Clarion Housing Association Limited (202101301)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202101301

Clarion Housing Association Limited

15 June 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 landlords handling of
    1. water ingress from the resident’s roof.
    2. the subsequent complaint about the roof repair.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident lives in a one bedroom fourth floor flat and holds an assured tenancy with the landlord which began in 2009.
  2. The resident has been having problems with water ingress since 2019. The leak mainly affected the kitchen and bedroom but later the living room was also affected. The water ingress was worse when there was heavy rainfall. The earliest record of a reported issue is in July 2019 after a plumber came to try and identify the source of a leak. The resident says that a hole was left in her ceiling which she covered with a plastic bag.
  3. The landlord attended to clear and unblock the roof outlets several times in 2019. In October 2019 it carried out a dye test and in November 2019, a water proofing treatment was applied to the roof to try and seal possible water ingress points. However, this was unsuccessful and the resident continued to experience water ingress.
  4. Following the repeated failures to patch repair the roof, the landlord carried out a survey by a roofing contractor in March 2020. Based on those findings, the landlord said that the roof had been laid at the wrong fall angle, meaning that water was ponding in different areas on the roof. The landlord said that the surveyor ‘identified insufficient falls, insufficient drainage, and also that the welded joints had been incorrectly finished with insufficient overlap.”
  5. The landlord said that it was often complex to identify the source of water ingress on a flat roof. It said that its attempts to identify the source had been unsuccessful partly due to the design of the roof. The landlord explained that “underneath the felt covering there was a 150mm layer of insulation on top of a concrete deck. Difficult to determine exactly where it (water) is entering the building as it could be tracking along the concrete from another location. The only way to resolve the issue is to strip the roof completely.”
  6. The landlord said that it was “not possible to make the entire roof water tight without the complete replacement of the roof covering” and therefore the work was referred to a planned works team rather than the routine repairs department.  
  7. On 11 March 2020, the resident made a formal complaint regarding the water ingress, the landlord’s failure to resolve the issue and the length of time it was taking to repair the roof. The resident did not agree with the landlord’s assessment of the situation and said that the issues were related to poor maintenance of the roof which was the responsibility of the landlord.
  8. On 20 March 2020, the resident was contacted by the technical inspector to advise the works would be placed on hold due to the Covid pandemic. The resident was informed that her complaint would be put on hold until repair works could be resumed. The landlord continued to make patch repairs to the roof in 2020 when needed but these attempts were unsuccessful in stopping the leak problem.
  9. In July 2020, the resident confirmed that she wanted all external work done first prior to any internal repairs and redecorations.
  10. Following the ease of lockdown restrictions in July 2020, the landlord arranged scoping of the planned works, estimates of associated costs were made and by September 2020 the works had been approved. The work was due to commence on 21 September 2020.
  11. On 29 September 2020, the landlord formally responded to the complaint the resident had made on 11 March 2020. The landlord provided a timeline of events outlining the process of setting up the major works. The landlord said that “works should take approximately 20 weeks to completion if all runs to plan.” The landlord offered the resident £250 which it said was for ‘delays and impact caused within your complaint.’
  12. On 18 November 2020, temporary repairs were again carried out by the landlord with a surveyor who had previously been inside the flat and knew the location of the leaks. The planned works began on 8 March 2021.
  13. The resident contacted the Chief Executive of the landlord by email on 12 March 2021 and made a further complaint about delays to the major works. The resident said that there was now a leak in the bedroom and internal damage to her property was being caused. The resident said that she had not received a proper update from the landlord regarding what was happening with the major works and why the repairs had been delayed. The resident asked for further compensation and said that “this claim that the roof was poorly laid in the beginning doesn’t mean that Clarion’s failure to clean and maintain the roof and drainage can be overlooked.”
  14. The landlord responded by email on behalf of the Chief Executive on the same day. The landlord offered the resident an additional £350 compensation. This was broken down as £100 for repairs completed outside of target, £100 for ongoing impact, and £50 for delay responding to the complaint made in March 2020.
  15. The landlord told the resident that there had been delays in the major works project due to the lack of a suitable site for storage and a mobile toilet for contractors. The landlord also said that Covid 19 had caused increased demand and supply shortages. It said the revised estimated completion date for the major works was 17 June 2021. The landlord accepted that there had been a lack of communication about delays and an update on the status of the works.
  16. The above response was then reviewed as part of the stage one complaints process on 14 April 2021, since the resident was not satisfied with the level of compensation offered. The resident also said she wanted all communication to be via email for her records. In this response, the landlord offered an additional £150 which it said was for ongoing impact and delay responding to the complaint. 
  17. On 19 May 2021, the landlord issued a stage 2 final response. The landlord increased the amount of compensation offered by a further £75 which it said was £25 for the delay to the review request and £50 for not using the resident’s preferred method of contact (email) in its previous communication with the resident.
  18. On 20 October 2021, the landlord confirmed to this service that the “roof covering to the 2 upper roofs has been completed and inspected as complete” but there were still some outstanding works to be carried out including work on balcony areas and installation of a new skylight which had to be reordered and would take 8-10 weeks to manufacture.
  19. The resident has advised that works continued ‘well into this year’ including work on the balcony area where until recently there had still been incidents of water ingress affecting her bedroom and living room.

 

Assessment and findings

Roof repairs

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. This includes the roof and the associated pipework and guttering. The landlord also had a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and the landlord is required to consider whether any water ingress is causing a damp or mould problem as well as tackle the water ingress issue itself.
  2. The landlord made several attempts to identify the source of the water ingress in 2019 but these were unsuccessful. In March 2020, it arranged a survey by a roofing contractor and then concluded based on those professional findings, that it was necessary to replace the entire roof in order to fix the problem. The decision to replace the entire roof was reasonable but the landlord could have arranged the survey earlier than it did given that problems had been reported since July 2019.
  3. The resident has said that the landlord failed to maintain the roof properly and should be held accountable for this. The landlord did attend to inspect and clear gutters in 2019 and 2020. It therefore met its repair obligations as set out in Section 11 above.
  4. It is not disputed that there was significant delay in carrying out the repair works. The earliest evidence of a report of water ingress seen by this service was July 2019. The main roof works were not completed until November 2021. This is a total period of 27 months during which the resident experienced water ingress which worsened during periods of bad weather.
  5. Government restrictions on repairs were in place during the Coronavirus ‘lockdown’ from the period of March 2020 until July 2020. This period is considered unavoidable delay and reduces the timeframe of delay on the repair by 5 months.
  6. The landlord has also cited issues relating to Coronavirus as further mitigation for the delays which the resident experienced. As part of its response to the resident’s complaint on 12 March 2021, the landlord explained that there was limited supply and heightened demand for items such as the storage and welfare unit which was essential for the work to commence.
  7. It is accepted that the weeks and months during and after lockdown restrictions were a difficult period for most organisations. This service is aware that staff and supply shortages affected many landlords and continuity of business. However, the delays experienced as a result were not totally unavoidable. In the circumstances, considering the overall difficulties for landlords during this time, it is reasonable to reduce the timeframe of delay on the repair by a further two months for these reasons.
  8. This leaves a total overall delay in repair of 20 months. This is an indication of the extended period during which the resident experienced the impact of the roof leaks which included damp problems and damage to personal belongings. This timeframe exceeds the target set out in the landlord’s repairs policy (given as 28 calendar days for routine repairs and unspecified for planned works). It is also well over the timeframe that was initially communicated to the resident in September 2020, which said the works were scheduled to take ‘approximately 20 weeks’.
  9. The landlord has accepted that there was a repair delay and has offered the resident redress in the form of financial compensation. The landlord’s compensation offers have altered over the period of the complaint. The landlord has attributed compensation amounts specifically for each service failure it has identified.
  10. In the case of delay on the repair itself, the landlord offered the resident £250 for delays on 29 September 2020, a further £100 for delay in repairs in March 2021, and a further £150 on 14 April 2021 for ‘ongoing impact and delay’. This is a total of £500 specifically for delays, which equates to approximately £40 per month of avoidable delay which is a reasonable rate and in line with Housing Ombudsman guidance.
  11. However, the landlord has acknowledged that although the main roof works were completed in November 2021, other repair works including work on the balcony and replacement skylight were continuing at least for a further 8-12 weeks. The resident has said these repairs continued ‘well in to this year’ and says that until these works were finished, water came in to her bedroom and living room.
  12. Given these circumstances, further compensation for repair delay needs to be provided. A payment at the same rate of £40 per month for a further 5 months is reasonable. An order has therefore been made below for a further compensation payment by the landlord of £200 in addition to the compensation already offered to the resident.

Complaints Handling

  1. The landlord has offered compensation for other service failures. The landlord has recognised that it failed to keep the resident informed of changes in the works schedule, and there were other communication failures such as delays in complaints responses and not using the resident’s preferred mode of contact which she stated as email for the purpose of record keeping.
  2. There was a significant delay in the landlord’s initial complaint response. While it is acknowledged that the situation during the Coronavirus lockdown was unprecedented, the landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaint until September 2020, seven months after her initial complaint and three months after lockdown restrictions had eased.
  3. The landlords complaints policy does not give a service standard for responding to complaints but says that one of its principles is “putting things right within reasonable timescales”. Ten to twenty working days is considered normal for a complaint response. A response explaining that planned works and costings were underway would therefore have been appropriate at a much earlier stage. 
  4. For overall impact of the other service failures, including acknowledged failures in communication and complaints handling, the landlord has offered compensation of £275. There is evidence that the landlord has demonstrated learning from the mistakes it has made, for example it has considered ways it can improve its customer interface so that communication preferences can be better recorded by staff. The offer of £275 made by the landlord to date is reasonable redress for the failings in complaints handling.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman scheme, there was service failure in the landlords handling of reports of water ingress from the resident’s roof.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 55b of the Housing Ombudsman scheme, the landlord has provided reasonable redress for the service failures in complaints handling.

Reasons

  1. The landlord has apologised and offered a total of £775 compensation. It said that the main roof work was completed in November 2021, but further works would continue for at least 8-10 weeks. A further compensation payment of £200 is therefore needed for repair work after November 2021.

Orders

  1. It is ordered that the landlord re-offers the resident the amount of £500 unless this has already been paid and pays the resident additional compensation of £200 within four weeks and provides confirmation of payment sent to this service.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord re-offers the resident the amount of £275 for complaints handling failures unless this has already been paid.