Lewisham Council (202328076)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202328076

Lewisham Council

30 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 a leak.
2. The Ombudsman will also be considering the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident is an assured tenant and lives in a 3 bedroom flat in a purpose built block.
4. According to its records, the landlord attended the property 5 times between August 2022 and January 2023 to deal with the resident’s reports of leaks into her property.
5. The resident raised a formal complaint on 2 February 2023. She said there had been a leak in her hallway but the landlord’s emergency repair team would not send a contractor out because she “did not know where the leak was coming from.” She also explained that the fire brigade attended and determined that the leak was coming from the roof, and was also affecting other properties in the block. To resolve her complaint, the resident wanted the landlord to find and fix the leak, and repair damage the leak had caused to her home.
6. The landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaints process on 22 February 2023. It said its leaks access team had located the source of the leak in the floor above her flat, and repaired it on 9 February 2023. It then asked the resident to monitor the leak for 2 weeks, and to contact it if the leak persisted. It also confirmed that it would carry out any remedial work once it had confirmed the leak was fixed.
7. The resident escalated her complaint to the landlord on 24 May 2023. She said that contractors had attended her property in March 2023 due to a leak from a pipe, and carried out a temporary fix. They told her they would need to return and also access the neighbouring property to resolve the issue. The resident agreed a return date of 30 May 2023, but was then told by the landlord that its contractor was on leave at that time and another date would need to be agreed. The resident was frustrated with what she felt was miscommunication between the landlord’s teams. She also reiterated that the leak was still occurring.
8. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 30 May 2023. It provided an explanation for the leak, and said it would attend on 28 June 2023 to fix it. It also explained that it would make good any damage once the leak had been fixed, and offered the resident £100 in compensation for distress and inconvenience.
9. On 8 October 2023, the resident escalated her complaint to stage 3 of the landlord’s complaints process. She said its contractor did not attend on 28 June 2023, and that because of damp from the leak she now had “flies and maggots” in her cupboards. The landlord provided its final response on 7 November 2023. It confirmed the leak had been fixed on 27 June 2023, but that remedial works had not been carried out afterwards as set out in its stage 2 response. It apologised, and offered her a further £50 in compensation. It also said that it would arrange an inspection of the damage, and share a schedule of works with her in the “shortest possible timescale.”
10. The resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. When she contacted the Ombudsman in November 2023, she said that the leak had been repaired but she had received no further contact from the landlord to make good the damage caused. To resolve her complaint, she wanted the landlord to repair the damage.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of a leak

11. According to its own repair logs, the landlord attended the resident’s property on a number of occasions prior to the resident’s complaint:
    1. On 17 August 2022, due to pipes leaking in her hallway.
    2. On 4 September 2022, due to an “uncontainable” leak coming through her ceiling.
    3. On 20 November 2022, due to a leak running through her electrics.
    4. On 4 December 2022, to make safe her electrics after the leak.
    5. On 18 January 2023, to attend and trace the source of the leak.
12. While it has recorded the visits it made over this time period, the landlord’s records do not show what action was taken on each visit to resolve the issue. Clear record keeping is extremely important, particularly in relation to repairs and contractor visits. Without comprehensive information, it is difficult for this Service to say that the landlord took appropriate action.
13. The landlord was under a duty to repair the leak within a reasonable time of the resident reporting it. This is set out in the landlord’s repairs policy, and the implied terms in s.11(1)(c) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
14. What is a reasonable time will depend on all the circumstances of a case. Most landlords will have repair policies which set out target timescales within which they aim to complete the repairs. In this case the policy states:
    1. Emergency repairs are repairs that remove immediate danger to people, avoid flooding or major damage to the property; and restore total failure of water supply. The landlord aims to attend these within 24 hours and complete a repair if it can. If it cannot, it will make the situation safe and carry out any follow up work as an urgent or routine repair in normal working hours.
    2. Urgent repairs are repairs that prevent damage to the property, or where there is a possible health, safety, and security risk. The landlord aims to attend these within 3 working days.
    3. Routine repairs are any other works that do not fall into the emergency and  urgent categories. The landlord aims to complete these within 20 working days.
15. It is unclear when the resident first reported the leak to the landlord in 2022. However, in her stage 1 complaint on 2 February 2023, the resident said she had been told by the landlord that it would not send a contractor out because she did not know where the leak was coming from, which is concerning. The landlord’s repairs log also shows that it raised a work order on 18 January 2023 to attend the property and trace a leak. However, according to the landlord’s stage 1 response, that does not appear to have been done until 9 February 2023. This means there was a gap of 16 working days between the landlord raising the work order, and attending the property, therefore the landlord did not adhere to its own repair timescales for attending emergency or urgent repairs. Given that the resident has confirmed the fire brigade attended the incident, it is reasonable to conclude that the leak was severe enough to warrant the landlord treating it as an emergency.
16. In addition, the landlord’s records show that the resident reported having a leak in August 2022, but a fix was not carried out until 9 February 2023. This started again, however, on 4 May 2023, and the landlord did not fix it until 27 June 2023.
17. Landlords should seek to offer repairs that are effective and lasting to ensure the property remains in good condition and working order. In this case, the resident had been suffering with a persistent leak issue for almost a year before the landlord was able to arrange a lasting repair. This is an unreasonable length of time. In addition, the landlord has confirmed that as of August 2024, no internal remedial works have been completed despite the leak being fixed months earlier.
18. In summary:
    1. The landlord failed to action an effective and lasting repair in adherence with its own repairs policy timescales.
    2. The landlord failed to action remedial work once the issue was fixed, in line with its own repairs policy.
19. The Ombudsman considers this did amount to maladministration and therefore the landlord should pay the resident compensation to recognise how these failings affected her. The resident has explained the significant frustration, upset and distress she faced with the leaks, and the damage caused to her home as a result.
20. In response to her complaint, the landlord offered the resident a total of £150 in compensation for the inconvenience caused to her, and it has been ordered below to pay that amount to her, if it has not already done so.
21. However, having carefully considered the Ombudsman’s policy and guidance on remedies, and the landlord’s own compensation policy, a fair level of compensation would be an additional £200. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for failures where a landlord has made some attempt to put things right, but the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified in this investigation. It is also in line with the landlord’s compensation policy for serious or repeat service failures.
22. The landlord has also been ordered to arrange a date for the internal remedial repairs with the resident, and provide proof that it has done so to this Service.
23. In this investigation, failures have been identified in the landlord’s handling of its repairs and record-keeping – similar to those identified in case 202124577. We have not, however, made any further orders for the landlord to improve this. This is because a wider order was made as part of case 202124577 which the landlord has now complied with. We expect the landlord to take forward the lessons and improvements it shared with this Service following the wider order and will monitor the progress of this. Moreover, the Ombudsman is currently undertaking a special investigation into Lewisham Council. This is being conducted under paragraph 49 of the Scheme and allows the Ombudsman to investigate beyond an individual complaint to establish whether there is evidence of systemic failings. The findings of this report will therefore contribute to the outcome and action needed following the completion of the investigation.

The landlord’s complaint handling

24. Under the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, landlords must ensure they:
    1. Acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days.
    2. Respond to the complaint within 10 working days of the acknowledgment at stage 1.
    3. Provide a final response within 20 working days of the date of acknowledgment.
25. At the time of the resident’s complaint in 2023, the Code also said that:
    1. Two-stage landlord complaint procedures are ideal. This ensures that the complaint process is not unduly long. If landlords strongly believe a third stage is necessary, they must set out their reasons for this as part of their self-assessment [against the code].
    2. Complaints should only go to a third stage if the resident has actively requested a third-stage review of their complaint. Where a third stage is in place and has been requested, landlords must respond to the stage 3 complaint within 20 working days of the complaint being escalated.
26. The landlord’s policy was compliant with the Code at the time of the resident’s complaint.
27. The resident raised her complaint on 2 February 2023, so the landlord had until 9 February 2023 to acknowledge it. It then had until 23 February 2023 to provide its stage 1 response. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 9 February 2023, and provided its response on 22 February 2023, in line with the Code.
28. The resident escalated her complaint on 24 May 2023, and the landlord provided an acknowledgment on 30 May 2023, in line with the Code, explaining that it would provide a full stage 2 response by 27 June 2023, which it did.
29. On 8 October 2023, the resident requested her complaint be escalated to stage 3 of the landlord’s process. The landlord provided its response on 7 November 2023, which was 2 days late. However, the landlord apologised for this, and offered the resident £50 in compensation, which was reasonable.
30. The Ombudsman therefore finds that there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Determination

31. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the landlord was responsible for maladministration in its handling of a leak.
32. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the landlord was not responsible for maladministration in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

33. The landlord must, within 28 days of the date of this determination:
    1. Pay the resident the £150 compensation it offered her for repair delays in its original complaint responses, if it has not already done so.
    2. Pay the resident an additional £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of a leak.
    3. Arrange a date for remedial repairs with the resident.
34. The landlord must provide this Service with proof it has actioned the above.