Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (202331302)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202331302

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

22 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to reports of recurring leaks and damp and mould in the property.

Background

The resident holds a secure tenancy which started in September 2016. The property is a 3-bedroom flat on the top floor of a mid-rise block.
On 11 August 2023, the resident complained to the landlord about its handling of a recurring leak which she had experienced for almost 3 years. She said that the leak came from the roof and that her son’s bedroom was unusable due to the leaks. She asked it to resolve the cause of the leaks, award a rent reduction for the unusable bedroom and offer her compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the leaks.
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 25 August 2023. It upheld her complaint. It said:
1. It apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the recurring leaks, which she first reported in December 2020.
2. It also apologised for the delay in completing roof repairs to the building after it identified this was the cause of the recurring leaks.
3. It had raised repairs to inspect and repair the roof, and to also treat areas affected by mould internally and to install an extractor fan in the kitchen to help improve ventilation. It said its contractors would contact her with the appointment date.
4. It would update her by 1 September 2023 regarding any internal works to make good any damages caused by the recurring leaks.
5. It had passed the request for a rent reduction for the loss of a bedroom to her Neighbourhood Services Coordinator who would discuss this with her.
6. It offered £450 compensation for the impact that this has had on the resident and her household.
The resident escalated her complaint on 21 September 2023. She said that the leaks worsened during heavy rainfall, and she mentioned that this impacted her health. She asked again for the landlord to resolve the leak, award a rent reduction for the unusable bedroom and pay compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused to her.
On 19 October 2023, the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It upheld the complaint. It said:
1. It apologised for the distress caused to her and that it had failed to provide a solution to the recurring leaks.
2. It had visited the property on 13 October 2023 and identified that the cause of the leak was an issue with a rainwater pipe within the roof space of the building.
3. It would arrange for a CCTV survey of the pipework to identify and repair the cause of the leak.
4. It would review the progress of the repairs weekly until it resolved the leak, completed necessary internal repairs and post-inspected the works.
5. It offered a 25% rent rebate for the loss of a bedroom which would be from 14 December 2020. It said that it would pay this once it completed the necessary works, and it would therefore write to her to confirm the finalised offer of compensation after it post-inspected the works.
The resident escalated her complaint to this Service as she remained unhappy with the ongoing recurring leaks within her property, and she said that the landlord had not completed the repairs that it said it would. The complaint became one that the Ombudsman could investigate on 26 June 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident said that the landlord’s handling of her reports of recurring leaks in the property affected her health. While this Service does not doubt the resident’s comments about her health, it is outside our remit to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(f) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.

The landlord’s response to reports of recurring leaks and damp and mould in the property.

The resident first reported a leak into one of the bedrooms on 14 December 2020. Between the first report on this date and the resident making her complaint to the landlord in August 2023, she raised concerns with leaks and damage caused by these on 11 occasions. The leaks mostly impacted her child’s bedroom, the hallway, and the kitchen. The leaks then caused one of the bedrooms to become unusable, which resulted in the resident sharing a bedroom with her son.
The landlord’s repair records lack detail. It is evident that the landlord responded to the resident’s reports of leaks in the property, but its repair records do not provide any details other than its contractors completing roof repairs. It does not refer to what works it planned to complete, whether it successfully completed the works, whether it needed to arrange any follow up works, or if any issues arose during the appointment.
Due to the landlord’s poor record keeping, it is difficult for the Ombudsman to assess what the landlord did and whether the actions taken were appropriate. For example, it is unclear whether the landlord completed all the repairs it intended to during each appointment and so this Service cannot fully assess its handling of each report of the recurring leak and associated damage caused by the leak.
While the landlord made attempts to resolve the leak following each report, it did not proactively manage the leak. Its actions were reactive to each of the resident’s reports which meant it failed to take a wider approach on how to resolve the problems that the resident faced and ensure a long-lasting solution.
On 12 May 2023, the resident reported that the leak had returned. The landlord inspected the area on 1 June 2023 and found that it needed to arrange a surveyor inspection, which it did on 18 August 2023. This delay of over 2 months was unreasonable, given that it was aware of the recurring leaks and the impact that this would have had on the resident and her household. Additionally, it is unclear why it did not arrange a surveyor inspection much sooner, as the issues had started nearly 3 years prior and it is evident that its previous repairs had not resolved the leaks.
Following the surveyor’s inspection, the Ombudsman would expect that the landlord would produce a schedule of works and follow these to resolve the leak. However, it instead stated within its stage 1 complaint response that it had raised works to inspect the roof to identify the source of the leaks. While the landlord may need to rely on specialist contractors to find the source of the leaks, it is evident that it repeated this step multiple times and failed to identify the cause within a reasonable period.
Throughout the reports of leaks, the landlord repeated steps to inspect the roof space and the resident’s property. Between 18 August 2022 and 25 August 2023, it completed inspections on 6 separate occasions. The repeated actions would have added unnecessary delays in addressing the issues at the property and understandably caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident.
The resident remained extremely concerned with the safety of the property throughout this time. On 9 October 2023, she told the landlord that she was scared that one of the walls would fall down because plaster had come away from it. In addition, within the resident’s complaint escalation on 21 September 2023, she said that the property affected her health. It is a failing that the landlord has not evidenced any support it offered to the resident to discuss her concerns or any efforts to signpost her for additional support.
The ongoing leaks caused mould to grow within the resident’s property, which the landlord noted during an inspection on 18 August 2023. Within its stage 1 complaint response, it said it would arrange for a mould specialist to treat the mould and to install a new extractor fan in the kitchen to improve ventilation. The repair notes state that there was no access provided for an appointment on 14 September 2023 for these works, but due to the poor record keeping, it is unclear whether it notified the resident of the appointment beforehand.
The landlord asked its contractor to rebook the appointment, but there is no evidence to suggest that it continued to manage these works despite being aware of ongoing leaks. It is evident that the landlord later raised the works again on 2 July 2024, nearly a year after it first did so. It is unclear whether it has yet completed the mould wash and the installation of the kitchen extractor fan. This is a failing.
The landlord’s repair records do not appear to be comprehensive or reflective of all repair appointments completed. The landlord referred to appointments within its complaint responses which it has not evidenced within the repair records provided to this Service, such as an inspection on 13 October 2023. This is a record keeping failure as it impacts the Ombudsman’s ability to fully assess the actions taken by the landlord.
The landlord’s final complaint response stated that it would review its progress weekly until it resolved the leaks and post-inspected the works internally to make sure it had rectified any damages caused by the leaks. However, the landlord has not provided evidence to the Ombudsman to suggest that it did so, which is a failing.
Overall, the landlord excessively delayed in resolving the leak. It acknowledged and apologised for the delays within its final complaint response, which was appropriate for it to do. To put things right, it said it would arrange for its contractor to complete a CCTV survey of the pipework. It is a failing that despite stating its repairing intentions in the response on 19 October 2023, it only raised the works on 30 October 2023. The works took an unreasonable amount of time to complete, as its records showed that the survey was completed on 16 April 2024. This was approximately 6 months after it said it would raise the works, which is not appropriate.
Throughout this time, the landlord was aware of ongoing leaks, and with mould caused by the leaks. The resident repeatedly reported this during the complaints process and afterwards. The lack of communication, combined with the landlord not doing what it said it would within its complaint responses, would have understandably caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident.
The resident sought support from an external support agency to help progress the repairs. The support agency contacted the landlord on 8 February 2024 and asked for it to resolve the leaks as the matter had worsened, and it had left a hole in the child’s bedroom ceiling which allowed rainwater to pour through it, as well as black mould being present within the property. It is unclear whether the landlord responded to the support agency or the resident in response to these concerns. This is a considerable failing, especially given that the landlord has evidenced communication internally where it said it was aware that its previous repair attempts had not resolved the leaks.
In summary, while it was appropriate for the landlord to outline its next steps in its attempts to rectify the leak and damage caused, it is a concern that it failed to follow through the repairs to completion in a timely manner. It is evident that there are still outstanding repairs required to the property, over 10 months on from the final complaint response and therefore the landlord’s actions after the final complaint response fail to demonstrate that it learned lessons from its failings.
In addition, it repeated steps to inspect the property and roof which would have caused delays in resolving the leak, and its repair records fail to show what works it completed due to a lack of detail. The landlord has also failed to evidence whether it appropriately considered the impact of the leaks on the resident’s health, which is not appropriate.
The landlord offered £450 compensation to the resident within its stage 1 complaint response for the impact of its handling of the leaks on her and her household. Within its final complaint response, it also awarded a 25% rent rebate to the resident for the loss of use of the child’s bedroom. It said it would award this from the date the resident first raised the issues on 14 December 2020, up until the date it completed works internally and externally and post-inspected. It said it would contact her further about this payment after the post-inspection. The offer of a rent rebate is in line with the landlord’s compensation and reimbursement policy where an outstanding repair resulted in the loss of a room.
As there are outstanding repairs at the time of this investigation, it is understood that the landlord would have not yet awarded any rent rebate to the resident. It is a concern that the ongoing failure to resolve the leak has impacted the landlord’s offer to put things right. As such, the landlord is ordered to pay compensation for loss of enjoyment of the home, based on 25% of the current basic rent charged. This has been calculated from 14 December 2020 to 19 August 2024. It should also confirm its intention to pay further compensation for loss of enjoyment of the home, based on the current basic rent charged. This should be calculated from 19 August 2024 to the date that it post-inspects the works after they are completed.
Additionally, given the above, the landlord’s offer of £450 compensation for the impact of its handling of the leaks is not proportionate to the failings identified within this investigation. The award failed to consider the time and trouble which the resident spent in trying to escalate her concerns with the leaks and the damages, as well as the distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to resolve the leaks which she first reported to the landlord over 3 years ago.
As such, the landlord is ordered to pay a further £1,250 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by significant failures in its response to reports of recurring leaks and damp and mould in the property. This is an appropriate award in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where the Ombudsman has found serious failings in the landlord’s handling of an issue. The Ombudsman has also made an order below regarding the outstanding repairs.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s response to reports of recurring leaks and damp and mould in the property.

Orders

Within 28 calendar days of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident in writing regarding the failures identified within this investigation. This should be a detailed apology which addresses specific failings.
2. Pay £8,031.36 compensation for loss of enjoyment of the home, based on the current basic rent charged. The amount of compensation awarded for the loss of enjoyment of the home has been calculated at £41.83 per week. This has been calculated from 14 December 2020 to 19 August 2024, which is a period of 192 weeks.
3. Confirm its intention to pay further compensation for loss of enjoyment of the home, based on the current basic rent charged. This should be calculated from 19 August 2024 to the date that it post-inspects the works after they are completed.
4. Pay the £450 compensation which it offered within the initial complaint response, if it has not already done so.
5. Pay a further £1,250 compensation to the resident for the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to reports of recurring leaks and damp and mould in the property. This should be paid directly to the resident and not offset against her rent account.
6. Inspect the property to establish what works remain outstanding to resolve the leaks and make good any damages internally. The inspection should be completed by a member of its senior management or by a surveyor and offer a full diagnosis of the source of any leaks, including the outcome of dye testing.
Within 42 calendar days of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Write to the resident and provide a list of repairs it will complete to address the leaks and related remedial works. It should clearly communicate the appointment dates to her to ensure that no further delays are experienced. This should include a commitment of what arrangements it intends to make to post-inspect the work to ensure it has been completed to an acceptable standard and a specific point of contact who will take responsibility for offering weekly updates.
The landlord must reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.