By Richard Blakeway, the Housing Ombudsman

It may be this single line of the Grenfell Tower Phase 2 report that has some of the greatest impact in terms of thought-leadership in social housing. The report stated that landlords shouldn’t have allowed “the relationship [with residents] to deteriorate to such an extent [it cannot] observe its basic responsibilities”.

These words have resonated – and it’s recognised that complaints are central to that relationship. This also came across in the Deputy Prime Minister’s party conference speech around the imbalance of power between resident and landlord – a concept which is central to our approach as an ombudsman.

Whilst the report contains many technical failings, it’s the gross imbalance of power and dismissal of residents detailed in volume 3 that’s striking. It’s clear residents’ complaints were dismissed and devalued.

These are some of the issues we still encounter in our investigations and highlighted in our recent systemic report on attitudes, respect and rights. It identified the need for human-centric provision of services by landlords.

Consider our recent learning from severe maladministration report on temporary moves.  You have residents moving for years when they were told it would be weeks; or placed into accommodation that’s neither suitable for their medical needs or vulnerable children.

These failings may not be because of people or processes, although these can be present.  Rather, it may be because of inadequate systems. And these systems can act in ways that are callous and uncaring. And it can be this system failure that gives the impression to  the resident that the landlord is uncaring.

There’s also wider societal change that needs to take place towards those living in social housing. This starts with the investment needed so that landlords can deliver services that meet residents’ needs and are able to maintain social homes in a way that’s responsible and ensures decency.

Our work with thousands of residents and landlords has also reinforced how the role of a landlord has changed – providing a one-size-fits-all approach to housing and repairs is no longer viable. This is evident from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s conclusions, with the landlord not fully understanding the needs of the residents they were serving. These are themes evidenced repeatedly in our casework.

It serves as a reminder to landlords that complaints hold a mirror up to the quality of service provision and culture of their organisation.

Too often I encounter a defensiveness around complaints and sometimes that extends to senior leadership. These behaviours are all the more apparent when I see the complete opposite being displayed by senior leaders – curiosity, reflection and humility about the need to improve outcomes.

Openness and transparency are essential to addressing challenges, and the concept of the ‘duty of candour’ across public functions is a clear commitment following scandals like Hillsborough and Grenfell Tower. What would this concept look like in social housing?

I appreciate there will be some landlords that feel that our awards of compensation are too high.  Compensation can be a challenging area. But look at our next report and you’ll see several landlords award around £150 to residents living with damp and mould.

In each case the resident experienced more than 12 months of delays. The landlords’ decisions were recent and aren’t historic. Understanding the disconnect between redress awarded at different parts of the complaints journey is important, including the ombudsman, but just reflect on some of those sums and the impact it must have on the resident-landlord relationship.

After Grenfell Tower, landlords should ensure they’re listening and involving residents in their decision-making processes, actions that were devastatingly absent there.