Network Homes Limited (202005315)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202005315

Network Homes Limited

5 July 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:
    1. the amount of compensation offered by the landlord in relation to repair works following the resident’s reports of a leak;
    2. delays to the landlord reinstating the resident’s lighting following the repair works.

Background

  1. The resident has been an assured tenant at the property of the landlord since 5 March 2001. The landlord is a registered provider of social housing. The property is a flat on the second floor of the building. The roof of the building is above the resident’s flat.
  2. The resident initially raised concerns about a leak coming from the roof into both her flat and a communal area in or around May 2019. Contractors attended and established that scaffolding was required which was erected in early July 2019. The roofers replaced two downpipes and applied a waterproof coating to the roof to fill any gaps. The scaffolding was then removed in August 2019.
  3. On 1 October 2019, the resident reported having no power in her property. An out-of-hours contractor attended as an emergency repair and found water within the lighting fixtures in the resident’s kitchen and bathroom. The contractor disconnected the lighting fixtures in these rooms and left the power working elsewhere in the property. The landlord provided temporary lighting to the resident around this time.
  4. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 2 October 2019 as she felt that no action had been taken following her previous reports of leaks into her property. She expressed concern that she could not see in the bathroom or kitchen and that she felt it was dangerous to wash or cook in the dark. She had been informed that the roof was due to be repaired in mid-October 2019 but did not feel that she could wait that long for her lighting to be reinstated. She explained that the leak and loss of lighting was affecting her physical and mental health and wanted the landlord to refund her the rent she had paid since 1 October 2019 until the issue was resolved.
  5. The landlord’s stage one response acknowledged that the time taken to complete repairs to the roof fell below its expected timescales and the resident had needed to chase the repair and updates. It subsequently offered £40 compensation. The resident advised she was dissatisfied with this offer and subsequently requested an escalation of her complaint on 21 October 2019.
  6. In its stage two response, the landlord noted that the resident had initially reported a leak in May 2019 and detailed the actions it had taken at the time in an attempt to resolve it. It confirmed that work to clear the guttering and apply a waterproof coat to the roof had been completed in July 2019 and noted that no further reports of leaks were received from the resident until the most recent incident on 1 October 2019, in which the resident reported a loss of power. Following the resident’s further report, the landlord confirmed that part of the roof was sealed and re-pointed on 23 October 2019 but further works were still required. Part of the guttering was then replaced and a temporary repair to a vent was completed on 6 November 2019. It explained that the contractors had recommended further works to replace the roof vents and guttering which was due to take place by the end of December 2019. The landlord acknowledged that it could have done more to prevent unnecessary delays during both incidents of leaks and that there were steps it could have taken to lessen the likelihood of the issue reoccurring which would have prevented the need for further repairs. It apologised to the resident for the inconvenience caused and increased its offer of compensation to £354 in recognition of the time and trouble, delays and distress caused to the resident. It noted that its records were unclear as to whether internal works were required and asked the resident to make contact if this was the case.
  7. Following the complaint, the resident reported that her lighting had not been reinstated. The works to the roof were completed and the scaffolding was removed on 5 December 2019. The landlord informed the resident on 11 December 2019 that it would need to ensure that the leak was resolved before reinstating the lighting but that the job had been raised. The resident has advised that she called the landlord twice in October 2020 regarding the lighting and that the lights were reinstated on 6 November 2020.
  8. The resident referred her complaint to this Service as she remained dissatisfied with the level of compensation offered by the landlord in relation to the issues reported and felt that the landlord had not explained its decisions when awarding the figure. She was also dissatisfied with the level of communication from the landlord. She maintained that the property had been uninhabitable for 13 months as a result of the leak and loss of lighting in her kitchen and bathroom, which had no windows. She wanted the landlord to refund the rent she had paid for the time she had spent without lighting in the property.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has said she considers that the issues affecting her property have impacted her health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments, however, it is beyond the remit of this service to decide on whether there was a direct link between the repair issues experienced and the resident’s health. The resident therefore may wish to seek independent legal advice on making a personal injury claim if she considers that her health has been affected by any action or lack thereof by the landlord. Whilst this service cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any errors by the landlord.
  2. As part of her correspondence, the resident advised she had also experienced issues with her heating system, the lighting in the communal area outside of her property and tiles within the property. As these are separate issues to the complaint brought to this service, this is not something that the Ombudsman can adjudicate on at this stage, as the landlord needs to be provided with the opportunity to investigate and respond to these aspects of the complaint. The resident will need to contact the landlord and, if appropriate, raise a separate complaint in the first instance.

Compensation relating to repair works

  1. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for repairs needed to the structure and exterior of the property which would include drains, gutters, external pipes and the roof. The landlord is also responsible for repairing any issues with the electricity supply to a property such as electricity cables and light fittings. The landlord’s repairs policy states that the landlord would aim to make safe an emergency repair issue within four hours and that follow-on works may then be required. The policy also states that loss of lighting or power in one room would not be responded to within the landlord’s emergency timescales. Routine repairs, including those which are not considered emergencies, should be completed within 15 working days and planned repairs, including bigger repair jobs such as those to roofs, should be completed within 90 days. The landlord would be expected to keep the resident regularly updated on the progress of the works and aim to provide an indicative timeframe in order to manage their expectations.
  2. The resident first reported a leak into her property on 3 May 2019. A repair order was raised on 10 May 2019 and works to replace guttering clips and apply a waterproof layer to the roofing were completed around 11 July 2019. This work was completed within the landlord’s 90-day timescale for planned repairs, however, as the leak was continuous throughout this period, it may have been appropriate for the landlord to have resolved the matter sooner in the circumstances.
  3. Following the resident’s report of a loss of power on 1 October 2019 the landlord acted appropriately by initially attending the property within its emergency timescales and disconnecting the light fittings in the resident’s bathroom and kitchen which resolved the power outage. It also acted appropriately by providing the resident with temporary lighting for these rooms on 4 October 2019 as there were no windows and the resident had expressed concern about showering or cooking in the dark. Following this, scaffolding was erected on 22 October 2019 and work to resolve the leak was carried out on 23 October 2019 which included sealing the valley of the roof, clearing and re-aligning the guttering, installing eave support trays, sealing a vent and re-pointing a ridge as cement was loose and missing. The landlord has confirmed that this did not resolve the issues and further work was carried out on 6 November 2019 to replace part of the guttering. It also advised that the contractors had recommended further works which appear to have been completed by 5 December 2019 as the records indicate that this was when the scaffolding was removed from the building.
  4. In its stage two response, the landlord appropriately acknowledged that the roof works had taken a significant period to complete, which was beyond the targeted timeframes within its repairs policy. The Ombudsman acknowledges that it is not always possible to complete repair works within the targeted timeframes of a repairs policy, and that circumstances beyond the landlord’s control, such as weather and the availability of specialist equipment such as scaffolding can cause reasonable delays. It should also be noted that it can take more than one attempt to resolve issues such as leaks as it can be difficult to identify the cause of an issue at the outset and in some case different repairs may need to be attempted before the matter is resolved.
  5. The landlord advised in its formal response that it could have done more to prevent the issue reoccurring, however, it did not elaborate on what these steps would have been. This would have caused confusion for the resident, and it would have been helpful had it provided more detail to support this statement.
  6. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  7. In its formal responses, the landlord acknowledged that the time taken to complete the roof works had caused distress, time and trouble for the resident. Given that it had accepted it could have done more to resolve the issues, its initial offer of £40 compensation was not sufficient to remedy its service failures. The resident also spent significant time and trouble pursuing the matter and there is no evidence to suggest that she was provided with regular updates regarding the progress of the repairs by the landlord. As such, it was appropriate that the landlord apologised for its service failure and increased its offer of compensation to £354 to reflect the time, trouble, distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
  8. The resident has expressed concern that there was a lack of transparency about how the figure was calculated. The landlord has confirmed that the amount was comprised of £55 for the delay, distress and time and trouble experienced by the resident in relation to the initial works between 7 May 2019 and 10 July 2019, and £299 for the delay, distress and time and trouble experienced by the resident in relation to works between 30 September 2019 and 31 December 2019 and for the loss of lighting in her kitchen and bathroom during this period.
  9. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, this amount of compensation, along with the landlord’s apology, is considered proportionate in recognising the impact the landlord’s failings had on the resident during these periods and amounted to reasonable redress for the element of the complaint relating to the completion of its roof repair works.

Reinstatement of the resident’s lighting

  1. Following the resident’s reports of a loss of power in October 2019, it is not disputed that the landlord disabled the lighting in her kitchen and bathroom. The resident has claimed that her property was uninhabitable due to the loss of lighting which continued for a 13-month period between October 2019 and November 2020. She has subsequently requested that the landlord reimburse her for the rent she had paid during this period.
  2. In accordance with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the Decent Homes Standard and the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, a landlord has a responsibility to ensure that a property it is ‘fit for human habitation’ and free from category one hazards, meaning that there are facilities for bathing, cooking and sleeping and there are no immediate risks which would put a resident in immediate danger. Whilst the loss of lighting within her kitchen and bathroom would have been frustrating and inconvenient for the resident, there is no evidence to suggest that the property was uninhabitable during this period or that there was any category one hazards which could cause immediate danger to the resident. The resident is responsible for paying her rent in line with her tenancy agreement. In the circumstances, the Ombudsman does not consider it proportional for the landlord to reimburse the resident for the rent payable during this period or provide compensation for loss of facilities as the resident was able to use her bathroom and kitchen through the provision of temporary lighting.
  3. It is of concern, however, that in its formal response, the landlord advised that it did not know whether internal repairs were required. The resident’s complaint clearly indicated her concern regarding the loss of lighting in her kitchen and bathroom. Additionally, the Ombudsman would expect a landlord’s repair logs to note that temporary lighting was installed and that it was yet to be removed. This is likely to have caused uncertainty for the resident who felt that her concerns had not been addressed. This also indicates poor record keeping by the landlord and demonstrated that it had not reviewed the previous communication or repair logs.
  4. Following its stage two complaint response, the landlord confirmed on 11 December 2019 that the repair issue related to the resident’s lighting had been raised but that it would need to wait for confirmation that the leak had been resolved before arranging for the lighting to be reinstated. Given that continued water leaking into the electrical fittings posed a risk, this course of action was reasonable. This service has not, however, received any evidence to suggest the landlord communicated further with the resident following the completion of the works. Having raised her expectations that it would arrange the reinstatement of the lighting following completion of the works, this failure to contact her would have caused further distress to the resident.
  5. The landlord’s failure to reinstate the resident’s lighting following the completion of the works, despite having promised to do so, amounts to maladministration in the circumstances, for which additional compensation is appropriate. When considering compensation, the Ombudsman notes that there is an onus on both parties to be proactive in the resolution of a dispute. The Ombudsman has therefore taken into account that while a significant amount of time passed between the completion of the works and the reinstatement of the resident’s lighting, the resident did not raise this issue with the landlord again until 10 October 2020.
  6. Having raised this concern, however, the landlord did not attend to the lighting until 6 November 2020, which was beyond the 15 working day timescale for routine repairs as noted in its repairs policy.
  7. In view of the delay in reinstating the lighting in the resident’s kitchen and bathroom, both immediately after the completion of the roof works, and following the resident’s further reports in October 2020, and in view of the landlord’s lack of communication, an additional £200 compensation is appropriate to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. This amount is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which states that amounts in this range are proportionate where the Ombudsman has found considerable service failure, but there may be no permanent impact on the resident.
  8. Given that the landlord’s stage two complaint investigation failed to recognise that the resident’s lighting hadn’t been reinstated, a recommendation has also been made below that the landlord’s complaints handling staff undergo refresher training.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, and in the Ombudsman’s opinion, there was reasonable redress offered by the landlord for its service failure in relation to repair works following the resident’s reports of a leak.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its delays in reinstating the resident’s lighting following the repair works.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay compensation of £200 for any distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its delays in reinstating the resident’s lighting following the repair works.
  2. This amount must be paid within four weeks of the date of this determination.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord to contact the resident within four weeks of the date of this determination and reiterate its offer of £354 compensation, if this is yet to have been accepted.
  2. The Landlord to take steps to ensure that its complaints handling staff have up to date training. This should also include consideration of this Service’s guidance on remedies at https://www.housingombudsman.org.uk/aboutus/corporateinformation/policies/disputeresolution/guidance-on-remedies/ and the completion of our free online dispute resolution training for landlords at https://www.housingombudsman.org.uk/landlords/e-learning/.