Milton Keynes Council (201902957)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 201902957

Milton Keynes Council

31 January 2023

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 landlord’s:
1. Response to the resident’s reports of multiple repairs required at the property.
2. Complaint handling.
3. Record keeping.

Background and summary of events

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a local authority. The property is a two bedroom new purpose built bungalow for wheelchair residents. The resident is visually impaired, partially sighted and her son has a heart condition.
The landlord did not provide a Tenancy agreement but according to the information received from the resident the tenancy started in 2015.
The general terms and conditions of the tenancy provided by the landlord say:
1. It will keep the resident’s home in repair in accordance with section 11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. This will include but not be limited to:
  1. The structure and exterior of the dwelling. This includes chimneys, external decoration, external doors, drains, fences, garages, gutters, outside pipes, roofs, sheds it has provided, steps, walls, interior doors and floors;
  2. Kitchen and bathroom fixtures and fittings, sinks, toilets, baths, and showers fitted by the landlord;
  3. Electrical wiring, gas, water and soil pipes;
  4. Space and water heating.
2. The landlord will do repairs in a reasonable time and how long this will take depends on how urgent the repair is.
The landlord does not have a Repairs policy. In its Tenancy handbook it says that it will make safe an emergency repair within 4 hours and complete a routine repair within 28 days.
The landlord’s complaints policy states that complaint is a clear expression of dissatisfaction about its service (whether that service is provided directly by the landlord or by a contractor or partner). Complaints will be acknowledged within five working days and stage one investigations should be completed and a full response given to the customer within 20 working days from receipt of the complaint. In exceptional circumstanced, the landlord may extend this with 10 working days and will keep the resident updated on the reasons for the delay.
Acknowledgements should be sent for all stage two complaints within 5 working days. Stage two investigations should be completed and a full response given within 20 working days from receipt of complaint.
In terms of compensation, landlord’s Complaints policy states that an ex gratia payment may be made in goodwill to settle complaints and this should be discussed with the Corporate Customer Feedback Manager, taking into account the local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s Guidance on good practice remedies.
According to The housing health and safety rating system ( HHSRS), damp and mould are assessed as category one hazards caused by reduced ventilation and increased humidity. Preventive measures that could have a significant effects on ventilation and moisture production:
1. damp proof courses, membranes and detailing around doors and window openings;
2. external fabric kept in good repair to avoid rain penetration;
3. properly installed baths, sinks etc.;
4. properly installed drainage;
5. properly installed and maintained rainwater goods;
6. properly ventilated roof and under floor spaces to ensure timber remains air dry;
7. continuous low-level background ventilation where necessary;
8. sufficient means of ventilation to cope with moisture from normal domestic activities without the need to open windows that could lead to heat loss, noise and security risks; and
The resident reported to this service that they had raised issues with defective drainage, damp wet-rooms, water leakage from the wet- room, defective windows and doors, issues with electric wiring since 2015-2016. The issues were also raised at the time together with two other neighbours, whose properties were also built in 2015 and had similar structural problems.
For the period from March 2017 until May 2019, the landlord’s repairs record evidence that the landlord has raised 33 jobs to the property, these including but are not limited to:
1. Heating issues raised four times related to insufficient heating from two radiators, loss of heating and lack of thermostat on 25 April 2017, on 13 February 2018, 7 March 2018, 11 February 2019. The landlord attended on each occasion and marked as completed on the repairs record respectively on15 May 2017, 15 February 2018, 7 March 2018, 11 February 2019.
2. Rotten carport panels was raised on 25 April 2017 and marked as completed on 12 May 2017.
3. Issues with electrics were reported twice on 24 April 2017 and 15 February 2018 related to intermittent electrics, coming on and off, issues with kitchen sockets. The landlord attended each time and marked as resolved.
4. As per the note of 4 October 2018, the drainage issues had been reported a few times. On 4 October 2018, the landlord raised a job for the drains to be inspected with a camera, but this Service has no information on the outcome. Between 17 May 2019 and 7 October 2019, the landlord arranged weekly flushes to the drainage. On 17 April 2019 another job was raised to clean the drains.
5. Defective windows (altogether seven blown windows), five were reported on 25 April 2017 and marked as completed on 08 June 2017 and 2 were reported on 18 March 2019 and marked as completed on 15 April 2019.
6. The front door not closing properly was raised twice, raised on 2 January 2019 and marked as complete on 7 January 2019 and again on 5 April 2019 and marked as resolved on 15 April 2019.
7. The bathroom issues raised for this period included:
  1. Mould and fungus in the bathroom on 19 November 2018, marked on the repair log as completed on 10 December 2018.
  2. Repair request to raise the WC and repair the bathroom shower floor logged initially on 25 April 2017, and marked as completed on 9 June 2017.
  3. Shower waste back surge and other leaks causing flooding from the shower overflowing reported on 19 July 2018 and marked as attended same day and then reported as a reoccurring issue on 18 March 2019, and attended on 28 March 2019.
8. Leak from the roof into the living room leading to damp and mould was initially reported on 13 February 2018, and attended on 28 February 2018. Then, it was again reported on 10 December 2018 and the landlord raised jobs for the gutters (completed on 17 January 2019) and the sprinkler system to be checked for a burst pipe (completed on 14 December 2018) to be investigated. There is no evidence of the outcome of those inspections.
9. The landlord raised jobs for a rat infestation – to make good holes around drains and meter cupboard on 15 April 2018, marked as completed on 25 April 2018.
In May 2019, the resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord and in June 2019 contacted this Service for assistance. Due to an administrative error this Service did not process her complaint further at this time.
The resident said in her complaint:
1. Since 2015 when the resident moved into the property she had raised numerous issues which had been acted on but never fully resolved.
2. The number of appointments booked and attended without any resolution had caused her great inconvenience given her vulnerability and her child’s health condition.
3. The outstanding repairs were:
  1. Drain blockage reoccurring causing smell in the property and floods when the shower is used. The same issue related to a few neighbouring properties.
  2. Water coming through the walls in the living room along the electrical wiring. Patches was getting bigger. Despite “two – three” reports and the landlord’s attendance, it had been unable to identify whether it was a roof leak or a burst pipe.
  3. Rear door, which is in the living room needs further check – not closing properly, seal coming off and faulty lock.
  4. Shower and toilet reoccurring blockage as a result of the drain blockage outside.
  5. Front door not closing or locking.
  6. Whilst windows had been replaced twice there were two more blown. It took the landlord three to five appointments just to get them replaced due to incorrect measurements taken.
  7. Lack of sockets in the kitchen, unstable sockets, electrics intermittent. The resident had raised concerns about health and safety, and had asked for a full electric check.
  8. Not enough cupboards in the kitchen and bad design which allows no space for the resident’s items as she was not a wheelchair user.
  9. Letter box wall always wet and letters getting wet too.
  10. Radiators giving insufficient heat and being incorrect size. One of the radiators in her child’s bedroom was the same size as the bathroom one and the rooms are different sizes. The resident stated that this had been reported over 5 times but nothing had been done.
  11. Issues with the carport panels not fitted correctly and water coming through the lights making them flicker.
  12. Wrong size guttering.
  13. Down pipes not connected properly to the main sewer.
  14. High infestation of rats around the properties.
  15. Rats had penetrated and damaged the fire wall in the loft space between the resident’s and the neighbouring property causing fire hazard. The resident raised concerns that the rat issues would increase with the new railway having been built in close proximity to the properties.
As per the landlord’s internal correspondence, the landlord had been aware of the issues “for some time”, and particularly of the structural issues with the new built properties on the street. It admitted it had failed to avoid the complaint and the Ombudsman’s involvement. In internal correspondence, it said it intended to act on the matter. However, there is no evidence to suggest it followed up on the complaint or responded to the resident.
On 6 June 2019, a Local Councillor contacted the landlord to further chase a response on behalf of the resident and to confirm a formal complaint had been raised. There is no evidence this had been done.
The landlord’s repair records evidence that for the period 6 June 2019 until 24 February 2020, the landlord raised 36 repairs, including but not limited to:
1. Electrics related:
  1. Install two double sockets in kitchen – raised on 11 June 2019 and marked as completed on 28 August 2019.
  2. Check sockets and electric appliance as electrics were playing off and on – initially raised on 16 August 2019, marked as completed on 27 August 2019, and then raised again on 9 September 2019 and marked as completed on 28 September 2019. On 24 February 2020, loss of power job was raised and marked as completed on the same day.
2. Front door to be refitted – raised on 11 and 12 June 2019 and cancelled, then raised again together with a removal of three windows on 12 July 2019, and marked as completed on 23 July 2019. The front door refitting was again raised on 14 August 2019, and marked as completed on the same day.
3. Bathroom basin cracked – raised on 14 June 2019, and marked as completed on 30 July 2019. A follow up was raised on 16 August 2019, and marked as completed on 2 September 2019, for the vanity unit to be rehanged as it was taken down for the basin repair.
4. Rat infestation raised on 20 June 2019, roof baited and marked as completed on 1 July 2019.
5. Broken, loose and wobbly paving slabs raised on 22 July 2019, and marked as cancelled. Raised again on 29 January 2020 and marked as completed on 31 January 2020.
6. The level of WC to be raised and the shower screen to be replaced– initially raised on 22 July 2019 and reported as completed as per the repairs logs on 20 August 2019. Raised again on 5 December 2019 with a note “ cancelled in error”, and marked as completed on the same day.
7. Insufficient heating in the hall raised on 22 July 2019 and marked as completed on 30 July 2019.
8. Roof leak going into the bedroom and lounge raised on 30 July 2019 and noted that previous check had confirmed no damage to the roof. The job was cancelled as per the repair records. This was further reported on 19 August 2019 and marked as completed on 9 September 2019. Another job to inspect the roof was raised on 11 September 2019, and marked as completed on 2 October 2019. Further report of damp coming on the side of the lights in the bedroom and ceiling room was raised on the repair records on 12 September 2019 but marked as cancelled.
9. Flooding reported on 24 September 2019, related to blocked manhole backing up to the shower, blocked guttering and blocked drainage. Attended the same day as per the repair logs. Additional appointment for the guttering was marked as completed on 7 October 2019.
10. Water in toilet and bathroom going down slowly. Resident raised concerns it might have been related to blocked drainage. Raised on 23 February 2020 and marked as completed on the same day.
On 24 February 2020, the resident wrote to the landlord. She said:
1. She was dissatisfied with the way her reports had been handled by the call centre and the contractors. Often when contractors had been booked to complete a repair they had only been inspecting rather than resolving the issue. Hence, further appointments were then required. The resident felt the staff had not been proactive.
2. Due to her condition it had been difficult to chase those repairs.
3. The resident also asked the landlord to consider that she was doing the school run when arranging appointments.
4. The resident listed the outstanding repairs as:
  1. A toilet leak after the landlord replaced the toilet but had missed to put back the disabled base.
  2. Bathroom door unable to close after the floor was relayed.
  3. Shower screen not containing the water and as such water going into the hallway. This had been reported a few times but contractors had not resolved it.
  4. Carport – electrics coming off and underroof panels moving.
  5. Bathroom window was blown and had not been replaced at the time the other windows were.
  6. Damp in walls was persistent at the property. The resident had asked the GP and they agreed to write a letter on the damp and mould effect on her child’s health. The issue in the roof had not been properly investigated to find out what caused the reoccurring damp spots on the walls.
  7. Radiators being insufficient and in those in the bedrooms not big enough. There was smell in the bedrooms and the living room possible from the lack of sufficient heating and damp from the roof and the bathroom.
  8. Living room rear door not properly closing and water was coming in. This had been attended a few times without any permanent resolution. Water had damaged the concrete flooring outside and this likely obstructed the rear door.
  9. She would like the landlord to clarify its position on the drainage repairs which were ongoing at the time for all the properties on the street. The resident had experienced great distress having to take a shower in sewage water on her feet, previously. Hence she would like this avoided in future and wanted reassurance from the landlord.
  10. Electrical issues had been reoccurring, including old fuse box issues, cheap sockets and switches having to be replaced often. An appointment was arranged for 27 February 2020.
  11. Paving slabs in garden not secure and rats had been channelling through them.
  12. The resident asked for an independent building, and health and safety check for the whole property.
  13. She raised some additional repairs which are not part of this investigation.
There is evidence of further correspondence between the resident and the landlord to which this Service was copied. Some of the repairs were briefly discussed but no outcome was provided. The resident raised concerns that Covid pandemic would further delay works and therefore, she wanted to be moved from the property. There is no evidence of any response sent to the resident addressing a transfer.
The repair records evidence that for the period 24 February 2020 until March 2021, the landlord raised the following repairs:
1. Repair leak at the rear of toilet raised and marked as completed on 25 February 2020.
2. Bathroom door was raised on 25 February 2020, and resolved on 5 March 2020. Raised again as stuck on 29 October 2020 and marked as completed on 3 November 2020.
3. Toilet cistern to be moved up – raised on 25 February 2020, and marked as completed on 5 March 2020.
4. Socket in garden was raised on 4 March 2020, and marked as completed on 16 March 2020. Reported again on 16 March 2020 and marked as completed on 17 August 2020.
5. Back surge from the drains raised on 4 October 2020, and marked as completed same day. Reported again on 15 November 2020, and marked as completed same day.
6. Radiators not heating the rooms enough – job was raised on 8 December 2020, and marked as completed on 11 December 2020. A job was raised on 1 February 2021 for the property to be measured in order for the right size of the radiators to be considered. This was marked as resolved on 3 February 2021.
7. Rain ingress to the rear entrance door raised on 8 December 2020, and completed on 22 December 2020.
8. Paving slabs and concrete to be repaired – raised on 8 December 2020, and marked as complete on 16 December 2020. Another job was raised for the front and rear door concrete and the paving slabs on 1 February 2021, and marked as completed on 19 February 2021.
9. Leak from guttering – raised on 21 December 2020, and marked as completed on 12 January 2021.
10. No electrics at the property – raised on 4 January 2021, and marked as resolved same day.
The resident contacted this Service again in 2021 with the request to assist her in her complaint to the landlord. She explained that most of the repairs were unresolved.
The resident provided to this Service an update to the repairs on 12 March 2021. She said:
1. Drainage and sewage pipe connection had been addressed in 2019. There had been a major issue with how the drainage and the sewage pipes were connected for the resident’s and other neighbouring new built properties affected by the same issues. During the repair process, the landlord had not kept the resident updated on the timescale or the plan of works. Whilst the works had been completed, in December 2020 the resident again had experienced back surge of raw sewage in her bathroom. The contractors found concrete obstruction to the main manhole. This was still an ongoing issue.
2. When it was raining, the water would not soak in the front garden. This was likely due to clay soil and no drainage there.
3. Water was still coming though the walls of the living room and wet patches had been growing. There was no finding made to the cause. The landlord considered a sprinkler system pipe burst, roof damage or too much insulation. However, the damp had caused black spores mould in their child’s bedroom. There was damp in both bedrooms.
4. The radiators were insufficient and the one in the child’s bedroom was too small. The resident was using external heat sources to heat her property.
5. Rear entrance door to the living room was still unable to close after multiple attempts and water was still coming when raining. The concrete in front of it was crumbling and coming away to the inside of the property which was likely an obstruction for closing the door.
6. Toilet water rose and shower drain blocked when there was an outside blockage despite the works to the drainage in 2019.
7. Shower screen had not been fitted despite the landlord’s many attempts to address it and stop the water escaping into the hallway.
8. Front door replacement was still outstanding.
9. Bathroom window was also outstanding and had not been replaced when all the windows at the property had been replaced in 2019.
10. The electrics kept blowing and the fuse box was too old and could be a hazard. There were not enough sockets in the kitchen. The back garden socket was still unresolved.
11. There were not enough kitchen cupboards. The landlord had attended twice for measurements but the issue was still unresolved.
12. Carport panels were still unresolved.
13. There was a rat infestation around the properties and the rats had caused uneven paving slabs.
14. The damage to the fire wall in the loft following the rat infestation remained unresolved.
15. The issues related to the corridor floor, the letter box, the windows except for the bathroom one, the down pipes and the guttering had been resolved.
16. The resident felt discriminated against due to the landlord not treating her fairly and addressing her concerns.
The landlord’s repair records evidence the following nine jobs were raised for the period 18 March 2021 until 9 April 2021:
1. No heating or hot water raised on 18 March 2021 and attended same day.
2. Condensation in roof, track and trace leak from loft above the lounge raised on 24 March 2021 and marked as completed on 20 April 2021.
3. Mould wash to both bedrooms as black spores were apparent raised on 24 March 2021, marked as completed on 16 April 2021.
4. Bathroom window replacement and repair to rear external door raised on 24 March 2021, and marked as completed on 7 April 2021.
5. Kitchen cupboard, inspection for lack of space raised on 24 March 2021, and marked as completed on 9 April 2021.
6. Radiator in child’s bedroom not heating raised on 24 March 2021, and marked as completed on 26 March 2021. This was raised again on 8 April 2021, and marked as resolved on 12 April 2021.
7. Relay the paving slabs in the back garden and redo the concrete to rear and front door drain covers as broken raised on 8 April 2021, and marked as completed on 14 April 2021.
8. Rear door water ingress raised on 8 April 2021, and marked as completed on 14 May 2021.
On 20 April 2021, this Service forwarded the resident’s concerns to the landlord. We further chased a response on 11 May 2021.
The landlord’s repairs log evidences that on 14 May 2021 a job was raised for a full structural survey. This was again raised on 2 August 2021, and for some reason marked as completed on 31 July 2021. It is unclear of whether it was conducted or what the outcome of the survey was.
This Service contacted the landlord again on 23 May 2021, chasing a response. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint at stage one on 2 June 2021 and said that:
1. It had undertaken high level of works to respond to the resident’s reports.
2. It could confirm that it had completed the following repairs:
  1. Corridor floor lifting – had been replaced in August 2019.
  2. Windows – had been replaced in July 2019.
  3. Unsafe electrics in the kitchen and lack of sockets – full electrical test had been carried out and installation of two additional sockets in July 2019.
  4. Back garden socket – had been replaced in March 2021.
  5. Not enough cupboards in the kitchen – three additional wall units had been installed in September 2019.
  6. Letter box had been resolved with additional brick work in November 2019.
  7. Incorrectly laid drainage and waste pipes causing foul smell and sewage to come into the property – works had been carried out in early 2020 to reduce the risk of back surge and ensure sufficient fall.
  8. Too much insulation to the roof causing damp and water coming through the walls- additional vent tiles had been placed to reduce risk of condensation in April 2021.
  9. Mould in the property – a wash and stain block to both bedroom had been carried out in April 2021.
  10. Damage to the rear external door in the living room – had been overhauled in April 2021. Water coming in from outside when it was raining – a soakaway had been installed in May 2021 to prevent this in future.
3. Two repairs remained outstanding – the fuse box and the front door lock.
4. It would also contact the resident in relation to the repairs planned for the carport.
5. The landlord realised how frustrating some of those issues might have been but it had endeavoured to remedy this with day to day repairs.
The resident asked for escalation of her complaint on 15 June 2021. She said:
1. The landlord had not addressed many of the repairs and how they had been handled.
2. She was seeking compensation for:
  1. Inconvenience while repairs were carried out – inclusive but not limited to while works had been carried out to the bathroom and the pipework outside (She had been unable to use water or get outside of her home).
  2. Compensation for loss of time and inconvenience due to the numerous appointments, lack of addressing the issues at the property and “mishandling of the case” since it had been raised in 2019.
  3. Damage to the property – dismantle of metal shed and replacement of matt in the living room.
3. She provided a list of outstanding repairs attached to her escalation request. The list was quite extensive as per the resident’s letter of 12 March 2021 and included the same outstanding repairs. Additionally to the list of outstanding repairs provided on 12 March 2021, the resident raised further the bathroom door getting stuck occasionally, lack of cupboards in the kitchen, and mould and damp in the whole property now.
4. Despite the landlord’s attempts the rear door needed replacement and the fuse box looked into again as it was too old. The drainage issues and the back surge were not fully resolved as the issues persisted when it was raining.
According to the landlord’s repair records, the resident reported really strong smell of sewage on 6 July 2021, which was marked as completed on 3 September 2021.
On 6 August 2021, this Service chased the landlord for a response to be issued to the resident’s escalated complaint.
The landlord’s repairs records evidence that for the period 27 August 2021 until 1 September 2021 the following jobs were raised:
1. To the carport – removal of existing panels and installation of fireboards and in the roof space installation of a firestopping seal to the plasterboard, both raised as firestopping works on 27 august 2021, and marked as completed on 21 September 2021.
2. Inspection of whether a large seal could be placed at the bottom of the shower screen to prevent water from escaping; to provide a drain pump as the resident had reported water not draining away; to inspect further the damp and mould on the bathroom walls and damp to the hallway. These were raised on 1 September 2021 and marked as completed on 17 September 2021.
On 13 September 2021, the landlord issued its final response. It said:
1. With regards to providing a schedule of works for the outstanding repairs, the resident had already been provided with an overview of the repairs at stage one. The carport works had started and the patio works would follow up once the carport work were completed.
2. It apologised for “the problems you (the resident) had experienced with your (the resident’s) home” and the “stress and inconvenience” as a result of the issues and offered £250 compensation.
3. It apologised that the resident had felt the communication with it had not been effective. However, it had visited the property and discussed the issues with the resident on a number of occasions.
4. It referred the resident to the Ombudsman.
The landlord’s repairs log evidence the following repairs being raised for the period immediately after the landlord’s final response:
1. Back board in the bathroom behind tiles was damp and needed removal, tiles loose, shower screen gap under the door cannot be resolved with a seal as too big. Jobs raised on 20 September 2021 and marked as completed on 12 November 2021.
2. Rats in garden – raised on 19 October 2021 and marked as completed on 4 November 2021.
3. Drains from the property to the front garden overflow when it rains, raised on 1 December 2021, and marked as completed on 2 December 2021.
4. Shower overflowing and flooding the hallway raised on 21 December 2021 and marked as completed same day.
The resident formally brought the complaint to this Service on 31 January 2022.
In a telephone conversation with the resident of 17 January 2023, she explained that the following repairs were outstanding:
1. The pipes at the front garden returned rainwater when it was raining.
2. Bathroom door, window, shower and toilet remain unresolved.
3. Carport panels not properly installed.
4. Lack of kitchen units.
5. Mould and damp in the whole property now. Mould wash had been performed in the past but damp was persistent. The landlord had arranged a survey two weeks ago but she had not received any outcome. The issue with the leak from the roof had not been properly investigated to find the cause of the dampness.
6. Heating was insufficient. The resident is concerned that the metal cover of the radiators absorbed all the heat.
7. Rat infestation. The landlord was aware of the issue but said it was the resident’s responsibility.
8. Electric issues were resolved but there was an issue recently with the living room lights which might be a result of the damp which was coming from the roof.

Assessment and findings

In reaching a decision about the resident’s complaint we consider whether the landlord has kept to the law, followed proper procedure and good practice, and acted in a reasonable way. Our duty is to determine complaints by reference to what is, in this Service’s opinion, fair in all the circumstances of the case.

How the landlord responded to the resident’s reports of repairs required at her property

This Service has seen evidence that in May 2019, the resident raised concerns about the landlord’s handling of numerous repairs. It is recognised that the resident reported some of those repairs as far back as 2015-2016. According to the landlord’s repairs log, however, some of those jobs were raised from 2017 onwards as reoccurring, or raised multiple times. This included:
1. Drainage issues, initially recorded before October 2018, and attended over eight times.
2. Flooding from the shower screen and water draining slowly, reported initially on 19 July 2018, and attended over six times.
3. Whilst there were multiple attendances to take measurements and to inspect, the issues with the insufficient heating had been reoccurring and over 5 job orders were raised for the period 13 February 2018 until 31 March 2021.
4. Intermittent electrics, problems with the fuse box and sockets were raised over seven times and initially on 24 April 2017. The repairs log evidences that the last job of no electrics was raised in January 2021.
5. The front door repair was raised at least three times and not resolved from 5 April 2019 until 23 July 2019.
6. The damp and mould issues in the bathroom and in the living room were reported initially in February 2018. The issues in the living room related to a leak coming from the roof were attended over seven times. There is no evidence of a proper investigation into what had been causing the damp patches in the living room. Despite putting vents in the roof space, the issues of damp and mould have spread from the bathroom and the living room, now in the whole property as per the resident’s reports.
7. The rear door letting water in and the concrete is cracked and crumbled. The resident said that she had reported that on numerous occasions. This Service has seen evidence of this reported on 24 February 2020 and three jobs being raised as per the landlord’s repairs logs.
8. The issues with the carport were initially reported in April 2017 and attended over three times with works being confirmed as completed per the repairs log.
9. The bathroom windows has been missed when replacing the rest of the windows in the property. Altogether the windows issues have been raised over four times.
For over four years from April 2017 until September 2021, the landlord raised multiple repairs related to the above matters (somewhere close to 120 jobs). Although the evidence suggests they were all responded to and attended, there is no evidence the reported repairs were raised unnecessarily but rather in response to legitimate repair issues that the landlord was responsible to put right.
Due to the number of repairs and the number of times they have been raised, it is difficult to establish exactly when some of them were completed. Additionally, there is no evidence of the resident’s reports or any correspondence between the resident and the contractors or the contractors and the landlord, which hampers this Service’s assessment into the reasons for the cancelled jobs and repeated reports. However, it is evident from the repairs log that the works were attended multiple times which evidences that the repairs visits were often of poor quality, not completed on each appointment or not effective.
Those repeated repairs also raise concerns about the relationship between the landlord and its contractors, and the communication with the resident. It is normally reasonable for the landlord to rely on its contractors for handling the repairs up to a point where multiple reports of reoccurring issues are raised. As this is the case, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to adopt a more proactive approach in dealing with the repairs and engage with its subcontractors and the resident in order to identify and resolve the issues that were repeatedly being reported. However, there are no evidence that the landlord took such a resolution oriented approach. A lack of guidelines, which would usually be found in a repairs policy may also have contributed to the landlord’s inadequate response to those repeated repair reports.
The landlord’s failure to permanently resolve the repairs contributed to delays, false and repeated expectations of the resident that a repair would be resolved after each attendance and repeated appointments for over three years for many of the repairs. Additionally, in her escalation request, the resident raised many of the repairs as still outstanding. In this case, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to inspect the property and conduct a thorough review to identify all the outstanding issues and provide a fair and thorough response to its repairs handling. However, it failed to do so and also identify any of its failures. This was an unreasonable and not resolution orientated approach.
Additionally, the landlord did not acknowledge the level of impact on the resident of the multiple visits and delays and particularly how these affected her and her child, given their vulnerabilities. The landlord also did not give any consideration to, or prioritise its response in relation to the resident’s reports despite her statement that her GP had provided a letter about the impact of the living conditions at the property on her child’s health.
The landlord admitted in its final response that as a result of “the issues” in her property, the resident experienced some “stress and inconvenience”. It awarded compensation of £250. However, it was unclear what failures this compensation was in recognition of.
When there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord (apology, compensation and details of lessons learned) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account 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. This service will also consider the resulting distress and inconvenience and the resident’s circumstances will be taken into account.
The landlord identified some of the outstanding repairs and attempted to resolve them. It also awarded compensation. However, it did not put things right for the resident as:
1. Whilst it undertook a great number of works at the resident’s property, it failed to permanently resolve for a considerable period of time a number of repairs raised by the resident in her formal complaint of May 2019 or inspect the ones she raised in her escalation request.
2. The overall repairs handling, the landlord’s failures and the extremely distressing situation for the resident over a period of 40 moths were not recognised when it considered the level of compensation. Hence the compensation awarded by the landlord was not proportionate.
For the landlord’s failures in the above paragraphs, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the repairs. Further compensation to reflect the impact on the resident and the delays in repairs will be ordered, along with the order for any outstanding works to be inspected and completed.
The compensation ordered is as follows:
1. £2590 for the repairs handling as evidenced by the repairs log, including delays in providing permanent resolution, multiple attendances and reporting.
2. £2400.00 for overall inconvenience caused to the resident by the handling of the repairs, not meeting her expectations after each repair attempt, and given her and her child’s vulnerabilities, for the period of four years from 2017 until 2021.

The landlord’s complaint handling

There was severe maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling as:
1. The landlord failed to raise the resident’s formal complaint of May 2019 under its complaints process. Internal correspondence suggests that regardless of the landlord being aware of the complaint and the issues raised, it did not follow up on the complaint. The Local Councillor’s attempts to chase a formal response were also unsuccessful. This was inappropriate and caused considerable delays in the complaint handling.
2. The landlord’s responses were considerably delayed despite the Ombudsman’s involvement and chase-up requests. There was a 14 days delay as per the landlord’s complaints policy which allows 20 working day for a response at stage one. Stage two response was delayed by 62 days. This was inappropriate.
3. The landlord failed to provide a thorough investigation of its repairs handling and address all of the outstanding issues as raised in the resident’s escalation request. For the ones it identified as outstanding and said that it would carry out, it did not provide any plan of works, like the carport or the fuse box.
4. It failed to investigate its failures in its repairs handling. It failed to recognise the amount of time and the number of appointments it took to resolve some of the issues.
5. It did not express any empathy or sympathy towards the resident or recognise the impact the complaint handling and the repairs handling had on her and her child given their vulnerabilities. This was inappropriate, caused additional frustration and may have contributed to the resident’s accusation that she was being discriminated by the landlord based on her disability.
6. Its complaint policy is not in line with the guidelines of the Ombudsman’s CHC. The Ombudsman recommends that a complaint response at stage one should be provided within 10 working days, and the landlord’s policy allows 20 working days.
The landlord did not learn from the outcomes. By not providing a thorough investigation and admitting its failures, it missed the opportunity to explore what went wrong and why despite multiple appointments, it had been unable to resolve some of the repairs for over four years. Hence, that prevented the landlord from learning how to avoid similar situations in future.

The landlord’s record keeping

As part of this investigation the Ombudsman requested records from the landlord such as correspondence and telephone contact notes concerning the resident’s reports, any action concerning the landlord’s investigation into the resident’s reports, copies of any survey or inspection reports, or feedback from other employees or contractors, confirmation of any outstanding repairs relating to the complaint and any plan in place to resolve these. The landlord has not provided these.
Whilst the landlord has provided copies of the repairs logs, the lack of any correspondence between the landlord and the resident and the landlord and the contractors, and the resident and the contractor is concerning, and a failure on the part of the landlord.
The contractor is an extension of the landlord and as such there should be a system in place for the landlord to request that the contractor maintains accurate records of correspondence, inspections and investigations. Good record keeping could have helped the landlord in these circumstances to alleviate the confusion of what repairs were permanently completed, when and what is left outstanding.
Good record keeping is vital to evidence the action a landlord or its contractors have taken and failure to keep adequate records indicates that the landlord’s repairs processes are not operating effectively. As this Service has not any records of such correspondence, and for the reasons set out above, there was maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was severe maladministration by the landlord in respect of its complaints handling.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s reports of numerous repairs at their property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its record keeping.

Reasons

The landlord did not permanently resolve number of repairs at the resident’s property for a considerable period of time. It failed to recognise its failures related to delays, repeated attendances and repeated reports of the same issues. It agreed that the issues caused inconvenience to the resident but failed to put things right.
The landlord failed to recognise the impact its repairs handling had on the resident and her child given their vulnerabilities. It did not offer proportionate compensation for its failures and did not put things right by exploring all outstanding repairs reported.
The landlord failed to recognise and raise the resident’s complaint in 2019. This had caused additional delays in the complaint handling and respectively the repairs handling. It also failed to respond within the time frames of its policy and the Ombudsman’s CHC.
Additionally, its policy is not in line with the Ombudsman’s CHC guidelines of 10 working days response times at stage one. In its complaint response, the landlord failed to properly investigate its action and address all outstanding repairs. It did not identify and admit any of its complaint handling failures and recognise the impact of those to a vulnerable resident.
The landlord did not keep appropriate repair records related to correspondence and repairs reporting, which could explain how it met its obligations. Additionally, it did not obtain such records from its contractors.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord is ordered within four weeks of the date of this report to carry out a management review of this case to identify learning and to provide this Service and the resident with a summary of the review setting out what went wrong and the steps it will be taking to ensure that the failures are not repeated. The management review should include:
1. Consideration of adopting a repairs policy, where guidance will be provided to staff on the measures it needs to take to avoid similar failings and guidance for dealing with vulnerable residents, e.g. inspections, surveys, feedback from contractors.
2. A review if its relationship with its repairs contractor in order to identify why so many jobs were required that did not properly resolve the issues being reported.
3. A review of record keeping practices with regards to resident’s reports and correspondence with contractors.
4. A review of its Complaints policy to respond to the Ombudsman’s CHC’s guidelines and self- assessing again against the CHC in light of this case.
5. Staff training in order to recognise a complaint, follow up on it and give consideration to issues raised by vulnerable tenants.
The landlord is ordered within four weeks of the date of this report to a provide this Service with a copy of the report prepared following the damp and mould inspection of the property from January 2023, together with details of what works will be carried out at the property and the target date for these to be completed.
Notwithstanding the results of the landlord’s damp and mould inspection of the property from January 2023, the landlord is ordered within four weeks of the date of this report to inspect the property. The landlord should write a report to the resident and provide a copy to this Service of the outstanding issues, and particularly:
1. Establish whether further works are required to the drainage and the front door garden;
2. Establish whether works are required to the carport underroof panels.
3. Establish what causes the damp patches in the living room ceiling and take necessary measures to resolve the damp and mould issue now across all the property.
4. Inspect the bathroom dampness and mould, resolve the shower screen issue, the bathroom flooring, toilet leak and loose tiles.
5. Resolve the issue with water ingress from the rear entrance door to the living room and the concrete.
6. To carry out a heat loss survey and establish whether the heating is sufficient.
7. To establish whether works to the bathroom window are required.
The landlord is ordered within four weeks of the date of this report to apologise for the failures identified in this report.
The landlord is ordered within four weeks of the date of this report to pay the resident £5490. This is comprised of:
1. £250 previously offered if it has not already been paid.
2. £4740 for the combined distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident whilst living at the property caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and repairs at the property.
3. £500 for the time and trouble and distress and inconvenience incurred by the resident as a result of its complaint handling failures.