Manchester City Council (202221216)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202221216

Manchester City Council

15 April 2024

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 the resident’s:
1. Reports of no heating or hot water.
2. Reports of mould in the hallway due to a lack of heating.
3. Associated complaint.

Background

The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord, which is a local authority, for a one-bedroom flat.
On 25 November 2022 the resident raised a stage one complaint which said:
1. She had an issue with her boiler which meant that her hot water only trickled out of the kitchen and bathroom sinks and it had been going on for over a year. Previous repairs were unsuccessful and because of her disabilities she was unable to carry a kettle to do washing up or wash her face when hot water was unavailable.
On 29 November 2022 an emergency repair was arranged for the resident due to no heating and hot water, which was completed on 1 December 2022.
On 13 December 2022, a routine repair was raised as the resident was only able to get hot water when the heating was on. This was completed on 29 December 2022.
On 9 December 2022 the resident contacted the Ombudsman for assistance with her complaint. She explained that she had made her complaint about her not having heating and hot water and that there was mould in her hallway due to lack of heating. The resident said that to resolve her complaint she wanted her boiler to be renewed and the mould to be washed, once the heating had been reinstated. The Ombudsman wrote to the landlord on the same day and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint by 23 December 2022.
On 22 December 2022, the landlord provided the resident with its stage one complaint response. The landlord said that it was aware that the resident’s heating and electric shower was working, but she did not have hot water. It said that it had been in contact with its contractor and confirmed that it would be returning on 28 December 2022. The landlord apologised and said that it would continue to stress to the contractor that it needed to attend and rectify the faults in line with the agreed standards.
On 17 January 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and requested an update. The resident explained that the mould had not been treated, and since 28 December 2022, the contractor had not returned to check the boiler and follow on works.
On 10 February 2023 the resident contacted the Ombudsman and explained that although her boiler had been fixed, follow on works had not been completed and the mould had still not been treated and was now spreading. She explained that she had sent multiple messages but had not received a response.
On 24 February 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and requested that her complaint was escalated as she had not received a response regarding the outstanding mould treatment.
On 27 February 2023, the landlord responded to the resident and said that it had arranged for a surveyor to attend the property and carry out an assessment on 8 March 2023.
On 8 March 2023, a repair was raised for mould to be treated by the front door. This was subsequently completed on 14 July 2023.
On 7 June 2023, the Ombudsman contacted the landlord and asked it to respond to the resident’s escalation request from February 2023 by 14 June 2023. The Ombudsman said that the resident’s escalation was in relation to no heating and hot water and mould in the hallway. Other issues raised as part of the original complaint had been resolved.
On 12 June 2023 the landlord visited the resident’s property and inspected the resident’s heating system, boiler and mould. The inspection concluded that although the boiler did work, due to the model it did take a long time for the hot water to get to the tap. The black mould was not excessive, but some works could be carried out to try and resolve it. It recommended that the boiler be replaced in the near future, as well as upgrading the 2 radiators and carrying out a mould wash.
On 15 June 2023 the landlord provided it stage 2 response, where it said that:
1. In relation to the lack of heating or hot water, it had carried out an inspection which had confirmed that the boiler was working as it should but noted that 2 radiators were marginally undersized. However, it acknowledged that the heating system had some limitations and would replace the boiler and radiators within 3 months.
2. In relation to the mould in the hallway, it had determined that the mould was not an immediate threat but would attend to remove it within 4 weeks.
3. In order to put things right, it offered the resident £150 compensation for the poor service she had experienced.
On 16 June 2023 the resident contacted the Ombudsman and said that she was unhappy with the landlord’s response. She explained that the surveyor had been and identified an inadequate heating system, which had increased her energy bills. The resident said that it had also ignored her requests, which had caused her distress and increased health issues. In order to resolve her complaint, the resident wanted the issues to be sorted out or to be relocated to a property that is fit for purpose.
On 5 April 2024, the resident informed the Ombudsman that the works were completed within the timeframes set by the landlord in its final complaint response. She explained that she remains dissatisfied with the level of compensation offered as it does not consider the physical and emotional impact that the unresolved damp problems had on her health.

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 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 resident says that as a result of the landlord’s actions she suffered with skin and chest infections due to the unresolved damp and mould. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments regarding her health, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing.
Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim. However, consideration has been given to the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about health and whether its response was fair and reasonable under the circumstances.

Policies and procedures.

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a legal duty on landlords to make full, effective and lasting repairs once it is given notice of disrepair. They must keep in repair and working order, the installations for the supply of gas and electricity, water and sanitation and space heating and heating water. The resident’s tenancy agreement also reflects these obligations.
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 category one hazards and the landlord is required to consider whether any mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard 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’s repairs policy defines repairs as either emergency, urgent or routine. Depending on the severity of the repairs, repair timescales vary as follows:
1. Emergency – Either 3 or 24 hours.
2. Urgent – Either 1 or 3 working days.
3. Routine – Either 5 working days, for non-urgent repairs or 3 weeks, for things such as partial loss of heating or hot water.
The landlord does not have a specific damp and mould policy, but its website states that if a resident thinks they have damp and mould, they should contact the landlord to make an appointment.
The landlord complaints policy states that it operates a 2-stage complaints policy. Stage one and 2 complaints will be acknowledged within 5 working days, and stage one complaints will be responded to within 5 working days and stage 2 complaints will be responded to within 10 working days.
The policy further states that the person responding to the complaint will take ownership of all aspects of the complaint and generally co-ordinate a single response for the resident, agreeing with them what remedial action needs to be taken within an agreed timescale.

The landlord’s handling of reports of no heating or hot water.

The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.
The Ombudsman would reasonably expect that on receiving reports of any repairs, the landlord should respond, arrange an inspection, and if necessary, carry out remedial repairs within a reasonable timescale. The Service would also expect to see clear records which detail any works which were completed so that a clear audit trail can be followed.
After reviewing the information provided by the landlord, prior to the resident’s complaint, the resident reported issues with the boiler in November 2021 and February 2022. It is not clear what work was completed, but the records show that there were no further repairs until the stage one complaint on 25 November 2022, following a leak from the property above.
The landlord’s repair records show that that 2 repairs were raised after the resident’s stage one complaint. These were competed, but it is not clear what work was carried out, or whether the works were linked to the previous repairs issued.
While the landlord acknowledged within its stage one complaint response, that it was aware that a repair remained outstanding in relation to the hot water, it said it would continue to chase the contractor and arranged for it to attend on 28 December 2022.
While the repair policy states that a partial loss of hot water would be classed as a routine job and completed within 3 weeks, the landlord was aware of the resident’s disabilities and that she struggled without hot water in her kitchen and bathroom. The Ombudsman would expect to see a landlord taking steps to ensure its records accurately reflect a resident’s vulnerabilities and that it is prioritised repairs accordingly. There is no evidence to show that the landlord took this into consideration and the resident continued to struggle with no hot water throughout the Christmas period. The Ombudsman would also expect the landlord to take this into consideration when trying to put things right as part of its complaint response. There is no evidence that the landlord did this and the resident waited an additional 6 days for the repair to be completed. This was a failing by the landlord.
Following the landlord’s stage one response, it did not actively follow up with the resident to ensure all the repairs had been resolved, this prompted the resident to contact the landlord for updates in January and February 2023. As she did not receive an update she escalated her complaint. It would have been inconvenient for the resident to have to chase the landlord for updates.
As part of its stage 2 complaint investigation, the landlord arranged for an inspection to be carried out at the property. The inspection determined that the boiler was working as it should but acknowledged that the hot water did take a long time to reach the tap. It was recommended that the boiler be replaced before the winter months. The landlord accepted the recommendation and confirmed within its final complaint response that it would replace the boiler within 3 months. It is positive to see that the landlord did as it said it would and shows that the landlord was trying to put things right for the resident and rebuild the resident and landlord relationship. Furthermore, it also offered £150 compensation for the poor level of service.
While compensation does not ease the distress and inconvenience the resident experienced due to the landlord’s service failure, it is used as a tool within complaints processes to try to acknowledge the detriment caused. In order to determine whether the amount the landlord offered was reasonable, the Ombudsman must first determine the period of time in which the resident was without heating and hot water.
In this case, the records show that the resident was without heating and hot water between 29 November 2022 and 1 December 2022. The landlord has indicated that the resident had access to an electric shower. Based on the evidence seen, the resident did not inform the landlord that her electric shower was also not working, so it is reasonable to conclude that it was functioning during this time. The landlord raised a further repair on 13 December 2022 for no hot water in the kitchen and bathroom sinks and was subsequently fixed on 28 December 2022.
Although the repairs were completed in line with the landlord’s repairs policy, and the duration of time was short-lived, the Ombudsman must also take into account the resident’s vulnerabilities and medical conditions which would have meant she experienced greater inconvenience compared to someone without these conditions.
The landlord does not have a compensation policy, but its offer of £150 was in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website), which recommends amounts of between £100 and £600 where the landlord has acknowledged its failings and made an attempt to but things right, but the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified. However, although the inconvenience was short lived, the Ombudsman does feel this fairly reflects the resident’s circumstances and the lack of prioritisation she experienced.
The resident informed the landlord of the difficulties she was having as result of the issues with the hot water, this led to increased frustration and inconvenience, which could have been avoided had the landlord taken steps to prioritise her repair accordingly.
Based on this information, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £300, which includes the £150 offered as part of its final response.

The landlord’s handling of reports of mould in the hallway due to a lack of heating.

The landlord’s website states that residents should contact it if they have any issues with damp and mould and does not give any further information.
The Ombudsman expects a social landlord to have these policies and procedures in place to be accountable and transparent in its service delivery. When the landlord does not have clear policies and procedures in place, it deprives residents of the ability to understand what their landlord should be doing. In this case, it would have been difficult for the resident to know what to expect from the landlord, which may have caused her worry and confusion.
The landlord was not able to provide any measurable service standards or policy and procedure documents for the complaint area of damp and mould. Therefore, the Ombudsman will look at the information provided by the landlord and the resident and consider whether the landlord’s approach was in the Ombudsman’s opinion, fair in all the circumstances of the case.
Based on the information provided, the landlord was initially informed about the resident’s issue with mould on 9 December 2022, following contact from the Ombudsman. However, it failed to address this within its stage one response or take any other action.
The resident chased the landlord in January 2023 and February 2023, where she informed the landlord that the mould had spread from the hallway and had affected the front door and kitchen windowsill. In response, the landlord arranged an inspection for 8 March 2023, and raised an order for a mould wash to be carried out. These were reasonable steps to take to address the damp and mould.
As part of the stage 2 investigation, the landlord attended the property and carried out a further inspection. It identified that the mould was visible in the porch area and was due to a reductant utility box, which was allowing large drafts into the area. It recommended that a mould wash be completed, in conjunction with the boiler and radiator upgrade. The recommendations were accepted and works were completed within the given timescales, which was appropriate.
The Ombudsman’s damp and mould spotlight report provides insight into how this Service expects landlords to act in these circumstances:
1. Landlords should ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue.
2. Landlords should review the number of missed appointments about damp and mould cases and, depending on the outcome of any review, consider what steps may be required to reduce them.
3. Landlords must ensure there is effective internal communication between their teams and departments and ensure that one individual or team has overall responsibility for ensuring complaints or reports are resolved, including follow-up or aftercare.
It is the landlord’s responsibility to ensure that it has a robust procedure in place so that reports of damp and mould are acknowledged promptly. In this case, although it ultimately carried out appropriate works to resolve the issues, the landlord failed to acknowledge the resident’s reports of mould on 3 occasions between December 2022 and February 2023. In recognition of this failure, the landlord has been ordered to pay the resident £200 compensation. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, as referenced above.
Further recommendations have also been made, in relation to the landlord’s policies and procedures, as detailed at the end of this report.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

The evidence shows that the resident sent a complaint to the landlord on 25 November 2022, and although the complaint was registered on the landlord’s internal systems, it was not acknowledged. It seems that it was not until the resident contacted the Ombudsman for assistance in progressing her complaint, that the landlord formally logged the complaint. This was unreasonable and it was not in line with the Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. In line with The Code, the landlord should have logged the complaint within 5 working days and responded within 10 working days. This failure caused the resident inconvenience as she had to contact the Ombudsman to progress the complaint and it may have given her the impression that the landlord was not listening to her or taking her concerns seriously.
The landlord’s stage one complaint response failed to provide the resident with a full and thorough investigation into the issues raised. The response did not give the resident any indication that the landlord had listened to her complaint, nor did acknowledge the difficulties she was experiencing as a result of the reports of no hot water. This would have added to her distress and inconvenience.
In line with the Code, the landlord should have addressed the resident’s complaint points fully. This did not happen and there was service failure by the landlord in that regard. Furthermore, it failed to detail what action it was going to take to ensure that it had learned from the outcomes, and this meant that it missed an opportunity to rebuild its relationship with the resident.
In addition to the landlord’s poor stage one response, the landlord also failed to acknowledge the resident’s stage 2 escalation, dated 24 February 2023. It was not until the resident contacted the Ombudsman again in May 2023 for its assistance with obtaining a response, that the landlord responded in accordance with its complaints policy. As above, this was unreasonable and would have caused additional inconvenience for the resident.
The Ombudsman would expect to see a landlord applying its dispute resolution principles, conducting a thorough investigation at all stages of the complaint process and attempting to put things right for the resident. The landlord failed to do this and this amounts to maladministration and will result in the Ombudsman awarding compensation.
The Ombudsman draws the landlord’s attention to the Code that 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”. Therefore, the decision to not take into consideration those factors and not offer the resident compensation in relation to its complaint handling was not reasonable and as the landlord had been unable to determine what went wrong, it cannot fully ‘learn from outcomes’ and take action to avoid such failings in the future.
In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, where the landlord hasnot acknowledged failings which caused the resident distress and/or inconvenience but may have had no permanent impact, a payment of over £100 may be awarded. The resident received her initial stage onecomplaint response, which did not provide her with any reassurance that the landlord understood the issues she was facing due to a lack of hot water. Furthermore, it failed to acknowledge her stage 2 escalation request. Because of this, the landlord missed a vital opportunity to rebuild the landlord resident relationship and caused the resident unnecessary inconvenience. In light of this, the Ombudsman has made an order for the landlord to pay the resident £150 compensation.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of no heating and hot water.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £650 within 4 weeks of the date of the determination as follows:
1. £300, which includes the £150 offered at stage 2, in recognition of the failures associated with the reports of no heating and hot water. The payment of £150 can be deducted from the compensation if this has already been paid.
2. £200 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures associated with reports of mould.
3. £150 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures associated with complaint handling.
The landlord is ordered to update the resident’s record to ensure it reflects her vulnerabilities and medical conditions accordingly. This should be done within 4 weeks of the date of the determination and the landlord should provide evidence to the Ombudsman when it has done this.
The landlord is ordered to carry out a self-assessment against the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report in damp and mould within 8 weeks of the date of the determination. The landlord should provide the Ombudsman with a copy of the assessment when it is completed.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord review its record keeping practices in relation to inspections, repairs and residents’ vulnerabilities, including in light of the findings of this report and the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management.
It is recommended the landlord update its repairs policy to reflect any prioritisation as a result of a resident’s individual vulnerabilities.
It is recommended that the landlord produces a compensation policy in order to assist with responding to future complaints:
It is further recommended that the landlord ensure its staff are aware of the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, including how to escalate complaints when they are received.