A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202216315)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202216315

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

17 October 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 the landlord’s handling of reports of a leak affecting the property.
2. The Ombudsman has decided to consider the landlord’s complaint handling as part of this investigation.

Background

3. The resident has occupied the property as an assured tenant since April 2019. The property is a 2-bedroom flat. The landlord is not the freeholder of the building.
4. The resident reported rainwater leaking through her ceiling from the balcony of the flat above in May 2019. On 30 October 2020, she complained that the leak had not been repaired.
5. In its response on the 17 November 2020, the landlord said it held the lease on the building but not the freehold, which meant it was not responsible for repairing the balcony. It said it was having discussions with the freeholder’s managing agent to get them to carry out the repairs. The landlord said its service had fallen below what was expected and offered the resident £75 for lack of updates and inconvenience while the matter was under investigation. The landlord committed to carry out further communication with the managing agent. It said it had put in place a point of contact for the resident, who would oversee the work and make sure it was completed.
6. On 9 December 2020, the local authority’s private sector housing team escalated the complaint on behalf of the resident. It said the landlord had not responded to enquiries and there had been a lack of action.
7. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 23 December 2020. In its final response on 16 December 2021, the landlord set out what it had done to try to resolve the leak, noting that a leak had first been identified on 17 October 2018. It apologised for the delay, which it said was due to the nature of the repairs and the number of parties involved. It offered an additional £15 for communication failures and £150 for the delays in completing the repairs and responding to the complaint.
8. In the resident’s complaint to this service in October 2022, she said she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s handing of the leak, which had been going on for 3 years. She wanted the landlord to ensure the works were completed and rectify the damage caused by the leak. She was dissatisfied with what she said was a lack of updates from the landlord.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of reports of a leak affecting the property

9. The landlord says that the freeholder, through a managing agent, is responsible for all external maintenance and external repairs. This Service has not seen a copy of the agreement between the landlord and freeholder.
10. The tenancy agreement between the resident and the landlord states that the landlord will keep the structure and exterior of the property in good repair. This includes balconies.
11. This service’s Spotlight report on engagement with freeholders and managing agents says a landlord is responsible for liaising with the freeholder and managing agent. The landlord should hold them to account and ensure they fulfil their obligations. Although the landlord maintains that the freeholder is responsible for completing the repairs, it is this Service’s view that the landlord has a significant role in ensuring repairs are completed.
12. The resident first reported the leak in May 2019 and complained about the delay in fixing the leak on 30 October 2020. Records provided by the landlord show that it was aware of the leak on 17 October 2018, which was 7 months before the resident moved into the property. There is no evidence that the landlord had resolved the leak before the resident moved into the property. There is also no evidence that the landlord carried out an assessment of the property’s fitness for habitation before the resident moved in. Despite this, the landlord let a defective property to a resident who had young children. This was a failure of the landlord’s duty of care to the resident. This was a failing by the landlord, which led to a significant detrimental effect on the resident and her family over a significant period. In line with this Service’s remedies guidance, the landlord’s failure amounts to maladministration.
13. In its final complaint response on 16 December 2021, the landlord acknowledged the delays.It said it told the freeholder about the leak on 28 February 2019. A meeting with the freeholder and managing agent took place on 24 July 2019.On 17 December 2020, the landlord’s contractor provided an updated report on the leak, and this was sent to the managing agent on 13 January 2021. On 29 January 2021,the parties agreedthat a flood test should be carried out. On 6 April 2021,the managing agent agreed to raise the leak with the National House Building Council (NHBC). A NHBC survey was arranged by the managing agent for 23 November 2021,but this was cancelled. In the landlord’s final complaint response, it told the resident it was waiting for a new survey date to be confirmed.
14. This Service has noted that the cancelled NHBC survey was 2 and a half years after the resident first reported the leak, and over 3 years after the landlord had first identified a leak.
15. Although the landlord was not responsible for carrying out repairs, it was responsible for investigating the cause of the leak and ensuring any required repairs were completed within a reasonable timeframe. Records show that the landlord investigated the cause of the leak, and attempted remedial works, but it did not ensure that the freeholder completed work in a reasonable timeframe. When the landlord identified the repair was the freeholder’s responsibility in October 2018, it should have promptly contacted the managing agent about the leak. Instead, it delayed contacting the managing agent until 28 February 2019. After this, there is no evidence that the landlord discussed the leak with the managing agent or freeholder until 24 July 2019. This was a significant time after the landlord identified the works were the responsibility of the freeholder. The landlord’s delays in progressing repair work with the managing agent and freeholder were unreasonable.
16. Considering the impact on the resident, the landlord should have acted sooner. This Service has noted that once the landlord engaged with the managing agent and freeholder, there continued to be significant gaps between events. For example, after the landlord met with the freeholder and managing agent on 24 July 2019, a further 18 months elapsed before the landlord sent an update report to the freeholder’s managing agent on 13 January 2021.
17. This Service has found that there was a lack of urgency in the landlord’s approach to resolving the leak. During the time the landlord was engaging with the freeholder, the resident had reported that the leak had got worse and was affecting more of her property. She told the landlord about the impact the leak was having on her and her family life. In line with this Service’s remedies guidance, the landlord’s failure to engage in a more urgent way with the freeholder amounts to maladministration.
18. In addition, this Service has found that the landlord failed to keep the resident informed. The Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard 2017 says landlords shall provide residents with accessible, relevant, and timely information about the progress of repairs work. This Service would expect the landlord to provide the resident with regular updates on the progress of the repairs. Records provided by the landlord show that the resident and local authority chased the landlord for updates. In an internal communication dated 9 December 2020, the landlord acknowledged its failure to respond to the resident’s enquiries.
19. However, there is no evidence that the landlord’s communication improved. This Service has seen no evidence that the landlord provided the resident with regular updates. It did not manage the resident’s expectations on how long the work would take. The lack of communication caused the resident additional distress. The landlord does not appear to have met its obligations under the Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard 2017. In line with this Service’s remedies guidance, the landlord’s failure to update the resident amounts to maladministration. The landlord should ensure that it provides the resident with regular updates on the progress of the works until it is completed.
20. This Service has considered the landlord’s actions after its final response, as the resident told this Service in September 2023 that the leak had not been resolved. The landlord has provided this Service with a NHBC report produced on 26 October 2022. It is accepted that the NHBC survey report has identified the cause of the leak and the freeholder’s responsibility. It is also accepted that the landlord does not control the repairs. However, as a year has passed since the NHBC report was produced, this Service would expect the repair to be completed or there to be evidence of the landlord pursuing the repair with the freeholder. As the leak remains unresolved, this is a further failing. In line with this Service’s remedies guidance, the landlord’s failure to ensure completion of the repairs 12 months after the NHBC report amounts to maladministration.
21. This Service has noted that after the landlord’s final response, the resident informed the landlord that water was falling through the extractor fan and onto her electric cooker. When assessing whether a property meets the Decent Homes Standard, landlords are required to consider whether it is free from category 1 hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). There is no evidence that the landlord has carried out an inspection. It is this Service’s view that the landlord should inspect the property and assess against HHSRS whether the property is fit for human habitation.
22. This Service finds that the landlord consistently failed to deal with the leak at the resident’s property. There were 4 separate failures over a 4-year period:
    1. A failure in the landlord’s duty of care by letting a property with a known leak.
    2. A failure to engage in a more urgent way with the freeholder to resolve the leak.
    3. A failure to update the resident on progress with the repairs.
    4. Afailure to ensure completion of the repairs 12 months after the NHBC report.
23. Individually, each failure was maladministration. Combined, these were serious failings that had a significant detrimental effect on the resident and her family. These failings caused distress, inconvenience, and affected the family’s home life over a significant period. The resident has told this service that the leak started in the living room but is now affecting the kitchen and her son’s bedroom. She said the leak is also affecting light switches and drops onto electrical appliances. In line with this service’s remedies guidance, severe maladministration is identified in cases where the Ombudsman has found a serious failure. Because of this, the landlord is ordered to compensate for its failings as follows:
    1. £500 in recognition of the landlord’s failure in its duty of care when first letting the property.
    2. £500 in recognition of the landlord’s failure to engage in a more urgent way with the freeholder.
    3. £200 in recognition of the landlord’s failure to update the resident on progress with the repairs.
    4. £300 in recognition of the landlord’s failure to ensure completion of the repairs 12 months after the NHBC report.

The landlord’s complaint handling

24. This Service’s Complaint Handling Code sets out requirements on landlords that enable them to respond to complaints effectively and fairly. The purpose of the Code is to enable landlords to resolve complaints quickly and use learning from complaints to drive service improvements. It also helps create a positive complaint handling culture.
25. The landlord’s complaints policy says that when it receives a complaint it will respond within 10 working days. When a complaint is escalated, it will respond within 20 working days. This is in line with this Service’s Complaint Handling Code.
26. The resident first raised a complaint about the leak on 30 October 2020. The landlord responded in 13 working days on 17 November 2020. This was slightly outside the landlord’s policy. The landlord said it would put in place a point of contact who would keep the resident updated.
27. The resident was dissatisfied that she had no contact from the landlord and escalated her complaint on 23 December 2020. The landlord issued its final response almost a year later, on 16 December 2021. This Service has seen no evidence that the landlord communicated with the resident about her complaint in the intervening period. The time taken to respond, and the lack of communication was a significant failing by the landlord. In line with this Service’s remedies guidance, the landlord’s failure to respond to the complaint in line with its policy and the Complaint Handling Code amounts to maladministration. Because of this, the landlord is ordered to compensate the resident an additional £150 for the inconvenience caused and the failure to follow its complaints policy and the Complaint Handling Code

Determination

28. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak affecting her property.
29. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

30. A senior manager from the landlord is ordered to personally apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report, acknowledging its failures and the way the resident was treated.
31. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £1,650 in compensation for distress and inconvenience caused. This is inclusive of the £240 previously offered by the landlord for lack of updates and delays in responding to the complaint and carrying out repairs. Compensation should be paid directly to the resident, and not offset against any arrears. The compensation comprises:
    1. £500 in recognition of the landlord’s failure in its duty of care when first letting the property.
    2. £500 in recognition of the landlord’s failure to engage in a more urgent way with the freeholder.
    3. £200 in recognition of the landlord’s failure to update the resident on progress with the repairs.
    4. £300 in recognition of the landlord’s failure to ensure completion of the repairs 12 months after the NHBC report.
    5. £150 in recognition of the failure to respond to the escalated complaint in line with its policy and the Complaint Handling Code.
    6. The landlord should provide proof of this payment to this service within four weeks of the date of this report.
32. The landlord is ordered to review how it carries out inspections of void properties to ensure that properties with significant defects are appropriately assessed prior to being let.
33. The landlord is ordered to inspect the property and assess against the HHSRS to consider whether the property is fit for human habitation.
34. The landlord is ordered to review its procedures to ensure that repairs that are the responsibility of a freeholder are correctly identified to avoid similar delays.
35. The landlord is ordered to confirm to this Service that the above orders have been complied with within 4 weeks of this report.
36. The landlord is ordered to share with the resident within 6 weeks their intended actions to remedy the leak and must then give regular updates until the work is completed.
37. The landlord is ordered to rectify damage caused by the leak within the property once the leak has been repaired.

Recommendations

38. It is recommended that the landlord provides staff training on the responsibilities of the landlord and the freeholder, to ensure that repairs are correctly allocated.