Beyond Housing Limited (202304137)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202304137

Beyond Housing Limited

23 April 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 handling of:
1. The resident’s report of a rat infestation and subsequent repairs.
2. The resident’s reports of multiple roof leaks and subsequent repairs.
3. The resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Background

The resident is a tenant of the landlord which is a housing association. The property is a 2-bedroom bungalow. The landlord has advised that it has no listed vulnerabilities for the resident, however, the resident has advised that she has arthritis which is impacted by damp conditions, and mental health concerns.
The resident had historically experienced issues with damp and mould in the property as early as May 2021. A damp report in August 2021 indicated that the issues were the result of condensation and a lack of suitable ventilation. At the time, works were recommended to replace extractor fans, carry out a mould treatment and install damp proofing thermal insulation. The resident continued to report issues of damp and mould into 2022 and the landlord’s records show works were undertaken in her bathroom in July 2022.
An inspection was raised on 17 February 2023 following the resident’s further reports of damp and mould in the property. On 28 February 2023, the resident also reported that rats had gained entry to her property through a hole in the kitchen. On 1 March 2023, the landlord asked that works were raised to renew the bathroom and kitchen extractor fans, wash down mould in the lounge and bedroom, renew the sink base in the kitchen, and block up the waste pipe into the floor to stop rat entry. The fans were replaced on 6 March 2023.
The resident initially reported that her roof was leaking into her bedroom on 10 March 2023. A roofer attended on the same day and found a hole in the roof felt below the tiles. A job to remove around 8 tiles, renew the felt, and replace any cracked tiles was passed to the landlord’s major works team.
The resident pursued a formal complaint between March and April 2023 which exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints process on 17 April 2023. Within her complaint and subsequent communication, the resident:
1. Expressed dissatisfaction with the way the repairs to her property were being handled and said that the issues were impacting her physical and mental health. She informed the landlord that she had arthritis which was impacted by the conditions, and depression.
2. Said that the damp and mould issues were supposed to have been dealt with the previous year. She believed that the damp and mould should have been treated properly, noting that the plaster in one of the bedrooms was supposed to be taken down to the bricks and made right.
3. Expressed concern that a large hole was found in her roof and despite being repaired, this had continued to leak 2 days later on 13 March 2023. She also expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of communication regarding the roof repair and said she had buckets in her bedroom to catch water. She added that her and her son were not sleeping in their bedrooms due to the severity of the roof leak. She reported an additional leak through the roof on 6 April 2023 which affected the second bedroom.
4. Said that the pest issue was not being dealt with promptly and she was dissatisfied that the appointment to repair and block the hole and uncapped drain was not scheduled until 12 May 2023. She was concerned that the property was left at risk of further entry by rats until this date.
5. Said she was seeking compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused as well as for the personal belongings she had needed to dispose of due to the mould in the property. She added that she did not feel the landlord had adequately taken into consideration her medical needs.
In response to the resident’s complaint, the landlord:
1. Confirmed that following a visit to the property on 1 March 2023, work to replace both extractor fans was completed on 6 March 2023. It also confirmed that it had attended to the resident’s reports of a roof leak on 10 March 2023 and completed works to the roof on 13 April 2023. Its internal records show that it had asked for the second roof leak at the rear of the property, reported on 6 April 2023, to be attended at the same time.
2. Inspected the property and treated the mould on 3 April 2023 and arranged works to take place on 20 April 2023 to replace damp insulation in the loft which had been affected by the leak. It had also arranged for a plumber to attend a leaking shower it identified which was completed on 17 April 2023.
3. Arranged for the hole in the kitchen to be blocked with expanding foam to prevent entry by pests in April 2023 while awaiting a full repair on 12 May 2023. It had also arranged for a pest control company to lay traps, but they were unable to establish the results as the hole had been blocked. It advised the resident to contact the pest control company if she experienced further issues.
4. Committed to complete works to insulate, plasterboard and skim three bedroom walls and the ceiling in the affected bedroom once the area had dried out. This had been booked for 22 May 2023 and would take around 4 days to complete.
5. Offered £143 compensation, comprised of £18 for the 4 day delay in issuing its stage 1 complaint response, and £125 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. It also provided contact details for its insurance team if she wished to make a claim for any damaged belongings.

Post complaint events.

Following the complaint, operatives attended to top up the roof insulation on 20 April 2023 and established that the current insulation was sufficient which the resident disputed. A post inspection of the roof works took place around 25 April 2023 which established that verge pointing was missing from both sides of the front roof and would be rectified that week.
The work to renew the kitchen sink base unit and block up the waste pipe was completed on 12 May 2023. The landlord’s records suggest that remedial works to the resident’s bedroom were due to take place around 12 June 2023 but on 19 June 2023 the resident reported that the roof was leaking again. It was established that work to the pointing should have been completed previously. Major works to strip the roof, refelt, place new insulation and complete work to the lead soakers and flashings were then undertaken in July 2023.
The resident reported that the roof was leaking again in September 2023 and the landlord established that the flashings were cracked, and pointing was missing. Areas were sealed as a temporary measure and works to strip the roof, refelt, install new soakers and flashing as well as repointing was completed in October 2023. The job notes show that the ceiling inside also needed to be cut out, boarded and skimmed due to the water ingress. A job note from 2 November 2023 shows that mould was cleaned off the bedroom ceiling during a job to look at this following the leak.
The resident initially referred her complaint to the Ombudsman as she was dissatisfied with the delays in carrying out repairs and the level of compensation offered by the landlord. In November 2023, the landlord contacted the resident in response to “complaints” she was chasing. It said that it did not have any open complaints for the resident and that it had issued its final complaint response in April 2023. It said that the resident would need to approach the Ombudsman should she remain dissatisfied.
The resident has advised the Ombudsman that the roof issues are now resolved but she was dissatisfied that it had taken 4 attempts to do so. She also advised that the issues of damp and mould remain unresolved. She wanted the landlord to resolve the damp and mould issues, replace her flooring, and increase its offer of compensation to include the damage to her belongings.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

In her communication to the Ombudsman, the resident has advised that the issues she experienced impacted her physical and mental health. While the Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s reports, we cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing or award damages. The resident may be able to make a personal injury claim against the landlord if she considers that her health has been affected by its actions. This is a legal process, and the resident should seek independent legal advice if she wants to pursue this option. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.
The resident has requested compensation for damage to personal belongings. While the Ombudsman can consider the impact the issues reported have had on the resident and whether the landlord acted reasonably, as above, we cannot determine liability, or award damages. These are matters better suited to an insurance claim or court. The resident may wish to pursue an insurance claim via the landlord’s insurance team should she feel that the landlord is liable for the damage to her belongings. A recommendation has been made below for the landlord to assist the resident.
Within this investigation, the Ombudsman has considered the landlord’s handling of ongoing issues following its final complaint response in April 2023 up until November 2023. The Ombudsman has seen evidence that the resident continued to express dissatisfaction with the ongoing repair issues and is noted to have been chasing “complaints” in November 2023. The Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord had the opportunity to open a new complaint to comment on any ongoing issues, but it confirmed that the resident had exhausted its complaints process and would need to approach us if she remained dissatisfied.

Policies and Procedures

The resident’s tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for repairs to the structure and exterior of the property, including the roof, walls and drains. The landlord’s website confirms that it is responsible for providing support to manage pest infestations (including rats) and pest control. It would also be responsible for addressing issues such as damp and mould and has recently implemented a damp and mould policy following the resident’s complaint.
The landlord’s repairs policy provides the expected timescale for each category of repair. Emergency repairs should be made safe within 4 hours. Urgent repairs, which may pose a risk to health and safety should they be completed within standard timescales, should be attended and made safe or completed within 24 hours. Appointed repairs should be completed at the next available appointment and planned works should be completed within 180 days. A repair may be considered a planned repair where specialist materials or planning is required; these are usually large jobs that may cause a greater deal of disruption to residents.
The landlord’s complaints policy states that it would acknowledge a complaint at stage 1 within 2 working days and provide a response within 10 working days. If the landlord is unable to meet the timescale, it would contact the resident to agree an extension date. If dissatisfied, the resident can escalate their complaint to stage 2. At stage 2, the landlord should respond within 20 working days. The landlord’s compensation policy states that claims for damages would not be considered under its complaints process.

The resident’s report of a rat infestation

The landlord’s records show that the resident first reported that rats had entered her kitchen through a hole on 28 February 2023. A repair was raised and attended within the landlord’s urgent timescales on 1 March 2023 which was appropriate. A follow-on work order to replace the sink base unit and block up the waste pipe hole into the floor was raised as a planned repair due to be completed within 180 days in line with the landlord’s policy. This was booked for 12 May 2023. It is understandable that repairs such as replacing a kitchen unit fall under the landlord’s planned works repair category given the need to source and manufacture parts. However, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have arranged for a temporary repair to be completed to prevent further access, and to arrange for its pest control team to attend from the outset in an attempt to resolve the issues.
The resident needed to spend additional time and trouble pursuing her concerns that rats would re-enter the property through the open waste pipe and raising a complaint with the landlord. The landlord did not instruct a pest control company to attend the property until 3 April 2023 and did not arrange for a temporary repair to take place to prevent further access until 11 April 2023, a significant time after the resident’s initial report. In addition, the Ombudsman has seen evidence that works to point the external wall of the kitchen and fill holes allowing rats to enter under the window was reported as needed on 3 April 2023. However, there is a lack of evidence to show whether this related to the same holes around the drain or a separate issue. It remains unclear as to whether this work was completed.
While the Ombudsman has not seen evidence that the resident had reported any further rats within the property during this period, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have acted proactively given the expected timeframe to complete the longer term repair. The delay in carrying out a temporary repair was likely to cause distress to the resident given that the access point remained open.
It is noted that the landlord offered the resident £125 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused within its stage 2 complaint response; this was an overall offer for the 3 aspects of the resident’s complaint. This is not considered proportionate taking into account that the landlord has not suitably acknowledged its failings or the impact this may have had on the resident. The Ombudsman has found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a rat infestation in view of the delays in completing a temporary repair to prevent further access or instructing pest control. An order has been made below for the landlord to pay the resident additional compensation.

The resident’s reports of multiple roof leaks and subsequent repairs

Following the resident’s report of a roof leak on 10 March 2023, the landlord acted appropriately by attending within its priority timescales. It was reasonable that works to the roof would need to be passed to the landlord’s major works team due to the nature of the reported issue and the need for scaffolding to complete the works. The landlord would be expected to ensure that the property was made safe in the interim period, especially considering that major works take additional time to prepare and complete.
The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence to show that temporary repairs were carried out to seal the roof and protect it from further water ingress in the interim period, or that any further steps were taken to complete temporary repairs following the resident’s further report of the leak on 13 March 2023. This would have been appropriate both to prevent ongoing damage to the property and to lessen the impact on the resident while she was awaiting a full repair. The situation was likely to have caused distress to the resident, who continued to experience water leaking into her bedroom. This, combined with a lack of clarity around when works would be undertaken, was likely to cause additional concern.
The landlord acted appropriately by attending the resident’s reports of a second roof leak on 6 April 2023 within its priority timescales, although it is noted that again, no temporary repairs to prevent water ingress were completed. The landlord’s records show that it acted reasonably by asking for the additional leak to be addressed as part of the existing works scheduled for 13 April 2023.
The landlord’s records show that work to the roof was reported as completed on 12 and 13 April 2023. This was within a reasonable timeframe given the need to source and erect scaffolding and was within the landlord’s planned works timescales. However, the landlord has not included clear records showing that the cause of the second leak was established or what works were undertaken, and it remains unclear as to how it satisfied itself that the issue had been fully resolved.
While the landlord acted reasonably by post inspecting the works and establishing that some pointing was missing, it has not provided clear records showing that this was re-attended to. In addition, its records suggest that work to make good the internal affected areas was scheduled but the Ombudsman has not been provided with repair records showing that this work was completed. The onus would be on the landlord to provide documentary evidence showing how it satisfied itself that it had acted appropriately and in line with its policy. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures. The omissions indicate a failing by the landlord in that it did not provide relevant information showing how it satisfied itself that it had resolved the issue satisfactorily at the time.
The landlord’s records show that the resident experienced further leaks following the initial repair in April 2023. The repeated leaks in July and September 2023 were found to be caused by pointing issues that should have been completed during the initial works and further pointing and flashing issues following the major works in July 2023. It should be noted that it can take more than one attempt to resolve issues such as leaks as it can be difficult to identify the cause of an issue at the outset and in some cases different repairs may need to be attempted before the matter is resolved. This would not necessarily constitute a service failure by the landlord. However, in this case, the repeated leaks indicate issues with the workmanship of the landlord’s contractors, and it is of concern that despite the significant list of works undertaken to strip and reinstate the roof in July 2023, the issues reoccurred a short time later.
The delay in fully resolving the leaks from the roof between the resident’s initial report in March 2023 and the third major works project to the roof in October 2023 was likely to cause inconvenience to the resident. The landlord attended within reasonable timescales following each report and completed the major roof works on each occasion within its published timescales for major works. It also acted appropriately by sealing the roof as a temporary measure following the further report in September 2023. However, the need to repeat works multiple times would have caused additional inconvenience to the resident and have led to a lack of confidence in the landlord’s (and its contractors’) ability to put things right. It is understandable that the resident would have growing concern that the works had not been successful, and the roof would leak again.
Additionally, despite the landlord’s records stating that the walls would need to be made good and that the ceiling would need to be cut out, boarded and skimmed following works in September 2023, the landlord has not provided evidence to show that this was fully completed.
Overall, the Ombudsman has found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of multiple roof leaks. While it attended within reasonable timeframes following reports, it failed to demonstrate that it had carried out temporary repairs to prevent ongoing water ingress into the property and further damage or distress to the resident. In addition, the need to repeat repairs and the delay in fully resolving the issues were likely to have caused additional inconvenience to the resident and warrants further financial compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused.

The resident’s reports of damp and mould

In this case, it is noted that there is a history of damp and mould within the property and several works have been recommended past. In her communication, the resident advised that she was informed that the historic damp and mould in the property was the result of a leak from the roof during an inspection in May 2021. The Ombudsman has seen a copy of the report carried out in August 2021 which established the damp and mould at the time to be the result of condensation and poor ventilation. While the roof leak issue may have been impacting the damp within the property since 2021, the Ombudsman has not seen evidence to confirm this is the case.
It should be noted that reoccurrences of damp and mould are not always caused by the same issues and the landlord would be expected to investigate each report and determine whether there are structural issues or other factors contributing to damp or mould growth.
The Ombudsman has not seen evidence to suggest that the resident had reported issues involving damp and mould in the 6 months prior to her report on 17 February 2023. The job notes for the repair raised by the landlord on 17 February 2023 show that there was “moderate” damp with instructions to remove, clean and treat. It is noted that the landlord attended the property on 1 March 2023 but its records are unclear as to the extent, or location, of the damp and mould at the time.
The extractor fans were replaced on 6 March 2023 which was within a reasonable timeframe and may have been beneficial to support ventilation within the property. The mould was washed off of areas in the living room and bedroom on 3 April 2023. Generally, and in line with best practice, routine repair issues should be attended to within 28 calendar days. Given that the issue was initially reported as moderate on 17 February 2023, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have been proactive and have attended sooner, particularly given the context of historic damp and mould reports at the property.
Within her complaint and escalation, the resident raised specific concern that the damp and mould was supposed to have been rectified a year prior and that an operative had recommended that the plaster in one of the bedrooms was removed and made right at the time. The landlord failed to address her concerns within its complaint responses which amounts to a failing. It also failed to confirm whether or not the works had previously been recommended or explain why they had not been completed which would have been appropriate to address the matter.
It is not disputed that the roof leak was likely to contribute to any existing damp within the property due to the additional water ingress. It is clear that the landlord attributed the damp in the property to the roof leak and it remains unclear as to whether it considered the historic nature of damp within the property or any other contributing factors alongside the roof leak. Ultimately, the damp was in part found in the living room which had not been impacted by the roof leak. This puts into doubt that the damp was solely the result of the roof leak, and it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have considered whether the damp was a combination of other factors.
The landlord has not provided clear evidence to show that the works recommended following a damp survey in August 2021 were completed, with the records showing that the resident continued to pursue the repairs into 2022. The landlord’s records show that it had raised work to insulate the plasterboard in the bedroom once the issues with the roof had been resolved which suggests that the insulation work previously recommended had not been carried out. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to clearly set out its understanding of the damp and mould issue within its complaint responses and explain the steps it had previously taken, and would continue to take, in order to provide some reassurance to the resident. This is particularly the case given the length of time the issue had been ongoing. Its failure to do so was likely to cause inconvenience and uncertainty to the resident.
The resident raised concern that her belongings had been damaged as a result of the damp and mould within the property and that the conditions impacted her arthritis. The landlord acted appropriately within its response by providing the resident with details of its insurance team. This was reasonable as claims for loss or damage are best suited to be dealt with as an insurance claim rather than via the complaints process. It is noted that the landlord said it had not received an insurance claim from the resident as of 9 January 2024. A recommendation has been made below for the landlord to support the resident with making a claim via its insurance team.
It is of concern that despite the resident informing the landlord of how the condition of the property was impacting her arthritis and depression, the landlord has advised us that it has no record of her vulnerabilities on its system. A landlord should ensure that its records suitably reflect any household vulnerabilities so that it can take these into consideration when handling repairs or other matters. A recommendation has made below in relation to this.
The Ombudsman has found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould. The landlord failed to address her specific concerns within its complaint responses, leading the resident to believe that it was not taking the matter seriously. There is a lack of evidence to show that it had considered the previous actions it had, or had not, taken when addressing the damp. While the roof leak was likely to contribute to the damp issues, the mould was reportedly impacting the living room which had not been affected by the leak and it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have considered other factors which may be contributing to the issue in order to resolve the problems moving forward.
As above, the landlord’s overall offer of £125 compensation for the 3 aspects of the complaint is not considered appropriate in putting things right, albeit it has been taken into consideration when calculating the overall compensation to be paid to the resident in the orders section below.
It is noted that the resident has said that she continues to experience damp and mould in her property since the most recent roof repair in November 2023 and mould was cleared off the bedroom ceiling at the time. In view of the resident’s ongoing concerns, an order has been made below for the landlord to carry out a damp survey of the property.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s report of a rat infestation and subsequent repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of multiple roof leaks and subsequent repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Orders

Within 4 weeks, the landlord is to write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report.
Within 4 weeks, the landlord is to pay the resident an additional £700, comprised of:
1. £50 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports of a rat infestation and of the related repairs.
2. £500 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its handling of reports of multiple roof leaks and subsequent repairs.
3. £150 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
This is in addition to the offer of £143 that the landlord made within its complaint responses. This should be paid if it has not already done so.
Within 4 weeks, the landlord is to complete an inspection of the property to determine whether there are any signs of ongoing leaks from the roof or damp and mould and establish whether the internal remedial work required following the leaks has now been adequately completed. It should then write to the resident setting out its findings and provide a schedule of works (if additional works are found to be required).
The landlord is to provide evidence of compliance with the above orders within the specified timescales.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord contacts the resident and updates its internal records with any household vulnerabilities to ensure that relevant staff and contractors are aware of this information when addressing repairs.
It is recommended that the landlord discusses the resident’s request that it replace her flooring with her, considers her request, and confirms its position in writing to her.
It is recommended that the landlord contacts the resident to support her with making a claim via its insurance team for damaged belongings. It should waive any time limits on making a claim on this occasion.
It is recommended that the landlord considers whether it has adequate systems in place to ensure that temporary “make safe” repairs are carried out where needed and contractors are reminded to do so when it is likely to be some time before a substantial repair can be completed, for example in cases where major works are required.
The landlord is to confirm its intentions in relation to the above recommendations within 4 weeks.