence showed that Sally submitted a formal complaint in July 2025 and later escalated it through QWZ’s internal procedure. Although an initial response was issued, the Ombudsman found no evidence that the complaint progressed through the required stages or that a final viewpoint letter was ever provided.

When considering the impact on Sally, the Ombudsman gave particular weight to the fact that the issues affected a family home with two young children and remained unresolved for an extended period. The situation was then exacerbated by the fact that Sally’s genuine health and safety concerns were not given any serious consideration, nor were steps taken to reassure Sally about the safety of the flooring.

The outcome

The Property Ombudsman did not award the cost of the flooring that Sally paid for; repair liability between Sally and her landlord was outside of the scope of the review. The complaint was upheld in part regarding the communications and handling of the repair and fully upheld issues regarding complaint handling.

The Property Ombudsman awarded £500 compensation for the avoidable aggravation, distress and inconvenience caused by QWZ’s service failings over a prolonged period.

The case shows that good communications are critical. An agent may comply with their obligations but lack basic customer service. Poor communication, inadequate follow-through and ineffective complaint handling can turn into a serious dispute.

*All names have been changed to maintain anonymity (including consumer and business names).

The post The Ombudsman Files – Goodwill property repair turns into grievance appeared first on The Negotiator.

Author: Gemma