Ombudsman calls for stronger apologies from social housing landlords
Social housing landlords are being urged to apologise for mistakes after a report revealed that residents suffered due to failures.
A report by the Housing Ombudsman found that one resident felt unable to leave their home due to anti-social behaviour, while another experienced a failure to replace windows for more than three years.
The Housing Ombudsman said that in several cases, social housing landlords apologise during their complaints process, but that those apologies could be stronger.
Unsympathetic apology
In one case, the Housing Ombudsman criticised Bristol City Council for being “unsympathetic” towards a resident who felt unable to remain in their home due to anti-social behaviour.
The Housing Ombudsman said the council failed to carry out a risk assessment and did not take a victim-centred approach.
Although the council apologised for the inconvenience caused, the Housing Ombudsman said the apology did not acknowledge the significant impact on the resident and ordered the council to issue a verbal apology for its failings.
The council told the report that it had “provided briefings to staff with case-based learning, strengthened its complaint handling process, and reviewed its antisocial behaviour model.”
In another case, Southern Housing failed to replace windows for three and a half years.
The report says that although the social housing landlord knew the resident was autistic, it did not offer a temporary move.
The social housing landlord did apologise in its complaint response, but the Housing Ombudsman said it only apologised for causing the resident to believe it would replace the windows and did not apologise for the impact these failings had on the resident.
The Housing Ombudsman ordered a verbal apology.
Southern Housing told the report: “We have increased resourcing within our contract services department to better support the management of complex issues and ensure resident vulnerabilities are consistently identified and taken into account.”
Genuine apologies can be restorative
Richard Blakeway, Housing Ombudsman, said social housing landlords should apologise for mistakes.
He said: “Genuine apologies can be restorative. It makes the resident-landlord relationship stronger. It shows an open, healthy culture. It provides residents with dignity and respect. And it offers the landlord a moment for reflection.
“Given the imbalance of power with residents, saying sorry for mistakes is especially important for social landlords. Rebuilding trust matters when most residents will still live with the same landlord, regardless of its performance or any failings.”
He adds: “Using our powers to facilitate a meaningful apology is an important aspect of our work. It can foster behaviour and culture change at little financial cost. Today, our service typically orders more than 4,000 apologies every year.
“An apology is a human way to acknowledge the pain organisational failings can cause. Complaints handled well can be restorative. Handled badly, and the complaints process compounds earlier service failings and further erodes trust.
“We know saying sorry isn’t always easy. Nor is it always enough. But we encourage social landlords not to shy away from it.”
The news comes as Awaab’s law requires all social housing landlords to fix dangerous damp and mould within set timeframes and to complete emergency repairs within 24 hours.
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Next Article
Rents now top £1,000 in half of BritainRelated Articles
1 year ago | 2 comments
3 years ago | 21 comments
Member Since April 2018 - Comments: 374
1:02 PM, 4th March 2026, About 2 months ago
That’s Ok then, private landlords can just say “sorry” in future and avoid all fines.
Member Since June 2025 - Comments: 4
7:09 AM, 5th March 2026, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by David at 04/03/2026 – 13:02
Two systems, two rules.
When councils or housing associations fail tenants, it ends with an apology and token compensation. When private landlords make a mistake, they’re heavily fined and labelled “rogue landlords”.
Just look at how Southwark Council handles fire safety checks, if they’re carried out properly at all. The process often feels comical. Even the Housing Ombudsman Service seems largely toothless when it comes to holding councils accountable.
Accountability should apply equally. Right now it clearly doesn’t.
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3538 - Articles: 5
5:34 PM, 5th March 2026, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Anthony Winter at 05/03/2026 – 07:09
The system itself discriminates against social tenants and ensures a divide exists.
Social tenants health and safety are of clearly lesser importance compared to tenants in the PRS.
Tenants pay less rent and receive less protection and when a major issue is found….an apology suffices apparently…..
Member Since April 2018 - Comments: 374
8:24 PM, 5th March 2026, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 05/03/2026 – 17:34
It’s not that social housing tenants are less important than PRS tenants it’s that again it’s one rule for council landlords and another for PRS landlords. Has anyone in any government party or the media actually raised this, let alone shout it from the rooftops! I am totally sick of this 2 tier government and treatment of PRS landlords.
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3538 - Articles: 5
5:43 PM, 6th March 2026, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by David at 05/03/2026 – 20:24
agree, but clearly social tenants ARE less important otherwise how can you justify different laws applying differently to different providers? The difference is ultimately down to which sector the tenant lies within.