The Guinness Partnership Limited (202127883)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202127883

The Guinness Partnership Limited

3 August 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 is about the landlord’s:
   1. Handling of repairs to the resident’s property.
   2. Associated complaint handling.
   3. Record keeping.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a two-bedroom end-of-terrace house.
3. A flood in the resident’s kitchen and living room caused by a broken pipe was reported in June 2021. Upon inspection, the landlord installed a dehumidifier in the resident’s property, and explained that repairs and redecoration would be carried out once the damaged areas were dry. The landlord has not provided a clear explanation of the repairs required.  An assessment was carried out in October 2021, but misunderstandings with contractors delayed the start of works until February 2022. An official complaint regarding the outstanding repairs at the resident’s property was raised in March 2022, following the resident’s complaint to this Service.
4. The landlord issued its complaint response on 13 April 2022. It apologised for the delays in completing the repairs. It confirmed that there were two outstanding repairs, although it did not specify which ones. The landlord said it would continue to chase these repairs with its contractors and provide the resident with a date and time of completion as soon as possible. It offered £100 compensation for delays in completing repairs and in providing a response and for poor communication.
5. The landlord’s records show that the resident asked to escalate her complaint in April 2022 as she was unhappy with the amount of compensation. However, the landlord did not issue a final response until 13 September 2022, following involvement by this Service. It presented a summary of events, acknowledging its communication and record keeping failures and the delays in completing repairs. It apologised and increased its original offer of compensation to £300. It also explained how the resident could bring her complaint to this Service if she remained dissatisfied.
6. The resident brought her complaint to this Service as she was unhappy with the offer of compensation, and she stated some repairs were still outstanding. She said that the compensation offered did not reflect the impact that the issue had had on her, as well as the economic costs of a sofa replacement and higher energy bills due to having to use a dehumidifier for several months.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

7. After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with paragraph 42(c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we will not consider issues that were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period. In her complaint, the resident has stated that she has experienced continuous leaks for several years. This investigation centres on events after the flood of June 2021, and the subsequent complaint in 2022. Any earlier leaks are not in the Ombudsman’s remit to investigate due to their age.
8. The resident has explained the considerable impact that the longstanding problem, as well as having to constantly chase repairs, has had on her mental health. However, this Service cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

Handling of repairs

9. The resident’s tenancy agreement sets out that the landlord is responsible for maintaining the outside and structure of the home, including drains, gutters, and external pipes. It is also responsible for the maintenance of internal walls, floors, and ceilings.
10. Following the flood in June 2021, the landlord provided the resident with a dehumidifier in order to dry the water off the walls and floor before proceeding to repair and redecorate the affected areas. Internal records show that the landlord attended the property for inspection several times, assessing the area before concluding its plan of action. Where repairs are delayed, or it is not possible to complete them at the initial visits, basic good practice is for a landlord to communicate clearly with the resident, explaining why the repair cannot be completed, what it intends to do and what should happen next, including when it will return to complete the repairs. In this case, the landlord’s records show that it failed to return the resident’s calls within two working days (the time frame stated in its policies) on several occasions throughout the months leading to the start of repairs. Moreover, there is no evidence of any communication from the landlord to update the resident on the state of the repairs.
11. The landlord has acknowledged that repairs could have started in October 2021, but that, due to a disagreement with contractors about the repairs’ necessity, these were delayed until February 2022. When repairs are considerably delayed, basic customer service is for landlords to communicate meaningfully with residents in order to manage expectations – and where relevant, consider providing compensation and demonstrating learning from mistakes.
12. The landlord, in its final complaint response, stated that repairs were completed in April 2022. The landlord’s records show there were repairs raised throughout September related to the strong smell of damp at the property, and the resident has said that some repairs were completed in December. However, the landlord has explained that it had spoken with the resident to clarify that its complaint investigation would only include repairs up until April, and that reports of the smell of damp and mould would not be included. However, it advised her to start a new complaint if there were problems with this issue moving forward. Accordingly, while it appears additional work was subsequently needed, at the time of the landlord’s complaint response its explanation was accurate.
13. Overall, the landlord failed to carry out a post-works inspection and to call the resident to ensure works were completed satisfactorily, which it has acknowledged. Records show that the landlord did not follow up scheduled calls with the resident, and closed the case without checking that everything was completed. The landlord has however acknowledged it and apologised.
14. The landlord’s repairs records do not appropriately reflect the works carried at the resident’s property. Landlords are expected to keep robust records of their voids and repairs works. When there is a disagreement in the accounts of the resident and the landlord with regard to the condition of the property, the onus would be on the landlord to provide documentary evidence showing how it satisfied itself that the repair work had been completed to a satisfactory standard. In this case, this Service has been unable to determine the specific repairs completed and their respective dates, which constitutes a failing.
15. The landlord acknowledged and explained the reasons for the delays in completing the repairs, explained how it had learnt from its mistakes with regards to record keeping and communication with the resident, and offered £300 compensation. However, the amount offered was not proportionate to the significant delays, and ongoing poor communication, meaning that the complaint was not appropriately remedied.
16. In her complaint to this Service the resident asked for compensation for having to replace her sofa – which she has said was damaged by damp and mould – and for the energy bill during the months where she had to use a dehumidifier. There is however no evidence that the resident raised these issues with the landlord. To assist in resolving this matter, an order has been included requesting that the landlord consider the resident’s evidence in relation to the expenses and costs, around damage to furniture and increased energy consumption as a result of the dehumidifier usage, and either refer the matter to its own insurers, or provide reasonable compensation itself.
17. Finally, it has been noted that the resident explained the issue is still ongoing and surveyors are attending their home to assess the damp and mould. As such, a further order has been included requesting that the landlord completes another inspection and confirms any works that are outstanding, with a view to booking the works within 6 weeks if it has not done so already.

Complaint handling

18. The resident escalated their complaint to stage two on 13 April 2022; however, the landlord failed to provide a stage two response until 13 September 2022 – 5 months after the date of escalation. Having reviewed the evidence, it appears that there was an error with the landlord escalating the complaint as the case was closed after the repairs had been completed. Under the circumstances, this Service does not consider this to be appropriate; particularly considering the fact that the resident contacted the complaints team to discuss the stage one outcome on 2 occasions in April and May 2022, but the calls were not returned. Had the calls been returned earlier, the landlord would have likely realised its error at this stage and would have escalated the complaint sooner. On this basis, this Service considers the amount of £300 to be proportionate and reasonable when considering the landlords failings and the impact upon the resident. This Service has considered the length of the delay, the landlord’s poor communication, and the level of distress and inconvenience this would have caused the resident.

Determination

19. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the repairs.
20. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.
21. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its record keeping.

Orders

22. In light of the failures identified, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident compensation of £1100. This amount is inclusive of the £300 already offered and breaks down as follows:
    4. £600 for the delays in completing the repairs and poor communication.
    5. £200 for the poor record keeping.
    6. £300 for complaint handling failures.
23. Review its record keeping practices to ensure appropriate records are kept relating to internal communications and notes, communications to/from residents, surveys and reports by surveyors and contractors in relation to assessments conducted or works completed.
24. Provide training to staff in relation to the closure of cases. Closure should be communicated to residents and cases should be reviewed to see if anything is outstanding before closure.
25. Consider the resident’s evidence in relation to the expenses and costs, around damage to furniture and increased energy consumption as a result of the dehumidifier usage, and either refer the matter to its own insurers, or provide reasonable compensation itself.
26. Complete another inspection and confirm any works that are outstanding to the resident, supported by evidence. Work should then be booked within 6 weeks if the landlord has not done so already.
27. Orders must be completed within four weeks, and evidence provided to this Service by the same deadline.