Paragon Asra Housing Limited (202005271)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202005271

Paragon Asra Housing Limited

27 January 2021

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 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

The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s response to his:
1. Reports of issues with his water supply.
2. Reports of a roof leak; and
3. The associated complaint regarding these issues.

Background

The resident is a leaseholder of the property, a seventh (top) floor flat in a block of flats.
The resident has reported that he and other residents have experienced issues with their water supply. Whilst this is noted, this Service is only able to investigate the landlord’s response to the issues with the resident’s water supply and not the block as a whole.

Policies and Procedures

The landlord is obliged to maintain and keep in repair the exterior of the property and any installation providing for hot water, in accordance with the lease and its policy. The resident is entitled to receive running water. He is obliged to pay a service charge for relevant services, including the maintenance of the water installations, and may be required to pay a reasonable contribution towards major expenditure, such as replacement or renewal of hot water supply equipment.
The landlord’s maintenance policy confirms that a lack of hot water is classed as a priority one/ emergency repair and is to be rectified within 24 hours. Priority two repairs include roof leaks. These are to be rectified within 15 working days. The landlord’s service standards as stated in the policy include keeping homes in good repair and in a lettable standard.
Its maintenance policy excludes liability for damage to residents’ personal belongings, except in limited circumstances, for example where it has been proven to have been negligent.
Its policy also sets out that any proposed works costing more than £250 per dwelling will first go to the leaseholder for consultation and approval in accordance with the Leasehold Reform Act 2002.
Responses to residents’ complaints can usually be expected within 10 days, but the resident was advised on 4 June 2020 that this has been extended to 20 working days as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic.
The landlord’s compensation policy sets out that it will consider paying discretionary compensation in instances where it has failed to meet its service targets, failed to deliver a service, or not acted reasonably. The amount of compensation should reflect the level of inconvenience, disturbance, stress or annoyance and the extent to which the landlord has been directly responsible. It will also consider the time taken to resolve the problem and any costs incurred. The policy includes a table for assessing compensation depending on the level of impact on the resident.

Summary of events

The resident has stated that he has experienced issues with his water supply since he moved into the property in 2017. He also reported a roof leak in 2019 which has persisted, and which forms the other basis of his complaint.
He submitted a message via the landlord portal on 30 May 2020, stating that he had reported the water and roof issues on 19 May 2020 but had had no response.
On 4 June 2020, he submitted a formal complaint to the landlord about the water supply, stating that he had issues with it during the warmer weather. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the same day.
The landlord responded on 16 June 2020 with its stage one response. It stated that “once the water supplier confirms the bar coming into the building is regulated to standard this is all the landlord is obliged to do”. It did however refer the matter onto its water hygiene team and contractor for further investigations. It aimed to update the resident by mid-July.
The resident sought the assistance of his local MP, who contacted the landlord in support of the resident. On 18 June 2020, the landlord responded to the resident’s local MP explaining that the issues with the water supply were due to external factors out of its control – water companies reducing the water pressure in the summer months – and that “there is not a simple or cost-effective solution to deal with the intermittent interruption to the water supply”. It confirmed it had asked its Building Services Team to investigate the available options for resolution.
The resident requested escalation of his complaint on 20 June. He stated that he was not experiencing minor inconvenience from the issues but major problems, as he was having to buy bottled water to ensure his son had enough to drink and to fill up the toilet with. He had also heard nothing further in relation to the roof leak, which a contractor had attended some weeks before.
Landlord records show that a repair job to “test water pressure” was submitted on 22 June 2020 in relation to the water supply.
The resident reports that a contractor attended on 3 July 2020 and confirmed that there was no issue with the water pressure. The resident stated this was “as predicted” because it was a wet day, though the contractor did recommend changing the water pump. The resident also sought an update on the roof repairs, as his last two emails requesting an update had been ignored. Contractors attended the roof and carried out repairs (it is unclear what these repair works were) on 9 July 2020.
Another repair job was raised to “test the water pressure” on 10 July 2020.
The resident wrote again to the landlord on 17 July 2020 expressing his view that there had been a “massive lack of action or willingness to assist in any way”. He reiterated his request for escalation of his complaint. The landlord replied the same day stating that it would continue to monitor the issue until it was resolved. It formally confirmed escalation of his complaint on 20 July 2020.
The resident emailed the landlord on 26 July 2020 to report that the roof repairs had been unsuccessful as water was continuing to leak into his property as a result of recent bad weather.
A stage two response was sent to the resident on 27 July 2020. The landlord apologised that the resident had had to chase a response to his complaint. It repeated what it had told the local MP about the water pressure, adding that the potential resolutions were likely to be expensive and the cost would have to be passed onto residents if approved. Its response to the roof leak was that repairs were completed on 9 July 2020 and this should have rectified the issues but, if not, the resident should contact to discuss further. It reiterated that he should apply through his buildings insurance for any remedial repairs required as a result of the roof leak.
The resident responded the next day stating, “it seems that no one at PA Housing is understanding the severity of the water issue,” that the issue was not that there was low water pressure but that he was not receiving any water at all for up to six hours per day. He stated he had been reporting this for almost four years. He stated that in addition to this, the roof leak reported had still not been resolved, despite some work having been carried out.
The landlord’s records state that the complaint was closed on 30 July 2020, citing a learning point as being to “improve response(s) to customer enquiries on communal repairs.”
Repair jobs for the roof leak were raised on 31 July and 26 August 2020. It is not clear what happened on 31 July 2020, but the resident reported that no one attended on 26 August 2020.
The landlord’s repair log refers to a repair job on 10 August 2020 as “4th 5th 6th 7th floor no water. Plumber to attend and also provide water if unable to rectify issue” and “no water board issue.”
The landlord emailed the resident on 17 September 2020 advising that an independent water contractor would contact the resident regarding an assessment of the water pressure.
The landlord sent another email the same day stating that repair work to the roof had been identified. It confirmed that scaffolding would be required, and that it would pay the excess on the building’s insurance for the subsequent internal reinstatement works which would be required. The resident states that, to date, there are no signs that any repair work has been carried out. He is concerned that the water supply issue will not be able to be identified and resolved at the moment as it is winter.
The resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. He seeks rectification of the water supply issue, and repairs to the roof and the resulting damage.

Assessment and findings

Water supply

Whilst the resident is entitled to free running water at his property, the landlord operates within financial and other constraints. The landlord is however expected to seek to identify the water supply issues and do what it can to resolve these issues. The resident has advised he has reported the issue for a number of years without a satisfactory response being provided. It is clear that the landlord has failed on a number of occasions to meet its service standard of rectifying issues with hot (or any) water supply within 24 hours. Despite the landlord stating a number of times that it had referred the issue on – to its Water Hygiene Team, Building Services, and independent contractors – this Service has not seen evidence of any of these investigations. The landlord stated to the resident and the local MP that the potential resolutions were likely to be expensive and the cost would have to be passed onto residents if approved, yet no such potential resolutions have thus far been identified.
The landlord has therefore demonstrated service failure in its failure to follow up on these investigations and explore these potential solutions. In accordance with its maintenance policy, the landlord may consult leaseholders where proposed works will cost more than £250 per dwelling. The landlord will therefore be ordered to complete this assessment and take steps to act upon any recommendations, whether these can be completed on its own accord or whether approval of leaseholders is required.
As the resident has reported that the issue mainly occurs during the warmer months, it is important that a summer review is carried out.

Roof leak

The landlord does not dispute its repairing obligations in relation to the roof. Despite the fact that some repair works appear to have been carried out, the recurrence of the leak suggests that the roof has not been satisfactorily repaired, and certainly not within 15 working days, as the landlord is obliged to do in accordance with the lease. It has therefore also demonstrated service failure in relation to the leak.
It identified four months ago in September 2020 that further repair works were required. The resident believes that no works have been carried out to date. An order will be made for the landlord to check the repair works have been satisfactorily completed and if not set a date when this will be done.
In addition to the failure to satisfactorily repair the roof, service failure was demonstrated in the landlord’s contractor’s failure to attend when it said they would, or for the landlord to update the resident on progress.
In order to be able to establish the landlord’s liability for the damage to the resident’s personal belongings, it must be proven that its negligence caused the damage – that it knew about the issue and failed to properly rectify it, which then lead to damage being caused. Insufficient evidence has been provided to reach this conclusion and ultimately it would be a matter for the courts or insurance to decide. While it is accepted there were delays, repair works have been carried out on at least two occasions to try to remedy the leak.

Complaints handling

Whilst the landlord responded to the formal complaint within policy timescales, its general communication with the resident around the complaint did not meet its service standards. The resident had reported issues with the water and roof on 19 May 2020 but had to chase the landlord for a response. The landlord later apologised for this. It also failed to update the resident on the status of the roof repairs for some weeks after a roofing contractor attended, and again the resident had to chase for an update on this. When it did respond to the complaint, it did not address the issues satisfactorily, referring for example to a lack of hot water, where the real issue was, as the resident had stated, that he was not receiving any water for periods of up to six hours. Service failure was demonstrated in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.
As a result of the complaint, the landlord cited a learning point as being to “improve (its) response to customer enquiries on communal repairs,” however no further indication was given as to what these learnings were. The landlord failed to offer redress for its failings; whilst it apologised for the resident having to chase it for a response, it did not provide information regarding timeframes for the water assessment or offer compensation for its failings. Compensation will therefore be ordered in line with the landlord’s policy.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of issues with his water supply.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a roof leak.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaints handling.

Reasons

The landlord has failed to satisfactorily investigate the issues with the water supply, or to seek potential resolutions to the issue, leaving the resident without water for hours at a time on a regular basis in the warmer months.
The roof leak appears to remain unresolved, despite some works having been carried out.
The landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint fell short of its service standards. It has not provided adequate redress for its demonstrated failings.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord is to commission an investigation into the issues with the water supply, including potential resolutions to those issues within 28 days:
1. The landlord is to confirm to the residents of the affected flats, in writing, what actions it will take in response to that investigation.
The landlord is to in the warmer months (June/July) with agreement with the resident, instruct a contractor to carry out a summer review of the water supply and act on any recommendations made.
1. The landlord should confirm to this service within 28 days that an agreement with the resident has been reached on when the review will be completed
The landlord is to carry out required repairs to the roof within 28 days of this report
The landlord is to pay a total of £450 in compensation to the resident, comprising:

£200 to reflect service failures in its response to water issues.

£150 to reflect service failures in its response to the roof leak; and

£100 to reflect service failures in its complaints handling.

These orders are to be complied with within 28 days from the date of this report.

Recommendations

The landlord is to consider how it will action its learning point of improving its response to customer enquiries on communal repairs.