Hammersmith and Fulham Council (202206970)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202206970

Hammersmith and Fulham Council

11 May 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

This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs at the property.
The associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is an assured tenant and the tenancy commenced 14 July 2003. The landlord is a local authority. The property is a four-bedroom house. The landlord has not listed that the resident has any vulnerabilities.

Scope of the investigation

The resident has brought a number of complaints about repairs to this Service in this investigation. However, a number of the repair issues have not yet exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints process. Therefore, they will not be included in the scope of this investigation as they are not yet ready for this Service to consider. They include the resident’s complaints about repairs to replacement doors for the basement and garden.

Summary of events

The resident reported that the property has outstanding repairs since 2020.
On 3 December 2020, the resident contacted the landlord to request repairs and decoration of her walls and ceiling in the bedrooms. Also, to replace the bathroom window and investigate damp in the basement of the property.
The landlord inspected the property on 5 December 2020 and the landlord noted replacement extractor fan was required in the bathroom, bathroom window needed replacing and repair to the walls and ceiling in the bedrooms.
On 19 March 2021, the landlord confirmed external damp specialist works were awaiting approval. This related to damp in the basement following the resident reporting this on 3 December 2020.
On 6 April 2021,the landlord completed its repairs in the resident’s toilets by addingnew timber and vinyl flooring.
On 25 November 2021, the landlord completed a survey on the windows and doors of the property. The landlord agreed to replace the bathroom window and front and rear basement doors with UPVC doors and frames.
The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 27 January 2022. The resident complained initially that bathroom windows and basement doors needed replacing. Additionally, that the hallway needed redecorating and the basement needed replastering and damp proofing. Also, the bathroom floor needed replacing as well as the staircase spindles.
The landlord provided its stage one complaint response on 9 February 2022. The landlord said:
1. The flooring in the residents two toilets was due to be replaced 14 February 2022.
2. The stair balusters are due to be supplied and fitted on 3 March 2022.
3. The landlord arranged for its contractor to contact the resident to arrange a time and date regarding outstanding work in the basement. Additionally, to replace bathroom windows. Further, once completed the landlord will contact to complete decorative work.
4. The landlord apologised for the delays in repair the resident experienced and offered £100 in compensation.
On the 22 February 2022, the resident requested for the landlord to escalate the complaint to stage two. The landlord acknowledged the residents request on 9 March 2022 and apologised for the delay in sending the acknowledgement. In its response the landlord said the resident would receive a stage two on 22 March 2022.
The landlord attended the resident’s property on 3 March 2022 and replaced the flooring in the resident’s two toilets.
On the 26 March 2022, the landlord emailed the resident to apologise for the delay in its stage two response. The landlord said it aimed to provide its stage two response by 1 April 2022.
On 22 April 2022, the landlord emailed the resident to confirm it was waiting on information from its contractors before providing its stage two response.
The resident contacted the landlord on 22 April 2022, to report issues with the loft. The landlord emailed the resident to confirm it was waiting on information from its contractors before providing its stage two response.
The landlord attended on 25 April 2022 and made safe the loft.
On 30 May 2022, the landlord contacted the resident by email to provide an update on the repairs. The landlord confirmed it was still waiting for an update from the repairs team.
The landlord provided its stage two complaint response on 30 June 2022. The landlord said:
1. A bricklayer is due to attend as arranged on 30 June 2022, regarding repairs to the loft.
2. A surveyor will attend the resident’s property on 4 July 2022, to review and plan further work.
3. Apologised for the delay in change to windows.
4. The landlord confirmed it had completed out promised work on:
  1. Replacing flooring and rotten ply to both toilets.
  2. Supplied, fitted, and decorated stair balusters.
The landlord apologised for the time taken to complete repairs. Due to the delays in completing work outstanding the landlord offered the resident £1000 (inclusive of amount offered at stage one) in compensation.
As the resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and brought the complaint to this Service.

Post complaint process

It is important to note that in correspondence to this Service in April 2023 the landlord confirmed the brickwork is now complete. However, it did not provide any further details on when.

Assessment and findings

When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman considers its Dispute Resolution Principles. This is good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.
2. Put things right, and.
3. Learn from outcomes.

The landlord’s obligations

Under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord is obliged to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling house. This obligation is confirmed in section 1.2 a (i) of the tenancy agreement.
The resident’s tenancy agreement states the landlord will carry out repairs for which it is responsible within a reasonable time, giving priority to urgent repairs.
The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy says that emergency repairs should be responded to within 24 hours, urgent repairs within three and five working days. It also says that routine repairs should be responded to within 20 working days. The repair policy confirms it is the landlord’s responsibility to repair brickwork, glazing external and communal, sanitary fixtures and stairs. The landlord is also responsible for internal decoration if damaged by repairs.
The landlord has a two complaints procedure. At stage one the landlord should provide a formal response within 15 working days. At stage two, the landlord should provide a full and final response within 20 days following a full investigation of the complaint.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs at the property.

Brickwork in the loft

The resident reported that the brickwork in the loft was unsafe, and debris was falling from the loft area. The resident initially raised a concern during a landlord inspection on 22 April 2022.
In terms of evidence available to this Service, the landlord has not provided comprehensive repair records detailing each visit and what works were undertaken. This Service would expect a landlord to keep a complete record of contacts and repairs, yet the evidence has not been comprehensive in this case. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. The findings made in this report are based upon the evidence provided.
From the records available, this Service can see that on 26 April 2022, the landlord made safe the loft area. At this time, the landlord’s actions were appropriate as the landlord acted within reasonable time frames to make the area safe. The landlord noted the cause of the debris was an old brick duct falling so the loft needed repointing. The landlord arranged for a contractor to attend on 9 June 2022.
A contractor attended on 9 June 2022, but identified that it would require more contractors due to the level of brickwork and insultation required. The contractor requested a booking for two people to attend for two days for brickwork and insulation. On 30 June 2022, the landlord completed a further inspection and identified that an asbestos check was required before work commenced.
In the landlord’s stage two response it said the brickwork was due to commence on 4 July 2022. However, the resident in her correspondence with this Service stated the brickwork in the loft was still outstanding as of 31 August 2022.
The landlord’s own repair policy is clear that urgent repairs must take place between three to five working days after the resident reports their concern. In this case, the resident raised the concern about the falling debris from the loft on 22 April 2022. The landlord attended the property and made the loft area safe on 26 April 2022. This was in line with the landlord’s own repair guidelines.
This Service notes that following making safe the loft area the landlord needed to undertake further work to secure the loft area. As per the landlord’s repair policy this would have been classified as a routine repair which should take place within 20 working days.
For the roof repair to be within the repair guidelines set by the landlord, repair work would have needed to be completed by 20 May 2022. The landlord failed to adhere to the timescales agreed for follow on works. Also, it was outside of the landlord’s published timescales in its repair manual.
The landlord has apologised for the delays in repairs. However, the landlord did not communicate the reasons for the delay to the resident.

Replacement bathroom window.

The landlord is responsible for repairs to and maintenance of the windows in the property. This is outlined in its repair obligations and the repair handbook.
The resident says the landlord agreed that a replacement bathroom window was required but delayed approving this with its contractors. As such, the resident waited from August 2021 since the window was measured for a replacement.
The records show that on 24 November 2021, the landlord completed a survey on the windows and doors of the property. Since November 2021, the evidence shows the resident contacted the landlord and the contractor on various occasions for updates. The records indicate that the resident contacted the landlord for an update by telephone seven times between 1 December 2021 and 21 January 2022. Also, by email on 27 January 2022. This Service has not seen any evidence that the landlord contacted the resident to provide an update between November 2021 and 9 February 2022 when it issued its first complaint response.
In terms of the landlord’s actions regarding the delay, the records show that a quote was sent on 24 November 2021 and a replacement window was approved on or around the 6 January 2022. The approval was then sent to a contractor who supplies and fits the window to contact the resident to arrange fitting.
The evidence suggests that it is not until the landlord issued its stage two complaint response on 30 June 2022, that the landlord apologised for the delay in repairing the window. The landlord explained its contractor had measured the window, but it was unclear what happened to its original quote as work did not take place. With this in mind, in its stage two response the landlord confirmed its surveyor would inspect the window during a planned visit on 4 July 2022.
In its stage one response the landlord said its contractor would contact the resident directly to arrange fitting of the new window. The landlord in its stage two response said it was not clear why the replacement had not yet been approved. The landlord said it will discuss this further on 4 July 2022 when it visited the property.
The records show the surveyor attended the resident’s property on 4 July 2022 and it is noted that the surveyor concluded that the window needed an overhaul not a replacement. It goes onto say that the surveyor discussed this with the resident who agreed to this.
Since the landlord initially agreed to replace the bathroom window in November 2021, the landlord did not manage the resident’s expectations effectively by confirming when the replacement would take place. Additionally, the landlord did not provide regular updates on the progress of the replacement. This would have caused the resident frustration and to expend unnecessary time and trouble.
In accordance with the landlord’s responsive repairs policy, it should have proactively consulted with, and kept the resident informed of any delays and managed her expectations accordingly. The landlord should have set clear timescales in which she was likely to receive a repair and provide an update on when the work will be completed.
In this case, with the absence of detailed records from the 4 July 2022 or detailed notes from 25 November, it is unclear why the resident was initially advised that she needed a replacement bathroom window. Additionally, why the surveyor decided an overhaul of the window was required instead.
This does, however, indicate that initially the landlord failed in its obligations to assess the property and investigate or carry out the repair as stated in its repair manual. Had the landlord have carried out a detailed inspection of the window earlier then it would have identified a replacement window was not required sooner. As such, this led to the resident expectations not being managed accordingly.
In conclusion, the landlord did not communicate effectively with the resident regarding progress of the repair to the bathroom window. Additionally, the landlord did not follow its own repair obligations by not carrying out a thorough investigation into the reported repair. Therefore, the landlord failed in its service delivery and failed to manage the resident’s expectations.

Replacing flooring and rotten ply in both toilets.

The resident reported that her toilets both have rotten ply on 12 May 2021 and therefore, needed the floors replacing.
From the evidence available to this Service, the resident initially reported that her toilet floors were damp during an inspection on 12 May 2021. The records show that on 27 May 2021, the landlord raised a service request to replace flooring and rotten ply in both of the resident’s toilets.
The resident subsequently contacted the landlord on 8 June 2021, for an update on the repair. The landlord confirmed that an appointment was arranged for a contractor to attend on 21 June 2021 and complete an inspection. The notes show that the resident called a further three times in June. On 16 July 2021, the resident noted she was concerned as the contractor said it was waiting on approval of works from the landlord.
The records show that the landlord approved the replacement of flooring for both toilets on 26 August 2021. There is a subsequent gap in records regarding the repairs to the bathroom floor between 26 August 2021 and 13 January 2021. This Service has not seen any evidence of proactive contact from the landlord to the resident to provide updates during this time.
The landlord’s records showed that the landlord’s next update on the replacement flooring was made on 13 January 2022. This states that the landlord needed to remove timber flooring in the toilet and replace with new vinyl. The landlord contacted the resident to confirm the appointment and the resident elected to buy her own vinyl to be fitted by the landlord. The landlord in its stage one response states that the flooring would be replaced on 14 February 2022. However, this Service can see that the flooring was not replaced until just under two months later on 6 April 2022.
In terms of the guidelines this Service relies on, the tenancy agreement is clear that the landlord will carry out repairs within a reasonable time. For further clarification on timings this Service refers to the landlord’s own repair policy. This policy states that routine repairs should be actioned within 20 working days.
The landlord acknowledged in its stage one complaint response that the resident had experienced delays in outstanding repairs. In the landlord’s stage two response it confirmed that this had been completed. The records show this was completed on 6 April 2022.
In this case, it took the landlord 11 months to repair both of the resident’s toilet floors. Therefore, the landlord’s response to the repairs to the toilet floors was not appropriate. In the circumstances, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to contact the resident to provide updates during this time.

Supply and fit stair balusters.

It is not disputed by either the resident or the landlord that the stair balusters needed replacing. From the evidence provided to this Service a repair request was generated on 27 May 2021 to supply, fit and decorate the resident’s stair balusters. The landlord has not provided a reason for the delay in repairs to the stair balusters.
The landlord initially advised the resident this would take place on 2 June 2021. The resident contacted the landlord for an update on 11 June 2021 and the landlord confirmed that the stairs would be repaired on 23 June 2021.
The evidence shows that the repair did not place on 23 June 2021 as agreed. This Service has not seen any indication as to why. As such, the resident contacted the landlord for an update on 30 June 2021, 16 July 2021, 13 August 2021, and 12 October 2021 to name a few. The evidence showed the new stair balusters were fitted on 3 March 2022. It is noted that the resident wanted to paint the spindles herself.
In terms of this complaint matter, it took the landlord ten months to replacement stair balusters. This is not in line with its own repair obligations to complete routine repairs within 20 days. Additionally, the landlord has not taken steps to explain the ten month delay between the repair being raised and actioned. It is this Service’s view that this was an unacceptable delay and there were no clear communications with the resident. Therefore, this left the resident chasing the landlord on a persistent basis.
Overall, in this case, in the landlords’ stage two response it acknowledged its handling of repairs in the property was not appropriate. The landlord has attempted to put things right by way of an apology for the delays in previous repairs and for the existing delays in completing outstanding repair work. In terms of compensation, the landlord has offered the resident £1,000 in its stage two response inclusive of the £100 previously offered to cover all of the complaint matters.
This Service’s remedies guidance suggests compensation from £100 to £1,000 is appropriate for instances of maladministration.
With this in mind, this Service has considered whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right.
It was appropriate that the landlord apologised for this delay, and that it had considered this delay in its offer of compensation which also included the poor communication while it liaised with its contractor, as discussed above. The landlord’s offer £1000 in its stage two response was reasonable in the circumstances. This is due to the fact that the landlord had recognised the affect it had on the resident and the time taken to call for updates.
Additionally, the landlord said it now has a more structured plan in place for dealing with repairs and has now completed outstanding repairs. With this in mind, this Service has found the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.

The associated complaint.

The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) was introduced with the aim of improving complaint handling across the housing sector. As a member of the Scheme, the landlord is obliged to establish and maintain a complaints procedure in accordance with any good practice recommended by the Ombudsman.
The landlord’s compensation policy states in awarding compensation, it must consider whether any statutory payments are due, if any quantifiable losses have been incurred, the time and trouble a resident has been put to as well as any distress and inconvenience caused.
The resident initially complained to the landlord on 27 January 2022. Nine working days later the landlord provided its stage one complaint response. This is in line with the landlord’s own complaint policy to respond within 15 days.
In accordance with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, it is recommended that a landlord’s provide its stage one response within ten working days from receipt of the resident’s complaint. Therefore, the landlord’s own complaint policy to respond within 15 days is out of line with our code.
On the 22 February 2022, the resident requested for the landlord to escalate the complaint to stage two. Over four months later the landlord provided its stage two response on 30 June 2022. Therefore, this is not in line with the landlord’s own complaint policy.
The records show that the resident contacted the landlord to chase up its stage two response. This Service notes that in response to the resident’s follow up contact the landlord contacted the resident on 26 March 2022 to advise that it aimed to provide its stage two response on 1 April 2022, the landlord also apologised for the delay and confirmed the delay was that it was waiting for confirmation from its contractors on when work will be completed. This Service can see that the resident contacted the landlord on 6 April 2022,14 April 2022 and 21 April 2022 for updates as she was not receiving call backs as promised.
The landlord contacted the resident by email on 22 April 2022, to confirm it had not yet provided its stage two response as it was still awaiting updates from its contractors. The records show the resident contacted the landlord on 6 May 2022 for an update on the complaint. On the 19 May 2022 the landlord apologised for the delay in issuing its stage two response. The landlord agreed to contact the contractors for an update.
Overall, a four month delay in providing its stage two response was unreasonable and would have caused the resident distress. Further, the landlord waiting for updates on outstanding repair work left the resident in the complaint process for a prolonged period of time without a final resolution. In addition, would have caused frustration for the resident, as well as time and trouble chasing it up.
In the landlord’s stage two response it acknowledged and apologised for the delay in providing its stage two response. In terms of putting things right, the landlord did not make any service improvements to ensure that future complaints are handled in a more timely way. Although the landlord has offered an overall compensation for the failings identified, it would have been more appropriate for the landlord to offer compensation for complaint handling.
In the circumstances, this amounts to maladministration. for which additional compensation is appropriate for the evidenced frustration caused to the resident.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress offered by the landlord for its handling of resident’s reports of repairs in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord for its response to the resident’s associated complaint.

Reasons

The landlord’s initial response to making safe the brickwork in the lift was appropriate. However, the subsequent repairs to the brickwork were not completed within a reasonable time frame, and its response was not in line with its policies. The landlord acknowledged its failures regarding the repairs and apologised for this. The landlord has also offered a reasonable amount of compensation due to the delays in repairs.

There was miscommunication regarding replacing the resident’s bathroom window. Additionally, significant delays in repair to the window. This amounts to maladministration. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for the delays in repairs. Also, the landlord arranged for the surveyor to attend the property a further time to assess the window and offered reasonable compensation.

There were lengthy delays by the landlord carrying out supplying and fitting stair balusters. Such delays amount to maladministration. The landlord acknowledged its failures in handling stair baluster repairs and offered fair compensation and an apology to reflect the time, trouble and inconvenience caused to the resident as a result.

There was a significant delay in the landlord issuing its stage two complaint response. This was not reasonable and not in line with what this Service would expect. Further it is not in line with the landlord’s own complaint policy.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord shall take the following action within four weeks of the date of this report and provides the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with these orders:
1. Pay the resident the sum of £1,250 made up of:
  1. The £1,000 previously offered (if not yet paid) for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s delay in carrying out repairs to the property.
  2. £250 for the inconvenience, time and trouble caused by the landlord’s poor complaint handling.

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord take the following action:
1. The landlord undertakes a formal review of its record keeping practices, to ensure quality records are kept of its repairs.
2. Review its complaints policy to bring it in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaints Handling Code.