Paragon Asra Housing Limited (202203220)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202203220

Paragon Asra Housing Limited

16 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 handling of:
    1. Reports of an ongoing leak from the roof and the associated repairs.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The resident’s partner, who lives at the property, was receiving chemotherapy at the time of the complaint and the resident has described her partner as “vulnerable”.
  2. On 7 July 2021, the resident contacted the landlord and reported a leak coming from the roof. Following this, the landlord’s contractor visited the resident’s property on several occasions between July and December 2022 to repair the leak. The repair works completed included repairing the felt on the roof and resealing a section of the cladding.
  3. On 7 January 2022, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord. She stated that a leak from the roof had been ongoing since July 2021 and had still not been repaired. The resident also stated that her partner was on chemotherapy and was vulnerable.
  4. On 20 January 2022, the landlord provided its stage one complaint response. It stated that it was not straightforward to identify the issue with the roof leak. The landlord apologised for the length of time it had taken to repair the leak. It also stated that it will ensure that it keeps the resident updated about the resolution of the repair.
  5. On 20 January 2022, the resident requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage. The resident stated that she was unhappy with the treatment she had received and had reported the issue with the leak on multiple occasions. She also stated that the roof required fixing, and her ceiling and light had still not been replaced.
  6. On 1 February 2022, the landlord provided its stage two complaint response. It stated that its contractor was unable to visit the resident’s property on 17 January 2022 due to its schedule. However, instead the contractor visited her property on 26 January 2022 to complete the water test and there were no leaks identified. The landlord explained following this, the electrician reinstated the light. In its response it also stated that all leaks had been rectified and all work had been completed.
  7. On 8 February 2022, the landlord emailed the resident. It offered £100 compensation to the resident for the inconvenience caused. The landlord stated that it had arranged for a roof contractor to visit the resident’s property during the week commencing 7 February 2022, to strip a section of the roof and renew the felt. It also stated that following this, it will arrange for the electrician to visit the resident’s property to reinstate the light.
  8. The landlord’s contractor also visited the resident’s property between January and August 2022 to attend to the leak and reinstate the light which had previously been removed. The landlord’s surveyor also visited the resident’s property in May 2022.
  9. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. Her desired outcome was for the repair issue to be resolved. The landlord and the resident confirmed that the repair was completed on 2 August 2022. However, on 1 May 2023, the resident contacted the Ombudsman and stated that the roof had started leaking again.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. This report will consider the initial leak the resident reported to the landlord on 7 July 2021. It will not investigate the new leak which the resident told the Ombudsman about on 1 May 2023.A significant period has passed since the repair was resolved in August 2022 and the new leak issue in May 2023. Therefore, the Ombudsman cannot conclude that the new leak is linked to the previous leak reported in July 2021, although we acknowledge the resident’s comment that the leak is affecting the same area. In addition, the Ombudsman recognises that the landlord should be given the chance to respond to the new leak in line with its repairs policy. If the resident is unhappy with the landlord’s handling of the ongoing repairs, she can raise a new complaint about this to the landlord.

The landlord’s response to the roof leak.

  1. The landlord’s repair policy states that a leaking roof would be classed as a non-emergency repair. It also states that the landlord will attend to a non-emergency repair within 15 working days.
  2. The resident first reported the leak to the landlord on 7 July 2021. Following this, the landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property on 12 July 2021. Therefore, the landlord initially responded to the repair within a reasonable amount of time and in line with its repairs policy. It is acknowledged that the landlord’s contractor visited the resident’s property on multiple occasions between July 2021 and August 2022, to identify the cause of the leak and to conduct repairs. The repairs conducted by the landlord’s contractor included repairing the roof felt, resealing a section of the cladding, fitting a new ceiling board, and removing and reinstating a light fitting. It is recognised that identifying the cause of a leak can be difficult and, in some cases, multiple appointments may be required to fully resolve the issue. However, in such circumstances the Ombudsman would expect to see that the landlord had done all that it could do to repair the leak and keep the resident informed. In this case, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to arrange for a surveyor to attend the resident’s property at a much earlier date than it did.
  3. The delay in repairing the leak and reinstating the light which the landlord removed as part of the repair process, would have caused significant distress and inconvenience to the resident. Furthermore, considering the resident’s circumstances, the Ombudsman recognises that it would have been particularly difficult for the resident and her partner. The Ombudsman would have expected the repair to be completed significantly more quickly than the timescale of one year which it had taken to resolve.
  4. The landlord has acknowledged during its own complaints process that there have been delays in repairing the leak. It apologised to the resident in its stage one complaint response for the length of time it had taken to repair the leak and reinstate the light. The landlord also offered £100 compensation to the resident on 8 February 2022 for the inconvenience caused.
  5. The landlord has also made an additional compensation offer of £200 in its file submission to the Ombudsman. It explained that it had offered further compensation because the repair issue with the leak and the light had continued for a longer period than expected.
  6. The additional compensation of £200 offered by the landlord is not proportionate to the resident’s circumstances and the significant distress and inconvenience she would have experienced. There has been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the water leak. Therefore, it would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident further compensation of £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused. This amount is in addition to the £100 the landlord offered the resident through its complaints process.
  7. The amount of compensation awarded is compliant with the landlord’s compensation policy. It’s policy states it offers compensation of between £100 to £500 where there has been a high impact on the resident. The amount awarded is also in line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance (published on our website), which sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation. The Remedies Guidance suggests awards of £100 to £600 where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident but there was no permanent impact. There was no permanent impact in this case because the leak was repaired, although it is acknowledged that another leak which may or may not be related has occurred recently.
  8. Following the end of its complaints process, the landlord confirmed it paid the resident final compensation of £3100 in December 2022 for all aspects of this complaint. This amount exceeds what the Ombudsman would have ordered and whilst it was post ICP, it was paid prior to this investigation, therefore it will be considered reasonable redress for the ongoing leak and associated repairs. The landlord is also expected to ensure the leak issue has been dealt with appropriately and provided a proper solution (not just temporary fixes).

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that one of the objectives of its policy is to be clear, simple, accessible and to ensure complaints are resolved promptly, professionally, and fairly.
  2. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (The Code) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states a complaint investigation shall be conducted in an impartial manner, seeking sufficient reliable information from both parties so that fair and appropriate findings and recommendations can be made.
  3. The landlord stated in its stage two complaint response dated 1 February 2022, that all leaks had been rectified and all work had been completed. It also stated that the electrician had reinstated the light. However, it appears this information was not accurate. From the information provided by both the landlord and the resident, it appears that the light had not been reinstated at the resident’s property and she was still experiencing issues with the leak. The light was not reinstated until 14 February 2022. In addition, the landlord’s contractors visited the resident’s property on several occasions between February and August 2022 to attend to the leak issue.
  4. The landlord’s complaint responses at both stages of its complaints process included inaccurate information. This does not comply with the landlord’s complaint policy or complaint handling code in ensuring that complaints are resolved fairly and based on reliable information. Therefore, it is suggested that the landlord reviews its complaint handling procedures to ensure that future complaint responses do not contain inaccurate information.  
  5. The inaccuracy would have caused distress for the resident, particularly as she had been dealing with the repair issue for over six months at the point the stage two complaint response had been issued. It would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident £200 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. The amount of compensation is appropriate to recognise the inaccuracy. It is also compliant with the landlord’s compensation policy and the Remedies Guidance, as referenced above.
  6. Following the end of its complaints process, the landlord confirmed it paid the resident final compensation of £3100 in December 2022 for all aspects of this complaint. This amount exceeds what the Ombudsman would have ordered and whilst it was post ICP, it was paid prior to this investigation, therefore it will be considered reasonable redress for complaint handling.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the ongoing leak from the roof.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should review its complaint handling procedures and ensure that stage one and two responses do not include inaccurate information.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord responds to the new leak in line with the timescales referenced in its repairs policy and takes appropriate steps to resolves the issue.