The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

Slough Borough Council (202002564)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202002564

Slough Borough Council

29 April 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 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. This complaint is about the landlord response to:
    1. The resident’s request for compensation for damage to his carpet following a leak from a radiator in his hallway.
    2. The resident’s complaint that he was unable to return to his property for a period of three days after his decant ended and had to find alternative accommodation for that period of time.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a Council. The property is a first floor flat for which the tenancy commenced on 11 November 2019.
  2. On 10 February 2020, the resident logged a formal complaint with the landlord about its response to his reports that his living room floor was breaking up under foot and was damaging his new carpet and underlay, that the draught excluder around his front door was incomplete and that there was an issue with his shower mixer which meant that he was unable to regulate the water temperature. In his Stage 3 escalation request of 14 April 2020, the resident also complained that the radiator in his hallway was not on its brackets causing a leak which damaged his hallway carpet.
  3. The resident’s complaint progressed through the landlord’s formal complaints process and a Stage 3 Complaint Panel meeting was held on 14 May 2020. It was agreed by the Panel that:
    1. All works to the resident’s floor should be completed by 31 May 2020. The panel heard that the preferred option would be for the resident to remain in the property whilst the work was carried but noted that the living room was quite large and could hold a lot of furniture and so storage could be a problem.
    2. The draught excluder to the resident’s front door and the shower mixer taps should be completed by 22 May 2020.
    3. With regards to the leak from the radiator in his hallway and the damage to his hallway carpet, the resident confirmed that he moved into the property in November 2019 and first reported the leaking radiator on 27 February 2020, conceding that the radiator may have been knocked during the course of him moving into the property. The panel agreed that the works to the radiator should also be completed by 22 May 2020.
    4. The landlord should review and agree reimbursement of costs and/or compensation by 31 May 2020.
  4. The landlord arranged decant accommodation for the resident between 1 and 8 June 2020 . The landlord advised this service that the works to the living room floor, the hall radiator, the draught excluder to the front door and the shower were completed prior to 8 June 2020. On 8 June 2020, the carpets and furniture were reinstalled to the resident’s living room. The landlord provided an email from the contractor confirming this.
  5. On 10 June 2020, the resident said that the contractor had attended his property the previous evening but had been unable to sign off the works because the door to his living room, that had been rehung, had not been planed down and so would not close completely without damaging his carpet. The resident said that he had given the contractor a key to his property for this job to be completed. The landlord said that when it attended on 8 June 2020 to sign off the works, the resident requested that a specific member of staff, who had been involved with his complaint, be present. The landlord said that as the property was safe to live in there was no need to extend the decant and an appointment was booked for the member of staff the resident had requested to attend on 11 June 2020.
  6. On 11 June 2020, the works to the flooring (including the reinstallation of carpet and furniture), the repairs to the radiator, the draught excluder to the front door and shower were signed off as being completed.
  7. On 11 August 2020, the landlord wrote to the resident regarding compensation following his complaint. The landlord acknowledged the problems the resident had encountered since moving into to his flat in November 2019 and apologised  for the longevity of the issues he had experienced. The landlord offered the resident a total of £5,084.43 compensation made as follows:
    1. £1,485.63 (Rent) plus £348.80 (Council tax) for the resident not being able to live in a large proportion of the property between November and June 2020, a period of 30 weeks. The amount offered was assessed based on half the rent and half the council tax for that period.
    2. £220 for additional heating costs incurred as a result of the draught caused by the front door.
    3. £1,200 for the distress and expense to the resident for him being repeatedly let down by its contractors contact centre and management, the complaint caused considerable distress given the effort and expense.
    4. £870.00 for the cost to the resident of taxi’s to his parent’s house after work to shower (18 November 2019 and 31 March 2020).This was based on £10 per day for each working day.
    5. £960.00 (12 days @ £80 per day (after tax)), for the resident’s loss of income/annual leave for 12 missed appointments within the complaint; the landlord said that the £80 wage was proved, which the landlord agreed as reasonable to pay in full.
  8. In an email to the landlord on 27 August 2020, the resident said that he would be willing to accept its offer of £5,084.43 compensation for its handling of his reports of repair to his flooring, radiator, the draught excluder to his front door and the repair to his shower mixer as an interim but not a full and final settlement. The resident said that this was because the accommodation he was decanted to only covered up to 8 June 2020 but the works were not signed off until 11 June 2020. The resident said that he received no communication regarding this and, as this was during Covid lockdown, his choices of where he could stay were extremely limited. The resident said that he was also still seeking compensation for damage to his hall carpet which he said was damaged due to a leak from a faulty radiator.
  9. On 7 October 2020, the resident emailed this service. In his email the resident confirmed that he had received the £5084.43 compensation from the landlord but that he had not received a response from the landlord regarding his claim for compensation for his carpet. The resident provided this service with a copy of a quote of £150 for the replacement of his hall carpet.
  10. Following contact from this service, the landlord confirmed that it had the quote for the replacement of the resident’s hall carpet and would be arranging for a payment of £150 to be made to the resident. The resident confirmed that the £150 was paid into his bank account on 25 January 2021.

Assessment and findings

  1. In determining whether there has been service failure or maladministration we consider both the events that initially prompted a complaint and the landlord’s response to those events. The extent to which a landlord has recognised any shortcomings and the appropriateness of any steps taken to offer redress can be as relevant as the original mistake or service failure.

The resident’s compensation claim for damage to his carpet following a leak from a radiator in his hallway.

  1. The tenancy agreement sets out the rights and responsibilities for the landlord and the resident. In general terms, the landlord is required to maintain and keep in good repair the structure of the building, including any fires or central heating or installation of water heating which belong to the landlord. The tenancy agreement also requires the landlord to carry out repairs within a reasonable time and that the tenant must provide access for the works to be done.
  2. The landlord’s Tenants’ Handbook, list three categories of repairs and the timescales within which it should respond to reports depending on the nature of the repair reports. These range from within 2 hours for urgent repairs, where the is a high and immediate risk to the resident, to 20 working days for standard, low risk, repairs.
  3. In its Panel meeting, on 14 May 2020, the landlord acknowledged that the resident first reported the leak from his radiator on 27 February 2020, over 40 working days earlier. The panel ordered that the works to the radiator be completed by 22 May 2020. The works to the radiator were signed off by the landlord on 11 June 2020.
  4. The resident accepted the compensation the landlord offered in its letter of 11 August 2020 for its failure to respond appropriately to his reports of repair including to the radiator in his hallway. However the resident remained dissatisfied that the landlord had not offered him any compensation for the damage to his hall carpet.
  5. Following further contact between the resident, the landlord and this service, the landlord agreed to the resident’s request for £150 compensation to cover the cost for replacing his hall carpet, paying the £150 to the resident on 25 January 2021.
  6. This represents a reasonable offer of redress and satisfies the resident’s claim for the damage to his carpet in full.

That the resident was unable to return to his property for a period of three days after his decant ended and had to find alternative accommodation for that period of time.

  1. The resident’s Tenancy Handbook states that, if the resident has to be re-housed on a temporary basis so that work can be done to the premises, the landlord will try to arrange to re-house the resident in a suitable alternative property. If the resident is moved to alternative accommodation, the resident will normally be required to return to the original property once the works have been completed.
  2. During the panel meeting on 14 May 2020, the landlord advised that its preference was for the resident to remain in the property while the works were carried out. There is no evidence as to why that decision was changed although at the panel meeting it was suggested that due to the extent of the works the resident’s furniture and carpets would need to be removed from his living room. The landlord arranged alternative accommodation for the resident whilst the works were completed. The booking was made to cover the week between 1 and 8 June 2020.
  3. According to the resident’s Tenancy handbook the resident’s should return once the works have been completed. The landlord has provided an email from its contractor, to support its position that the works were completed by 8 June 2020 and that the resident could move back in. The email stated that the contractor was reinstalling the resident’s living room carpets and furniture that day.
  4. Whilst the landlord’s and resident’s accounts of why the works were not signed off until 11 June 2020 differ, there is no evidence to support the resident’s claim that he was unable to return to his property, when his decant came to an end on 8 June 2020. In his email to the landlord on 9 June 2020 the resident said that the contractor had attended his property that day to sign off the works but was unable to do so because the living room door needed to be planed down so that it did not damage the resident’s carpet. This in itself would not have prevented the resident moving back into the property. There is also no evidence of any other issues with the works carried out being raised by the resident at the time, that would have reasonably prevented him from returning to the property. It was therefore reasonable, and in accordance with its policies and procedures, for the landlord to expect the resident to return to his property on 8 June 2020.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s request for compensation for damage to his carpet following a leak from a radiator in his hallway.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of the resident’s complaint that he was unable to return to his property for a period of three days after his decant ended and had to find alternative accommodation for that period of time.

Reasons

  1. The resident sought £150 compensation to cover the cost of replacing the carpet in his hallway, which the landlord agreed to pay in full.
  2. Whilst the works were not signed off until 11 June 2020, there is no evidence to support the resident’s claim that he was unable to live in the property for the three days between when the works were completed, on 8 June 2020, and when the works were signed off. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to expect the resident to return to the property when the works were completed on 8 June 2020.