London Borough of Hillingdon (202201619)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202201619

London Borough of Hillingdon

29 September 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 handling of reports of poor workmanship relating to balcony repairs.

Background

  1. The property is a flat on the second floor of the building with a balcony. The resident is a leaseholder.
  2. The landlord finished repairs to the resident’s balcony done as part of a major works cycle on 6 December 2022. The same day the resident e-mailed the landlord to express her dissatisfaction with the repairs. She said the tiles were uneven, the surface had not been levelled and that she felt the balcony looked tatty. The landlord passed this information on to the contractors who came out to perform remedial work on 8 December 2022. The resident reported further issues with several tiles coming up and pooling water on 13 December 2022. The landlord again sent out a contractor to stick down the tiles on 15 December 2022.
  3. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 28 February 2022, telling it she was unhappy with the workmanship on the balcony repairs. The landlord acknowledged this on 2 March 2022 and requested an extension to provide its stage one response on 17 March 2022. The landlord did not uphold the resident’s complaint. It said it had completed all outstanding work, finishing the minor snagging work, and that its contractors had provided photos of this. It believed there was no further outstanding work.
  4. The resident requested to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 7 April 2022. She felt that the work undertaken was not satisfactory and that no one had come out to look at the snagging repairs, other than through photos which did not show how bad this was. The resident sent a further e-mail to the landlord on 15 April 2022 saying that several of the tiles wobbled and made cracking sounds when walked upon. She said five of the tiles had lifted. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 21 April 2022. It said that it had contacted its contractor to urgently attend to reinstate the tiles that had lifted. It also said that it felt several of the issues the resident raised were cosmetic rather than faulty workmanship. It believed it had completed all the previous necessary works to the balcony.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint to this service on 22 April 2022. She said she was unhappy with the poor workmanship on the balcony that had left her embarrassed about it. She mentioned several issues including poor quality coping tiles and floor tiles, uneven tiling, and insufficient tile adhesive, as well as several aesthetic complaints about the type of tiles the landlord had used. To resolve her complaint, the resident would like the landlord to redo the entire work to a reasonable standard. In a call to this Service, the resident advised the tiles had continue to lift, with nearly half of the tiles now risen. 

Assessment

  1. The landlord’s repair policy does not specify whose responsibility repairs to a balcony are. It does specify that outdoor patios, and floor tiles within the property (up to 10 tiles) are the resident’s repair responsibility. However, the major works program under which this repair was undertaken was due to water ingress into other flats in the building. The landlord would be responsible for repairs to the structure of the building which would include the balcony. The landlord would therefore be expected to complete this repair, and deal with any subsequent issues.
  2. The landlord has been responsive to the resident’s concerns. The resident first raised concerns on 6 December 2022, with the landlord visiting on 8 December 2022 and raising a work order on 9 December 2022. A contractor came to deal with several issues including replacing a chipped tile, re-bedding a tile near the balcony outlet, cleaning the paint from a door frame and raising the height of a side wall. This was a fair and reasonable timeframe for it to respond to the resident’s concerns.
  3. The resident raised new concerns on 13 December 2022. The landlord visited on 15 December 2022 to re-secure tiles and perform some aesthetic work that the resident had requested. This again was fair from the landlord and represented a reasonable timeframe to respond to the resident’s concerns.
  4. The resident raised concerns on a third occasion on 15 April 2022. She told the landlord that another 5 tiles had lifted. This was the third occasion where the resident had raised issues with tiling rising. Although the landlord again arranged for someone to come to deal with this issue, at this stage the landlord should have appointed an independent surveyor to look at the balcony and determine if the reoccurrences were the result of structural problems.
  5. The landlord had this inspected, adding new comments to the original survey it carried out prior to the works. This inspection consisted of checking all the individual tiles, with additional lines added to the survey completed before the work began. It was reported that six of the tiles were loose. There was no issue found with the rest of the tiles. However, given the reoccurrence of the issue, it was unreasonable that the landlord did not do more to satisfy itself that the tiling issues would not recur.
  6. The landlord should have appointed a surveyor to perform a new independent survey of the issue. It would have been fair for the landlord to have a surveyor check the entire structure to determine if there was an underlying issue that was causing the tiling to come unstuck. The landlord’s failure to perform a new independent survey represented service failure.
  7. The resident has spent time reporting this to the landlord, causing additional inconvenience. She has also described how she has been unable to use the balcony due to the tiles rising, making them potentially unstable. The landlord should pay the resident compensation for its delay in getting the balcony fully surveyed.
  8. The resident raised concerns about several issues with the type of tiles used, as well as aesthetic issues. Whilst the landlord came out and completed some of this work at its discretion, it would not be expected to amend the tiling on the balcony to suit the resident’s preferences. The reason for the change in tiles used was a shortage of materials. The landlord would not be obliged to amend the tiles, or reperform any work for these reasons.
  9. The landlord dealt with the resident’s complaint fairly. It responded within the timescales set out in its complaints policy. Its responses were also fair in content and tone.
  10. There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of poor workmanship on the balcony. The landlord should pay the resident £100 for its delays in properly surveying the issue. This is in line with this service’s remedies guidance.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of poor workmanship relating to balcony repairs.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. It is ordered that within four weeks of the date of this letter the landlord:

a.     Pay the resident £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused to her by its failure to fully investigate her balcony repair concerns.

b.     Appoint a surveyor to inspect and provide a report on the balcony. If any works are recommended, the landlord should provide the resident with timescales for completing these.

  1. The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within four weeks of this report.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should consider amending its repair policy to include repair responsibilities which extend to balconies.