Camden Council (202010798)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202010798

Camden Council

28 January 2022

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:
1. The resident’s concerns that the landlord breached its housing allocations scheme.
2. The landlord’s decision not to offer the resident a permanent move while repairs were taking place.

Jurisdiction

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
The resident considers the landlord has breached its housing allocations scheme. However, this Service cannot consider complaints which relate to an application for re-housing. Therefore, complaints about the assessment of such applications, or the award of points, would likely be considered by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) which deals with issues around the allocations scheme by councils. The resident may wish to refer this aspect of her complaint to the LGSCO.
This is in accordance with paragraph 39(m) of the Scheme, which states that the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator, or complaints-handling body.
Any further reference in this report to the issue of the awarding of points or the allocations scheme would be for contextual purposes only.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is a tenant of the landlord and has a secure tenancy.
The landlord’s essential repairs transfers document (under Section 1.1) says that transfers take place when residents have to move out of their homes, either temporarily or permanently, to allow it to carry out repairs.
Under Section 2.3.2, the document says:
“If it is estimated that repairs will take less than 2 months and the tenant has not made their own arrangements, a temporary move to our own stock is the preferred option. No points are awarded under the allocations scheme but we can make a direct offer…If works subsequently go on longer than 2 months, the tenant can have the option to stay as long as the property is the right size, not on the ground floor and has not already been accepted by someone else…
If it is estimated that repairs will take more than 2 months, then the resident should be given the choice as to whether the move is permanent or temporary.”

Summary of events

On 26 September 2020, the gas supply to the resident’s communal building was cut off. On 6 October 2020, the gas provider contacted all residents to keep them updated on the situation. It also offered £1,020 compensation to cover extra electricity and anything else needed whilst the gas was off.
A few days later, the landlord advised the residents that repairs would take up to two months. It said it would fit electric showers in flats without hot water, but would need to do this in stages (though it would prioritise tenants with health and other needs). It also said hot plates and mini ovens would be available to everyone, but it would be providing electric cookers to the larger families who would struggle to cook on hot plates. Also, if hot plates, portable showers, electric blankets or heaters were needed, the residents should contact the gas provider. Finally, it said it was looking into the possibility of fitting water heaters for the largest families who could not manage with the kettles already supplied.
On 12 October 2020, the landlord arranged for the resident and her family to move into nearby temporary accommodation.
Later that month, the resident told the landlord that her family of five were living in a one-bedroom flat, and she was unhappy with the state of the flat and the surrounding building. She asked if they could remain in their temporary housing until a suitable property was found. The resident later asked the landlord if it could award her extra points for the bidding system for a new property, or house her and her family in a more suitable permanent property. She said she did not want to return from her temporary accommodation to her home.
The landlord responded on 6 November 2020. It said it was obliged to follow its allocation scheme which was designed to give all residents equal opportunity to bid for properties. To achieve this, points were awarded to prioritise housing to those who were eligible for assistance and in the greatest need. The landlord said that, whilst it sympathised with the resident’s situation, it could not allow her to remain in the temporary accommodation once the gas was restored at her building.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 26 November 2020. She said the gas supply had been shut off in September 2020, and she and her family had had to live without heating or hot water for two weeks (her youngest child was only two weeks old at the time this happened). The landlord had allowed her family to move to a one-bedroom property whilst the gas works were being done. The resident said she had since found out that she should have been awarded 600 essential repairs points, or the choice between a permanent or temporary move as the works would take in excess of two months to complete. Despite the resident previously expressing her preference for a permanent move, this was denied and she was not made aware of the allocation procedure. She asked the landlord to arrange for her to have a permanent move.
On 3 December 2020, the landlord advised the resident that she was not eligible for 600 points. It said an essential repair move was only applicable if works to remedy the problem could not be performed with the resident remaining in occupation. However, the works to restore the gas supply to the building could have been safely completed with residents in occupation. In addition, the landlord had offered a range of appliances (free of charge) to allow residents to live in their flats. This included installing electric showers, as well as electric cookers and heaters.
The landlord said it had arranged the resident’s temporary move as a goodwill gesture as it did not have these electrical items immediately available. It explained that it wanted to support her as it recognised her household’s need for access to hot water and heating. However, shortly after arranging her temporary move, it was able to offer households the appliances, and so it had the means to make the property habitable and the temporary move was not a requirement for two months or longer. Finally, it said its policy was clear that a permanent essential repair move was only applicable if a resident cannot remain in occupation of their home for at least two months whilst works take place, but this was not the case for the resident.
The resident responded on 4 December 2020 and made the following main points:
1. She thought the landlord had misinterpreted its allocations policy. The resident said that, based on her understanding of the policy wording, she should have been awarded essential repairs points.
2. She said the gas was turned off on 26 September 2020, exactly two weeks after she had given birth. She was given a kettle to heat water and a small plug-in heater, and her family had to live with that for two weeks.
3. She explained how her family struggled over that period with washing and heating the property, particularly with three small children (including a newborn baby).
4. She had been advised that electric showers would be fitted into flats, but this would be done gradually. She was given the option to remain in the property if the landlord could provide an electric cooker and shower, or move her family of five to a nearby one-bedroom property. The resident said she again asked for a permanent move, but this was denied. She therefore accepted the temporary move.
5. She disputed the landlord’s assertion that she could have remained in the property whilst works were undertaken.
6. She also thought that being in the property for two weeks without gas was a breach of her tenancy agreement.
7. Finally, she explained how the whole situation had had a negative impact on her, and how she felt she was “robbed” of the first two weeks of her baby’s life that she should have been able to enjoy, and instead was going through a nightmare at the property.
On 10 December 2020, an internal email sent by the landlord said the following:
1. When the gas was disconnected on 26 September 2020, the gas provider had offered emergency hot plates, electric heaters, kettles, electric blankets etc to residents.
2. The landlord was advised the gas would not be reinstated until late December 2020 as pipes needed to be replaced. Therefore, the landlord decided to install electric showers to the flats and supply electric ovens to those most in need.
3. However, this could not be done immediately. It identified some properties in the building where it could offer welfare facilities as they were most in need/most vulnerable so they had access to heating and hot water – one of those was the resident.
4. It decided not to move all the residents from the building because it did not have the finances to pay for this, or the properties available. Also, by the time it had done this, the gas would have been returned. Therefore, although not ideal, with the appliances it was offering, this allowed residents to remain in their homes, despite the gas not being connected.
5. The resident was moved into temporary accommodation on 12 October 2020.
6. Following this, the landlord installed electric showers to the properties and supplied electric ovens. This was done in stages so as not to overwhelm the electricity supply. Once it had the ability to supply showers, ovens, heaters etc, the properties were habitable and the works could still take place with the residents living in their homes.
7. Rather than force the resident to accept the electrical items and ask her to move back home, the landlord decided to allow her to stay in the temporary accommodation, though she could have moved home if she had wanted to.
8. All bill payers on the estate were offered £1,000 compensation, which the resident claimed. An emergency electric meter top up was offered to any resident who needed it, though this did not apply to the resident as she did not have this type of meter.
On 16 December 2020 the landlord wrote to the resident and made the following points:
1. The resident’s tenancy began in January 2018 when she moved into a one-bedroom property. Since then, she had had more children and made an application for rehousing because of overcrowding, as well as noise and dust from nearby works.
2. In September 2020, an issue arose with gas supply to the building where the resident lives.
3. Given the resident’s circumstances, she was provided with temporary accommodation at this time.
4. The landlord’s guidance was explicit that essential repair points are only necessary when it is necessary to move a tenant from their home to carry out works. However, essential repair points were not appliable to her because the repairs work to remedy the gas supply issues were largely external to the building, and were mitigated by the offers the landlord made to provide electric appliances free of charge.
5. It confirmed the resident would need to leave their temporary accommodation as the property was needed. It said it had been explained to her before the temporary move that this would only be for the short-term until the gas was reconnected.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 16 December 2020. She said there was a two-month period where essential repairs were carried out, and she did not have access to heating or hot water. She explained she has two young children and a newborn baby, and to not have heating or hot water would have had a direct impact on health and wellbeing. The resident said she understood alternatives could have been provided (by way of the possible eventual instalment of an electric shower, and plug in heater), but these would not have been adequate for her family over that period of time.
On 17 December 2020, the landlord advised the resident that there was no further review available with regards to its decision not to award her with essential repair points. It confirmed the points were not appliable as it did not require her to move. It said it had worked closely with the gas provider to ensure heating, cooking and washing facilities were provided. In addition, it took into account her personal circumstances and offered additional support via a temporary move.
The resident contacted this Service about the matter. This Service advised the landlord of the resident’s complaint. The landlord wrote to the resident on 23 April 2021 and said that it had not received a formal complaint from her. It asked her for more information about her concerns, and the outcome she wanted.
The resident responded on 25 April 2021. She told the landlord she had asked this Service to consider her complaint that it had breached its housing allocation policy. She said she would like to be offered her right of a choice of a permanent move and/or be awarded 600 essential repair points. If the latter, then she wished to have her secure tenure transferred to her temporary accommodation until such time that she could use the essential repair points to successfully bid on another property.
The landlord provided its final response on the resident’s complaint on 18 May 20201. It said:
1. The resident’s case had been overseen by its Head of Service and Director for Housing. It said that the substantive part of her complaint was outside the jurisdiction of its complaints policy. For that reason, it said it could not look into her concerns about her housing application.
2. Its guidance was that essential repair points were only appropriate when it was necessary to move a tenant from their home to carry out works. As it had previously explained, essential repair points were not applicable to the resident because the works to remedy the issues at her housing development were largely external, and were mitigated by the offers it had made to provide electric appliances free of charge.
3. Housing Needs had advised that the resident had 550 points, and the landlord advised the resident to continue working with Housing Needs whilst she remained in temporary accommodation.
4. The complaints procedure would not deliver the resident’s desired outcome of a choice to move from her property or be awarded 600 essential repair points. Nor could it assist with transferring her tenure to her temporary property. It confirmed the resident had exhausted its complaints procedure.

Assessment and findings

The landlord says the resident’s temporary move was offered as a gesture of goodwill, and was not an essential repair transfer. That is because the repairs to the gas works were able to continue whilst the resident and her family remained in their home. However, given her personal circumstances, and that it could not immediately offer her the electrical items she needed for heating and hot water, it arranged for the resident and her family to move into temporary accommodation.
The landlord’s essential repairs transfers document makes it clear that transfers take place when residents have to move out, in order to allow the landlord to carry out repairs (see point 7 above). However, the resident was not required to move out of her home in order to allow the gas repairs to take place. It is reasonable for landlords to rely on the opinion of their professionally qualified operatives in deciding how best to handle repairs and the landlord’s finding that the situation in this case did not qualify as essential repairs was based on the assessment of its expert personnel. Thus, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord’s essential repairs transfer procedure was not applicable here.
Consequent on the above, the landlord was not required to offer the resident a permanent move under the essential repairs transfer policy.
The resident was offered temporary accommodation by the landlord as a goodwill gesture due to her personal circumstances. It was reasonable for the landlord to do so, given that it did not know exactly when it would be able to provide the resident with heating and hot water.
The landlord explains that soon after the resident had moved into temporary accommodation, it was able to provide heating and hot water in her property. Nonetheless, it decided to allow the resident and her family to remain in their temporary accommodation until the gas was switched back on. That was a reasonable approach, given the resident had already undergone disruption by moving into temporary accommodation initially.
The resident is of the view that the landlord has breached its housing allocations scheme. That is because she and her family were moved due to the disruption caused by the works. Also, the works took longer than two months to complete, and so she considers the landlord ought to have offered her the option of a permanent move/600 points.
However, as explained, this aspect of the resident’s complaints cannot be considered by this Service, as the landlord’s housing allocations policy falls within the jurisdiction of the LGSCO.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 39(m) of the Scheme, the resident’s concerns that the landlord breached its housing allocations scheme is outside the jurisdiction of this Service to consider.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s decision not to offer the resident a permanent move while repairs were taking place.

Reasons

The landlord’s essential repairs transfer policy makes it clear that its transfer procedure only applies when residents have to move out in order to allow the landlord to carry out repairs. This did not apply in the resident’s case, as residents in the building were able to remain there, with the support from the landlord and the gas provider. The resident was offered a temporary move due to her personal circumstances as a goodwill gesture (which was reasonable), and so the landlord was not required to offer her a permanent move.