Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Hammersmith and Fulham Council (202017220)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202017220

Hammersmith and Fulham Council

13 December 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’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to her bathroom.

Background and Summary of Events

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a council. The tenancy commenced on 10 January 2000. The property is a three bedroom maisonette.
  2. On 24 January 2020, the resident reported a leak coming from her bathroom into her living room ceiling. The landlord’s repairs records note that the resident had contained the leak but it was still ongoing.
  3. On 3 February 2020, the landlord called the resident to confirm an appointment to carry out the repair on 5 February 2020. The landlord’s repairs records do not record what the repair was for, whether the repair was attended and if so, what the outcome was.
  4. On 4 May 2020, the landlord raised a job to regrout the tiles to the resident’s bathroom. On 4 August 2020 another job was raised to regrout the tiles to the resident’s bathroom, which noted that the job raised on 4 May 2020 was not completed. The landlord’s repairs records do not record whether the repair was attended and if so, what the outcome was.
  5. The landlord also raised a further job on 4 August 2020 following a report that the resident’s bathroom extractor fan was not working.
  6. The resident logged a formal complaint with the landlord on 17 August 2020. The resident complained about the standard of the service she had received from the landlord including its communication and delays in dealing with their concerns. The resident complained that:
    1. Issues with her bathroom (including mould, damp, generally deplorable condition) had been a reoccurring problem over the 20 years they had resided at the property and that after ‘‘constant perseverance’’ by their family, the landlord repaired parts of their bathroom in February 2020. However, within a week it became clear that the tiling would need to be redone.
    2. When they contacted the landlord in early April 2020 they were told the landlord was only dealing with emergency repairs due to Covid19. The resident said that this was understandable, however, there was also a leak that was causing water to leak into her kitchen ceiling which was already unstable.
    3. After follow up by her family, the landlord sent an operative on 18 June 2020 only for them to say that they couldn’t completed the job and that throughout the months of June-July they had to go back and forth with the landlord about the status of the job, only for them to get the wrong information from the repairs team and to be left for long periods of time without an update.
    4. An operative attended on 12 August 2020 to repair the bathroom tiles but the job was not completed. The resident said that they were told the operative was given the wrong information about the job. The resident said that the job should be rebooked and completed by the 27 August 2020 at the latest.
  7. On 20 August 2020, the landlord records note that the extractor fan in the bathroom could not be repaired and needed replacing.
  8. On 2 September 2020, the resident emailed the landlord to report that the contractor that was due to carry out works to the bathroom tiling that day had not turned up.
  9. On 4 September 2020, an appointment was raised for a surveyor to inspect ‘‘several’’ issues in the resident’s property. The landlord emailed the resident to advise that an appointment was to take place on 8 September 2020.
  10. The landlord issued its stage one response on 8 September 2020. The landlord said that it upheld the resident’s complaint, acknowledging that:
    1. The resident had received a poor level of service whilst trying to get her bathroom repairs completed, had tried to contact the landlord on a number of occasions to chase the repair and that it had taken far too long to address her concerns.
    2. The appointment on 12 August 2020 had been to regrout and not replace the tiles, for which it apologised.
    3. An appointment was then booked for 2 September 2020 but the operative went to the wrong address.
    4. The operative should have called to check and apologised that they did not do so.

The landlord offered the resident £100 for the inconvenience caused.

  1. On 9 September 2020, the bathroom extractor fan was replaced. However, the resident reported that it was insufficient and not making any difference.
  2. On 10 September 2020 a new appointment was made for the tiling works to be completed on 16 September 2020. However, when the operative attended they were unable to complete the job due to an issue with the boarding behind the tiles.
  3. On 6 October 2020, the resident contacted the landlord requesting that her complaint be escalated to stage two as she was dissatisfied with the response and lack of action taken by the landlord.
  4. The landlord issued its final response on 24 November 2020. The landlord apologised to the resident for the delay in its stage two response, explaining that it had a lot of evidence to consider, and for the inconvenience she had experienced with regards to missed repair appointments and its lack of communication with regards to the outstanding repairs to her home. The landlord confirmed that following its surveyor’s visit to the resident’s property on 8 September 2020, an order had been raised to address the outstanding repairs. These included:
    1. To repair crack to ceiling in living room and prepare for decoration.
    2. To repair the leaking tap in the toilet.
    3. To ease and adjust the front bedroom window, test and leave in good working order.
    4. To prepare and decorate right hand side wall to the rear bedroom and colour to match existing.
    5. To ease and repair sash to both bedrooms windows, test and leave in good working order.
    6. In the kitchen to:
      1. Repair small area of damaged ceiling and prepare for decoration.
      2. Prepare and decorate kitchen ceiling.
    7. In the bathroom to:
      1. Supply and fit new bath panel.
      2. Renew bath trap, ensuring it is water tight.
      3. Replace flooring with nonslip flooring properly sealed at perimeter.
      4. Repair and fix new tiles to bath splash back.
      5. Once roof leak is repaired, prepare and decorate walls and ceiling in bathroom.
    8. To prepare and decorate the walls and ceiling to the hall next to bathroom.
    9. To prepare and patch up paint to ceiling and walls in toilet and the hall next to toilet area.
    10. With regards to the bathroom roof to:
      1. Investigate and carry out necessary repairs.
      2. Renew flashing as necessary.
    11. To prepare and decorate walls and ceiling to first floor hall following water leak.
  5. The landlord said that its contractor would be attending on 3 December 2020 to carry out the repairs and that it understood this had been confirmed with the resident. The landlord acknowledged the length of time the repairs had taken to resolve and the inconvenience this had caused the resident. As a result the landlord offered the resident a further £150, in addition to the £100 it had offered in its stage one response, bring the total compensation offered to £250.

Assessment and findings

  1. In determining whether there has been service failure or maladministration we considered both the events that initially prompted a complaint and the landlord’s response to those events. The extent to which a landlord recognised any shortcomings and the appropriateness of any steps taken to offer redress can be as relevant as the original mistake or service failure. We may refer to a landlord’s own remedies policy and any other relevant guidance when considering whether the steps that the landlord took to resolve the complaint were reasonable.

Relevant legislation, agreements, policies and procedures.

  1. Under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord is obliged to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling house. This obligation is confirmed in section 1.2a(i) of the tenancy agreement.
  2. Section 1.2d states that the landlord will carry out repairs for which it is responsible within a reasonable time, giving priority to urgent repairs.
  3. The landlord’s Repairs and Maintenance Handbook provides a table of response times for a number of different priority repairs:
    1. Priority 1, Within two hours e.g. major leaks and total loss of power.
    2. Priority 2, Within 24 hours e.g. no working toilet and loss of heating in winter.
    3. Priority 3, Within three to five working days e.g. minor leaks and dripping pipes.
    4. Priority 4, Within five working days e.g. mechanical extractor fan not working.
    5. Priority 5, Within 20 working days e.g. replacement of damaged worktops.

Assessment

  1. The resident reported a leak from her bathroom ceiling into her living room on 24 January 2020. In accordance with the landlord’s Repairs and Maintenance Handbook, as a minor leak this should have been responded to within three working days, which would have been 31 January 2020. The landlord failed to book an appointment within this timeframe, its repairs records noting that an appointment was not arranged until 5 February 2020, three days later that than the timescale set out in its Repairs and Maintenance Handbook for a minor leak.
  2. At some point in early April 2020 the resident reported that whilst some of the repairs to the bathroom had been completed during the February visit, the tiles needed further works. There is no record of the resident reporting that the leak was ongoing at that time. In accordance with the landlord’s Repairs and Maintenance Handbook the landlord should have completed the repairs to the bathroom tiling within 20 working days. However, it is noted that between 28 March and 18 May 2020 Government guidance recommended that ‘‘access to a property is only proposed for serious and urgent issues’’.
  3. The landlord raised two jobs to regrout the tiles, initially on 4 May 2020 and then again on 4 August 2020, neither of which were completed. An operative then attend on 12 August 2020 but this job was not completed and on 2 September 2020 the operative that was due to attend that day did not turn up.
  4. The extractor fan not working was reported to the landlord on 4 August 2020. In accordance with the landlord’s Repairs and Maintenance Handbook this repair should have been attended to within five working days. However, the operative did not attend until 20 August 2020, 12 working days later, at which point it was established that the extractor fan needed replacing. The bathroom extractor fan was then replaced on 9 September 2020, a further 13 working days later.
  5. By this point there had been multiple occasions where the landlord failed to comply with the timescales set out in its Repairs and Maintenance handbook when responding to the resident’s repair reports, there had been a number of missed appointments and occasions where operatives attended but did not complete the repairs. This was not only inconvenient for the resident but also understandably frustrating and distressing.
  6. This was recognised by the landlord in its stage one response it which it acknowledged that the resident had received a poor service and offered the resident £100 compensation for the inconvenience caused.
  7. It has also been noted that whilst the repair records note that jobs were raised and provide an indication of the nature of the works involved, they do not record whether the repair was attended and if so when, what works were carried out of any nor what the outcome was.
  8. Given the concerns raised by the resident in her initial complaint about issues with their bathroom, it was appropriate at this point for the landlord to arrange for a survey to be carried out of the property to establish exactly what works were needed. The survey of the resident’s property was carried out on the same day as the landlord’s stage one response, 8 September 2020.
  9. Following the landlord’s stage one response there is evidence of a further appointment being made for the tiling to be completed, on 16 September 2020, but again the operative that attended was unable to complete the works.
  10. It was that this point that the resident requested that her complaint be escalated to stage two of the landlord complaints policy, expressing her understandable frustration and dissatisfaction with the way the landlord had handled her repairs.
  11. In its final response of 24 November 2020, the landlord apologised to the resident for the service she had received with regards to the repairs to her property, acknowledging the length of time the repairs had taken to resolve and the inconvenience this had caused the resident. To remedy this the landlord offered the resident a further £150, in addition to the £100 it had offered in its stage one response, bringing the total compensation offered to £250.
  12. The landlord also provided the resident with an extensive list of repairs, not only to the bathroom but also the living room, bedrooms, kitchen, hallways and bathroom roof, that had been identified in the surveyors report. It is noted that the repairs identified during the survey were significantly more extensive than the bathroom repairs complained about by the resident.
  13. The landlord said that its contractor would be attending on 3 December 2020 to carry out the repairs and that it understood this had been confirmed with the resident.
  14. Subsequent to the landlord’s final response to this complaint, there were delays in the completion of the repairs agreed to in the landlord’s final response. At the time the resident referred her complaint to this service on 28 March 2021 the resident advised that the repairs had still not been completed.
  15. This report has not investigated what happened following the landlord’s final response, as the landlord should first be given the opportunity to address the resident’s concerns about how it handled the subsequent repairs through its formal complaints process. When offering a remedy, the Ombudsman expects the remedy proposed to be followed through to completion within a reasonable time period.
  16. It is clear from the evidence that this did not happen in this case, and so, whilst the £250 compensation and the landlord’s agreement to carry out the more extensive works was fair and proportionate redress for its acknowledged failures at the time of the final response, the landlord has failed to complete those repairs within timescales set out in its response.
  17. Following contact from this service, on 7 December 2021 the landlord agreed to log a new complaint about how it handled the repairs it had agreed to carry out in its final response of 24 November 2020.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to her bathroom.

Reasons

  1. There were multiple failures by the landlord in response to the resident’s reports of repairs to her bathroom, including missed target timescales, missed appointments and repairs not completed. These failures were acknowledged by the landlord which apologised and offered £250 compensation to the resident for those failures. The landlord also arranged for a survey to be carried out of the resident’s property and agreed for more extensive repair works to be carried out. However, the landlord failed to complete those repairs within the timescales given in its final response. As such a finding of service failure has been made.

Orders and Recommendations

Orders

  1. That within 28 days of the date of this determination the landlord is to pay the resident:
    1. The £250 compensation offered in its final response, if it has not done so already.
    2. An  additional £100 for its failure to complete the repairs it agreed to in its final response within the timescales set out in that response.

Recommendation

  1. That the landlord reviews how it handled the repairs agreed in the final response of 24 November 2020 under its formal complaint process, taking into account any unreasonable delays and whether further compensation is owed to the resident.