A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202106413)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202106413

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

27 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. The complaint is about:
   1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s property following a leak.
   2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

2. The resident is a tenant of the landlord who resides in a second floor flat, with a neighbouring property directly above his property. The building type is a block of flats.
3. The first record provided of the resident reporting the leak was on 2 November 2020. The landlord noted that there was damage following a previous leak and it agreed to attend on 24 November 2020. The landlord subsequently attended the property and found the resident’s hallway and bathroom ceiling, as well as the bathroom walls suffering from water damage. It arranged an asbestos test which came back as negative on 26 November 2020.
4. The resident reported an urgent repair on 2 December 2020, concerned that his hallway ceiling may collapse. The landlord’s operative attended the same day to find the ceiling was not at risk of collapsing but was wet. The landlord noted that it was unable to carry out any repairs until the asbestos survey came back. Its operatives later attended on 21 December 2020, tracing the source of the leak to the neighbouring property above the resident’s property.
5. The resident raised a complaint on 26 January 2021, unhappy that the leak was still ongoing, despite the landlord’s previous inspections. He requested for his complaint to remain open until the landlord resolved the leak and completed the repairs.
6. The landlord’s operatives later attended the property on 17 February 2021 during which they stripped the wall coverings and carried out several stain blocks to the property. The operatives returned the following day, stopping the leak from the property above, and to carry out decorative repairs to the resident’s property. The landlord advised the resident that it would not restore any wall coverings (wallpaper) as this was his responsibility. Due to the resident’s behaviour, the landlord advised its operative to leave the property early. It arranged for an alternative contractor who attended on 2 March 2021, when all remaining repairs were completed.
7. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 12 March 2021, upholding the resident’s complaint. It confirmed that there were still some wet patches to the resident’s walls and ceiling but would require this to dry before assessing if any further decoration works would be required. It agreed it did not meet its service levels, offering the resident £110 compensation.
8. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s compensation offer. He expressed concerns that he and his family had lived with mould for seven months, and that this had increased his costs as he had to keep the heating on to help dry out the property, as well as breathing in damp and mould. He said he had to keep the lights on in his bathroom and hallway to avoid any trip hazards.
9. In response the landlord contacted the resident on 24 April 2021 with an increased compensation offer of £160, but the resident declined this. The resident subsequently requested an outcome to his complaint. The landlord contacted the resident on 12 May 2021, offering a revised offer of £225 as well as providing a copy of its liability insurance claim form.
10. The resident subsequently contacted this Service for assistance with progressing his complaint. Following this Service’s request for a stage 2 written response in January 2022, the landlord issued its stage 2 response on 2 February 2022, which did not uphold the resident’s complaint. The landlord said that its previous offer of £225 compensation was correct. It attributed the delays to the repairs to awaiting an asbestos survey and Covid-19 restrictions.
11. The resident brought his complaint to the attention of this Service, as he remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and offer of compensation. He considered compensation between £500 and £600 as a reasonable offer and wanted the landlord to acknowledge the distress and inconvenience he experienced, as well as the time and trouble he spent pursuing his complaint. More recently the resident has told this Service that the leak has recurred.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the property

12. In accordance with the resident’s tenancy agreement, the landlord is responsible for keeping in good repair the internal walls and ceilings within the property. Decorating the property is usually the resident’s responsibility. However, this would be the landlord’s responsibility if decorations have been disturbed as part of repairs it has carried out to the property, or where it has failed to stop a leak into the property within a reasonable timeframe where it is responsible for repairing the area where the leak came from.
13. Although the landlord’s responsive repairs policy is silent on its repair timescales, in line with best industry practice, this Service would expect urgent repairs to be completed within one working day and routine repairs to be completed within one calendar month. According to the landlord’s records, the leak was resolved and the majority of the decorating works to the resident’s property completed on 18 February 2021. This was 11 weeks after the resident reported that the leak was ongoing in December 2020 and far in excess of a reasonable repair timeframe.
14. The landlord attributed the repair delays to the impact of the Covid-19 lockdown and the need to carry out an asbestos survey. While it would be reasonable to expect a disruption in repair services during the Covid-19 pandemic, the landlord did not evidence, nor explain to the resident what these delays were, why they took place or what actions it took to progress the repairs during this period.
15. Furthermore, according to the records provided, the asbestos test result came back negative on 26 November 2020, two days after it was requested. However, the landlord’s records show that it was awaiting a copy of this report on 2 December 2020 before the works could progress. The landlord agreed that its records should have been updated to show the asbestos survey had been previously carried out. This resulted in unnecessary delays to the works progressing.
16. The landlord has also told this Service that it had to gain access to four flats above the resident’s property in order to locate the leak, and it took time to gain access to all the properties. However, no evidence has been provided to show that the landlord experienced difficulties in gaining access to these properties or that it kept the resident informed of the action it was taking in this regard. Therefore, it has not been able to demonstrate that it took appropriate and timely action to identify the source of the leak and repair it.
17. As part of his complaint to the landlord, the resident said that he and his family were exposed to the effects of damp and mould over a considerable period of time because of the leak. According to the records provided, the landlord attended the resident’s property on 18 February 2021, after repairing the leak, but was unable to evidence any moisture within the resident’s walls. However, it agreed that there was mould growth around the back door, attributing this to condensation.
18. The landlord appropriately investigated the report of damp and mould by arranging an inspection and was entitled to rely on the surveyor’s advice that the mould was caused by condensation (rather than by the leak). However, it has not provided any evidence to show what actions it took, if any, to treat this damp and mould, or that it confirmed to the resident any treatment plans. This is likely to have further added to the resident’s concerns that the landlord was not progressing the works, and contributed to the resident’s distress and inconvenience regarding the property’s condition. Orders have been made to address this matter, as set out below, including that the landlord inspects the property for any ongoing leaks.
19. Where failings are identified, it is the role of this Service to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord has put things right and resolved the complaint satisfactorily. This is in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from the outcomes. In this case the landlord took steps to put matters right by stopping the leak, completing the internal decorative repairs and offering the resident £225 compensation for the delays. The landlord also showed some learning as a result of the resident’s complaint by undertaking staff training to improve communication within departments, contractors and customers, and to ensure staff give more attention to repair details.
20. However, the offer of compensation falls short given the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. The available evidence indicates that the leak was ongoing for at least 11 weeks and affected several rooms in the property. This would have had a significant impact on the living conditions in the property and is of particular concern given that the resident has a young child. As such, this Service finds that there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the repairs and orders £500 compensation (including the landlord’s previous offer of £225) to put things right. This amount has been calculated using this Service’s remedies guidance for complaints, available on our website.

Complaint handling

21. The landlord operates a two stage complaints procedure. Upon receiving a complaint, it is required to issue a stage 1 response within 10 working days; where a complaint is escalated, it is required to issue its stage 2 response within 20 working days.
22. The resident first raised his complaint to stage 1 on 26 January 2021, and the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 12 March 2021, some 43 working days later. Further delays can be evidenced in the stage 2 response, as the resident expressed dissatisfaction with the stage 1 compensation offer on 16 April 2021 and on several occasions following this, and the landlord issued its stage 2 response on 2 February 2022.  These were unreasonably long and unexplained delays that far exceeded the landlord’s stipulated timescales to respond by.
23. Where delays are inevitable, the landlord is required, in line with its complaints policy and this Service’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), to inform the resident at the earliest opportunity of any delays, including a date when they may next expect a response. However, this was not forthcoming in this case and the landlord has not evidenced what actions it took, if any, to clearly communicate these delays to the resident. This resulted in the resident chasing for an outcome to his complaint, further increasing his distress and inconvenience as well as the time and trouble spent pursuing his complaint.
24. It is acknowledged that the resident responded to the stage 1 complaint by requesting an increase in compensation, and the landlord made two further increased offers in response. However, it was clear that the resident was dissatisfied with the stage 1 response and the landlord should have escalated the complaint at this time and provided a formal stage 2 response in line with its published timescales. The failure to do so contributed towards the complaint handling delays. It also resulted in the resident being unable to progress his complaint for investigation by this Service as his complaint had not exhausted the landlord’s internal complaint procedure at that time.
25. The landlord also did not utilise its complaints procedure to identify, address and offer a suitable and proportionate remedy to the complaint handling failures identified above. As such, its lack of a fair and proportionate remedy to these delays, considering the time and trouble the resident spent pursuing his complaint is a further failing on the landlord’s behalf. Accordingly, this Service makes a finding of maladministration in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling and orders £150 compensation to put things right. The landlord has also been ordered to conduct staff training in respect of its complaints handling procedure to ensure that the same failures do not recur.

Determination

26. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of repairs to the property following a leak.
27. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

28. The landlord is ordered to do the following within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
    1. Pay the resident £650 compensation. This is to be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears. It includes the landlord’s previous offer of £225 compensation and is broken down as follows:
       1. £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the repairs.
       2. £150 for its complaint handling failings.
    2. Contact the resident to arrange a surveyor inspection of the property to establish if any further repairs are required, including to the area by the rear door where mould was present and to remedy any ongoing/recurring leaks. Following this it should confirm to the resident and this Service in writing the findings of the inspection and any repairs that will be completed, including the associated timescales.
    3. Conduct staff training in respect of its complaints procedure, in particular, its handling of final stage complaints and ensuring it responds to all complaints within stipulated timescales. It is also to ensure that, moving forward, all remedies offered to resolve a formal complaint are issued in writing to the resident and form part of its formal complaint response.
29. It is recommended that within the next 8 weeks the landlord introduces target timescales for repairs as part of its repairs policy and makes this available to residents, for example on its website, if it has not already done so.