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

Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited (202104684)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202104684

Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited

28 February 2022


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 handling of water damage in the resident’s property.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a bungalow.
  2. On 26 May 2021 the resident brought her complaint to this Service, regarding the landlord’s handling of repairs and damage following a leak in her property. She said the landlord had advised her to contact her insurance for the damages, however she believed that the leak was caused by the work of the contractors. On 27 May 2021 we passed the resident’s concerns to the landlord for a response. This Service explained the nature of her complaint, and advised that she remained dissatisfied with its response to her request for compensation. We noted that, the resident asked the landlord to; re-plaster and repaint the walls; replace the carpet and pay her £300 compensation for damage to her personal belongings.
  3. Although the resident’s original complaint was not provided, we have received the landlord’s summarised version of her complaint made on 27 May 2021. It said that the resident reported that in October 2019, she had a new bath fitted, and in December 2020 she noticed a leak from the other side of the wall (bedroom). The landlord noted that she reported the leak on 5 December 2020 and it attended on 6 December 2020. It also noted that she said a plumber told her that the leak was due to “dodgy workmanship”. Thus, the resident believed it was the landlord’s responsibility to make repairs and compensate her accordingly. (no repair records were provided).
  4. Internal emails between staff on 8 June 2021 showed that a contractor had attended the resident’s property in December 2020 and made safe the leak. The contractor returned (the date is not specified) and fixed a pipe, which was leaking from a fitting in the wall from a shower which had been installed three years previously. The contractor found that the fitting “hadn’t been soldered (job done by previous contractors)” and so the contractor re-routed the pipe work so that it was surface mounted. The contractor reported that water leaked down a wall in a cupboard in the bedroom (not the entire bedroom), and also that there was mould on the cupboard wall which needed a course of mould paint.
  5. According to the landlord’s records it completed the mould treatment to the resident’s cupboard wall on 8 June 2021. On that same day the resident contacted this Service and confirmed that the landlord had sent someone to clean and repaint the damp and mould on the wall.
  6. On 8 June 2021 the landlord issued its stage one complaint response. It apologised that the resident had cause to complain. It noted that the resident reported a leak on 5 December 2020 and it attended on 6 December 2020. The landlord advised that it had visited the resident’s home, and found no damage to plasterwork, decorations, nor damage to the carpets or personal belongings caused by the leak. Accordingly, it said it had not found any evidence that it was responsible for any damage. It said that it did find a “small amount of mould on the wall” which it would have treated with mould paint.
  7. The resident requested to escalate her complaint on 25 June 2021. She said that it did not respond to an email sent on 14 June 2021 about the leaking pipe (this email has not been provided for this investigation). She explained that the leak had been building up for 14 months and had damaged her documents and shoes, which needed replacing. She said the bedroom carpet was wet and would not dry out. She also said that the landlord had painted the walls but that did not solve the problem because the walls still held water. She said that she had to sleep in her front room due to the damage, and because she had a medical condition, and could not leave the damp and mould any longer, she had to clean it herself. She said the landlord advised her to claim from her insurance, however she said that it was the landlord who had her property refurbished, and so she believed it should rectify the damage caused.
  8. On 30 June 2021 the landlord issued its final complaint response. It advised that its decision remained the same. It said it had not received her letter dated 14 June 2021. The landlord stated that on 2 June 2021, its repairs operational manager visited her home and found no damage to the plasterwork, decorations or carpets. It reported that the carpet was not wet at the time of the visit and it found no damage to her personal belongings caused by the leak. It advised that it had no liability in that regard. The landlord provided information on how she could contact this Service if she was dissatisfied with its response.

Assessment and findings

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement sets out the rights and responsibilities of the resident and landlord. It advises that the landlord is responsible for the structure of the building and will maintain and repair walls, external pipes and floors (but not floor coverings). It will keep all fixtures and fittings supplied by it, for the supply of water, and for sanitation in repair and proper working order.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy aims to provide a timely and cost-effective responsive repairs service, and to ensure ongoing compliances with all its legal and regulatory responsibilities. It advises residents to report repairs promptly. The policy uses a red, amber and green (RAG) status, which indicates the priority of the job and its target time for completion. It advises 24 hours for uncontrollable leaks, major health and safety risk; 60 days for routine work and 90 days for plastering and internal plumbing jobs.
  3. The landlord’s compensation policy encourages all residents to have home contents insurance. It explains that the policy does not cover; compensation for resident improvements; financial support to residents for redecorating costs following improvement work or where damage is covered under a contents insurance policy.

The landlord’s handling of water damage in the resident’s property

  1. In reaching a decision we consider whether the landlord has followed proper procedure and good practice, and acted in a reasonable way. Our duty is to determine complaints by reference to what is, in the Service’s opinion, fair in all the circumstances of the case. The Service has a very specific role in considering whether the landlord has met its obligations to a resident and taken reasonable steps to resolve the complaint.
  2. The resident reported a leak on 5 December 2020. The landlord attended promptly and made safe on 6 December 2020, this was in line with its repair policy of 24 hours for uncontrollable leaks or major health and safety risk. The contractor found that a pipe fitting hadn’t been soldered previously and so it corrected the pipework. In accordance with the tenancy agreement the landlord is obligated to keep fittings in proper working order. Therefore, it was necessary and appropriate for the landlord to investigate the resident’s reports of a leak and take appropriate action to resolve the issues it identified.
  3. The resident asked the landlord to re-plaster and repaint her walls, and also replace the carpet in her bedroom. When deciding on how best to proceed with the repair, it is reasonable for a landlord to rely on the conclusions of its appropriately qualified staff and contractors. In this case, the contractor concluded that water leaked down the wall in a cupboard, not the entire bedroom. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to remedy that specific section of the room. In the landlord’s complaint response, it confirmed that when it visited the resident’s home it found no damage to plasterwork, decorations, carpets or personal belongings caused by the leak. Therefore, the landlord was within its right to decide that it had no liability in that regard. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s advice to contact her insurance for the damages, as she believed the landlord should be held responsible. Under its compensation policy the landlord encourages residents to have home contents insurance. The landlord would not be expected to pay the cost or to replace damaged items where there is no evidence that it’s actions or inaction led to the damage, so its advice to make a claim through the resident’s contents insurance was therefore reasonable in the circumstances. 
  4. The resident stated that the leak was caused by the work of the landlord’s contractors, and so it should compensate her for the damage. When the landlord attended the resident’s home, it found no damage to her personal belongings caused by the leak. The contractor in December 2020 said the pipe hadn’t been soldered properly three years previously, and the resident told the landlord the leak had been building up for 14 months However, nothing in the evidence gives an indication as to how long the leak may have been occurring, and a landlord is only expected to address an internal repair issue once it has been reported by a tenant. In this case, the landlord responded promptly to the resident’s repair report, and assessed and addressed any damage resulting from the leak at that time. The resident’s and landlord’s views of how much damage was caused differ widely, but without robust evidence to support the resident’s complaint, there is nothing suggesting the landlord’s response to her reports and complaint were not reasonable.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of water damage in her property.

Reasons

  1. The landlord acted in line with its policies and procedures, to investigate the water damage and make safe the area. Given it found no damage to plasterwork, decorations, carpets or personal belongings caused by the leak, it was not unreasonable for the landlord to decline the resident’s requests for compensation and direct her to her home contents insurance.