Sovereign Housing Association Limited (202220067)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220067

Sovereign Housing Association Limited

7 November 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of reports of a roof leak, damp and mould and damaged belongings at the property.
The landlord’s complaint handling has also been investigated.

Background

The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord, which is a housing association. The tenancy began on 27 May 2022 for a 1 bedroom bungalow.
On 10 June 2022 the resident contacted the landlord’s out of hours service to report water leaking into her bathroom, through the ceiling. An operative attended and reported that there were no issues with the pipework, but he had identified a hole in the roof which required a follow on appointment for a roofer to inspect. A follow on appointment was booked for 5 July 2022.
On 13 June 2022 the resident contacted the landlord and said that she was unhappy that the landlord had not completed repairs which she was promised would have been completed within a week of her moving in and were still outstanding. The resident also explained that she had also had a leak, which had come through her ceiling and affected her belongings, damaged her bed and she was now sleeping on the floor. The resident explained that she did not want to be decanted from the property and could not stay with friends or family.
On 15 June 2022 the resident raised a formal complaint regarding the property condition and a lack of support from the lettings team as she says she was not told about contents insurance, shown where the stopcock was or who the utility companies were. The resident said that she was vulnerable, the property was not suitable and work had not been completed. In order to resolve her complaint, the resident wanted compensation for her damaged belongings, however the landlord informed the resident that she should claim for her damaged items through her contents insurance, which the resident did not have.
On 15 June 2022 the landlord’s internal complaints team contacted the lettings and repair departments and detailed the resident’s complaint and asked for it to make contact with the resident in order to resolve the complaint.
The lettings department contacted the resident on 15 June 2022 and confirmed to the internal complaints team that it had spoken to the resident and apologised for the issues with regards to the stopcock and utility company, and had resent an email it sent to her on 18 May 2022, which gave details about contents insurance. It offered the resident a £20 shopping voucher and confirmed that the resident was happy for the lettings aspect to be closed.
The follow on appointment on 5 July 2022 determined that scaffolding was required so that it could rerun the roof verge. On 7 July and 1 August 2022, the resident contacted the landlord for an update on the roofing works. On 2 August 2022 the landlord arranged for a roofer to attend the property on 11 August 2022 to inspect the roof.
On 11 August 2022 the resident contacted the landlord as she was unhappy that an operative was sent to inspect her roof again, and she was expecting scaffolding to go up. The landlord said it would contact the resident with an update. On 2 September 2022 the resident chased the landlord for an update, she was informed that the order for scaffolding was awaiting approval and once this had been done, a further job would be raised to complete the works.
On 5 and 18 October 2022 the resident contacted the landlord for an update regarding the roofing work as her bathroom ceiling was soaking, cracks had started appearing in the walls and that water had continued to leak through her ceiling and affected the electrics. She also said that she wanted to escalate her complaint to stage 2 as she had been requesting updates and callbacks from the landlord which had not been responded to..
On 18 October 2022 the landlord arranged for an emergency job and informed the resident that an admin error had occurred regarding the scaffolding request. However, it had now received a quote and would be approving it within the next couple of days and the resident would be contacted. It also asked the resident to send in pictures of the cracks and the damaged items.
Following the emergency job on 18 October 2022, the landlord reported that the issue identified was not linked to the original leak in June 2022, and arranged for a further roof inspection to be completed on 20 October 2022. The inspection determined that the verge needed rebedding, loft insulation needed removing, there were 2 large holes in the roofing felt membrane and that stain blocking was required in various rooms.
In November 2022 there were multiple communications between the landlord and resident as she remained dissatisfied with the way in which it was communicating with her and wanted her complaint to be escalated. She also reported a further roof leak. The landlord attended and confirmed that while there were identified defects, the roof was watertight and the repairs had been booked in for January 2023.
Furthermore, in November 2022 the resident informed the landlord that the property was covered with mould as a result of the roof leak, cracks were getting worse and that her belongings had been damaged. The landlord arranged for the cracks to be filled in the bedroom, for a mould wash to be applied to the affected areas and for data loggers to be installed. The landlord also arranged to contact the resident on a weekly basis.
On 27 November 2022 the resident contacted the Ombudsman as she was dissatisfied with the way in which the landlord had dealt with her complaint. The resident said that:
1. The roof on her property had not been fixed,
2. The walls within her property were full of mould, and it was airborne
3. Ceilings and walls were damp every morning,
4. She had not received her weekly updates as promised,
5. The mould was making her sick.
On 22 December 2022 the landlord attended the resident’s property and carried out a further inspection. It said that there were no current damp issues within the bedroom, no mould issues present and that the resident did not have any issues with mould on her belongings at present. The inspection concluded that while there was no property defect, it had identified some areas of improvement, which were:
1. 2 hallway cupboards required treating with mould paint
2. The bathroom fan needed replacing
3. Gas team to advise if it could upsize the radiator in the bedroom.
On 19 January 2023 the Ombudsman contacted the landlord and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint by 2 February 2022. On 6 February 2023 the landlord provided the resident with a written stage 2 response. The landlord upheld the complaint and said:
1. Following the roof leak, it had:
  1. Carried out an inspection on 11 August 2022 and a temporary repair had been carried out.
  2. Attended on 4 November 2022 following an emergency repair, no leaks had been detected.
  3. Arranged for further repairs to the roof to be completed on 31 January 2023 (postponed from 19 January 2023 due to weather)
2. Regarding reports of damp and mould, it had:
  1. Fitted data loggers to monitor the humidity levels.
  2. Plastered the walls in the bedroom, kitchen ad bathroom.
  3. Installed a new bathroom trickle fan to help with extraction.
  4. Moved the living room radiator and was looking to install a larger radiator in the bedroom.
  5. Identified that stain blocking needed to be completed in the cupboards, and
  6. Said that it would provide and install a PIV.
In October 2023, the resident provided the Ombudsman with an update regarding the issues she had made a complaint about. The resident confirmed that the cracks had been filled, the roof had been repaired, roof insulation had been installed, a humidity fan had been installed within the loft and room had been painted with anti mould paint. The resident said that the landlord’s actions had resulted in many of her belongings being damaged and wanted this Service to investigate.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s approach

The Ombudsman’s role is to determine complaints by reference to what is fair in all the circumstances and decide if the landlord is responsible for maladministration or service failure.
When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its dispute resolution principles. These are high-level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only 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.

Scope of Investigation

The Ombudsman notes that the resident has informed the landlord and this Service of the health issues she has experienced, which she says are as a result of the condition of her property. This investigation is unable to determine a causal link between these and the landlord’s actions. Often when there is a dispute over whether a health issue has been caused or made worse, the courts rely on expert evidence in the form of a medico-legal report. This will give an expert opinion of the cause or deterioration of a condition. Without that evidence, this Service is not able to draw any conclusions on whether the resident’s health has been affected by the way in which the landlord handled the reports of damp within her home. This question may be better for the courts to decide, where an expert can be cross examined during a live hearing.

Policies and procedures

The Housing Act 2004 ensures landlords are responsible for assessing hazards and risks within their rented homes. When assessing any such hazards and risks, the assessment should be considered in line with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Damp and mould growth are potential hazards that may require remedy. Section 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 also requires the property to be free from a hazard to be fit for human habitation.
The landlord has provided the Ombudsman with a copy of its damp and mould policy, dated March 2023, however, this was not in place at the time of the resident’s complaint.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) provides recommendations for landlords, including that they should:
1. Adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions. Landlords should review their current strategy and consider whether their approach will achieve this.
2. Ensure they can identify complex cases at an early stage and have a strategy for keeping residents informed and effective resolution.
3. Ensure that they clearly and regularly communicate with their residents regarding actions taken or otherwise to resolve reports of damp and mould.
4. Identify where an independent, mutually agreed and suitably qualified surveyor should be used, and share the outcomes of all surveys and inspections with residents to help them understand the findings and be clear on the next steps. Landlords should then act on accepted survey recommendations promptly.
The landlord’s repairs policy, dated March 2023, does not give specific details on how it categorises repairs, nor does it specify what the timescale for it to it attend a repair. It does confirm that it will prioritise appointments by recognising the health and safety of residents, urgency of work or nature of the accommodation affected and the availability of the resident. It also states that emergency repairs include flooding or water leaks, roof leaks and water leaking onto electrics.
The policy also confirms that it will attend an emergency repair the same day where feasible, but always within 24 hours, regardless of the day of the week or time of day. As a minimum, it will make safe all emergency and out of hours jobs. Where this occurs, it will return to complete any required follow-on works at an agreed appointed time.
The landlord has not provided a copy of a compensation policy, but its repair policy also states that if there has been service failure, in certain circumstances it will compensate residents for a loss of personal property, damage or inconvenience.

The landlord’s handling of reports of a roof leak damp and mould and damaged belongings at the property.

After reviewing the information sent by the landlord, it is clear that there were a number of failings by the landlord over an extended period of time. The resident first reported the leak on 10 June 2022 via the out of hours service, and an emergency job was raised in line with the landlord’s repairs policy andthe landlord identified that a roofer was required as there was a hole in the roof. The landlord appropriately raised the follow on appointment for 5 July 2022, and records show that the operative identified that scaffolding was required in order to fix the roof.
It is not clear whether the operative carried out a temporary fix to the resident’s roof, but as the resident requested monthly updates from the landlord between July and October 2022, and did not report a further roof leak until 18 October 2022, it is assumed that a temporary fix was completed.
However, despite the resident contacting the landlord monthly for an update and internal records showing that a quote for scaffolding was awaiting to be approved; it was not until 18 October 2022 that the landlord identified that an internal administration error had occurred and the request for scaffolding had not been processed correctly. This amounts to Service Failure, and the Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to have identified this as part of its complaint investigation and provided compensation. This did not happen and will be addressed later in the report.
Following the resident’s report that the roof was still leaking on 18 October 2022, there are discrepancies as to what action the landlord was taking in order to resolve the roof leak. Notes from 19 October 2022 suggest that the leak was unrelated to the June 2022 leak, and that the landlord would be recommending the whole roof was replaced. It was also going to put the scaffolding job on hold. However, on 2 November 2022 a job was raised for scaffolding to be erected and for the verge and roof tiles to be replaced.
There are further discrepancies between the resident and landlord as to whether the roof continued to leak. On 7 November 2022 the resident reported that her roof was leaking, but internal emails suggest that the site visit completed that day identified that the roof was watertight and remedial works were booked for the end of January 2023.
The Ombudsman is unable to determine whether the leak was still occurring based on the information provided, however it is clear that the resident was being affected by the lack of progress and communication regarding the roof leak. The landlord’s repair policy states that follow on works will be completed within 6 months, and although the repair was completed in 7 months, there is no evidence that the landlord fully took into account the affect the roof leak and lack of communication was having on the resident. The landlord was aware that the resident had said that she was vulnerable and that the roof leak was continuing to affect her home and her health.
On 4 November 2022, the resident informed the landlord that as a result of the leak, her property was damp and contained mould , which was impacting her health. In line with the HHSRS guidance, damp and mould are potential hazards, and as such, this Service would expect to see records that demonstrate the landlord was exploring every possible solution to try to resolve the issue with the damp and mould.
It is positive to see the landlord’s prompt action and records show that it arranged for a mould wash to be completed and data loggers to be installed in the property in November 2022. A follow up inspection was completed on 22 December 2022 where it was noted that there were no visible mould issues, no damp was detected in the walls, ceilings or woodwork and the resident said she did not have any current issues. The inspection did however identify a number of unrelated recommendations, which the landlord completed to address the issues.
While the landlord’s final response upheld the complaint and detailed the steps it had taken to try and resolve the roof leak and the damp and mould, it did not provide the resident with any insight into failings that a comprehensive complaint investigation would have identified. The landlord’s records show that there were multiple occasions where the resident asked for an update and was told that she would receive a callback. As the resident continued to contact the landlord for an update, it would be fair to assume that it failed to respond to her requests. Furthermore, on 17 November 2022 the landlord told the resident that it would provide her with weekly updates, however there is no indication that this happened, which amounts to service failure.
Section 6 of the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code, sets out what the Ombudsman considers are the best practice principles of “putting things right” where there have been failings. This includes the principle that any remedy offered by a landlord “must reflect the extent of any service failures and the level of detriment caused to the resident”. Having upheld the complaint the landlord has not demonstrated that it has put things right.
In order to resolve this aspect of the complaint, the resident is seeking compensation for her damaged belongings, and the distress and inconvenience she experienced whilst chasing the landlord for a response.
The Ombudsman has first considered the distress and inconvenience suffered by the resident as a result of the landlord failing to identify that it had not progressed the request for scaffolding correctly and therefore failing to complete the roof leak within a more timely timeframe. Ultimately, had the failure been identified sooner, the resident would not have had to spend so much time chasing the landlord for a response and the roof defects would have been fixed sooner.
In line with the Ombudsman’s remedy guidance where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident a payment of in the range of £100 to £600 is recommended. Following the resident’s requests for updates between June and October 2022, the landlord had multiple opportunities to identify that it had not dealt with the request for scaffolding correctly, which in turn delayed the repair to the roof unnecessarily. In recognition of this, the Ombudsman has made an order for the landlord to pay the resident £450.
Finally, paragraph 4.17 of the tenancy agreement states that residents must arrange contents insurance for anything belonging to them that is kept in the home. It was therefore appropriate for the landlord to explain to the resident that she should make a claim on her contents insurance for any damage to her belongings.
In summary there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the roof leak due to the unnecessary delay the resident experienced whilst waiting for the leak to be fixed.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

The landlord’s complaint policy shows that it operates a 2 stage complaint policy. It does not give any indication as to how or when it will acknowledge complaints when they are received, but says that when it first receives a complaint, it aims to agree a resolution within 10 working days. If the resident requests a review stage 2 complaints will be responded to within 20 working days.
The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code April 2020, (the Code), paragraph 3.14 specifies that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law, and good practice where appropriate.
The resident first raised a complaint on 13 June 2022, where she informed the landlord that she was dissatisfied with the condition of the property. She contacted the landlord again on 15 June 2022 and asked to log a complaint about the lettings process and repairs. Internal emails show that a member of staff contacted the relevant departments and explained the resident’s complaint in detail and asked for them to make contact with the resident.
It is noted that each department called and spoke to the resident to discuss their specific area of the complaint. However, section 5.8 of the Code says that landlords must confirm in writing to the resident at the completion of stage 1 in clear, plain language. It seems that the landlord chose to deal with the complaint informally and did not provide a written response. This meant that the resident did not have the opportunity to appropriately escalate her complaint if she remained dissatisfied. Nor was the resident provided with information about what the landlord was going to do to put things right.
On 18 October 2022 the resident contacted the landlord and asked to raise a complaint about the handling of the roof leak. It is concerning to see that a note was logged to say that no one was available to take the complaint, so the resident would call back. The Ombudsman expects landlord’s to make the complaint journey as accessible as possible for residents and given that the resident was already dissatisfied with the landlord’s service; the inconvenience of having to ring back, would have exacerbated the frustration she was already feeling.
The resident contacted the landlord again on 18 October 2022 to raise a complaint. The landlord again dealt with the complaint informally and noted that the resident agreed to close the complaint down, as long as it continued to update her on the outstanding repairs.
The landlord failed to keep the resident up to date and she contacted the landlord on 2 and 4 November 2022 asking for her complaint to be reopened and escalated to stage 2 as the landlord had not followed through with what it said it would do. While the complaint was reopened, it was not formally acknowledged and this led to the resident contacting the Ombudsman on 27 November 2022 for assistance in progressing her complaint.
Following the Ombudsman’s request for the landlord to respond to the resident, it sent a formal stage 2 response on 6 February 2023. The response detailed the steps that it had taken when addressing the issues raised but failed to provide the resident with any details of the investigation, or how it had reached its conclusion. Had the landlord conducted a full investigation it should have identified the failings and taken the relevant steps to rebuild the landlord and tenant relationship, as well as taking steps to put things right.
During this investigation, the Ombudsman has identified the landlord’s willingness to deal with the complaint informally. Section 4.1 of the code says that the Ombudsman encourages the early and local resolution of issues between landlords and residents and recognises that there may be times appropriate action can be agreed immediately. Any decision to try and resolve a concern must be taken in agreement with the resident and landlords must ensure that efforts to resolve a resident’s concerns do not obstruct access to the complaints procedure.
In this case, the landlord made clear its intention to take action to resolve the resident’s concerns, however the actions were not completed. This meant the resident had to request to have her complaint reopened, adding to the time taken to resolve the substantive issues. This is likely to have added to the distress and inconvenience the resident had already experienced.
The Ombudsman has found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint, and has ordered an amount of compensation proportionate to the failings identified. The Ombudsman has also made a recommendation regarding the landlord’s complaint handling.
Where there was a failure which has adversely affected the resident, and the landlord has failed to address the detriment to the resident, payments of £100 and above are recommended. The landlord did not handle the resident’s stage 1 and stage 2 complaints in line with its own complaint policy, which caused unnecessary distress and inconvenience. An order has been made for the landlord to pay the resident £250 in recognition of this.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the handling of reports of a roof leak, damp and mould and damaged belongings at the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £700 compensation within four weeks of the date this report for the following reasons:
1. £450 compensation for the unnecessary delay in repairing the roof leak.
2. £250 compensation for the landlord’s failure to deal with the resident’s complaint in line with its own policy.
The landlord should provide a written apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report within 4 weeks of the date of this report.
It is recommended that the landlord should consider sharing the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code with its staff members who deal with complaints in order to ensure that complaints are responded to in line with best practice.