Christian Action (Enfield) Housing Association Limited (202103069)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202103069

Christian Action (Enfield) Housing Association Limited

18 August 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

The complaint refers to:
1. The landlord’s handling of repairs needed to the guttering outside the resident’s property and internal works required following water damage.
2. The landlord’s record keeping.

Background and summary of events

The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is a flat within a block of flats. The landlord’s records show that there have been historical issues with pigeons nesting at and around the building where the resident’s property is situated.
In June 2019, the resident raised a complaint to the landlord about pigeons nesting above her bedroom window. She said that they were fouling the window and she did not feel that the landlord had provided a satisfactory response to this issue. Conversations regarding the pigeon issue continued into September 2019 however it is unclear as to whether this was pursued as a formal complaint at this stage.
On 18 June 2020, the resident reported that water was running over the blocked gutters at her property. She added that it looked like pigeons had made their nests in the gutters. The landlord has stated that the resident sent a follow-up email on 18 August 2020 but the details of this email have not been provided to this Service for review. The resident sent a further email on 25 October 2020 and said that the guttering outside her bedroom window was blocked which had caused damp and mould in her bedroom, she asked the landlord to fix this.
The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 6 November 2020 and expressed dissatisfaction that it had been five months since she had reported issues with the guttering outside one of the bedroom windows in the property and nothing had been done. She explained that she had reported the issue on 16 June 2020 and there was now a large damp patch on the internal wall. She was concerned that the damp would get worse in the winter months as the patch was wet and dripping. She added that the bedroom had only been decorated that year and was now ruined.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 9 November 2020 and said that it would respond by 20 November 2020.
The landlord’s records show that it followed up with its contractors at this time regarding the works needed to the guttering.
The landlord issued its stage one complaint response to the resident on 20 November 2020 and explained the following:
1. It acknowledged that the resident had first reported the issues with the guttering on 16 August 2020 and since then no work had been carried out. It apologised that there had been an oversight and said that this should have been picked up sooner. It confirmed that the issue would be discussed in its next meeting.
2. It explained that it had responded to the resident on 26 October 2020 and said that the job required scaffolding which it was in the process of arranging. There were issues around restrictions in the area and the landlord had to assess how the scaffolding was to be erected. Once this had been done and the scaffolding could be placed safely the work could go ahead. The landlord confirmed that it would monitor this to ensure the work was carried out swiftly.
3. The landlord upheld the resident’s complaint based on the time it had taken for the repair to be carried out. It confirmed that the resident could escalate the complaint if she remained dissatisfied.
The resident asked for her complaint to be escalated on the same day as she had reported the blocked guttering in June 2020 not August 2020 as the landlord has stated in its response. She said that it had also not fully acknowledged the impact of the damp in the bedroom of indicated a timeframe for resolving the issue. She asked the landlord to make good the inside of the property which had been damaged.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 23 November 2020 and said that it would respond by 4 December 2020.
The landlord issued its stage two complaint response to the resident on 3 December 2020 and apologised for the delay in completing the repairs and the omission in its original complaint response. It confirmed that it had taken longer than expected to resolve the problem and it was not clear as to whether the work had now been completed. It said that it would write to the resident again when it had the details she had requested. It added that once the damp patch in the bedroom had dried out, it would make good the damage to any decorations. It upheld the complaint and said that it would focus on pro-actively contacting tenants when it became aware of any delays in completing repairs. it confirmed that the resident could escalate the complaint if she remained dissatisfied.
The landlord’s records show that it emailed the contractors at this time to ask whether the guttering had been fixed and when the internal repairs would be scheduled.
The resident asked for her complaint to be escalated on 10 December 2020 as the drain was still blocked and water would continue to run down the walls until this was rectified. As she had reported this in June 2020, she expected this to have been remedied and for the landlord to know whether the work had been completed or not.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 15 December 2020 and explained that it would now arrange for a panel hearing to take place at stage three of its complaints process. It confirmed that it would let her know when this had been arranged.
The complaint panel hearing was held on 5 January 2021 via video conference. The scaffolding was approved to be placed on 6 January 2021.
The landlord issued its stage three complaint response to the resident on 19 January 2021 and explained the following:
1. It apologised for the inexcusable delay in completing work needed to the gutters and upheld the resident’s complaint. It could not find any evidence to confirm that a repair had been raised in June 2020 but admitted that the resident had sent an email at that time regarding the overflowing gutter. It explained that in order to fix the issue scaffolding was needed which required the permission of the neighbouring landowners. Two of the business owners had objected to the erection of the scaffolding which caused a delay. The landlord acknowledged that there had been an unreasonable delay between June and October 2020 where it had not followed-up on the progress of the work.
2. The landlord confirmed that its contractors had now visited the property and established that the issue was with the upper part of the guttering being blocked. It confirmed that it now had permission to erect scaffolding at the front of the property which would be placed on 25 January 2021 where the part would be repaired. It confirmed that once this was completed and the resident’s bedroom walls had dried out, it would repair and make good the damage to the resident’s bedroom. It added that it would provide the resident with a free choice of decoration, including wallpaper rather than paint if she wished or provide her with the financial equivalent for her to choose herself.
3. Its surveyors were due to meet with several land-owners in the area in February 2021 to discuss erecting scaffolding at the rear of the building so that any further issues could be identified and rectified. It apologised that there had been some confusion over the front and rear works but assured the resident that the blocked gutter would be repaired on 25 January 2021. It confirmed that it would personally oversee the works and continue to liaise with the resident to ensure she was informed of any further delays.
4. It also acknowledged that there had been an ongoing issue with pigeons around the building due to the proximity of local restaurants. It said that it had already undertaken work to resolve this, including the installation of spikes to prevent the pigeons from nesting. It said that it was continuing to investigate alternative options and would take photos from the roof once the scaffolding was erected to provide to its pest controller for further advice.
The landlord’s records show that the landlord took further action to prevent pigeons nesting at the property by installing netting between April and May 2021 and carrying out a deep clean of the area.
The resident contacted this service on 7 May 2021 for further support. She expressed concern that the internal works had not been carried out and the scaffolding was still in place. She explained that the pigeons were now nesting on the scaffolding which was closer to her windows. She added that she could not open or close the bedroom window due to the pigeon excrement, and whilst the landlord had done some cleaning of the area, it had not resolved the pigeon issue. She wanted the landlord to get rid of the pigeons and complete the internal decoration works to her bedroom.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of repairs needed to the guttering outside the resident’s property and internal works required following water damage.

The landlord’s repairs policy states that it would be responsible for keeping the structure and exterior of the property, including gutters and drains, in good repair. When a repair is reported by a resident it will be given a priority and handled accordingly. Emergency repairs should be made safe within 24 hours. Urgent repairs should be completed within five working days and routine repairs should be completed within 20 working days. It some cases, where specialised materials or equipment are needed to complete a repair these may take longer, however, the landlord would be expected to keep the resident updated and provide estimated timescales.
In this case the landlord has admitted that it had not acted within its timescales or communicated effectively with the resident and apologised for any inconvenience. It should be noted that some delay may have been unavoidable as a result of the restrictions in place as a result of Covid-19, which was outside of the landlord’s control. The landlord also faced issues gaining permission to erect scaffolding at the property due to business owners in the area rejecting this. this was also somewhat outside of the landlord’s control. However, the landlord would have been expected to keep the resident regularly updated on the progress of such works. In this case it is clear that the landlord did not provide clear information regarding the status of the repairs or when these would be completed. It also did not take any action to progress the work until 26 October 2020, despite the resident first raising her concerns in June 2020.
It is unclear from the evidence provided as to when the work to the guttering was completed although this was due to take place on 25 January 2021. It appears that this went ahead. However, in the resident’s communication with this Service on 7 May 2021 she expressed concern that the scaffolding had not been taken down and the internal work to her property had not been completed. When contacted by the Ombudsman, the landlord has not been able to confirm whether the internal works to the property have since been completed but said that it had called the resident on 1 and 2 July 2021 to arrange an inspection. Ultimately at this stage it had been over a year since the original issue was reported which amounts to an unreasonable delay in completing the works.
The resident has, historically, raised concerns about pigeons nesting at the property and has explained that she believed it was the pigeons which had caused the guttering issue. Her concerns about the pigeons did not form part of her formal complaint to the landlord raised on 6 November 2020. The landlord has confirmed that it has since put pigeon netting up to resolve this problem. If the resident remains dissatisfied about the landlord’s handling of her reports of pigeons at the property she may wish to raise a separate complaint to the landlord regarding this. The Ombudsman cannot consider this issue further as part of the current investigation because it has not exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure and we can only consider complaints which have first exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure under our rules.
Whilst the landlord upheld the resident’s complaint at each stage and identified its service failures, the length of time it has taken the landlord to resolve the issue is not sufficient and does warrant financial compensation for the delays and lack of communication, which caused the resident considerable distress and inconvenience. The landlord has not offered suitable redress to the resident in view of the delays, lack of communication and the inconvenience this may have caused. As such, there has been service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs needed to the guttering outside the resident’s property and internal works required following water damage.
The landlord should offer the resident financial compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused, and time and trouble she had spent pursuing this matter. If it has not already done so, the landlord should also arrange for an inspection of the inside of the resident’s property to take place to ensure that the decoration works have now been completed to a suitable standard. If this is not the case it should arrange for the works to be completed as required in line with the timescales listed in its repairs policy.

Record keeping

As part of this investigation the landlord was asked several times to provide documents, correspondence, and any other evidence relevant to the resident’s complaint. Only limited information was received, which did not include significant items such as the dates that repair orders for the guttering and internal works were raised and reported as completed.
The landlord has explained that it has since terminated the contract with the contractors who used to deal with its repairs and for this reason it was struggling to obtain the information the Ombudsman had requested. This is not an adequate response as the landlord should have its own records of repair works needed to its properties and whether this work has been completed, partly for circumstances such as these where it may be difficult to gain information from a former contractor.
When there is a disagreement in the accounts of the resident and the landlord with regard to the condition of the property, the onus would be on the landlord to provide documentary evidence showing how it satisfied itself that the repair work had been completed to a satisfactory standard. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures correctly.
We were still able to determine this case using the information that was available, as there were clear delays in completing the work needed to the guttering amounting to a service failure. However, the omissions indicate poor record keeping by the landlord in that it was not able to provide the relevant information when asked. This has also likely caused inconvenience for the resident as this Service has been unable to investigate her concerns in full or determine whether the issue is now fully resolved due to the lack of evidence provided.
Furthermore, in the landlord’s stage three complaint response, it stated that it would personally oversee the works and continue to liaise with the resident to ensure she was informed of any further delays to the repairs. As such, the landlord should have internal records of the works and correspondence with the resident about whether the repairs went ahead on 25 January 2021 as expected, that it could provide to this Service for review.
There has been service failure by the landlord in respect of its record keeping. The landlord’s overall lack of record keeping was likely to have caused the resident inconvenience in that it was unsure whether the work had been completed in December 2020 and has not been able to confirm whether the work has since been fully completed. As such, the landlord should offer the resident further compensation for the inconvenience caused. It is recommended that the landlord conducts a review of its record keeping processes, ensuring that there is a clear audit trail for its repair works, which provides details of specifically when the repair was raised and reported as completed.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs needed to the guttering outside the resident’s property and internal works required following water damage
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its record keeping.

Reasons

The landlord has demonstrated that it has utilised the complaints process to identify its service failures, including poor communication ad unreasonable delays in work being carried out. However, the landlord has not offered any form of redress to the resident for the inconvenience caused or her time and trouble spent pursuing this matter.
The landlord has not been able to confirm the dates on which the work to the external guttering and internal remedial works were completed which indicates poor record keeping. This poor record keeping is likely to have inconvenienced the resident in that the landlord was not able to confirm whether works had been completed in December 2020 or provide her with updates. It has also impacted the Ombudsman’s ability to fully investigate the resident’s complaint and confirm that all outstanding works have been completed.

Orders

The Ombudsman orders that the following actions take place within four weeks:
1. The landlord is to pay the resident £300, comprised of:
  1. £200 in recognition of the inconvenience caused and time spent as a result of the landlord’s handling of the repairs.
  2. £100 in recognition of the inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor record keeping.
2. The landlord is to arrange an inspection of the inside of the resident’s property to ensure that the decoration works have now been completed to a suitable standard. If this is not the case it should arrange for the works to be completed as required. The inspection should be carried out within four weeks and the landlord should arrange any repairs required as a result of the inspection in line with the timescales listed in its repairs policy.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord conducts a review of its record keeping processes, ensuring that there is a clear audit trail for its repair works, which provides details of specifically when the repair was raised and reported as completed.