London Borough of Redbridge (202212305)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202212305

London Borough of Redbridge

26 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 concerns:
   1. How the landlord handled the resident’s reports of outstanding repair issues, including damp and mould in their property, following a leak from the property above.
   2. The associated formal complaint into this matter.

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a local authority. The property is a flat in a communal building. The property above the resident is owned by a leaseholder, who sublets to a tenant.
3. The resident has advised that on 21 April 2022, an operative attended the property to assess cracked walls in the hallway, and during the appointment, the resident showed the operative the damp that was coming from the property above and affecting her bathroom and kitchen. A contactor inspected the property on 22 April 2022 to assess the water damage in the property. The contractor raised works and contacted the leaseholder of the property above to request that the leak be repaired. The resident continued to chase the repairs throughout May 2022.
4. On 7 June 2022, the resident raised a complaint. She was unhappy that no further action had been taken to resolve the leak or remedy the damp from the property above. She stated that she had tried to contact the repairs team directly, but the landlord had not provided the repairs team with work instructions. She added that the landlord had not updated her, surveyors never answered her calls, and she was seeking for the work to be resolved.
5. The landlord sent a stage one complaint response to the resident on 15 July 2022, then a stage two complaint response on 31 October 2022. In its responses, the landlord:
   1. Apologised for the lack of communication and delays. It added that a team had attended to prepare a quote for the plaster works, and that it would also repair the kitchen and bathroom following the leak from the property above.
   2. Informed the resident that a report had been completed on 6 September 2022 which concluded that the leak was coming from the property above due to blown tiles in the owner’s bathroom. It stated that works had been delayed while waiting for water ingress to stop and for the affected areas to dry. It added that contractors were on site completing works currently (as of the date of the stage two response sent on 31 October 2022).
   3. Appointed a staff member as a point-of-contract for the resident to keep her updated on the progress of the work.
   4. Apologised for not meeting the resident’s expectations.
6. In referring the case to this Service, the resident confirmed that the work had now been completed, but that she was dissatisfied with the length of time it took the landlord to complete the work and its decision not to offer her any compensation. The resident also stated her dissatisfaction with the delays she experienced progressing the complaint with the landlord.

Assessment and findings

Relevant policies and procedures

7. Section 3.7 of the tenancy agreement sets out the landlord’s repair responsibilities. This states that the landlord will repair “the structure and exterior of the building -this includes roofs, wall, floors, ceilings, window frames, external doors, drains, gutters and outside pipes; kitchen and bathroom fixtures -these include basins, sinks, toilets and baths”.
8. The landlord’s repairs policy categorises it repair types as “emergency” (attend within two hours and complete within 24 hours), “Urgent” (complete within five working days) and “Routine” (complete within 28 calendar days). As examples for what it considers an emergency repair, the landlord suggests “Making safe any fault that is likely to cause extensive damage to property. [An] initial response to storm damage/roof leaks”.
9. The landlord operates a two-stage complaints process. When a complaint is received, the landlord aims to provide a response at stage one within ten working days. If the complainant is dissatisfied with the response, they can request an escalation of the complaint to the next stage. The landlord will then undertake a review of the complaint and provide a stage two response within 20 working days. This will be the landlord’s final response to the complaint.

Scope of investigation

10. In her correspondence with the landlord and with this Service, the resident has described the effect on her and her family’s health caused by the condition of the property while the repairs remained outstanding. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments. However, it is beyond the remit of this Service to make a determination on whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions and the health of the resident and her family. Whilst we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any errors by the landlord.

How the landlord handled the resident’s reports of outstanding repair issues

11. When informed by the resident of her concerns as to the condition of the property and the leak she was experiencing from the property above, the landlord had a duty to respond to the matter in line with its obligations set out in the tenancy agreement and its published policies and procedures. Initially, the landlord acted appropriately. The landlord’s repair logs show that several work orders were raised between 21 October 2021 and 14 February 2022 to undertake work to the property’s bathroom, kitchen and bedrooms. This work was completed within the landlord’s published target dates (one job was raised as an emergency repair on 27 January 2022 to clear a sink blockage, the remaining work was attended to as routine repairs).
12. Following the discovery of the leak from the property above on 22 April 2022, the contractor informed the landlord that it had left a voicemail message for the leaseholder of the flat above and spoken to their tenant. The contractor also informed the landlord that “it is fruitless carrying out remedial repairs [to the resident’s property] if the water ingress from [the leaseholder’s property] continues”. The landlord’s records state that it sent a letter and a text message to the leaseholder on 19 August 2022. There is no evidence of any other attempts of contact with the leaseholder by the landlord until the inspection of the leaseholder’s property was arranged for 6 September 2022.
13. It is not in dispute that it was the leaseholder’s responsibility to resolve the leak and that the outstanding work to the resident’s property would not be able to be completed until the leak was repaired. However, the landlord would be expected to ensure that the work was completed promptly by the leaseholder to minimise the level of disruption caused to the resident and the damage caused to the resident’s property. The evidence provided in this case does not suggest this occurred. In the five months the leak remained outstanding, the evidence provided showed that the leaseholder was contacted by telephone once, by text message once and by letter once. It was not reasonable for the resident to wait five months for the leaseholder to repair the leak and the evidence provided does not suggest that the landlord chased the issue with the leaseholder with any urgency or considered taking further action (such as court action) in order to ensure the leak was repaired in a timely manner. The landlord has also accepted that its communication with the resident during this period was poor and it did not keep her properly updated on the status of the leak and the repairs. Therefore, there has been maladministration by the landlord in how it handled the matter, and it would be appropriate for it to pay compensation to recognise its service failures.
14. The Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance (which is available on our website) suggests a payment of £100 to £600 in cases of considerable service failure or maladministration by a landlord. This includes distress and inconvenience, time and trouble, disappointment, loss of confidence, and delays in getting matters resolved. Therefore, a payment of £300 that recognised the landlord’s lack of urgency in pursing the leaseholder to resolve the leak which resulted in a delay of five months before work in the resident’s property could be completed and the poor level of communication it provided to the resident which resulted in her raising a complaint to receive updates on the status of the work would be appropriate in the circumstances.

The landlord’s complaint handling

15. The landlord did not follow its complaints policy at either stage of the complaints process. The resident raised a complaint on 7 June 2022 and received a stage one complaint response on 15 July 2022, 19 working days outside the landlord’s published target of ten working days. The resident then requested an escalation of the complaint on 20 July 2022 and received a stage two complaint response on 31 October 2022, 53 working days outside its published target of 20 working days.
16. This caused clear inconvenience to the resident, who contacted the landlord on several occasions requesting the complaint responses to be issued. The resident also sought the intervention of her MP and this Service in requesting the responses. The evidence provided by the landlord suggests that it was waiting for the leak to be resolved and the repairs to the resident’s property to resume before it sent the stage two response. It is the established view of this service that landlords should respond to complaints in a timely manner, and it is not necessary to wait for repairs to be completed before responding to a complaint. A complaint response can be issued whilst repairs are outstanding and compensation can be offered for any delays which have taken place and which are expected, based on the proposed completion date for any outstanding repairs. If there are further delays after the landlord has issued its final complaint response, the landlord can issue a further response and consider whether to offer additional compensation for the further delays. Moreover, there is no evidence the landlord contacted the resident to inform her that the stage two response would be delayed.
17. Therefore, there has been maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling and additional compensation is warranted. In line with the remedies guidance detailed above, it would be appropriate for the landlord to pay £150 compensation for the delays in providing both complaint responses and the inconvenience that this caused the resident.

Determination

18. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of:
    1. How it responded to the leak from the property above.
    2. Its complaint handling.

Orders

19. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £450 compensation, comprised of:
    1. £300 for its service failure in how it responded to the leak.
    2. £150 for its service failure in complaint handling.
20. This payment should be made within four weeks of the date of this report. The landlord should update this Service when payment has been made. It is the Ombudsman’s position that compensation awarded by this Service should be treated separately from any financial arrangements between the landlord and resident and should not be offset against any arrears.