The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited (202218434)

Back to Top

 

A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202218434

Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited

18 March 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of leaks and the associated damp and mould.
    2. Associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy which began on 24 January 2000. The landlord is a housing association.
  2. The resident lives in the property with her child. The landlord is aware of the resident’s vulnerabilities.

Summary of events

  1. The resident reported a leak on 29 July 2022. The landlord attended the same day and found water was leaking from the water tank in the attic. It reduced the water level in the tank to below where it had cracked to prevent further leaks and raised an order for the water tank to be replaced.
  2. On 4 August 2022 the resident reported another leak. The landlord attended the same day but its records state it was unsure where the leak was coming from. It returned on 11 August 2022 while the resident was on holiday and found the leak was due to a loose pipe connection in the flat above. It fixed the pipework and resolved the leak.
  3. The resident returned to the property on 15 August 2022 after being on holiday and reported she had no power and the ceilings in her bedroom and bathroom looked like they could collapse.
  4. The resident raised a complaint on 15 August 2022. She said an operative was supposed to attend her property that day to fix the water tank, however, when on arrival they said they could not do the work as it needed two operatives. She said she called the repairs team and was told her boiler was going to be changed that day, but no one had told her about this. She said she had no water and her electrics had not been checked.
  5. On 16 August 2022 the landlord acknowledged the complaint and said it would respond by 26 August 2022. On the same day the landlord attended the property to look at installing a new combi boiler. The resident declined the new boiler and asked for the water tank to be replaced instead.
  6. On 18 August 2022 the landlord made the ceilings safe. It told the resident before any further works could be carried out the resident needed to clear the attic.
  7. On 25 August 2022 the landlord replaced the water tank.
  8. On 30 August 2022 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said:
    1. It attended the property on 11 August 2022 and arranged a further appointment, but it could not gain access on 14 and 15 August 2022. It attended on 17 August 2022 and made the ceilings safe.
    2. The resident should not be storing items in the loft space in line with her tenancy agreement.
    3. A surveyor inspected the property on 17 August 2022 and arranged for works to be carried out to resolve the damp.
    4. It wants to fit a new combi boiler and remove the water storage system. The resident has refused these works, but it feels this would prevent any issues in the future. It asked the resident if she wanted to proceed with a new boiler.
    5. It apologised for the delay in issuing its complaint response and offered £10 compensation.
  9. On 31 August 2022 the resident asked the landlord to decant her whilst the repair works were carried out to her property.
  10. In September 2022 the resident chased the landlord for an update 4 times about the works to fix the damage from the leak and her request to be decanted.
  11. On 7 September 2022 the landlord’s surveyor inspected the property and agreed a schedule of works to repair the damage caused by the leaks. The report said:
    1. Works had been carried out to the defective ceilings in the main bedroom and bathroom to make it safe. However, the blown plaster was separating from the supporting joists. An urgent order must be raised to take down all blown sections of plaster and fit boarding to the ceiling.
    2. The laminate flooring was not repairable and needed replacing in the bedroom and hallway.
    3. The bath panel was damaged at the time of inspection.
    4. The ground floor hallway, walls and ceilings needed redecorating.
    5. It recommended the electrics were tested.
  12. On 15 September 2022 the resident escalated the complaint. She said no one attended on 14 August 2022 as that was a Sunday and someone did attend on 15 August 2022, however, they could not do the works as it needed 2 people. She said the ceiling was not made safe on 17 August 2022, no one had contacted her about the damp and mould, and she was not told she needed a new boiler. She raised concerns that appointments were being missed and she was left with no water for 2 days waiting for the landlord to check the electrics were safe.
  13. On 13 October 2022 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. In its response it:
    1. Apologised for giving incorrect dates for visits in its stage 1 response and said this was due to miscommunication. It agreed there had been 3 missed appointments.
    2. Accepted there had been delays in making the situation safe and this was due to the repair not being recorded.
    3. Said it would contact the resident weekly to clarify the status of the damp and repairs.
    4. Wanted to upgrade the boiler.
    5. Said lessons had been learnt from the complaint and it would be taking action to ensure that works were managed and tracked more effectively, and it would communicate at regular intervals with a view to manage expectations.
    6. Offered £300 compensation which was broken down as:
      1. £75 for 3 missed appointments.
      2. £150 for inconvenience.
      3. £50 for the quality of service provided.
      4. £25 for its lack of communication.

Events after the landlord’s internal complaints procedure

  1. The resident was decanted from 8 August 2023 until 13 October 2023. The works outlined in the surveyor’s report dated 7 September 2022 were completed in September 2023.
  2. In November 2023, the landlord wanted to remove the old water tank and put in new insulation, however, the job was placed on hold due to the resident’s personal circumstances. The landlord told the resident to contact them when she was ready for the works to be completed.
  3. On 18 December 2023 the landlord wrote to this Service and acknowledged that the £300 compensation offered may have been reasonable in October 2022 but would not be sufficient now as works were still outstanding. It revised its compensation offer to £750.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. Whilst this Service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on the resident’s health or wellbeing. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the resident’s claims that the landlord’s handling of her reports of damp and mould had a negative impact on her health and wellbeing. These matters are better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

Relevant policies and procedures

  1. The landlord has a statutory duty under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property.
  2. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
  3. The landlord’s vulnerable residents policy states when a resident reports a repair, the contact centre call handler will confirm if there are any disabilities or support needs which should be considered. Any vulnerabilities will be recorded so the landlord can see any communication or access needs.
  4. The landlord’s repairs policy states it will respond to repairs that need an immediate response within 4 hours. The target response time for emergency repairs is 24 hours, urgent repairs within 5 days, routine repairs within 20 days and complex and major repairs within 40 days. The policy says an emergency repair includes a high-pressure water leak to a water pipe on the landlord’s side of the stopcock. It says if a follow-on appointment is required, this will be categorised as either an urgent or standard repair. The policy also states if the landlord fails to attend or re-arranges an appointment, the resident will be awarded £25 compensation which will be credited to the rent account.
  5. The landlord’s decant policy states where it requires a resident to move temporarily, they are entitled to an offer of suitable accommodation within 60 minutes of travel from the main accommodation. The policy states the landlord will compensate residents for reasonable costs sustained from moving from one property to another.
  6. The landlord’s damp and mould policy states it will attend and complete all non-emergency works within 20 working days. It says where the problem is not easy to identify it will carry out a full survey of the property. Following any damp and mould works being completed, it will contact the resident to identity any outstanding issues. And after a year of the works completed it will contact the resident and arrange a follow up visit to make sure the damp and mould has not returned.
  7. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. It states it will acknowledge a complaint within 2 working days, and it aims to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
  8. The landlord’s compensation policy states it will pay £25 compensation if it fails to keep a booked appointment or cancels/postpones within 24 hours. It will pay £10 for its failure to complete repairs within its target timescales, and £2 per working day up to £50 for every additional day the work remains outstanding. It says following a service failure, it can make a discretionary payment of up to £250 for distress or inconvenience. The policy says if a resident cannot use a room, after 14 days, or 28 days for routine repairs, it will pay 20% of the rent for the loss of a bathroom or bedroom.

The landlord’s handing of the resident’s report of leaks and the associated damp and mould

  1. The resident first reported the leak in her property on 29 July 2022. The landlord inspected the property the same day which was within its target timescale of 24 hours. The landlord acted appropriately by putting temporary measures in place and arranging for the water tank to be replaced.
  2. The resident reported a further leak on 4 August 2022, the landlord acted appropriately by attending the same day. Although it could not identify the cause of the leak immediately, it investigated and resolved the leak on 11 August 2022, which was within its 5 working day timescale for an urgent repair.
  3. No evidence was provided to this Service to show the landlord contacted the resident after it inspected either leak to tell her what steps it had taken to resolve the issues reported, if there were any actions outstanding and the timescales for further works. When the resident chased an update on 15 August 2022, she was told by the repairs team that a new boiler was supposed to be installed that day, however, no evidence was provided to this Service that it discussed this with the resident. The landlord acted inappropriately by not keeping her updated and managing her expectations.
  4. Once the landlord had inspected the property, we would have expected to see it monitor the situation. On 15 August 2022 the resident reported her kitchen and bathroom ceilings were about to collapse due to the damage caused by the leaks. The landlord failed to take a proactive approach, and acted inappropriately by putting the onus on the resident to report issues before it took any action. Conducting follow up checks can help landlords to quickly identify when matters have not been resolved without residents having to keep reporting issues.
  5. On 18 August 2022 the contractor said that the resident should not be storing items in the attic as per her tenancy agreement and the landlord confirmed this its stage 1 complaint response. There is no term in the resident’s tenancy agreement that says this. The landlord acted inappropriately as it did not investigate why the contractor had said this, whether it was preventing repairs being carried out, and no evidence was provided to show it considered whether the resident would need support clearing her attic.
  6. The landlord was aware of the resident’s vulnerabilities. There was no evidence it communicated with the resident about any risks or carried out a risk assessment. The resident told the landlord the damp and mould was causing her family health issues. No evidence was seen that the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns showing a lack of empathy towards the resident. This Service would have expected to see the landlord assess the level of risk at these clear escalations and evidence it had considered all options available to it to support the resident though this time. No evidence was seen that the landlord was proactive in its response, or that it made any attempt to mitigate the worry that the resident had in this regard.
  7. A landlord must consider loss of amenity and what interim measures could be considered and put in place. This could include dehumidifiers, support from local services, or a decant. Although the landlord’s records show that it agreed to a decant, this seems to only have been considered after the resident repeatedly asked for this in August and September 2022. There is no evidence the landlord provided dehumidifiers whilst it was trying to arrange the decant. The landlord acted unreasonably by leaving the resident and her household living with damp from the leaks for a significant amount of time without any interim measures or appropriate support.
  8. There was evidence of poor communication throughout this investigation. The lack of communication from the landlord left the resident in a position where she did not know if or when the damaged caused by the leaks was going to be resolved. This led her to reporting the same issues several times and repeatedly chasing updates. This caused the resident significant distress and inconvenience.
  9. A landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records of repair reports, responses, inspections, investigations, and communications. Good record keeping is essential if the landlord is to fulfil its statutory repair obligations. The landlord’s staff should be aware of it’s record management policy and procedures and adhere to these. The landlord failed to maintain adequate records, which has impacted this Service’s ability to carry out a thorough investigation. For example, the landlord did not provide clear repair logs and records of internal communication records, the evidence it provided often showed different dates for its appointments and the notes did not clearly say what action it had taken. This contributed to the other failures identified in this report. The failures in the landlord’s knowledge and information management caused delays and frustration, distress, and inconvenience to the resident.
  10. The landlord completed works to put the property back to the condition it was in before the leaks in September 2023, which was just over a year after the leak was reported. This was a significant delay. This Service does recognise that some of the delays were outside the landlord’s control due to finding alternative accommodation that the resident was happy with and not having access to the property to carry out the repairs.
  11. In December 2023 the landlord revised its compensation offer to £750. This Service commends the landlord carrying out a review of the case following the end of its internal complaints process. However, it must be stated that any offers of compensation made after the landlord’s complaints process and after the involvement of this Service cannot be purported to be ‘reasonable redress’. This is because for redress to be reasonable it should take place prior to the Ombudsman’s formal investigation and on the landlord’s own initiative. Actions made following the landlord being made aware of an investigation cannot be described to be on the landlord’s initiative as it was the initiative of the resident to escalate the complaint.
  12. In summary the landlord attended and fixed the leaks within its target timescales, however, there were significant delays in the landlord carrying out the surveyor’s recommendations. There was poor record keeping and communication. It failed to consider the resident’s vulnerabilities, carry out risk assessments and offer appropriate interim measures and support. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord acknowledged and apologised for the missed appointments, the quality of the services it offered, lack of communication and the inconvenience caused. However, its offer of £300 compensation failed to take into consideration the distress and inconvenience and time and trouble caused to the resident.
  13. Based on the above the Ombudsman finds maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of leaks and the associated damp and mould.
  14. The landlords revised offer of £750 compensation is in line with its compensation policy and the Ombudsman’s remedy guidance. This Service feels this compensation amount reflects the failings identified in this report and the distress and inconvenience, and time and trouble caused to the resident.

The landlord’s handing of the resident’s associated complaint

  1. The resident submitted a complaint on 15 August 2022, the landlord acknowledged the complaint within its 2 working day timescale and told the resident it would respond by 26 August 2022. It is noted the landlord gave a target response time in calendar days rather than working days. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 30 August 2022, this was just outside the landlord’s target response time of 10 working days. The landlord acted appropriately by apologising for the delay and offered the resident £10 compensation.
  2. The landlord included inaccurate information in its stage 1 complaint response. It gave incorrect dates of when its contractors attended the property and said a surveyor investigated the damp and mould on 17 August 2022 when there is no evidence this appointment took place. The landlord’s record keeping had an impact on its ability to effectively review the case when responding to the resident’s complaint. This restricted the landlord’s ability to put things right and to learn from its mistakes. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to effectively investigate the complaint issues and resolve the complaint at the earliest opportunity.
  3. The resident escalated her complaint on 15 September 2022. No evidence was submitted to this Service that the landlord acknowledged this within its 2 working day timescale or told the resident when she would expect a response. This led to the resident chasing updates. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to communicate with the resident and manage her expectations.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 13 October 2023, which was within its 20-working day target response time. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for giving incorrect dates in its stage 1 response and stated this was due to miscommunication. However, it failed to offer any redress and did not say what action it was going to take to ensure it would not make the same mistake again.
  5. In summary, landlords must have an effective complaint process to provide a good service to their residents. An effective complaint process means landlords can fix problems quickly, learn from their mistakes and build good relationships with residents. In this case the landlord failed to fully investigate the complaint at stage 1, there was poor record keeping and poor communication. It failed to acknowledge these failings in its stage 2 response, and it did not offer suitable redress or state how it had learnt from this complaint.
  6. Based on the above the Ombudsman finds service failure for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of leaks and the associated damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Reasons

  1. The landlord attended and fixed the leaks within its target timescales, however, there were significant delays in the landlord carrying out works to put right the damage caused by the leaks. There was poor record keeping and communication. It failed to consider the resident’s vulnerabilities, carry out risk assessments and offer appropriate interim measures and support. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for some of these failings in its stage 2 response, however, it failed to offer suitable redress and did not show any learning.
  2. The landlord failed to fully investigate the resident’s complaint at stage 1, it gave inaccurate information in its stage 1 response, there was poor record keeping and poor communication. It failed to acknowledge all these failings in its stage 2 response, and it did not offer suitable redress or state how it had learnt from this complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
    1. A senior member of the landlord’s staff should apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. If the landlord has not already done so it should pay the resident the £750 compensation it offered her in December 2023.
    3. In addition to this the landlord must pay the resident £50 for the distress and inconvenience, and time and trouble caused to the resident by the failures found in the landlord’s complaint handling. Compensation should be paid directly to the resident, and not offset against any arrears.
  2. Within 8 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must complete a case review on the issues identified in this report and its overall failures. The landlord must provide a copy of the case review to this Service. If it has not already done so, as part of this review, the landlord must carry out a self-assessment against the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended the landlord considers reviewing its staff’s training needs to ensure all relevant officers:
    1. Respond to requests for repairs appropriately and progresses works orders in accordance with its relevant policies and procedures.
    2. Are keeping relevant records up to date and making sure information is accessible to all relevant departments.
    3. Respond to formal complaints appropriately. Responses must address all issues raised by the resident. It should ensure all relevant officers do so in an efficient and timely manner, and in accordance with its relevant policies and procedures and the Code.