Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

GreenSquareAccord Limited (202008441)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202008441

GreenSquareAccord Limited

22 June 2023

 

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 request for compensation following damage to a carpet caused by a leak.

Background

  1. The resident had an assured tenancy agreement with the landlord.
  2. The resident had been reporting intermittent leaks in their bathroom from 2015. The leaks had caused damage to the carpet in 2015 and 2017, which the landlord had subsequently replaced.
  3. On 23 June 2020, the resident contacted the landlord to report another leak in the bathroom. The resident contacted the landlord again on 7 July 2020 to report that the leak had worsened, having damaged the lounge ceiling and the carpet below.
  4. The resident made a complaint to the landlord in July 2020 which included reference to the damage the leak had caused to their carpet. Between the initial complaint and the executive review in April 2022, the landlord made different offers to address the damage to the carpet and some other personal belongings. These were:
    1. A goodwill gesture of £300 to cover damaged belongings and for the carpet to be professionally cleaned.
    2. A goodwill gesture of £300 and for the carpet to be replaced “like-for-like”.
    3. A goodwill gesture of £300 and to “supply and fit” a new carpet.
    4. A goodwill gesture total of £450 (£300 from the separate complaint and £150 at executive review stage) and an additional £200 towards the carpet being replaced.
  5. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s offer and requested the carpet be replaced, the equivalent monetary value or the value in vouchers, to be redeemed after redecorating. The resident confirmed to this Service they had been quoted £1800 to replace the carpet.

Assessment and findings

  1. The resident’s complaints to the landlord included a number of different issues, such as the leak, a Right to Buy (RTB) application, replacing the kitchen and bathroom, and damage to other personal belongings. However, the resident has confirmed to this Service that the outstanding issue to be considered for investigation is the landlord’s offer in relation to the damaged carpet. Therefore, this investigation has focussed on the offer and whether it was fair and in line with the relevant compensation policies.
  2. The landlord has not refuted responsibility for the damage to the resident’s carpet, caused by a leak. It has demonstrated a willingness to put things right by acknowledging the issue and agreeing to provide some form of compensation.
  3. The landlord’s relevant compensation policy states discretionary payments are made “where it is clear and can be proved the damage to belongings is a direct consequence of our service failure.” The same policy goes on to state “where we offer to pay to replace belongings, payments will be made on a like for like basis (not new for old), taking into account any evidence of purchase, damage, age and condition of items.”
  4. The first offer made by the landlord was a £300 gesture of goodwill for damage to personal belongings, including the carpet. In addition, it offered to arrange for the carpet to be professionally cleaned. While the offer to arrange for the carpet to be cleaned is not something specifically mentioned in the relevant policy, it was a reasonable step for the landlord to take. It is appropriate for the landlord to determine whether remedial action would resolve issues similar to this, such as cleaning or redecorating, before agreeing to replace something entirely as this can have considerable financial implications for the landlord.
  5. In an email to the resident on 15 December 2020 the landlord amended its offer to the resident. It maintained the original £300 as a goodwill gesture but offered to replace the “living room carpet like-for-like”. The landlord included a compensation acceptance form which confirmed the offer to be “£300.00 and the supply and fit [of] a new living room carpet.”
  6. While it is not clear why this offer was amended by the landlord, it was entitled to do so. The amended offer was in line with the provisions of its compensation policy – replacing “like for like” – and therefore appropriate, given the circumstances. The resident confirmed acceptance of this offer in an email dated 17 January 2021. The landlord requested the completed acceptance form from the resident on 18 January 2020, however this Service has not seen evidence of this being completed and returned at the time.
  7. In a complaint response dated 8 April 2022, the landlord reaffirmed the offer of £300 and arranging for the carpet to be cleaned. It also said that it would be “unable to offer compensation for any personal belongings damages as a result of the leak.” The landlord also referred the resident to claiming on home contents insurance to cover damage to personal belongings.
  8. The landlord acted fairly when informing the resident of home contents insurance, but it did not consider the relevant policy, when it was appropriate to do so. The landlord’s compensation policy refers to it considering compensation “without a contents insurance claim being made” if the damage is a consequence of service failure by the landlord. The landlord did not directly cause the leak which subsequently damaged the resident’s carpet. However, its failure to permanently repair a leak which had been reoccurring since 2015 meant damage which could have been avoided was not prevented. Therefore, it should have considered compensation on a like for like basis, as per the compensation policy and its offer of 15 December 2020.
  9. The offer of compensation was changed again at the executive review stage, in which the landlord offered a total of £450 as a goodwill gesture (to cover personal belongings, including the carpet) and an additional £200 towards replacing the carpet. While the landlord demonstrated a willingness to put things right for the resident, the offer was not in keeping with the compensation policy and fell short of providing a like for like remedy.
  10. Throughout the complaint process the landlord showed a resolution focussed approach by offering gestures of goodwill to part replace the damaged carpet. However, in amending an offer made early on during the complaint process it did not follow its own compensation policy. In doing so, it failed to put things right sooner for the resident which meant the outstanding issue continued for a substantial amount of time.
  11. When deciding what the landlord should do to put things right, this Service has considered the circumstances and what is fair an appropriate for this case. The resident has confirmed that they have since moved from the property, therefore replacing the carpet like for like would not be appropriate. It would also not be appropriate to expect the landlord to pay compensation of an equivalent value to that of replacing the carpet, as this would place the resident in a better position rather than the same position they would have been in if the landlord had not made errors. However, this Service has determined that the landlord should pay the resident additional compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused throughout a substantial period.
  12. The Ombudsman’s approach to compensation is set out in our Remedies Guidance, published on our website. The Remedies Guidance suggests that awards of £100 to £600 may be appropriate for cases where the landlord has made an error which adversely affected the resident, and the landlord has acknowledged failings, but the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation.
  13. Given the amount of time the complaint about the damaged carpet remained unresolved, the absence of explanations for the associated offers being amended and the impact this had on the resident, this Service has determined £250 to be a fair and appropriate amount. This is in addition to the £450 goodwill gesture and £200 towards replacing the carpet which the landlord offered previously.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, this Service has found maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request for compensation following damage to a carpet caused by a leak.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident compensation of £900, made up of:
    1. £450 total goodwill gesture offered during the complaint process.
    2. £200 offered to go towards replacing the carpet.
    3. An addition £250 for the failures identified in this investigation.
  2. The landlord should confirm compliance with the above order within four weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should run refresher training for all relevant staff on complaint handling, particularly on providing appropriately detailed responses when amending offers of compensation or making changes to an outcome.