London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202123311)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202123311

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

19 October 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. Response to the resident’s reports of repair to the windows, kitchen sink tap, heating and hot water, TV aerial and light fitting at the property she had been decanted to.
   2. Response to the resident’s report of a leak at the property she had been decanted to.
   3. Handling of the associated complaint.

Jurisdiction

2. What the Ombudsman can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Scheme. When a complaint is brought to this service, the Ombudsman must consider all the circumstances of the case, as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
3. Under paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme, the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints that are made prior to having exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.
4. On 17 February 2022, the resident complained to the landlord that the windows, which she said were supposed to be sound proof were very noisy, that there appeared to be air blowing through the living room window whilst it was closed and that it had been ‘‘absolutely freezing’’ the previous night. The resident also complained that the kitchen sink tap was broken, she had no heating or hot water, that the TV aerial in the bedroom did not work and that there was an issue with a light fitting in her lounge.
5. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 3 March 2022, in which it said that:
   1. The landlord’s energy team had advised that the heating and water issue had been resolved on 18 February 2022 and asked that the resident confirm if this was correct.
   2. With regards to the defective living room window and kitchen sink tap, the contractor had been emailed directly, again, and urged to book appointments with the resident. The resident was asked to advise if no contact had been made in the next 48 hours, it would be escalated to the contract managers.
   3. The landlord’s Direct Maintenance team had been asked to raise an order for an electrician to attend and for the defective aerial connection work to be booked in directly with the resident.
   4. Its records showed that the building was built in 2018 and the window units and other parts of the building would have complied with planning and building control regulations at the time of construction. It was acknowledged that the property was located near to train tracks, however, from a repair view-point, there may be limited action it could take to address any noise transference into the flat. This point had been referred to the landlord’s  surveyor for their input and they would let the resident know when they responded.
   5. If the resident was not happy with its response, she could escalate the complaint to the next stage and that she could speak to the Ombudsman to discuss her complaint at any time.
6. In its correspondence with the resident on 4 May 2022 regarding the escalation of her complaint about the leak in her bathroom, the landlord asked the resident to confirm by return if there were any points from the above stage 1 complaint that she remained unhappy with, so that these could be included for the stage 2 complaint reviewer to assess.
7. The resident responded the same day with more information regarding the leak but made no mention of any issues she remained dissatisfied with regarding the landlord’s response of 3 March 2022.
8. The landlord acted in accordance with its complaints policy by providing the resident with the opportunity to escalate her complaint about the issued raised in her initial complaint. However, as the resident did not do so, these matters have not exhausted the landlord’s formal complaints process and therefore fall outside of this service’s jurisdiction under paragraph 42(a) of the scheme and as such will not be assessed further in this report.
9. During a telephone conversation with this service on 12 April 2023, the resident advised that the issues relating to her living room window and TV aerial remained outstanding. Whilst, for the reasons explained about, the landlord’s handling of these matters have not been assessed in this report, a recommendation has been made for the landlord to consider obtaining an independent assessment of these issues in order to seek to find a permanent resolution for the resident.

Background and summary of events

10. The tenancy of the resident’s substantive property commended on 30 September 2016. The property is a 1 bedroom first floor flat. The resident was decanted from her substantive property on 16 February 2022, following a leak. The decant property is a 1 bedroom ground floor flat.
11. On 11 and 15 March 2022 the resident emailed the landlord to report a leak in her bathroom of her decant property. The resident said that the leak appeared 5-10 minutes after she had a shower, it was not coming from the ceiling but after she showered, water from under the bath traveled from the side of the bath, under the bathtub, then out onto the floor and spread to near to toilet.
12. In an email to the landlord on 21 March 2022, the resident advised that when she had a shower the water gathered to such an extent that if she were to have a bath the flat would flood.
13. The landlord responded on 29 March 2022, to apologise for the delay in its response and to say that, from the picture the resident sent, it would appear that the gap under the shower tray needed to be sealed. However, the connection to the waste system must have a leak as there should not be any waste water seeping under the shower tray. The landlord said that it could not see that this had been reported to the repairs team as there was no repair issued for this, and that it had reached out to the surveyors and asked for an order to be issued to a contractor. The landlord also said that it had now asked for this to be issued twice, first on 21 March and again that day, and explained that it was experiencing severe delays with securing resources for any repairs at that time as it was still dealing with ‘‘vast back-logs’’.
14. The landlord’s repair records note that a job was raised on 29 March 2022 and that this was completed the same day.
15. The resident emailed the landlord on 30 April 2022 to say that that the bathroom leak had reoccurred every day since she moved into the property a few months ago. The resident said that she had logged a complaint about this leak, and the engineer who came out 2 weeks previously confirmed that further investigation was needed. The resident went on to say that the engineer also confirmed that the leak was most probably an existing issue that was never repaired which she said was really disappointing as she had been decanted to this property from her main property, which had had a 6 year leak and heating issue disrepair.
16. On 3 May 2022, the resident chased the landlord regarding the leak. The landlord responded on 4 May 2022 to say that:
    1. It had reviewed repair records and noted that a plumber visited 27 April 2022 and the job completion report stated that they checked the waste and water services, ran the supplies and were unable to find any evidence of a leak.
    2. It had reviewed the resident’s complaint and the leak was not reported until her email of 15 March 2022. However, it would escalate the resident’s complaint about the other repairs, for which it issued its stage 1 response on 3 March 2022,citing the leak repair delay as the reason for the resident’s dissatisfaction.
    3. The landlord noted that the resident had stated the leak was not instant and happened some 20 minutes after the shower was used. To resolve this it had emailed managers in its maintenance team and asked that they contact the resident directly to complete a full and thorough assessment, and resolved the issue.
17. A further job was then raised on 5 May 2022, to renew the seal to shower screen, noting that this was possibly causing the leaks. The repair records note that this was completed on 30 May 2022.
18. On 13 May 2022, the resident emailed this service to say that she had asked the landlord for its final response to her complaint about a recurrent leak in her decanted property.
19. On 24 May 2022, this service wrote to the landlord advise that the resident had said that she was yet to receive a response to her complaint about the leak in her decant property. The landlord was advised to either raise a new complaint or, if it had already provided a response, to write to the resident to provide her with a copy of that response setting out what stage the complaint is at, if she had the right to escalate the complaint or if the complaint had exhausted its formal complaints process to explain that in its response.
20. On 31 May 2022, the landlord issued its stage 2 and final response, noting that the leak did not form part of the resident’s initial complaint on 17 February 2022, having not been reported until 15 March 2022.  The response went on to say that:
    1. A plumbing repair operative attended 27 April 2022, and reported that they had checked to see where the leak was coming from but could not locate anything. There were no damp patches identified when the bath panel was removed and no leaks from the waste pipe. (A copy of the report was included in the landlord’s response).
    2. The report had been discussed with the contracts manager who deemed the actions taken during the visit appropriate and that they were satisfied that the met the level of investigation warranted for the report of an intermittent leak.
    3. With regards to the resident report of second leak, an order had been placed with the contactor to investigate further and resident had stated that she did not wish to agree to an appointment unless she received certainty that the leak would be repaired on the next visit date.
    4. A further visit was completed 30 May 2022, and the repair operative identified the shower screen seal as a possible cause of water spillage during the use of the shower and this seal had been replaced. The landlord said that it found no failings with regards to its investigations into the leak.
    5. There had been a delay in both its stage 1 and stage 2 responses, for which  apologised and offered £150 compensation.

Assessment and findings

Response to the resident’s report of a leak at the property she had been decanted to.

21. The landlord is obliged under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling-house for the supply of water, gas and electricity and for sanitation (including basins, sinks, baths and sanitary conveniences, but not other fixtures, fittings and appliances for making use of the supply of water, gas or electricity). This obligation is confirmed in the landlord’s repairs policy.
22. Once a landlord is informed of some damage or deterioration in a property, it is ‘on notice’ to carry out a reasonable inquiry to determine the cause and complete a repair. What is a reasonable time will depend on all the circumstances of a case.
23. In this case the landlord’s repairs policy states that for emergency works, where there is an immediate danger to the occupant or members of the public, it will attend within 24 hours. For routine day to day repairs, it will aim to complete the repair at the earliest mutually convenient appointment. Whilst the repairs policy does not give a specific timeframe for routine repairs, the general standard amongst social landlords is around 20 working days, and so this can be taken as a baseline against which to consider the landlord’s actions in this case.
24. It is noted that in her complaint to the landlord about the leak the resident said that she had reported it in February 2022, however, the first evidence seen by this service of the resident reporting the leak was on 11 March 2022. As the leak reported was not uncontrollable and was limited to after the resident had taken a shower, it was reasonable for the landlord to respond to the resident’s reports as a routine repair. This would mean that the landlord would be expected to complete the repair within 20 working days, by 8 April 2022.
25. There is no evidence of the landlord taking an action following the resident’s report of 11 March 2021 and there was a delay in the landlord contacting the resident following her email to the landlord on 21 March 2022, in which she raised further concerns about the water that was gathering when she had a shower. The landlord did not respond until 29 March 2022, 6 working days later. Whilst this was a relatively short delay, and whilst there was no indication that the leak had escalated to the point where it needed to be responded to as an emergency repair, it was appropriate for the landlord to apologise to the resident for the delay in its response. This was especially so given the issues the residents previous experience with leaks in her substantive property. The landlord’s repair records note that the repair was completed the same day, which was within 20 working days of it first being reported.
26. The resident continued to report the leak in response to which the landlord attended the property on 27 April 2022, and raised a new job on 5 May 2022 to renew the shower screen, which was completed on 30 May 2022.
27. The landlord issued its final response to the resident’s reports of the leak the following day, 31 May 2022, 56 working days after she had first reported the leak on 11 March 2022.
28. The Ombudsman recognises that repairs may be delayed on occasion, such as when specialist parts or equipment are required. However, there was no evidence that this was the case here and as such, that the landlord took 36 working days longer than the 20 working days to complete the repair, represents maladministration by the landlord. In order to address the understandable distress and inconvenience to the resident as a result of this unreasonable delay, the landlord has been ordered to apologise to the resident and pay her £150 compensation.
29. Following the landlord’s final response, the resident reported further leaks in the bathroom on 11 November 2022, 18 November 2022 and April 2023. It is therefore unclear whether there has been a permanent resolution to this issue.
30. If this has not been resolved, it is recommended that the landlord consider arranging an independent inspection of the resident’s bathroom in order to establish what, if any, repairs remain outstanding in relation to the leak. It has also been recommended for the landlord to consider whether additional compensation is due to the resident for any further unreasonable delays in completing this repair following its final response of 31 May 2022.

Handling of the associated complaint

31. The landlord has a 2 stage complaints policy which states that it will provide its stage 1 response within 10 working days and its stage 2 within 20 working days.
32. This service’s complaint handling code confirms that a landlord’s complaints procedure should comprise of two stages, stating that this ensures that a resident has the opportunity to challenge any decision by correcting errors or sharing concerns via an appeal process.
33. On 13 May 2022, the resident contacted this service to advise that she had she had logged a complaint with the landlord in February/March 2022 about a leak from her shower but had not received the landlord’s final response. Following contact from the resident this service wrote to the landlord providing it with a range of options as to how to respond to the resident’s complaint, including that if it had not already logged a complaint that it should do so and to respond in accordance with its complaints policy.
34. As the landlord had not previously responded to the issue of the leak through its formal complaints process, it should have initially considered the resident’s complaint at stage 1 and then provided the resident with an opportunity to escalate that complaint were she to be dissatisfied with its response.
35. However, the landlord failed to do so and issued a stage 2 and final response on 31 May 2022. This was despite the landlord stating in both its final response and its earlier email of 4 May 2022 that the issue of the leak did not form part of the complaint for which it had issued its stage 1 response on 3 March 2022. This represents a service failure by the landlord, it having followed neither its own policy or this service’s complaint handling code. This failure resulted in a missed opportunity for the resident to challenge its decision through its formal complaint process for which the landlord has been ordered to pay the resident £100 compensation.
36. It has been noted that in its final response the landlord offered the resident £150 compensation for its delayed response at both stage 1 and 2. However, given that the issues responded to in the landlord’s stage 1 response are outside of this service’s jurisdiction and as the landlord responded to a new, unrelated, issue at stage 2, no further comment has been made regarding the £150 offered except for a recommendation that this now be paid to the resident, if the landlord has not already done so.

Determination (decision)

37. 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 report of a leak at the property she had been decanted to.
38. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of the associated complaint.

Reasons

39. There was an unreasonable delay of 36 working days in the landlord completing the repair to the leak in the resident’s decant property which resulted in unnecessary distress and inconvenience to her.
40. The landlord failed to respond to the resident’s complaint about the leak at her decant property in accordance with either its complaints policy or this service’s complaint handling code.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

41. That within 28 calendar days of the date of this report, the landlord is to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident a total of £250 compensation made up of:
       1. £150 for the unreasonable delay in its response to her reports of a leak.
       2. £100 for its failure to provide the resident with the opportunity to escalate her complaint as a result of it only responding to her complaint about the leak at stage 2.
    3. Consider what learning it might take from this report in order to ensure that similar failings do not happen in the future, such as staff training and ensuring that its processes are in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.

Recommendations

42. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Consider arranging an independent inspection of the resident’s bathroom, if the leak has not been resolved, in order to establish what, if any, repairs remain outstanding. The landlord is also to consider whether additional compensation is due to the resident for any further unreasonable delays in completing this repair following its final response of 31 May 2022.
    2. Pay the resident the £150 offered in its final response for the delay in its stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses, if this has not already been paid.
    3. Consider obtaining an independent assessment of the issues relating to the resident’s living room window and TV aerial in order to seek to find a permanent resolution for her.