Leeds City Council (202221856)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202221856

Leeds City Council

30 May 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:
   1. Response to the resident’s reports of drainage issues.
   2. Complaints handling.

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant at the property of the landlord. The landlord is a local authority. The property is a three-bedroom house with a sewer that runs through the back garden. There are no vulnerabilities listed by the landlord.
3. Both the resident and his partner have been involved in the complaint; however, for the purpose of this report, both will be referred to as ‘the resident’ unless it is otherwise necessary to distinguish between them.
4. Between 1 April 2022, and 14 May 2022, the resident reported that the drains in the back garden of the property were blocked, which caused raw sewage to spill. The landlord’s contractors attended seven times during that period.
5. On each occasion, the blockages were cleared. On the sixth occasion (6 May 2022), evidence shows a CCTV inspection was carried out, but it was not explained what the blockage was or what had caused it. Between 10 June 2022, and 19 July 2022, the drains blocked and had to be unblocked a further three times.
6. On 16 May 2022, the resident raised a complaint with the landlord. He stated that a couple of months prior, the drainage company had moved the drains from the back of the property to halfway down the garden and replaced the gullies. Since then, the drains have been blocked on multiple occasions and had to be unblocked by a contractor. He stated that each time the drains blocked, raw sewage would flow into the back garden, which had made it unusable. He also explained that it had been very difficult to contact anyone during this time.
7. The landlord provided its complaint response on 17 August 2022. It apologised that it had not provided a formal response previously and that it had tried to contact the resident directly to discuss the complaint. It understood that there had been multiple visits to the property for blocked drains and that the issue was now resolved. In light of the issues faced and to acknowledge the delay in responding to the resident’s complaint, it offered £100 in compensation.
8. On 21 August 2022, the resident escalated the complaint. He stated that the issue with the drains had not been resolved and that, while a surveyor did attend the property, they had not returned or provided an update. He explained that the drains were still blocked halfway down the garden and that if they were not fixed, they would keep blocking. He also explained that he had not been able to tend to the garden for four months during the spring and summer and that his plants had died due to not being able to water them. He also stated that £100 in compensation was not enough.
9. The landlord provided its final complaint response on 11 October 2022. It provided detail about its contractor’s reports about obstructions and operational difficulties, as well as evidence of wipes found on 7 October 2022. It also explained that the contractor had identified that a pipe had broken where it connected to the public sewer and that a referral had been made to the water company to undertake the necessary repairs, as this was their responsibility. It therefore only partially upheld the complaint due to what it stated were aggravating factors within the resident’s control that contributed to blockages.
10. The resident brought his complaint to this service because he was dissatisfied with how the landlord handled reports of drainage issues and the subsequent complaint. The resident wanted the landlord to resolve the issue with the drain.
11. After the landlord’s internal complaints process was completed, various visits were made to the property to unblock the drains and fix the pipes. On 17 April 2023, the landlord spoke to the resident, who confirmed the drains were fully repaired and working okay. While the landlord stated in its stage two response that a drain had broken and a referral had been made to the water company, no evidence has been provided to show what the water company did in response to this.

Assessment and findings

Drainage issues

12. The landlord has expressed to this service that there was confusion over who was responsible for the various different parts of the drainage system when the blockages were first dealt with. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for repairing and maintaining the exterior of the property, including the drains, gutters, and external pipes. Adding to this, the water company’s website states that the homeowner is responsible for the section of pipe that goes into the ground, either directly, or into a gulley close to the property, until it reaches a shared drainage pipe or public sewer. After that, it is the water company’s responsibility.
13. While the landlord stated in its stage two response that the pipe had broken where it connected to the public sewer and that it had made a referral for the work to be carried out by the water company, there has been no evidence or explanation provided to this service to show that the water company carried out any work after the landlord’s internal complaints process had been exhausted. Evidence provided shows that the landlord carried out works within the boundary of the property before the pipes joined the public or shared sewer and that this work resolved the blockage issues.
14. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance handbook states that plumbing and drainage faults are priority repairs, and repairs will be completed within 24 hours. In this case, not only was there a delay in the landlord resolving the blockage issues, but there is no indication in the evidence provided that the landlord considered or investigated why the resident was experiencing so many blockages in such a short time period. This is a fundamental aspect of basic repair management. The blockages were first raised in April 2022 and were expected to have been addressed within the same month. The issues were not resolved until April 2023, eleven months later. While the landlord did highlight various obstructions as possible contributing factors to the blockages, its lack of consideration for the numerous blockages and lack of effective investigation caused delays in finding the cause of the blockages.
15. In this case, while there has not been a permanent impact on the resident, there were significant delays in the landlord’s handling of the drainage issues with raw sewage in the garden for a sustained period of time, adding to the inconvenience, time, and trouble for the resident. The landlord’s compensation policy states that maladministration where the resident has suffered significant inconvenience and/or upset over a sustained period can be compensated up to £600. The landlord’s offer of £100 was therefore not sufficient to reflect the impact on the resident.
16. In light of the failures above, a finding of maladministration has been made in regard to how the landlord handled the drainage issues, for which £600 compensation has been ordered to reflect the impact caused to the resident, being £50 for each month the repairs were delayed and a further £50 for the resident’s time and trouble in chasing up the issue.

Complaints handling

17. As per the landlord’s complaints policy, it should acknowledge a stage one complaint within three working days and provide a stage one complaint response within 15 working days. In this case, not only did the landlord not acknowledge the stage one complaint within three working days, it also did not provide its response within the policy’s timeframe to provide a stage one response. The resident first raised a complaint on 16 May 2022; therefore, the expected complaint response would have been 9 June 2022. However, the landlord did not provide its response until 17 August 2022. This was 49 working days after the expected response.
18. Similarly, the complaints policy states a stage two response will be provided within 15 working days. The landlord did not provide its stage two response within the policy’s timeframe to provide a stage two response. The resident escalated the complaint on 21 August 2022, and therefore the expected complaint response would have been 7 September 2022. However, the landlord did not provide its response until 11 October 2022. This was 24 working days after the expected response.
19. As per the landlord’s compensation policy, a moderate service failure can be compensated up to £100. In this case, there were significant delays in both the landlord’s stage one and stage two complaint responses adding to the inconvenience, time, and trouble for the resident. The landlord apologised for the stage one response delay and offered the resident £100 in compensation. However, the landlord did not acknowledge its stage two response delay or offer any compensation for the stage two delay.
20. The landlord’s delays amount to service failure, and an order has been made for £200 in compensation, being £100 for each delayed response. This replaces the landlord’s previous offer.

Determination

21. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s reports of drainage issues.
22. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord for its complaints handling.

Orders

23. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay compensation of £800, comprising:
    1. £600 for any distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its poor response to the resident’s reports of drainage issues.
    2. £200 for its ineffective complaints handling.
24. This replaces the landlord’s previous offer of £100. This amount must be paid within four weeks of the date of this determination.
25. The landlord is to obtain evidence from the water company that the pipe issue identified where it meets the public sewer has been rectified. The landlord is to provide this update to the resident within four weeks of the date of this determination.