Hammersmith and Fulham Council (202109138)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202109138

Hammersmith and Fulham Council

30 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

The complaint is about the level of compensation the landlord has offered for the delays in completing repair works to the resident’s property.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is a secure tenant living in a one-bedroom flat, his tenancy began on 20 July 1998.
The landlord has a repairs and maintenance policy which confirms that emergency repairs will be carried out within two to 24 hours to make safe, with an appointment being arranged with the resident for any further repairs. Urgent repairs will be carried out within three to five working days and routine repairs will be carried out within 20 working days.
The landlord has a Code of Conduct for its contractors. It states, amongst other things, that work will be carried out to a high standard, and that contractors will clear and remove all waste or make collection arrangements.
The landlord has a compensation policy that allows it to consider awarding compensation to residents where it has been responsible for a delay in resolving an issue or loss of facilities outside of its target timescales.

Scope of investigation

Initially the resident’s complaint concerned the landlord’s handling of works to resolve damp in his property and delays in decorating his bedroom following repairs from a previous leak in the property. The resident had asked for the following to resolve the complaint:

for the landlord to made good decorations in the bedroom
for the landlord to remedy the dampness which is currently untreated in the living room
compensation for the loss of use of the bedroom caused by the delays in completing the works to his property

Since the complaint has been with this Service, the resident has informed us that all the repairs have now been completed, which the landlord has confirmed. Therefore, the only outstanding complaint is the level of compensation the landlord has offered for the delays in resolving the issues.

Summary of events

On 20 June 2020, the resident contacted the landlord asking why it was taking so long to fix his bedroom ceiling following a leak in his roof in July 2019.
On 10 July 2020, the landlord sent its stage one response in which it said the following:

An asbestos survey needed to be carried out. This was arranged for 22 July 2019, however the contractors did not attend the appointment.
A further appointment was made but the landlord has no record of the report on its system.
As the survey was not carried out no further works to the ceiling were raised.
A new request was raised in June 2020 to repair holes in the ceiling, but it was placed on hold as its contractor could not obtain materials due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
An appointment was arranged to complete the plastering, but the contractors had said that they were no longer able to carry out the works, for which it apologised.
As its agreement with its contractors was ending, up until 31 July 2020, only emergency appointments were being raised.
A new contractor would be put in place on 1 August 2020 and the landlord would contact the resident after this date to arrange an appointment.
It apologised for the delays and offered £150 compensation for the inconvenience the resident suffered.

As the resident remained unhappy, the complaint was escalated to stage two on 13 July 2020.
On 27 July 2020, the landlord issued its stage two response. It confirmed that it would be in touch to make an appointment within the next couple of weeks for the new contractors to come and complete the works. It also offered the resident another £150 in compensation, bringing the total amount offered to £300.
On 18 November 2020, the resident made a further complaint as the works had not been completed. He said when the contractor came, he told the resident he had other jobs to complete that day and so would not be able to complete works on the resident’s property. Also, the resident complained that the electric light in his bedroom was not safe and that he could not take any more time off work to wait for the repairs to be completed. He added that he had taken many days off from work to facilitate the repair, but the landlord had not attended the property.
On 10 December 2020, the landlord sent its stage one response in which it said the following:

It apologised that the resident had to make another complaint about the completion of works to repair his ceiling and said it had “not provided the resident with the service he deserved”.
It said that it could see that the appointments made had not been kept by its contractor and that when the contractor has attended it had not completed the works.
It had fed the issues back to the contractor’s management and will use the feedback to help improve its service.
Due to the issues the resident had experienced, it had made an exception and arranged for works to be carried out over the weekend as the resident could not take any further time off from work.
It offered the resident a further £80 in compensation for the missed appointment, lack of communication and poor service.
An appointment was booked for 19 January 2021, which the resident told the landlord he could not take time off work to attend, and that the appointment would need to be made for a day during the weekend.

The resident then contacted his local MP and on 14 December 2020, the MP contacted the landlord asking for a full history of the resident’s case, reasons why the work had not been completed, what could be done to complete the works, and why the matter had not been adequately discussed with the resident by the landlord.
On 24 December 2020, the landlord responded to the MP’s request stating the following:

It was sorry to learn of the delay in completing the plastering and decorating works.
It appreciated the resident’s frustrations at the several rearranged appointments and the length of time the works had been outstanding.
It had spoken to the resident and raised a job to inspect the roof and trace any leak that may be found. It would then “ensure that the repairs to the property are carried out promptly…”
Regarding the resident’s request for a rent reduction for the loss of use of his bedroom due to damp and mould, it was organising an inspection by a surveyor to assess the property condition and whether any further works were required as it had been some time since the current internal repairs had been raised.

On 25 January 2021, the resident made another complaint to the landlord stating the following:

He received a text message on 21 January 2021, saying that an operative was on their way to his address even though he had made no appointment with them.
He received a phone call the next day asking if the contractor had arrived, he had to explain that never had any appointment with the landlord.
He had been told that his roof was going to be inspected which had not happened.
He was still paying full rent for the bedroom even though all the items from his bedroom were in his kitchen.
He would like his complaint resolved as it had been going on since 2018.

Throughout January and February 2021, the resident was chasing and corresponding with the landlord about the repairs. The landlord has several file notes showing that it chased for information and updates from its contractor.
On 5 March 2021, in an email to the landlord, the resident said that the previous contractor who had worked on his ceiling had left debris from the works in his bedroom.
Some of the landlord’s records are unclear and incomplete, however there is a final response letter dated 19 August 2021, where the landlord has responded to another complaint by the resident regarding the fact that he was still waiting for repairs to be carried out. In its final response, the landlord has said the following:

Tracing and repairing leaks can be difficult and it acknowledged the resident had experienced poor service. However, several attempts had been made to trace the leak. Some of these attempts, such as the one made in February 2021, found further leaks in the property, including one coming through the skirting board in the living room.
The scaffolding already in place had to be extended which required gaining a quote and approval. The works to the roof were completed on 10 April 2021.
An inspection was carried out on 22 July 2021, as the resident said that the walls were still wet, and the bedroom and ceiling works were not complete.
It agreed with the resident to carry out works to prepare and decorate the bedroom and living room and to clear the rubble left behind by the contractors from the previous job. These works had been arranged for the week commencing 23 August 2021.
Under its corporate complaints policy, it can only backdate a claim up to six months prior to a complaint being submitted.
Having reviewed the overall delays and inconvenience the resident experienced, it would like to offer a further £520 in compensation bringing the overall total compensation it had offered to £900.

On 8 September 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to say the works due to commence on 23 August 2021 had not started as the contractor had not turned up to the appointment.
On 8 September 2021, the landlord issued its final response letter in which it said the following:

It is sorry the works meant to start on 23 August 2021 did not go ahead as planned and that the resident was notified of this by the contractor.
It is also sorry that this happened on the resident’s birthday.
The operative who was assigned to start the work left the company without giving notice. The contractor arranged for a plasterer to attend who then subsequently went on sick leave. They tried to arrange for a sub-contractor to carry out the work, but none were available.
It asked the resident to advise of when he was next on leave so that it could arrange to have the works carried out.
It noted that the resident had not accepted the initial offer of £900 compensation. To take into account, the additional delays and the overall impact on the resident of the experience, it increased the offer to £1,200.

The resident bought the complaint to this Service on 21 October 2021.
Since the complaint has come to this Service, the landlord has confirmed that all the works outstanding were completed on 10 February 2022.

Assessment and findings

The initial repairs due to the property were following a leak in the roof that occurred in July 2019, which caused water damage to the bedroom and to the living room walls. A further leak was identified in the living room which the resident reported had caused him not to have full use of the room.
The landlord has offered £1,200 in total to the resident, which is a significant amount of compensation. However, what must also be considered is the level of impact that the resident has reported as having suffered due to the landlord’s delays.
For almost three years the resident had to consistently chase the landlord for the works to be completed, sometimes on a weekly basis. This included contacting the landlord to get its contractors to clean up debris they left in his bedroom. This is despite the fact the landlord’s Code of Conduct states that contractors will clean up and remove all waste. Pictures taken of the damaged bedroom show that the bedroom light fitting was left with exposed wires, even though the room was suffering from damp, therefore it is understandable that the resident was concerned about the safety of the light fitting. There were numerous occasions where the resident took time off work to allow the landlord to attend the property to complete the works. However, the works were either not carried out, not completed, or the contractors failed to attend the appointments made and, on occasion, without giving the resident any notice that they would not be attending.
The resident has said that due to the ongoing issues he was not able to use the bedroom and had to move his personal belongings out of the room. Also, the resident told this Service that he had not been able to fully use the living room due to the damp and the fact that he is asthmatic. He said this meant that he could not stay in the living room for long periods of time. The resident says that the landlord is aware of that he has asthma, however the landlord’s records do not show any evidence of it being aware of any medical condition that the resident has.
The evidence shows that the landlord did act in raising the repairs promptly and in trying to rearrange appointments when scheduled works were not carried out. This included making an appointment for works to be carried out on a weekend as the resident said he could not take any more time away from work. However, the landlord has a responsibility to meet its obligations in terms of completing repairs to the property for which it is responsible within the timescales laid out in its policy and on multiple occasions this did not happen.
The landlord did make sure make sure that missed appointments were rebooked. However, this Service has not seen any evidence surrounding what specific measures it took with its contractors to try and resolve the issues. Also, the landlord did not outline to the resident what measures would be put in place to prevent the issues from reoccurring.
In the landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy the longest timescale it has for carrying out works is 20 working days. Even taking into account circumstances which have reasonably caused some delay such as the difficulty in tracing the source of the leak, new leaks appearing in the living room, and delays caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, the landlord has far exceeded its own timescales for completion of the repairs.
The landlord has admitted that it has repeatedly failed the resident and that it had “not provided the resident with the service he deserved” and it has offered, in total, £1,200 in compensation. The resident has said that he does not believe this amount is adequate and it does not reflect the fact, nor has the landlord mentioned, that he has had to live in a damp flat throughout the time that the repairs have been ongoing.
The resident believes that although he has continued to make full rental payments, he has not had full use of the property, a claim which the landlord has not disputed. In its responses to the resident’s complaints the landlord has said, on each occasion, that the compensation was for the delays and inconvenience caused by the repeated missed appointments. There is no mention in any of its responses of the fact that the resident was living in damp conditions, and only had partial use of his home.
The resident’s property is a one-bedroom flat. From July 2019 up until February 2022, because of the delays in the landlord completing repairs, the resident did not have full and proper use of a very significant part of the overall property. It is reasonable to say that this represented a significant hinderance to resident’s ability to be able to make use of and enjoy his home in the manner that he should expect. It also caused considerable distress and inconvenience to the resident, as noted in his email to the landlord dated 5 March 2021, where the resident asked the landlord “how much longer am I supposed to live and go to work like this”.
There is an outstanding issue regarding the resident’s request for a reduction in rent for the period of the delays because of a loss of use of the bedroom. The landlord told the resident’s MP in its response on 24 December 2020, that it would consider the resident’s request following an inspection by its surveyor. The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the resident’s request has been considered and responded to by the landlord and so its response on this matter was not appropriate.
The landlord should have taken into account the impact of the repairs delays on the resident’s use of his property and the inevitable distress that will have been caused by him living in a property for almost three years that it knew to be in an unsuitable condition when considering its offer of compensation. Therefore, whilst the sum it has offered is significant, it does not go far enough to adequately compensate the resident for what he has suffered because of the delays in completing the works on his home.
The Ombudsman has three Dispute Resolution Principles which it believes are good practise for the effective resolution of complaints, one of these principles is to “Learn from Outcomes”. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence that the landlord used this complaint as an opportunity to see how it could improve the service it delivers in leak and damp cases in the future.
In summary, the landlord has apologised and acknowledged its service failings in resolving damp at the resident’s property over the course of almost three years. However, its compensation award did not recognise the full impact of this failure on the resident and it did not address the resident’s request for a rent reimbursement. It also neglected to use the complaint as an opportunity to learn lessons so did not offer sufficient redress given the circumstances of the case.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in the amount of compensation it has offered for the delays in completing repair works to the resident’s property.

Reasons

The landlord’s compensation offer does not adequately reflect the level of distress and inconvenience caused to the resident, it did not answer his request for a rent reimbursement, and it did not learn lessons from its handling of the case in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles.

Orders

The landlord to write to the resident to apologise for the service failures identified in this report.
If it has not already done so, the landlord is to pay the resident £1,200 compensation it offered in its final response letter.
In addition, the landlord to pay the resident a further £400 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused to him.
The landlord to consider, in line with its procedures, the resident’s request for a reduction in his rent due to the loss of use of his bedroom for the period in which the completion of the outstanding works was delayed. It must then write to the resident with an outcome of its considerations.

The landlord should confirm compliance with these orders to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.