Waverley Borough Council (202220267)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220267

Waverley Borough Council

26 June 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

1. The complaint concerns how the landlord responded to the resident’s reports of:
   1. Leaks into the wet room of his property.
   2. Damp and mould in the property’s wet room and hallway.

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a local authority. The property is a flat in a senior living scheme.
3. The resident has had an ongoing issue of leaks from properties above causing damage to his wet room since 2020. The landlord’s internal correspondence and records show that several work orders were raised to undertake repairs following three different leaks which caused damage to the wet room’s ceiling and floor.
4. On 11 September 2022, the resident wrote to the landlord and requested to raise a complaint into how it had handled the repairs. He described the elements of the complaint as:
   1. He had experienced several leaks into the wet room over the last two years which had left it in an unhealthy and unhygienic condition.
   2. He had received a poor level of service from the landlord when reporting the issues. The resident noted that the ceiling had been removed to undertake work to resolve the leak from above, but he had not been made aware if the work had been completed or when the ceiling would be replaced. He also stated that the flooring was saturated and becoming detached from the wall.
   3. Due to the dampness of the wet room, black mould had been a recurring problem, which the resident had attempted to contain himself due to the smell. He had pointed out the mould to the operatives who had attended, but nothing had been done.
   4. The ongoing issue has had an effect on his health and also on his finances as he had to redecorate the hallway and replace the hallway carpet as the mould had spread out from the wet room.
5. The landlord sent a stage one complaint response to the resident on 28 September 2022 and a stage two complaint response on 19 October 2022. In its responses, the landlord:
   1. Accepted that there had been a breakdown in communication between it and the resident, and that there had been delays in completing repairs to the wet room. It explained that delays were caused by a lack of resources and the requirement of a specialist contractor to complete the work to the floor. It also explained that it had experienced issues with gaining access to the property above which had caused additional delays. The landlord noted that the reason for the delays should have been fully explained to the resident at the time.
   2. Confirmed that the work to the wet room was completed on 4 October 2022. A post-work inspection was undertaken on 5 October 2022 which identified several outstanding minor repairs. These were completed on 8 October 2022.
   3. Offered £100 compensation for the inconvenience that the delays in completing the work had caused. The landlord also informed the resident that damage to his personal possessions would be an insurance matter and that it advises its tenants to have their own home contents insurance.
6. In referring the case to this Service, the resident stated that the outstanding issues of the complaint were that while the landlord had now completed all the outstanding work, the level of compensation it had offered did not properly reflect the level of inconvenience the matter had caused or the length of time it took for it to compete the work. The resident also stated his dissatisfaction that the compensation offered had not taken into account the effect on his health or the damage caused to his personal items.
7. When providing evidence to this Service on 28 March 2023, the landlord stated that it had undertaken a review of its compensation offer and that it had increased it to £300.

Assessment and findings

Relevant policies and procedures

8. Section 8.1 of the tenancy agreement sets out the landlord’s responsibilities for repairs and maintenance. This states that the landlord agrees to “keep the structure and outside of [the] home in good repair”. In regard to insurance, the tenancy agreement advises tenants that “the building, including any fixtures and fittings that [the landlord has] provided are our responsibility unless otherwise specified. We are not responsible for insuring your furnishings and personal possessions, including the content of fridges, freezers and washing machines. We advise you to have insurance cover or enough money to cover any losses, repairs or the costs of replacing any items that you are responsible for. But, this is not a condition of your tenancy”.
9. The landlord’s website states that reports of uncontained leaks into a property will be treated as an emergency repair and attended to and made-safe within four hours. Contained leaks into a property will be treated as an urgent repair and attended to within seven days. The website also states that for routine repairs, the landlord will aim to arrange an appointment within one day of the issue being reported but, does not give any timescales. The work order sheets the landlord provided as part of its evidence note that routine repairs should be completed within 28 calendar days, which is the industry standard.
10. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance compensation and reimbursement policy sets out the circumstances when it will offer financial redress for not meeting its expected service when undertaking work at a property. The policy states that the landlord will consider offering compensation for a tenant’s inconvenience if it failed to meet its published targets. The policy also notes at “any claims for compensation for personal injury, psychological damage or health deterioration are passed directly to the [landlord’s] insurance company for investigation”.
11. The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation strategy document states that the landlord will “work in partnership with tenants to resolve issues of damp and mould in their home. This will include advising them on ways to reduce condensation.”

Scope of investigation

12. In his correspondence with the landlord and with this Service, the resident has described the effect on his physical and mental health caused by the poor condition of the wet room. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments. However, it is beyond the remit of this Service to make a determination on whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions and the resident’s health. Whilst we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any errors by the landlord.

Repairs to the wet room

13. Once it had received the reports from the resident relating to the condition of the wet room, the landlord had a duty to respond to the matter in line with the obligations set out in the tenancy agreement and its published policies and procedures.
14. The landlord’s repair logs and internal notes showed that it acted appropriately to the initial reports of leaks in the building. It’s work orders state that when it received reports of the three different leaks (on 28 September 2020, 13 May 2022 and 24 September 2022), emergency repairs were raised to inspect and make-safe the issue and that urgent repairs were then raised for a plumber to attend to repair the leaks. However, it is not in dispute that there were then significant delays in completing the follow-on work to repair the wet room’s ceiling and floor once the leaks had been resolved. Moreover, the landlord has accepted that the resident did not receive proper updates on the status of the work and the reasons for the delays. This caused clear inconvenience to the resident, who had to raise a complaint in order for the matter to be resolved.
15. Therefore, it was appropriate for the landlord to apologise to the resident, offer compensation and explain what steps it had taken to improve its service. This position is in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles of: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
16. The landlord acted fairly in acknowledging its mistakes and apologising to the resident. It put things right by completing the work to the wet room and offering £300 compensation. It looked to learn from its mistakes by ensuring it had the appropriate contractors available for the type of work required to the wet room flooring. The landlord’s evidence provided an internal email chain between the contracts manager and a maintenance inspector who had visited the wet room which highlighted the lack of a specialist contractor to repair the sub-flooring before its regular contractor could complete the work as the source of the delay. The landlord informed the resident that it now had a specialist contractor in place to prevent a similar delay happening in the future.
17. The £300 compensation offered by the landlord is broadly in line with the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance (which is available on our website). This recommends a payment of £100 to £600 in cases of considerable service failure or maladministration by a landlord. This includes distress and inconvenience, time and trouble, disappointment, loss of confidence, and delays in getting matters resolved. Therefore, a payment of £300 that recognised the delays in completing repairs to the wet room’s ceiling and floor once the leaks had been resolved and the poor level of communication experienced by the resident when chasing the landlord for updates on the status of the work, is appropriate in the circumstances. The measures taken by the landlord to redress what went wrong were proportionate to the impact that its failures had on the resident.
18. The resident requested an increase in the compensation offer to cover the costs of damage to his personal items. This was declined by the landlord on the grounds that it was insurance matter. This position is in line with the advice given in the tenancy agreement and the repairs compensation policy detailed above. The landlord’s website also provides further information on making an insurance claim. This recommends that a tenant contact their own insurer in the first instance and that if it is believed that the landlord is liable for the issue, then their insurer can look to reclaim the costs from the landlord’s insurance provider. Landlords are entitled to have insurance policies to cover the cost of liability claims and the landlord would not be expected to consider a claim for damage to the resident’s possessions outside the insurance process. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord not to consider an increase in its compensation offer to cover the damaged items and advise the resident to contact his insurance provider in its complaint responses.

Damp and mould in the property’s wet room and hallway.

19. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in good repair. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by the Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth is a potential hazard, and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require action.
20. The Ombudsman’s spotlight on damp and mould (which is available on our website) recommends that landlords “should adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions” and “should ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue”. The report goes on to advise landlords to “ensure that they clearly and regularly communicate with their residents regarding actions taken or otherwise to resolve reports of damp and mould” and “ensure there is effective internal communication between their teams and departments, and ensure that one individual or team has overall responsibility for ensuring complaints or reports are resolved, including follow up or aftercare”.
21. In his letter of complaint, the resident described the issue of black mould he had experienced caused by the leaks into the wet room, what work he had taken to attempt to resolve the issue, how it had spread into the hallway and what damage it had caused. The landlord did not address this issue in either of its complaint responses. Moreover, none of the notes left by its contractors and staff members in its repair logs make reference to the resident’s concerns of mould growth.
22. Therefore, there has been maladministration by the landlord in how it responded to this issue. The resident clearly described a serious issue with mould in the property which he was struggling to contain. The landlord would be expected to engage with the resident upon receipt of the report and investigate the issue. If the presence of damp and mould was confirmed, it would then be expected to work with the resident to resolve that issue and offer help and advice to him to minimise the impact of the damp and mould. There is no evidence that this happened in this case.
23. In order to resolve this element of the complaint, the landlord is ordered to contact the resident to arrange an inspection of the property to assess the condition and identify if any additional work is required to address damp and mould. It would also be appropriate for the landlord to pay further compensation for its failure to properly respond to this element of the complaint. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance detailed above, a payment of £400 compensation for its failure to respond to the resident’s report of damp and mould in its complaint responses and the significant inconvenience caused to the resident in having to contain the issue without any support from the landlord is reasonable in the circumstances.

Determination

24. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of redress to the resident in respect of how it responded to his reports of leaks into the wet room of his property which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint.
25. 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 damp and mould in the property’s wet room and hallway.

Orders

26. For the service failure in how it responded to the resident’s reports of damp and mould, the landlord is ordered to pay to the resident £400. This payment should be made within four weeks of the date of this report. The landlord should update this Service when payment has been made.
27. It is further ordered that the landlord contact the resident to arrange an inspection of the property to assess its condition and identify if any additional work is required to address the issue of damp and mould.

Recommendations

28. As the finding of reasonable redress for the delays in completing repairs to the wet room was made based on the landlord’s offer of £300 compensation, it is recommended that the landlord now pay this to the resident if it has not done so already.