The Riverside Group Limited (202210893)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202210893

The Riverside Group Limited

16 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

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to the gable end of the resident’s property.

Background

2. The resident is a leaseholder of the landlord. The property is a second floor flat within an end terraced house, with a gable end. The landlord is the freeholder of the property.
3. After purchasing the property using her right to buy in 2017, the resident asked the landlord to inspect the brickwork at the gable end of the property as she said surveyors had recommended that damage to the brickwork be addressed before it led to further damage and damp to the interior walls. The landlord inspected the property and in 2018 told the resident the brick work was “ok”, and no work was carried out.
4. In January 2022, the resident requested that the landlord inspect the gable end brickwork again, along with a crack in the brickwork at the front of the property, as she felt repairs were needed. The landlord raised one job to inspect both areas and following the inspection, in February 2022, erected scaffolding to repair brickwork at the front of the property. It then confirmed to the resident that the job had been completed. However, the resident sent a photograph showing that no work had been carried out on the gable end, so the landlord recorded a repair failure on 1 March 2022 to investigate why no repairs were made to the gable end. On 3 March 2022, the foreman asked the resident if they could inspect inside the property for damp. The resident refused as it was not a convenient time and she said she had already re-plastered the walls. The contractor told the resident that if there was no damp inside the property then no repairs were needed to the external brickwork.
5. On 10 March 2022 the landlord raised a complaint, as the resident said she disagreed with the decision not to carry out repairs as she had had damp in the property previously. She asked at what point the landlord would carry out repairs and asked if she would need to wait until there was “terrible damp in my flat which effects my health?” In its stage one complaint response on 15 March 2022, the landlord said that no repairs would be carried out as its foreman had reported that only the face of the bricks were blown and this was not causing any internal damage to the building. It said it would provide a written statement, as requested by the resident. Although we have not been provided with the resident’s request for the written statement, the landlord’s records confirm that on 16 March 2022, it requested that an officer provide a written statement, to answer the resident’s question about at what point the landlord would determine it necessary to carry out repairs. There is no record of the officer responding to the request and no record of a written statement being issued.
6. The landlord recorded on 7 April 2022, that the resident wanted to escalate her complaint as the “bricks were in a poor state of repair and causing water penetration leading to her experiencing damp in her home.” It contacted the resident on 13 April 2022 to inform her that it would be issuing its stage two complaint response and agreed with its stage one decision that no repairs would be carried out. The resident sent the landlord a copy of the home buyer’s report for the property from 2016 which she said recommended that the gable end brickwork should be repaired. She said when she had the walls re-plastered and treated the damage caused by damp, the operatives she had instructed to carry out the work said that the problem would recur if the outside of the property was not addressed. She asked for a clear explanation as to why the landlords decision differed from theirs.
7. In its response on 14 April 2022 the landlord said it had attached a copy of the letter it sent to the resident on 15th March 2022 explaining the reason it could not carry out the repairs. (The only evidence we have of a letter dated 15 March 2022 is the stage one complaint response). In its stage two complaint response issued on 14 April 2022, the landlord confirmed that the stage one decision would be maintained as the property had been inspected by a qualified tradesman and the area foreman, and both they and its home ownership officer agreed that no work was required. It said although the face of some of the bricks were blown it was not affecting the structural integrity or the interior of the building.
8. The resident contacted this Service as she said the landlord had originally agreed to carry out repairs to the gable end. She said although you could not see the damp, the poor state of the brickwork was leading to water penetration that was causing damp inside her property. The outcome she sought was for the landlord to investigate the damaged brickwork properly and to give an estimate as to when this would be rectified, to avoid future internal damage. Following a request for further information, the landlord has confirmed that it was not able to evidence the written statement, mentioned in its stage one complaint response, and that the response was given as part of its stage two complaint response.

Assessment and findings

9. In the resident’s correspondence with this Service, she has made reference to a previous request she made to the landlord, to inspect the brickwork at the gable end of the property in 2017 and to the landlord deciding in 2018, after inspecting the brickwork, that no repairs were needed. Under Paragraph 42(c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we may not consider complaints that were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within six months of the matters arising. Therefore, whilst the events of 2017 to 2018 provide contextual background to the current complaint, this assessment focuses on events from January 2022 onwards, which is when the resident made her second request for the brick work to be inspected.
10. The resident’s leasehold agreement confirms that the landlord has an obligation to provide services which include “The repair, decoration , improvement, maintenance, renewal, replacement and rebuilding  of the retained property (including the conduits and plant that form part of the retained property, including decorating the building and common parts, as often as we deem necessary) “ as well as “The provision of any other services, and the carrying out of any other works (including improvements) which we may, from time to time consider necessary or desirable for the property maintenance, safety, enjoyment or administration of the building. “
11. In January 2022, when the resident requested that the brickwork at the gable end and front of the property be inspected as she felt repairs were needed, as the landlord’s obligations include the repair and maintenance of the exterior of the property, it took appropriate steps to arrange an inspection. The landlord’s record of the original repair report says “Spoiled brickwork on the gable end at high level – cracks going through bricks at front” The repairs record of the outcome of the inspection, says that follow- on work was required “To rake out and repoint brickwork and scaffold needs to be erected”. However, the record is ambiguous, as it does not specify whether the follow-on work and scaffolding were required at the gable end of the property, the front of the property, or both. The repairs record when the job was completed was equally ambiguous as it just said “Raked out and repointed brickwork and stitched brickwork around window”.
12. The ambiguity of the records led to some confusion, as the landlord confirmed to the resident that the job had been completed, and the resident pointed out that only the front of the property had had scaffolding erected and been repaired. As it was unclear from the repairs records whether the inspection had found that repairs were needed to the front, the gable end or both, it was reasonable that landlord raised a repair failure to clarify this. When its foreman went back to the property, it was reasonable that they asked to check if there was any damp inside the property, as that would affect their decision as to whether repairs were needed outside. Although it would have been helpful had this been checked when the exterior was originally inspected. It would also have been helpful if the landlord had made the resident aware of the date of this visit or arranged a mutually convenient time to inspect inside the property.
13. As the resident declined to give access to the property and confirmed that the walls had been re-plastered (implying there was no damp to see at that time), it was reasonable that the foreman relied on this information to make a decision about whether repairs were needed to the gable end. And, as the landlord has a limited budget for repairs and maintenance it was reasonable that it decided not to carry out any repairs as there was no evidence that the brickwork was affecting the interior of the property at that time. We do not have evidence of the conversation that took place between the resident and the foreman, about previous issues with damp at the property. However, as the resident had mentioned these issues in an email to the landlord on the day of the inspection and again in her escalation request, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have requested more information from the resident about any previous damp issues, such as when these occurred, when the property was re- plastered, whether there was any evidence from that time such as photographs, or official damp reports. As the resident had not permitted the foreman to inspect inside the property, it would also have been appropriate for the landlord to consider arranging a damp inspection of the property at a mutually convenient time for the resident. However, as the landlord failed to do so there was maladministration by the landlord. In view of that, and the fact that the resident has told this Service that even though there is no visual evidence of the damp, she believes it is damp, the Ombudsman will be ordering the landlord to contact the resident to confirm whether there are any current damp issues or if there is any evidence of previous damp issues, and whether a damp inspection is required.
14. During the complaints process, the resident requested that the landlord provide her with a written statement confirming at what point it would be prepared to carry out repair work to the property, which is a reasonable request. In its stage one complaint response on 15 March 2022, the landlord appropriately agreed to provide this written statement and the landlord’s records show that this was requested internally on 16 March 2022. However, there is no record of this ever being sent to the resident. When this Service requested a copy of this written statement, the landlord advised that it was “unable to evidence” it and that “the response was given as part of the stage two response. However, the stage two complaint response does not address the question as to at which point the landlord would be prepared to carry out the repairs. It just reconfirmed its position from its stage one complaint response that it would not carry out any repairs at that point as there was no impact on the interior of the property.
15. As the landlord agreed to provide this written statement, and then failed to so there was further maladministration by the landlord. In view of that, this Service will be ordering the landlord to provide a written statement that confirms what if, any repairs it will be carrying out to the gable end. If no repairs are needed at that point, it should confirm how often it will review its decision and at what point in the future it would consider carrying out the repairs. This Service will also be ordering the landlord to award £200 compensation for its maladministration. This amount is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website) which sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation for distress and inconvenience. The remedies guidance suggests that amounts in this range are appropriate for cases of maladministration where the landlord has failed to acknowledge its failings and/or has made no attempt to put things right.

Determination

16. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request for repairs to the gable end of her property.

Orders and recommendations

17. Within four weeks of the date of this decision the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £200 compensation for its maladministration in respect of its response to the resident’s report that repairs were needed to the gable end of her property.
    2. Contact the resident to confirm whether there is any damp present in her property, and/or if she can provide any evidence of previous damp issues, such as photographs, or professional damp inspection reports, in order to ascertain whether a damp inspection of the property is required.
    3. Following this, the landlord should provide the resident with a written statement that confirms what if, any repairs it will be carrying out to the gable end. If no repairs are needed at that time, it should confirm how often it will review its decision and under what circumstances it would consider carrying out the repairs.