Wandle Housing Association Limited (202115426)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202115426

Wandle Housing Association Limited

31 August 2022

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
   1. The level of compensation following leaks and associated damage from a boiler repairs.
   2. Complaint handling through its internal complaints process.

Background and summary of events

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The property is a 3-bedroom house. The tenancy commenced during 10 October 2003.
3. Following reports by the resident in February of issues with the boiler, the landlord arranged for work to be carried out. However, damage was caused by contractors during repairs being carried out and there were missed appointments. Following the resident’s concerns, the landlord wrote to her on 24 February 2021 to apologise. It acknowledged several appointments were required and its failure to provide full repair. It explained that repairs to boilers often require several parts needing to be tested and replaced before a full repair is completed.  The landlord acknowledged that it failed to deliver service in a timely manner and meet its standards. The landlord offered the resident £150 compensation to reflect its service failings and, in an effort, to put things right it said it would do the following:
   1. Make good the staining to the ceiling in the bedroom.
   2. Make good the staining to the ceiling in the living room from a previous repair.
   3. Box in the pipework in the bedroom.
   4. Send our operatives to investigate the clicking in your house, which was noted by PCM.
4. On 13 May and 7 June 2021, the landlord had arranged for work to be carried out on the resident’s property. This included stain blocking and painting the lounge. On 8 June 2021, the resident informed the landlord the work had not been completed, and it arranged for an inspection of the property to be completed on 15 June 2021.
5. The resident escalated the complaint and was dissatisfied with the following:
   1. Redecoration was not carried out as agreed as part of the landlord’s stage one response.
   2. The time taken to complete work.
   3. The work not completed to the expected standard and damaged was caused by workmen.
6. In response the landlord issued its stage 2 response on 21 July 2021. It explained steps it had taken. It had liaised with its contractors to follow up on appointments booked, and there were email exchanges after visits to the resident’s home. It also arranged for the repairs services manager to carry out an inspection when the resident expressed dissatisfaction. Pictures showing what the resident was unhappy about was also passed onto its contractors.
7. The landlord apologised for any inconvenience and distress caused. It acknowledged that its contractors did not follow up on the original request to attend and carry out redecoration. It also acknowledged that when it did, there were delays in organising appointments due to it only being a small team. The landlord explained that painting and decorating was not the contractors main function and acknowledged the quality of work was not up to standard.
8. As a resolution the landlord said it would arrange compensation for the resident to decorate privately, rather than have the contractor reattend. The landlord offered the following:
   1. £300 for service failure, length of time taken, time and effort into chasing appointments.
   2. £500 to cover cost of outstanding decoration for labour and materials.
9. Regarding damage to the resident’s furniture, the landlord informed the resident this was being processed separately with contractors as a claim against their insurers.
10. On 31 July 2021 the resident emailed the landlord stating she was rejecting its compensation due to it being a low offer. The resident explained that stress and anxiety was triggered as a result of the landlord’s service failures. It was stated the damage caused to the wallpaper, flooring and furniture left the resident feeling distressed. She was also dissatisfied that she would now be responsible for finding decorators to redecorate the lounge and middle bedroom. It was further expressed that she did not want to have to liaise with the contractors over the damage to the sofas.  As a resolution the resident was seeking a higher level of compensation to cover remedial works and compensate for the impact on mental health and wellbeing.
11. On 18 October 2021, the resident emailed the landlord thanking it for its letter from July 2021. She apologised for the delay in responding and explained she was unable to locate receipts for the damages items and stress caused to her pet’s health. The resident explained that her items damaged were in a good condition and gave an estimate for the value. These were the following:
    1. Habitat Tall shelving unit red magna £550.
    2. House of Fraser 3-seater leather sofa £2500.
    3. House of Fraser 1-seater sofa £1100.
    4. Flooring £800+.
    5. Waller covered £57.
12. On 10 December 2021, the resident asked this service to investigate issues outstanding listed in her letter to the landlord dated 30 July 2021. The resident expressed that the landlord failed to take into account the full impact of stress and anxiety which had been triggered by its service failures.
13. On 7 January 2022 the landlord contacted the resident apologising for delays in responding. It explained that it had not received the resident’s email over Christmas and apologised if this was missed. Regarding the resident email in October 2021, an offer was drawn up and sent to the resident on 21 October 21. The landlord provided the resident with a further copy in the event this was not received.
14. On 15 March 2022, the resident emailed the contractors stating items were purchased some time ago and she no longer had the receipts. She expressed that the work done by the contractors was not of satisfactory quality and had caused damage to her belongings. She explained the Items were in near perfect and timeless condition and amount offered failed to take this into consideration. As a resolve the resident was seeking compensation of £3550.
15. As the resident remained unsatisfied with the landlord’s response, the complaint was sent to this service for adjudication.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of leaks and associated damage following boiler repairs.

16. When the resident had complained to the landlord about damaged caused to her belongings by the contractors. It discussed this with her and arranged for this to be processed separately with the contractors as a claim against its insurance. The landlord was proactive in providing the resident with the information needed for her to process her claim on damages with the contractors. As this matter was dealt with separately through the contractors, this service will not comment further on the matter.  This service will focus on the landlord’s actions to the residents reports in relation to the relevant policies and procedures.
17. The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, Section 11 implies repair obligations for landlord tenants. It states, ‘In a lease to which this section applies there is implied a covenant by the lessor— To keep in repair and property working order the installations in the dwelling-house for the supply of water, gas and electricity and for sanitation.
18. This is also stipulated in Section C.5 of the tenancy agreement. It states the landlord will maintain any installations. In this instance as there was a found fault with the resident’s boiler, the landlord was obliged to fix it.
19. Section 4.7 of the landlord repairs and maintenance policy states that containable and minor leaks would be considered under appointed repairs. It aims is to complete these works within 28 days unless the type of work requires more time to be completed.
20. The resident has stated that when she raised concerns about repairs with the boiler, she experienced a low standard of service from the landlord. This service has not seen any call notes or evidence to support the resident’s claims. However, in the landlord’s stage one response dated 24 February 2021, it had acknowledged the resident had several appointments and failures in terms of it providing a full repair and apologised for this. It also explained that repairs can take longer due to several parts and testing being needed. Therefore, this service is of the understanding that the landlord did not act in accordance with its terms.
21. In the landlord stage one response it had stated what actions it would be taking to put things right for the resident. This included redecoration in the bedroom and living room. However, the resident stated this had not been carried out as agreed within a reasonable period of time and had not been completed to the expected standard.
22. The evidence shows that despite the landlord stating in February it would arrange for work to be carried out, this did not start until 13 May 21, where the contractor had applied stain block but said a further appointment would be required to paint. The paint was applied on 7 June 2021. Throughout June and July there were two missed appointments which the contractor apologised for and awarded the resident £30. The resident had also raised concerns about the work, and it was found by the service manager that the work completed had not been done to a high standard and was not finished.
23. In consideration to paragraph 18 which states the landlord’s expected timeframes for repairs and maintenance. It is the Ombudsman’s view that the length of time taken to make repair was not considered reasonable.
24. Despite this, the evidence shows that throughout June and July, each time the resident made the landlord aware of issues, it liaised with contractors and arranged for the work to be inspected within a reasonable period of time.
25. In recognition of its service failings from February 2021, which includes the length of time taken, the resident having to chase appointments, and the inconvenience caused the landlord offered the resident £300. It is the Ombudsman’s view that the amount of compensation offered is reasonable. Whilst this service understands that the service the resident received by its contractors were poor, each time it was informed of this it made efforts to liaise with contractors to get the work completed, it also acknowledged its service failings and provided the resident with a sufficient apology each time.
26. In its stage two response, the landlord explained that because there were concerns about how long it would take the contractors to complete the job and concerns about the quality of the work, it would provide the resident £500 compensation for materials and labour to get the work completed.
27. Whilst the resident has expressed upset having to source decorators and that the landlord has not provided an alternative option. This service is of the understanding that the landlord’s offer and explanation is reasonable. It is evident there has been several issues with its contractors regarding missing appointments, delays and damaged items. Therefore, the relationship and trust between the resident and contractors would have broken down. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, the landlord has been proactive and made reasonable attempts to have repairs completed by its contractors. As using the same contractor in future may result in further issues with delays it is reasonable for it to provide the resident with the costs of repairs to have the work completed, so she is not out of pocket.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint through its internal complaints process.

28. The complaints policy states, the landlord aims to provide a response within 10 working days. Where a response cannot be sent within the expected timeframe it will aim to provide the response within a further 10 working days. For a stage two response within 20 working days, should this take longer it will aim to provide a response within 10 working days. It states it would not extend beyond these additional days without a good reason.
29. The evidence shows that the resident had informed the landlord on 28 April 2021 that she would like to escalate the complaint. However, a stage two response was provided on 23 July 2021. Taking into consideration its timeframes including the additional 10 working days, the landlord should have responded to the resident by 9 June 2021. However, it failed to do so and therefore did not act in accordance to its guidelines.
30. This service understands that in the landlord stage two response it awarded compensation for the length of time taken to resolve the issue. However, this does not refer to the delay in provided the resident with a delayed response. This service has also not seen evidence to show that the landlord had addressed this or apologised to the resident. Therefore, a further compensation of £50 is being ordered.

Determination (decision)

31. In accordance with paragraph 55 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of the level of compensation following leaks and associated damage from a boiler repairs.
32. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint handling through its internal complaints process.

Reasons

33. Whilst there were several service failings, the landlord acknowledges this apologised and provided the resident with a reasonable level of compensation. The majority of service failing experiences were by its contractors, when the landlord was informed it attempted to resolve the issues.
34. The landlord did not acknowledge that it was delayed in providing the resident with a stage 2 response. The length of time taken to provide a response was not in line with its guidelines or considered reasonable.

Orders and recommendations

Order

35. The landlord should pay further compensation of £50.