Lambeth Council (202120072)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202120072

Lambeth Council

27 April 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 resident complains about how the landlord handled his reports of leaks affecting the property, including the time taken to complete repairs and the landlord’s communication.

Background and summary of events

The resident is a leaseholder of a flat on the third floor of a detached house (the property). The property is a three-bedroom property with a lounge, kitchen, bathroom and separate wc.
The resident moved into the property on around 29 June 2021.
The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on or around 11 July 2021, but the Ombudsman has not been provided with a copy of this complaint. By 24 July 2021 at the latest, the resident had made the landlord aware that rainwater was entering the property and he believed that roofing works completed prior to the sale had not been completed properly. The landlord agreed to arrange for contractors to attend and check the roof.
On 27 August 2021, the resident emailed the landlord about the same issue. The resident raised concerns that the property would continue to be damaged as a result of the defective works; that the scaffolding was a security risk to the property; and poor customer service.
On 1 September 2021, the landlord contacted its contractors requesting a date for the works. On 7 September 2021, the landlord raised a works order to provide a report on the condition of the roof, gutters and windows to address the leak. The landlord noted that its records showed that a previous contractor had completed a roof repair. The landlord told the resident that he would not be charged for the works. An appointment was made for 20 September 2021.
On 23 September 2021, the resident chased up the landlord in relation to the leak stating that three people had attended on 20 September but had different ideas about what was wrong. He asked what the next steps would be.
On 29 September 2021, the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint at the review stage of its complaints process. In its response, it referred to its previous complaint response of 30 July 2021 and said the resident had requested the complaint be escalated on 16 August 2021 since the repairs had not progressed. (The Ombudsman has not been provided with either the complaint response of 30 July 2021 or the escalation request of 16 August 2021.)
The landlord acknowledged that scaffolding was still up and the leak was ongoing and that it had not responded to the resident’s communications in a timely manner. The landlord apologised for this and upheld the complaint. It said it had recently changed contractors and that the new contractor was working to address the repair but requested the resident keep it informed stating that it would “endeavour to ensure that prompt action is taken”. It offered £75 as a goodwill gesture for the time and trouble in pursuing the complaint. It also advised the resident to make an insurance claim if there was any internal damage within the property as a result of the leak.
The resident responded to this stating that the landlord had not committed to any time frames and that the matter was not progressing.
On 30 September 2021, the resident emailed the landlord again stating he had had no response to his email of 23 September or three telephone calls since. He said that due to wet weather, they were having to regularly move furniture out of the way due to the leak.
On 30 September 2021, the landlord told the resident that the works were authorised and should be completed by the end of the following week referring to defective brickwork and pointing rather than roof issues. It also agreed to attend the property and look at any internal damage.
On 5 October 2021, the landlord met the resident and contractors and the contractor was due to start work the following day.
On 14 November 2021, the resident chased up the landlord stating the leaks were ongoing and it had not heard anything for a month.
On or around 3 December 2021, the landlord attended the property and noted that the front elevation wall had been repointed but it thought it would be sensible to check the guttering again.
On 23 December 2021 and 10 January 2022, the resident chased up the landlord in relation to the leak.
The landlord’s surveyor attended the property on 17 January 2022 and identified that the roof was incomplete. He referred to “dormer hanging tile” not completed and “badly fitted” leadwork. He needed the scaffolding to be extended to access the top of the dormer but also identified issues with the guttering.
On 17 January 2022, the landlord told the resident that it would authorise the contractor to extend the scaffold and provide a schedule of any further work. It said it would update the resident after a meeting with the contractor on 20 January 2022.
The resident responded that it had had no communication between 30 September 2021 and 17 January 2022. He was unhappy that the landlord had not apologised for the delays and the lack of responses and unannounced visits. He requested the landlord detail the process to making the internal damage good. The landlord said he should provide two detailed quotes for making good the damage and provide them to the landlord and it would then confirm which one it would accept and arrange payment.
A further inspection was arranged for 24 January 2022. On 15 February 2022, the landlord told the resident that an order for additional roof works had been raised but no start date provided. Contractors attended again on 4 March 2022 and put up scaffolding.
The Ombudsman communicated with the landlord about the resident’s complaint and on 9 March 2022 under the Ombudsman’s mediation process, the landlord agreed to:
1. Carry out repairs to resolve the leak.
2. Compensate the resident for any internal damage caused.
3. Pay £500 compensation in recognition of the time and trouble spent chasing the matter, the delay in resolving the repair and for the distress and inconvenience caused.
4. Provide a written apology to the resident. The resident explained this should be by someone with appropriate seniority. The resident explained they specifically wished for the landlord to set out the number of times the resident contacted the landlord about the issue, and for the landlord to note when the resident’s contact via email and calls were not returned.
As the mediation outcome was agreed between the parties, the Ombudsman decided that the complaint had been resolved and recommended that the landlord pay the compensation and provide the apology, as well as arrange appointments and agree timescales for the repairs and compensation for internal damage by 6 April 2022. This was subsequently extended to 21 April 2022.
A meeting was arranged with the contractors and roofers for 14 March 2022 and following this appointment, the landlord was aware that the defective window boards could be a cause of damp and agreed to rectify this. It had to decide whether to replace the boards and fix the existing windows, or replace the windows. As at 5 April 2022, the contractor was waiting for the landlord to confirm which option to go ahead with.
The landlord’s internal correspondence refers to the roofing works having been completed as at 14 April 2022.
On 28 April 2022, the landlord’s Policy and Communications Manager wrote to the resident stating it had accepted the Ombudsman’s findings and recognised that the service they had received was below the standard expected. It acknowledged that it had failed to respond to emails sent and apologised for this. It said it would take the steps agreed during mediation.
There is evidence that as at 25 April 2022, the landlord was waiting for a contractor to measure up the windows and provide a quote. They attended on 28 April 2022. On 13 May 2022, the landlord informed the resident that the windows were in fabrication.
On 10 June 2022, the resident told the landlord that the new windows had been installed but asked the landlord why it was not also cleaning the property since it was covered in dust from the works. He also said that he had had to cover the cost of the contractors’ parking permits. He also asked if the making good works would be done or if the costs would be added to the costs to repair the damage caused by the leak the landlord had agreed to pay.
On 23 June 2022, the resident asked the landlord for an update in relation to the “remediation of the windows and the removal of scaffolding”. The landlord responded that its contractor would make contact to visit the property and the Ombudsman recommendations would be dealt with by senior management. The resident subsequently chased up the payment for the internal works.
On 30 June 2022, the Ombudsman told the landlord that it would now put forward the complaint for investigation since the landlord had not evidenced that it had completed all the steps agreed in mediation.
In terms of the mediation agreement, the landlord informed the Ombudsman that the payment of £500 compensation was arranged and was with the post office from 16 June 2022. The resident needed to collect this. It said it was waiting for the resident to provide quotes for the internal damage.
On 4 November 2022, the resident informed the Ombudsman that it had supplied quotes for works but the landlord had not responded.
On 14 December 2022, the landlord informed the Ombudsman that it had agreed the following resolution:
1. It would increase the compensation to £1300.
2. The resident would re-submit a quote for the internal damages and the landlord would pay.
3. It would then send him an apology letter.
On 28 December 2022, the resident provided authorisation for a bank transfer and a quote for the internal works to the landlord. The landlord arranged the compensation payment and said it would be in touch in respect of the quote.
On 24 January 2023, the resident chased up the landlord in relation to the quote. He also asked for an apology from a Director.
On 16 February 2023, the landlord said the payment for works had been processed and should be received within 14 days and said it would issue an apology letter once he had confirmed receipt of the payment. On 23 February 2023, the resident chased up both.
On 1 March 2023, the landlord informed the Ombudsman that the payment for the works had been made on 24 February 2023 and it was going to meet the resident in person to make sure his concerns had been resolved, following which it would issue a full apology letter. The landlord subsequently said that the resident did not attend the meetings so it considers that the issues are resolved.
The resident has informed the Ombudsman that he is still waiting for an apology letter from someone at Director level or above and he is dissatisfied that the landlord did not keep to any agreed timescales and he had to chase it for nearly two years.

Assessment and findings

Under the terms of the lease, the landlord’s responsibilities included repairing and keeping in good order and condition the exterior walls, the roof structure, gutters and rainwater pipes, and window frames. It is not in dispute that the landlord was responsible for completing repairs to stop the leaks into the property which were reported by the resident soon after he bought the property. The landlord also accepted responsibility for the cost of putting right the internal damage.
It is clear from the evidence that the landlord was made aware that a leak was affecting the property from 24 July 2021. Despite numerous communications from the resident, the repairs were not fully completed until July 2022. This was an unreasonable length of time, particularly given the impact on the resident whose home was affected by water penetration in two rooms including the main living area (the lounge and spare bedroom). The resident complained of the inconvenience of dealing with the leaks every time it rained; his safety concerns over having scaffolding erected for an extended period; and the inconvenience of not being able to redecorate internally until the leaks were fully resolved.
During this period, the landlord made multiple attempts to arrange the repairs. It contacted contractors in early September 2021. They attended the property but no works were carried out at that stage. When responding to the formal complaint in September 2021, the landlord appropriately acknowledged the delay in repairs and poor communication. However, it did not put in place an action plan to ensure the repairs were then completed in a timely manner. Works were due to start in early October 2021 but the Ombudsman has not been provided with any evidence to confirm any works took place at this time.
The landlord identified in January 2022 that further roof repairs were required. In March 2022, the landlord identified that windows required replacing. Roof repairs were completed by mid-April 2022 and the windows were replaced in early July 2022. The landlord has informed the Ombudsman that much of the delays were caused by issues with contractor performance and resource and staff turnover issues. While it is acknowledged that such challenges can impact a landlord’s repairs service, ultimately the landlord was responsible for completing the repairs under the terms of the lease and it did not do so within a reasonable time.
The landlord has paid the resident compensation of £1300 and the Ombudsman is satisfied that this payment was a reasonable offer of compensation to address the impact of delays in completing the repairs, that is, the 12-month period that it took to resolve the leaks into the property. This takes into account the length of time the property was affected, the impact on the resident’s enjoyment of the property and the inconvenience of having to chase and complain to the landlord during this time. This was proportionate to the distress and inconvenience caused and was in accordance with the Ombudsman’s own Remedies guidance.
However, the Ombudsman has noted that the landlord delayed in complying with the terms of the mediation agreement and that despite acknowledging that it had significantly delayed in completing repairs, it did not then take ownership of the complaint to ensure it put things right for the resident. It should have prioritised taking the steps necessary to ensure the agreed actions took place rather than relying on the resident to keep making contact to move matters forward. There is also no evidence of the landlord indicating how it would improve its management of repairs going forward or prevent the same shortcomings in repair management and communication happening again.
This is of particular concern given the way the repairs were managed. The landlord arranged for contractors to attend on multiple occasions, but the diagnosis process was slow and confusing. For example, the landlord knew from the beginning of the complaint that the roof needed checking, and several appointments took place, but it was not identified until January 2022 that the roof was defective. Additionally, it knew from the start of the complaint that the gutters and windows also needed checking. However, these defects were not identified until January and March 2022 respectively. The landlord should have looked into what had caused these delays to learn from the complaint and improve its services.
As part of the mediation agreement, in addition to completing the repairs, the landlord agreed to (in summary):
1. Compensate the resident for any internal damage caused.
2. Pay £500 compensation.
3. Provide a written apology to the resident.
The landlord should have paid the £500 compensation, provided the apology and provided a time frame for the internal damage compensation by 21 April 2022.
There is evidence that the landlord:
1. Provided an apology letter from a manager on 28 April 2022.
2. Attempted to arrange the compensation payment through the post office in June 2022 and paid the increased compensation payment in December 2022.
3. Paid the cost of the internal works in February 2023 after the resident had first asked about this in June 2022 and submitted a quote in by November 2022 at the latest.
While the landlord has made some attempts to put right the shortcomings in how it handled the leaks, there have been further delays on the landlord’s part in doing this. The works were not completed until three months after the agreement and the landlord did not agree time scales with the resident as recommended by the Ombudsman. The compensation to cover internal damage was not paid until 9 months after the mediation agreement and the resident had to chase the landlord about this. The landlord did not take responsibility for ensuring the agreed resolutions took place, similarly to how it did not take responsibility for completing the identified repairs after acknowledging they were outstanding in the complaint response. This extended the resident’s inconvenience of living in a property with internal water damage, and caused the time and trouble of repeatedly chasing the landlord and having to explain the situation to different members of staff.
The issue of the apology letter is still disputed by the parties now. The resident states that he requested an apology letter from someone at Director level or above and he feels that no one within the landlord organisation has taken responsibility for what happened. The landlord’s complaints team have informed the Ombudsman that they have apologised to the resident and offered to meet with him. A manager wrote to the resident on 28 April 2022 apologising for the failings identified and in particular acknowledged a failure to respond to the resident’s emails. Since the mediation agreement did not specify the seniority level required, it is accepted that a letter from a manager was a reasonable attempt to comply with the mediation terms.
The resident has since requested an apology from a Director and the landlord agreed to send an apology after it met with the resident. As the resident did not attend the meeting, this issue remains unresolved and the confusion around this issue has hindered the parties’ ability to resolve the complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of how it handled the leaks reported at the property.

Reasons

When responding to the formal complaint, the landlord appropriately acknowledged delays but failed to make an action plan and ensure that the repairs were then completed within a timely manner. During the Ombudsman’s mediation process, the landlord agreed some reasonable steps to put right its shortcomings, but it then failed to appropriately manage these steps which led to further delays in works being completed and compensation being paid. While the landlord did then increase the compensation, the Ombudsman considers that this was proportionate to the inconvenience caused by the delays to repairs but did not address the shortcomings in communication and delays in complying with the mediation terms. Neither did the landlord identify what steps it should take to prevent the same mistakes happening again.

Orders

Within 28 days of the date of this report, the landlord must pay the resident £250 compensation for the additional distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in complying with the mediation terms and the time and trouble caused to the resident in chasing up and communicating with the landlord about this.
Within 8 weeks of the date this report, the landlord must carry out a review of the handling of the repairs in this complaint and identify the causes of the delays and the steps it can take to improve its communication and handling of such repairs in the future. This should consider in particular:
1. The internal policies and processes the landlord uses to manage and monitor repairs to ensure they are completed within a reasonable time.
2. The processes it has in place to ensure that repairs agreed to within a complaint response are completed within a reasonable time of that response.
3. How the landlord communicates with residents about ongoing repairs and how it can improve this to minimise inconvenience to residents.

The landlord to report back to the Ombudsman with the findings and proposals following this review.