Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (202312568)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202312568

Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council

29 February 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 the resident’s concerns about an electrical fault in his property.
This Service has also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident has been a secure tenant of the landlord since July 2014. The property is a 2-bedroom first floor flat in a block of 4 flats.
In November 2018, the landlord’s contractor inspected the electrics at the property and issued an electrical installation condition report, which classed the electrical installation as satisfactory. In 2019 an engineer attended the resident’s property to fit a smart meter. They were unable to do the work because there was no isolation switch in the property and the incoming electric cable did not meet the current standards.
On 17 June 2022, the landlord’s contractor reported a fault on the electrical installation. Access to the flat below (also owned by the landlord) was required to investigate the fault.
The resident completed an online complaint form on 19 August 2022, he said:
1. He had reported issues with the electrical supply in 2019 and told the landlord there was no isolation switch.
2. In June 2022, the landlord’s contractor fitted a shower in the property. The electrician could not provide a sign off certificate because of a fault on the supply.
3. He had called the landlord 4 times between 27 July 2022 and 19 August 2022. Each time he had been told someone would call him, but no one had.
The landlord contacted the resident on 22 August 2022 and agreed to treat the complaint as a ‘rapid response’. It said it would aim to provide a resolution to the issue within 5 days. The same day it contacted the electricity supplier and arranged an inspection at the resident’s property for 1 September 2022. The electricity supplier did not attend the inspection as arranged.
On 6 September 2022, the resident raised his complaint to stage 1. The landlord sent a stage 1 complaint acknowledgement the same day.
The landlord sent an internal email on 12 September 2022 stating that the fault was on the supply side of the meter, which would make the repair the responsibility of the electricity supplier.
On 13 September 2022, the resident told the landlord he had contacted the electricity supplier, who had advised him the cable coming into the property was not their responsibility, it was the responsibility of a subcontractor within their organisation.
On 14 September 2022, the landlord sought further clarification and was made aware the resident was correct. The fault would have to be reported to the subcontractor through their website. The subcontractor would then raise an order for the work to be completed.
On 16 September 2022, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response with the following points:
1. The resident first raised the issue with the electric supply in the property in 2019.
2. It apologised for its communication with him which it acknowledged had not been satisfactory.
3. it had tried to resolve the issue but the electrical supply company were responsible for the supply to the building. The landlord had no control over the supplier and was not responsible for it missing appointments.
4. It could help him to make an appointment with the supplier’s subcontractor. He could contact the subcontractor directly if he preferred.
The landlord sent an internal email on 26 September 2022 reporting a conversation with the resident. The resident said he had contacted the subcontractor to arrange an appointment, they told him he could not arrange the appointment because he did not own the property. The landlord requested that its officer arrange an appointment with the subcontractor and update the resident with the outcome.
The landlord has not provided a copy of the resident’s escalation request. However, it sent its stage 2 acknowledgement email on 2 December 2022 and said it would respond in 14 working days. The stage 2 response was issued on 21 December 2022. The landlord said:
1. It had spoken to the resident on 20 December 2022 and reviewed all of the correspondence in the case.
2. It was in the same position as him in having difficulty in arranging appointments with the supplier’s subcontractor.
3. It could not explain why the electricity supplier had not attended the last appointment. The supplier had confirmed the appointment but later said it had no record of it. The landlord would ask for future appointments to be confirmed in writing.
4. It would work with the resident and his neighbour to arrange another appointment. It would have to follow the supplier’s procedure in doing so.
5. It was sorry that its previous communications had not been acceptable. It would keep him up to date in future.

Events after the internal complaints procedure

On 19 March 2023, the resident emailed the landlord. He said it was the landlord’s responsibility to ensure the electrical supply was up to standard and he had not had any communication in 3 months. It had not answered his question about the missed appointment that the electricity supplier had claimed had not been booked on their system. He would like to know if this appointment had been showing on the landlord’s system.
On 6 April 2023, the landlord sent an internal email reporting a conversation with the resident. He had called to report that the issue with the electric remained unresolved. He had sent it 2 emails since he had received the stage 2 response but had not received a reply.
As the issues with the electric supply remained outstanding the resident brought his complaint to this Service on 31 July 2023.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the electrical fault

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a legal obligation on the landlord to keep electrical installations in repair and proper working order. The resident’s tenancy agreement confirms the electrical wiring is the responsibility of the landlord and requires residents to inform it immediately of any faults with the electrical installation. Residents are also required to allow access for the purposes of periodic electrical inspections.
The code of practice for the management of electrotechnical care in social housing recommends landlords undertake electrical testing every 5 years. The landlord’s essential electrical works management procedure, says that it identifies electrical work, either as part of legislative requirements, through surveys or reports from tenants.
The landlord’s electrical specification states that it requires all electrical works to comply with the 18th Edition of the wiring regulations. These regulations require that an electrical installation certificate or minor works certificate is issued when a new circuit is created, or an existing circuit is worked on. The competent person will issue a certificate to record and demonstrate the work satisfies the requirements of the regulations, particularly, for the safe disconnection of the circuit under fault conditions.
The landlord has a procedure to gain access to properties for the purposes of electrical testing. The procedure lists the steps the landlord must follow where access attempts are unsuccessful or where residents are refusing access.
When the landlord was first made aware of the issue with the electrics in 2019 it visited along with the electricity supplier and told the resident it would resolve the issue. However, it did not do any works or communicate with the resident until he reported the fault again in June 2022, which was unreasonable. The landlord’s contractor refusing to sign off the electrical work to the shower is significant as it means they cannot guarantee the safety of the system.
The landlord did notify the electricity supplier of the fault. It also raised its own work order on 14 July 2022 to check the electrics. However, it has not provided any evidence to show the inspection took place or what the outcome was. The landlord was aware that electrical work had been done; that its contractor had not signed off the work and that there was a fault on the installation. The electrical installation was therefore not in compliance with the 18th edition of the wiring regulations. This was a failure in the landlord complying with its own electrical specification, which was inappropriate.
It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have explained the nature of the fault to the resident, and whether it posed any risk to him. The landlord’s failure to do so caused the resident to worry whether his electrics were unsafe.
The resident called the landlord 4 times between 27 July 2022 and 19 August 2022. Each time he was told someone would call him, but no one did. This was a failing which caused the resident frustration and inconvenience. He felt he had no option but to raise a complaint.
The landlord arranged an inspection for the electricity supplier to attend the property on 1 September 2022. The resident and his neighbour both waited in for the appointment, but the electricity supplier did not turn up. The landlord reported in its complaint responses that it could not be held responsible for an external contractors missed appointments. However, internal emails we have seen show the supplier was supposed to contact the landlord on the morning of the appointment. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have contacted the supplier, when they did not get in touch on the morning of the appointment. If the landlord had done so, it may have avoided the supplier missing the appointment or, at least, enabled the landlord to keep the resident informed. Failing to do so left the resident feeling further frustrated, which was unacceptable.
The landlord told the resident that he could make an appointment directly with the supplier. The resident was not able to do so because he did not own the property. On 26 September 2022 he asked the landlord to make another appointment. We have seen no evidence that the landlord did so or that it responded to the resident’s request.
In its stage 2 complaint response on 21 December 2022, the landlord committed to help the resident to arrange another appointment. We have seen no evidence that it did so. This was a further failing and meant that the electrical issue was not resolved.
The resident chased for an update on 9 March 2023. Although the landlord acknowledged his contact, we have seen no evidence that it responded to him. He chased again on 6 April 2023 and, again, we have seen no evidence that the landlord responded. This was unreasonable and caused frustration and inconvenience to the resident. This Service expects landlords to have in place, apply and monitor their own communication key performance indicators, to ensure residents are responded to as required. This helps deliver clear, effective and timely communication, which is essential to an effective repairs and complaints handling process. The landlord’s communication with the resident throughout the repairs process was unacceptable. Its failure to follow up on its commitments made in the stage 2 response, left the resident feeling exasperated, he said he was “fed up” having to repeat himself.
The landlord’s internal emails on 6 April 2023 show that it had decided that it was the resident’s responsibility to contact the subcontractor to arrange an appointment. This was not reasonable given the landlord had previously committed to helping and knew the resident could not make an appointment directly with the subcontractor. The landlord knew they needed access to the neighbour’s flat. The landlord should have recognised its responsibility to ensure the subcontractor attended.
The resident told us that another appointment was arranged in September 2023. However, the subcontractor was not able to resolve the problem as they could not gain access to the neighbour’s flat. The resident told us he had not heard from the landlord or the subcontractor since then.
The Ombudsman is concerned that the landlord has been aware of a fault on the system for a period of 4 years that remains outstanding. This timeframe is significantly outside the time limits its sets for repairs. We are also concerned about its failure to adequately investigate the reason a competent engineer refused to sign off the installation of the shower. We have seen no evidence that there is a certificate in place for the shower or a valid electrical installation condition report for the property.
The landlord has communicated poorly throughout the repairs process. It has allowed an avoidable and unnecessary electrical hazard to persist over a prolonged period of time and has not taken sufficient steps to ensure the electrical installation in the property meets the current standards. Overall, in the Ombudsman’s opinion the landlord’s response to the electrical fault amounts to maladministration.

Complaint handling

The landlord has an informal rapid resolution procedure. It will use this when it thinks it can resolve the issue within 5 days. The landlord attempted to resolve the complaint through this procedure but was unsuccessful. In trying to resolve the complaint the landlord arranged an appointment for the electricity supplier. This was the only action it took at this point. It did not respond to the other aspects of the resident’s complaint and was unlikely to be able to respond to these complaint points within the 5 day timeframe. The landlord should be commended for aiming to resolve issues within a short timescale. However, in this instance it should have raised the complaint under stage 1 of its complaints process, which states: “some complaints require more time and investigation to establish what went wrong and how it will be put right. Where this is the case and the complaint is new to us, a stage one complaint will be opened.” Failing to correctly assess the complaint caused unnecessary delay in the process.
The landlord has a 2 stage formal complaint process. It will acknowledge complaints within 2 working days and respond within 10 working days for stage 1 and 14 working days for stage 2 complaints.
It responded to the stage 1 complaint within the prescribed timeframe. It partially upheld the complaint outlining the reasons for its decisions and provided an apology for its communication errors. It did not give any reason for its inaction between 2019, when the resident first reported the issue, and 19 August 2022 when he raised the complaint. In aiming to put things right it said it could assist the resident in making an appointment with the electrical supplier. However this did not happen, which was unreasonable.
The stage 2 acknowledgement letter had errors in the dates, which indicate it was sent before the stage 2 escalation was made. It has not been possible to verify the date because the landlord has not submitted the resident’s stage 2 escalation request. It offered a further apology for the communication errors. However, it did not address the resident’s question about the appointment on the 1 September 2022, appearing on its own system. Not acknowledging its shortcomings on the missed appointment was a missed opportunity to be fair and learn from outcomes. The resident asked the question again in his email on 13 March 2023, but it went unanswered as the landlord did not respond at all. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) requires landlords to address all complaint points raised by a resident. The complaint response also failed to provide any detail on the electrical fault and any associated risks or acknowledge the impact on the resident. Not adequately investigating or acknowledging the impact on the resident meant the landlord did not consider its compensation policy and did not put things right. Overall, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint amounts to maladministration.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s
1. Handling of the resident’s concerns about the electric fault in his property.
2. Complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Provide a written apology from a senior manager to the resident for the failures detailed in this report and provide a copy to this Service.
2. Provide a written explanation from a competent person outlining the fault on the resident’s electrical installation and what risks are associated with the fault. Provide a copy of the communication to the resident and this Service.
3. Pay the resident £400. The compensation must be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears. It is comprised of:
  1. £300 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by the landlord’s response to the electric fault.
  2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling.
Within 6 weeks from the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Arrange a joint inspection with the electricity supplier/subcontractor to the resident’s and neighbour’s property to determine what work is required to resolve the electrical fault. Provide the resident and this Service with the outcome of the inspection and a schedule of any works required.
2. Arrange for a competent electrician to attend the resident’s property and inspect the electrical installation and provide a certificate confirming the installation of the shower is safe. Provide a copy of the certificate to the resident and this Service.
The landlord must provide this Service with evidence of compliance with the above orders within the time limits set out.

Recommendations

The landlord should consider:
1. Installing an isolation switch for the electrics in the resident’s property.
2. Undertaking the 5-year periodic inspection of the electrics and provide the resident with an Electrical Installation Condition Report.