Lewisham Council (202325734)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325734

Lewisham Council

21 August 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. Request for external repairs relating to damp and mould.
    2. Request for external decorations.
    3. Associated formal complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is the secure tenant of the property, a house owned by the landlord. He resides with his family.
  2. The resident first reported issues with concrete around the front window of the property and poor external paintwork to the landlord on 2 October 2020. It booked an appointment to inspect the concrete on 27 October 2020. There were no further reports until April 2022 when he reported issues with damp and mould. It inspected the property on 27 April 2022 and subsequently raised a works order.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 15 August 2022 as it had completed no works following the visit in April 2022. In his complaint he stated that mould was spreading in the house and that despite his best efforts, he had been unable to contact the contractors directly.
  4. The landlord provided a stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 31 August 2022. It apologised for the delays in resolving damp and mould issues, for failing to complete the repair in the expected way, and for the inconvenience this may have caused him. It said its contractor would contact him on 1 September 2022 to discuss the schedule of works which were due to start in the following 2 weeks. It also apologised for the delays in responding to his queries.
  5. Following this response, the resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 on 3 October 2022. He said that the landlord completed works in a bedroom, but mould remained on the windows. He stated that there was a hole remaining in a kitchen wall and significant holes in the living room which it had not plastered. He also raised issues with holes, cracks, and mould in the hallway and front walls of the property and it not completing external decorations.
  6. In its stage 2 response on 1 November 2022, the landlord apologised for not responding to the resident’s email on 3 October 2022. It advised him about how the works would be completed, including the timescale for the planned works. It apologised for any miscommunication about this.
  7. The resident first requested escalation of his complaint to stage 3 on 6 December 2022 as the landlord’s contractor had not contacted him. He emailed it 4 times in January 2023 advising that it had not completed works. On 3 July 2023 he requested escalation of his complaint again. It accepted this for stage 3 adjudication and acknowledged the complaint on 26 July 2023.
  8. The landlord provided its stage 3 response on 23 August 2023. It agreed to undertake an inspection to identify any necessary repairs or decoration. It noted that it had conducted an inspection in June 2023, in which it had identified required works, and it would ensure that it completed these without further delay alongside arranging an inspection.
  9. The resident brought his complaint to this Service as he remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response to works and external decorations.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. Throughout the period of the complaint the resident has reported the effect these delays have had on his and his son’s physical health. The Ombudsman is not able to make a determination about any links between the delays and the resident’s health concerns. However, we will consider the overall distress and inconvenience that the issues in this case have caused. A determination relating to damages caused to his physical health is more appropriate for the courts and he may wish to seek appropriate advice if he wishes to consider that option.

Policies and procedures

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out its repair priorities and response times. It will attend emergency repairs that will remove immediate danger to people or property within 24 hours. It will respond to urgent repairs to prevent damage to the property or to rectify a potential health and safety risk within 3 working days. It will complete routine repairs which do not fall into emergency or urgent requirements within 20 working days.
  2. The terms and conditions of the tenancy agreement state that the landlord will decorate the exterior of the property but that the resident is responsible for keeping the inside of the property in a reasonable state of decoration. It does not provide any information on the frequency of these works.
  3. In its planned maintenance policy, the landlord states it will conduct regular needs assessments to identify properties requiring major repairs or improvements. These assessments can include inspections and surveys. Based on the assessments, it will develop a future maintenance plan outlining the priority of replacements and improvements.
  4. The landlord’s damp, mould and leaks policy says that it will follow up a report with remedial action to solve the problem, or a visual investigation and additional lines of enquiry to help it resolve the issue. It states that it will communicate with residents to provide advice and support.
  5. The landlord operates a 3 stage complaints policy. It will acknowledge stage 1 complaints within 5 working days and respond within 10 working days. At stage 2, it will acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days and respond within 20 working days. It has an adjudication process at stage 3, and it will acknowledge complaints within 2 working days, then respond within 20 working days.
  6. In its compensation, reimbursement and remedies procedure, the landlord provides guidance on the levels of compensation it can award for inconvenience and distress. These levels very from no compensation to £1,000 depending on its assessed level of impact on a resident.

External repairs, damp, and mould

  1. It is unclear from the evidence provided when the resident first reported issues with damp and mould to the landlord. However, it contacted him on 19 April 2022 to confirm it had booked a damp and mould inspection at his property for 27 April 2022. During this inspection, it identified required internal works related to damp and mould, but it noted no external repair issues. He chased these repairs on 5 occasions between 3 May 2022 and 9 August 2022. It exceeded the routine repairs response time as set out in its policy and the delay in completing these works was not reasonable.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord on 15 August 2022 as he had been chasing it for an update without success, along with failed attempts to contact the contractor directly. At this stage, it had not completed any of the works identified in April 2022. It responded on 31 August 2022, stating its contractor would call him on 1 September 2022 to discuss the upcoming schedule of works at his property. It apologised for the delays in resolving the matter and for failing to execute the repairs as expected. Its response was reasonable in the circumstances at the time as it focused on getting works arranged to resolve the issue.
  3. In his October 2022 escalation request, the resident acknowledged that it had completed some works but that it had left other works outstanding. These included holes in the living room, hallway, and front external walls of the property. It responded on 1 November 2022, acknowledging this and advising that its contractor would contact him by Friday 4 November 2022 to arrange an appointment with him. It apologised for not responding to his email on 3 October 2022 and for not resolving all the issues. It stated that it had scheduled repairs to the external front walls for completion during the 2025/26 financial year, along with decorations. It said it would investigate any availability to complete these works sooner.
  4. On 6 December 2022, the resident contacted the landlord as its contractor had not contacted him as advised. He advised it that the external works were important because the internal walls were becoming soaked internally during rain or snow. It arranged an inspection of this issue for 16 December 2022 and asked for its contractor to repair any issues or report back to it for arrangement of further works. It marked this as complete on 16 December 2022 on its repair logs. This was a prompt response, but it is unclear whether it completed any works on 16 December 2022 or if it only completed an inspection.
  5. The resident chased the landlord for an update about the works on 10 January 2023. It responded on 11 January 2023, explaining that it had not received a report from the operative that attended on 16 December 2022. It said it might have needed to arrange a further inspection so that it could have a detailed report with recommendations to resolve the issue. However, it did not do this, and he chased it again on 30 January 2023 without reply. This demonstrated an issue with communication between the landlord and its contractor, which led to repairs remaining outstanding for the resident. This was not appropriate and led to him requesting escalation of his complaint on 3 July 2023.
  6. In his complaint escalation request, the resident raised the outstanding repairs to the front of his property. In its response, of 23 August 2023 the landlord stated that it required an inspection to confirm any outstanding works to the front of the property to make it weatherproof. This was over 8 months since it had previously identified that an inspection was necessary and while it was a reasonable complaint response, there had already been excessive delays in doing so. To date, it is unclear whether it has completed these works.
  7. In conclusion, there were avoidable delays in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests for external repairs. After he raised the issues, it took no action between January 2023 and August 2023 when it determined it did not have a report from its contractor visit on 16 December 2022. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 requires landlords to make repairs to the structure and exterior of a property. It remains unclear whether it has completed a further inspection of his property or the required works, although it has completed a full survey of the estate and has budgeted for roofing and brick repairs and decoration for his property.
  8. This Service’s dispute resolution principles are, be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. It did not offer any financial remedy to demonstrate adherence with these principles, or any explanation of how it would learn from the complaint, and as such, a finding of maladministration is appropriate in the circumstances of the complaint.

External decorations

  1. The resident first reported that the front of his property needed redecorating to the landlord on 2 October 2020. Its major works team responded to him on 7 October 2020, stating that it was planning the external decoration programme for the next financial year and if he could send it photographs, it would ask management to include his property as a priority. However, it is noted that this period of the report took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, in which services provided by social landlords were impacted by lockdown and local restrictions. This will be considered when assessing its response at this time.
  2. As part of a damp and mould inspection at the resident’s property on 27 April 2022, the landlord noted that the outside of the property was in a bad state and needed painting. There is no evidence that it took any action relating to external decorations following this report. While the terms and conditions of the tenancy agreement do not provide a timeframe for works, it would have been reasonable for it to consider arranging works after identifying them.
  3. At the time of the resident’s stage 2 complaint escalation on 3 October 2022, the landlord had not arranged any works or communicated with him about the matter since it inspected the property in April 2022. He included the issue in his complaint escalation, stating that it had previously painted the outside of the property every 7 years, but it had not done so. In its stage 2 complaint response on 1 November 2022, it stated it had scheduled external decorations for the 2025/26 financial year as part of planned works, but it would investigate any availability to complete them sooner if possible. It apologised for any miscommunication about the works, but it did not provide him with an explanation for delaying the works from the 2021/22 financial year to 2025/26.
  4. Communication between the resident and landlord remained ongoing in relation to multiple issues. On 30 January 2023, he raised the external works again. It did not respond to this point. On 3 July 2023, he sent a further complaint about external decorations. He stated that he felt embarrassed by the outside of the property and that he found its stage 2 response unsatisfactory.
  5. As part of its stage 3 complaint investigation, the landlord requested an inspection of the resident’s property to assess whether it needed to complete decoration works more quickly. In its response, it stated that it agreed the property looked “shabby” but that would not solely be a reason to disapply its planned scheduled works. It advised him that it would be arranging an inspection to investigate whether the condition of the paintwork was affecting how weatherproof the property is and that it would then provide him with a decision without delay. Its response was clear and fair, offering an evidence-based approach to the issue. Since providing its stage 3 response, the landlord has calculated the budget for decoration works to the property as part of wider works on the overall estate, but it has not provided a date for these works to this Service.
  6. In conclusion, while the landlord moving external decoration works from 2021/22 to 2025/26 was undoubtedly frustrating for the resident, the landlord has arranged these in line with its planned maintenance policy and it must be considered that the period between his initial report in October 2020 and the inspection in April 2022 was subject to COVID-19 restrictions by the Government. It was therefore reasonable of the landlord to move major or planned works onto future programmes and as such, a finding of no maladministration is appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

Associated formal complaint

  1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s stage 1 and stage 2 complaints was mostly compliant with its policy. It did not acknowledge his stage 2 escalation request, however it apologised for this in its stage 2 response. The issues found in this complaint related to his requests to escalate his complaint to stage 3 of its process.
  2. On 6 December 2022, the resident raised ongoing concerns as it had been a month since the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. In these emails, he requested it provide him with its “full and final report” so he could raise a stage 3 complaint if it could not resolve the issues. While it is unclear what documentation he was requesting, it did not acknowledge his mention of escalating his complaint, either to clarify his intention or confirm it would do so. This was not appropriate as the issues remained ongoing and its complaints policy at the time allowed for a third complaint stage.
  3. The resident made further contact with the landlord on 10 and 30 January 2023 regarding ongoing repair issues. His email on 10 January 2023 stated that he had been reporting issues with external works for almost a year and it had done very little, which was leading him to consider claiming compensation. On 30 January 2023, he emailed it again asking for a copy of its final report of the internal and external works so he could take the matter further. Again, it did not acknowledge either of these statements and did not clarify whether he wished to escalate his complaint at the time. Its lack of response to this was not reasonable and led to a drawn-out complaint process for the resident.
  4. On 3 July 2023, the resident made a further complaint related to external decorations. On this occasion, the landlord responded on 7 July 2023 advising him that he could request an adjudicator review of his complaint within 6 months of its stage 2 response or contact the Ombudsman. He replied on 17 July 2023 advising that he would like a copy of its final stage 2 report so that he could escalate his complaint. It accepted his complaint at stage 3 on 26 July 2023 despite the time that had passed since its stage 2 response, as it could see from his December 2022 correspondence that he had requested it escalate his complaint to stage 3. This demonstrated good practice and a customer-focused approach to complaint handling.
  5. The landlord did not acknowledge its failure to escalate the resident’s complaint in its stage 3 response. By the time it provided this on 23 August 2023, it was over 8 months since his initial escalation request in December 2022. It did not acknowledge his further escalation requests from January 2023 and did not offer any apology or remedy for its failure to escalate his complaint earlier. Its response in relation to complaint handling did not adhere to the dispute resolution principles and as such, was not reasonable.
  6. In conclusion, due to the landlord’s failures to escalate the resident’s complaint, a finding of service failure is appropriate in the circumstances of this case. Since this complaint was brought to this Service, it now operates a 2-stage complaint process and as such, no orders will be made in relation to its policy.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for external repairs relating to damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for external decorations.
  3. 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 formal complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident compensation totalling £300, broken down as follows:
    1. £200 for the failures identified in its handling of the resident’s requests for external repairs.
    2. £100 for the failures identified in its complaint handling.
  2. The landlord must provide proof of compliance with the above orders to this Service within 4 weeks of the date of this decision.
  3. The landlord must arrange with the resident a full and thorough survey of the property to identify and arrange any outstanding required works or repairs. It should provide a timescale for the completion of the works.
  4. It must provide proof of compliance with this order to the Ombudsman within 6 weeks of this decision.

Recommendations

  1. This Service recommends that the landlord provide the resident with a date for completion of external decorations as soon as it has arranged these.