Clarion Housing Association Limited (202122932)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202122932

Clarion Housing Association Limited

26 July 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of damp reports and repair requests.
The landlord’s handling of the related complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident lives in a three-bedroom house on an assured tenancy that began in 2010.
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the tenancy agreement places obligations on the landlord to maintain the property in relation to the structure and outside of the property.
The landlord’s repair and maintenance policy aims to ensure repairs to properties are carried out in a timely and efficient manner. It categorises repairs into emergency and non-emergency as follows:
1. Emergency – to be attended within 24 hours. It classifies this as one that presents an immediate danger to the resident, the public, the property or would jeopardise the health, safety or security of the resident.
2. Non-emergency – appointable within 28 days.
3. Planned investment works – if the repair is not economical, its contractor can refer this to the landlord for consideration of the most effective works required.
The Housing Act 2004 ensures landlords are responsible for assessing hazards and risks within rented homes. When doing so, this should be considered in line with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) and damp is classed as a potential hazard that may require remedy.
The landlord’s complaints procedure has a 2-stage approach. It aims to resolve stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 (peer review) complaints within 20 working days.
The landlord’s compensation policy gives guidance on discretionary compensation awards and the suggested ranges depend on the adverse effect and impact on the complainant. The ranges of compensation are between:
1. £50 to £250 where service failure results in some impact.
2. £250 to £700 where there has been considerable failure.
3. £700 and above where there has been significant and serious long-term effect on the complainant, including physical or emotional impact or both.

Summary of events

Between December 2020 and August 2021, the landlord’s records show various repair orders were raised at the resident’s home and details are outlined below.
On 30 December 2020, an order was raised to grout the bathroom tiles with an appointment date of 26 January 2021. However, records do not confirm whether this was completed.
On 21 January 2021, there was a works order for the chimney, stating “resident reported chimney cement work, visible damp stains from top to bottom. Scaffold required to inspect the chimney”.
On 19 February 2021, the landlord’s records show part completion of a job to “change privacy lock on bathroom door”.
On 15 March 2021, further landlord records show that an additional appointment was required for an inspection of the outside walls for water ingress.
On 22 March 2021, an order is shown to check all the plumbing. Notes state that there was no issue, and the outside wall needed new render and pointing.
On 30 March 2021, an inspection took place, and it confirmed that scaffold was required to the rear of the property to allow the repair of cracks and repointing of the walls and investigation of a leak around the chimney breast.
On 17 May 2021, the landlord attended the property, noting there was a very bad damp issue around the bottom plinth of the outside of the house. It said that it was crumbling and when it removed the older render, the brickwork underneath was rotten. It said that it all needed replacing, re-rendering and a job would need to be booked for two operatives to finish the render and pointing.
On 15 July 2021, an additional appointment was noted as follows:
1. The operative uncovered airbricks to let out a lot of moisture as the smell was very strong. It also referred to watermarks being above the damp course. The area was left for five hours, and it was still wet, and the landlord’s surveyor was recommended to inspect the damp course and inside the property.
2. The operative also unblocked the drains and lifted up the manhole to clear it. He said that the rainwater gulley was blocked, and it had been rising above the top.
3. A camera was put in the air brick to look under the bathroom and there was a lot of water and damp areas to the bathroom floor and corner of the building.
4. A recommendation was made for further works in the bathroom to trace and eliminate any leaks.
The landlord’s internal emails show that it arranged an inspection at the property for 24 August 2021 with a view to agreeing a scope of works.
On 18 August 2021, the resident sent the landlord an email accompanied with photographs showing various defects around her home. The resident stated that she was exasperated at trying to organise repairs to be carried out (which she said had been ongoing for the past 3 years). She commented on the following:
1. A leak behind the boiler in the kitchen had been reported and she said it was still wet and plaster was falling off the wall.
2. There had been a number of broken appointments.
3. The landlord had apologised and compensated her but the next year, she had to start the process all over again.
4. In August 2020, she reported the following:
  1. The kitchen and dining room walls were wet.
  2. The bathroom door did not lock.
  3. The grout was falling out of the bathroom tiles.
  4. Faulty windows would not close properly.
5. The resident gave a list of dates between September 2019 and August 2020 when various landlord contact and repairs were carried out at her home as follows:
  1. 26 September 2019 – the damp was inspected, and the resident was told someone would contact her.
  2. 5 November 2019 – she received a text message to say someone would visit the following day. Two operatives arrived but did not know what they were meant to do and so they left.
  3. 7 November 2019 – the roofing supervisor contacted the resident to say he was arranging scaffolding for the following week.
  4. 12 November 2019 – the resident said that no-one turned up or contacted her.
  5. 21 January 2020 – the roofer came, looked in the loft, and said the pointing needed doing to the chimney and it would be reported and someone would get back to her.
  6. 26 January 2020 – various repairs carried out as follows:

(1) The dining room window was repaired.

(2) The handle on the bedroom window was removed, leaving the window open and the resident had to call them back.

(3) The bathroom lock could not be repaired as the landlord said the door was hung upside down so this had to be fitted correctly first.

22 February 2020 – the window handle was fitted, and the operative returned to carry out work to three window hinges and another handle.
24 February 2020 – the repairs team made another appointment to carry out a damp inspection on 22 March 2020.
23 and 25 March 2020 – the repairs team called to arrange a damp inspection, and this took place 30 March 2020.
30 March 2020 – repairs to windows were carried out. The operative tried to put extra handles next to the handles that were already fitted. The resident said the windows still did not close.
12 May 2020 – an appointment was booked for pointing but due to heavy rain, the operatives called to say they could not carry out the works and the job was rebooked for 17 May 2020.
June 2020 – two operatives came and hacked off the outside lower walls and said they would return the following week to carry out the work.
July 2020 – scaffolding was erected.
August 2020 – the resident confirmed that no works were completed.

The resident said she received information from the landlord about fitting new front and back doors. She said that she did not need a new front door.
The resident said that the windowsills in the property all need attention, but the landlord had said they were fine so she was now paying a builder to do them.

On 21 August 2021, an acknowledgement letter was sent to the resident, confirming receipt of the complaint.
On 27 August 2021, the landlord’s internal emails confirm that an inspection of the property took place, and the following actions were discussed:

Front elevation and garden

Downpipe and gulley to be checked, flushed and cleared if required.
Front timber door – date of replacement to be confirmed.

Dining room and lounge

Damp plaster below rear window to be made good .

Bathroom

Bath panel and section of floorboard to be removed to allow further investigation of leaks.
Bath splashback tiles and seal to be repaired.

Kitchen

Floor had a significant dip, and this would need the existing kitchen base units removing to allow full access to carry out the repair.
It advised the resident it would enquire if there was capacity to renew the kitchen and repair the floor at the same time. However, she had confirmed that she would rather have the floor repairs only.

Rear elevation

Chimney flaunching and pointing to be repaired.
Gutters and downpipes to be flushed and tested.
Brick detail to head of window cracked and movement evident.
Gullies and drainage to be tested and repaired or renewed as required.
Repointing and repair of brickwork as required.

Windows, external doors and kitchen

It had asked if there was capacity to include a full window/door replacement and kitchen works.
The front door was already on a programme but a date had not been confirmed.

On 2 September 2021, the landlord’s internal emails confirm that a plumber was due to attend the property on 17 September 2021 to inspect the bath leak.
On 23 September 2021, the landlord sent an email to the resident to advise her that it was still awaiting confirmation of the works required.
On 4 October 2021, the landlord’s internal emails confirm that the doors and windows had been added to the window and door programme for that year.
On 8 October 2021, the landlord sent the resident an email, advising that it was awaiting information and confirmed the matter had been escalated.
On 15 October 2021, the resident replied and stated it was unacceptable to be still awaiting the information and that she wanted her complaint escalated to stage 2. This was due to scaffolding being erected in her garden since July 2020 and numerous visits but with no works were getting done. This included the damp and mould in the bathroom that she said was getting worse. Pictures were attached showing the bathroom condition.
On 18 October 2021, the landlord called the resident but there was no answer, and a voicemail was left asking the resident to call it to discuss outstanding works.
On 21 October 2021, the landlord sent the resident an email to acknowledge the stage 2 complaint. It confirmed that, taking into account the experience the resident had with the landlord and it not being able to provide a full response, it had escalated her complaint as per her request for a peer review.
On 22 November 2021, the landlord sent the resident its peer review final complaint response. It confirmed this was about the following:
1. Repair to a reported wet wall in the kitchen.
2. Numerous appointments attended, but problems remaining.
3. Faulty windows and a bathroom door lock.
4. Front and rear door – the resident had previously been advised these would be replaced.
5. It apologised that it had failed to investigate the stage one complaint. It said that at the time, it had low staff resources, and it was a challenging period. It had since addressed this issue and recruited new staff.
6. It confirmed that to resolve the complaint, the resident wanted the following:
  1. Outstanding repairs completed, following the surveyor inspection.
  2. Clarification on the position in relation to the door and windows.
7. It noted that there had been significant delays and it had failed to complete the necessary repairs.
8. It said that the incomplete works were partly due to the repairs being managed previously by a supervisor from its repairs contractor who left the company without notice. As a result, the outstanding works were not handed over to the new supervisor and this caused further delays.
9. It reviewed the resident’s letter of 18 August 2021, giving the repairs history from 2018, and it said that its new area manager had taken on the lead on this case.
10. The officer attempted to contact her on 8 and 9 November 2021 to schedule an inspection and, as several previous inspections had been completed, she did not want another one.
11. On 10 November 2021, a meeting took place with the surveyor who had previously carried out an inspection and a list of outstanding works were agreed.
12. On 11 November 2021, it confirmed that works to the outside of the property were attended, and internal works were scheduled for 19 November 2021. This would include checking the floor under the bath and renewing any floor and wall tiles.
13. It confirmed that it would redecorate as appropriate once internal works were completed.
14. It confirmed the outstanding works to be completed:

Front elevation and garden

Downpipe and gulley to be checked, flushed and cleared if required.

Dining room and lounge

Damp plaster below rear window to be made good.

Bathroom

Bath panel and section of floorboard to be removed to allow further investigation of water under the floor.
Bath splashback tiles and seal to be repaired.

Kitchen

Kitchen floor had a significant dip, and this would need the existing kitchen base units removing to allow full access to carry out the repair.
It advised the resident that it would enquire if it had capacity to renew the kitchen and carry out the floor works at the same time. It was noted that the resident did not want the kitchen replacing.

Rear elevation

Chimney flaunching and pointing to be repaired.
Gutters and downpipes to be flushed and tested.
Brick detail to head of window had cracked and movement was evident.
Gullies and drainage to be tested and repaired or renewed as required.
Repointing and repair of brickwork as required.

Windows/cyclical works

The front door was fitted on 9 September 2021.
Replacement windows and the rear door were scheduled, and the contractor would be making contact.
It would not anticipate a renewal of the kitchen for 3 to 4 years and it advised the resident to report any repairs.

It offered compensation of £500 in acknowledgement of the inconvenience the resident had experienced and the unnecessary involvement of having to follow up the matter. It said that this amount would be offset against any arrears on the rent account. It provided a breakdown of the compensation of:
1. Discretionary payment in acknowledgment of delays to complete repair works – £400.
2. Discretionary payment in recognition of the delay to investigate and respond to the complaint – £100.

Summary of events after landlord’s complaints process

In September 2022, the resident updated this Service to say that none of the repairs had been carried out and the property condition was either the same or worse, commenting that the bathroom tiles had started to fall off. She said that she was scared of how she was going to manage to heat the house due to the rise in energy costs. She also confirmed the following:
1. On 14 June 2022, a structural surveyor visited her home.
2. The scaffolding was removed on 6 July 2022.
3. The operative attended to fit a new back door on 8 July 2022, but it could not be fitted as the walls were too loose and cracking.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles are to:
1. Be fair;
2. Put things right;
3. Learn from outcomes.

These principles are applied in this assessment and findings.

It is evident that the landlord raised a variety of repairs from December 2020 and throughout 2021. However, in the resident’s comprehensive email to the landlord of August 2021, she gave a detailed chronology of repair reports from as early as September 2019 that the landlord has failed to evidence, and it is therefore difficult for this Service to accurately determine how long some repairs remained outstanding.

The landlord’s handling of damp reports and repair requests

Damp and associated works

It is evident that the resident began to report damp concerns at the property in 2019. However, as mentioned above, the landlord’s records are limited for the period 2019 to 2020 and it is therefore difficult to establish when specific reports and visits were made to the property during this time and what, if any, repairs were attempted. In the resident’s email of August 2021, she refers to a damp inspection in September 2019, but it is unclear what, if anything, happened at this point in terms of a diagnosis and schedule of works.
By August 2021, it is clear that the resident was frustrated that work was not proceeding and she made a complaint to the landlord. Within her email, she gave a comprehensive chronology of landlord contacts that included the period from September 2019 to August 2020. These included dates of the landlord’s damp inspections in September 2019, January and March 2020. The resident referred to rendering being hacked away in June 2020 and scaffolding being erected in July 2020.
The landlord has evidenced some work orders throughout 2021 when it was attempting to resolve the damp issue. In March 2021, it inspected the outside walls and then checked plumbing to eliminate this as a cause of dampness. There is reference to another inspection at the end of March 2021, when it said that scaffolding was required to allow work at the rear that included pointing.
In May 2021, in one of the landlord’s repair orders, it made reference to there being a very bad damp issue and then in July 2021, it again referenced the smell being very strong. Further works were carried out to unblock the drains and a camera was used as part of investigative work to the bathroom. The outcomes of these visits to the property in May-July 2021 should have been a ‘red flag’ indicator to prompt the landlord to act swiftly in resolving the damp and identifying an action plan to manage the situation and any potential impact this may have had on the resident.
Whilst the landlord has evidenced some works, its record keeping is limited and there are gaps where the resident has kept her own notes of contact to show that the issues had been ongoing for much longer than the landlord’s records show. This will inevitably have made it more difficult for the landlord to accurately diagnose required works, track progress of these and conduct a thorough complaint investigation.
The landlord’s records and in particular the condition survey reports are vital evidence to demonstrate that it acted appropriately in assessing the property and any potential risks. Without this evidence, the landlord cannot satisfy itself, or this Service, that it has fulfilled its repair duties or appropriately assessed the property in accordance with HHSRS.
The resident’s evidence suggests that scaffolding was erected in July 2020 and not removed until July 2022 – 2 years later. The landlord’s records in March 2021 comment that scaffolding was required and therefore suggests that, at that point, it was not in situ. Again, the landlord’s records are of concern as it is unclear for what period the scaffold was in situ. Whether or not the scaffold was in place for the whole of this prolonged period, it demonstrates that the resident was inconvenienced significantly by the scaffolding and delayed works.
When the resident raised the complaint in August 2021, the landlord has evidenced that it carried out an inspection of the property within a reasonable timeframe and noted defects throughout with significant works deemed necessary. This included damp works to the plaster in the dining room and lounge, investigative works in the bathroom, and additional works to the kitchen floor. The landlord confirmed in its complaint response that the internal and external works were scheduled for November 2021. However, the evidence suggests that up to September 2022, at least some of this work remained outstanding.
It is of particular concern that given the prolonged damp reports, and the concerns raised on the works order notes in May and July 2021 that the damp was very bad, the landlord still cannot evidence that it has completed the full works to improve the resident’s living conditions.
The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould (October 2021) places expectations on landlords to adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions that include taking swift action. It is of serious concern that works related to damp conditions affecting multiple rooms in the resident’s property remained outstanding for a prolonged period of over 3 years and the landlord’s approach was not pro-active. This demonstrates that the landlord failed to meet its repair and maintenance obligations and the resident will inevitably have been uncertain as to how seriously it was taking her concerns.
The landlord did recognise that there had been service failure in its stage 2 complaint when it confirmed there had been significant delays not only with the damp reports but with other outstanding repairs to the windows and doors. It offered the resident compensation for the overall delays in these works of £400. However, given the delayed damp works over a period of around 3 years, this amount of compensation falls short of what the Ombudsman would consider to be reasonable redress.
Given the impact on the resident’s ability to enjoy her home and the distress and inconvenience caused over a lengthy period, a more significant offer of redress would have been appropriate. Further, the lack of records after the stage 2 final complaint response to show that works were progressed and post-inspected indicate that the landlord failed to learn lessons from the outcome of the case and it therefore did not act in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles.

Windows and doors

It is evident that the landlord has carried out some repairs to the windows and doors of the resident’s property during January to March 2020 – this was to a dining room window and a handle on the bedroom window. However, it is unclear on the timeframes involved in carrying out these repairs due to the lack of landlord records. In February 2021, an order was also raised for a lock to be changed on the bathroom door, but it is noted that this order shows only part of the repair was completed.
In the landlord’s email of August 2021, it confirmed that it was awaiting a date for the replacement of the front timber door. It also said it had requested the property was included in a window and door replacement scheme that was later confirmed in October 2021. In November 2021, the landlord advised the resident that the front door was replaced in September 2021 and the contractor would contact her to arrange the remaining window and door replacements.
Whilst the landlord’s records are again vague, it has demonstrated that from August 2021, it was pro-active in managing works to the windows and doors of the property by assessing the overall condition and making a decision to renew them as part of a window and door replacement scheme albeit it is unclear if this work has been carried out.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

In August 2021, the resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord, giving comprehensive details of repair reports and events. The landlord acknowledged the complaint within 3 days. However, in October 2021, it confirmed to the resident that it still was not in a position to respond to her. Whilst it updated the resident on its position, there was an unreasonable delay of 2 months and a missed opportunity for the landlord to put things right from an earlier point in the complaints process.
After the resident raised her continued dissatisfaction with the landlord (mid-October 2021) about not responding to the complaint, she requested that the matter was escalated. The landlord acknowledged this 4 days later and confirmed that it was now reviewing the complaint at stage 2 of its complaint procedure. The landlord demonstrated that it acted upon the resident’s request but again, the lack of a stage 1 complaint response was a missed opportunity for the landlord to investigate her concerns and escalate the matter for further senior review if necessary.
The landlord sent its stage 2 (peer review) in late November 2021 when it apologised for its failure to respond at stage 1 of its complaint procedure and offered the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the delay in it investigating and responding to the complaint.
The landlord acted appropriately in recognising its failure to respond to the stage 1 complaint and offered an appropriate apology. Its compensation award was proportionate to the delay period of 2 months in it progressing the resident’s complaint through the complaints process and therefore represented sufficient redress.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of damp reports and various repair requests at the resident’s property.
In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress in relation to the landlord’s related complaint handling.

Reasons

The landlord delayed significantly in remedying the damp impacting multiple rooms in the resident’s property and carrying out associated works to prevent water ingress and completing related remedial works.
The landlord failed to keep adequate records of its repairs actions and contact with the resident. It failed to assess the property in accordance with its obligations under the Housing Act 2004. The compensation it awarded was insufficient given the circumstances of the case.
The landlord failed to respond to the resident’s stage 1 complaint, leading to an overall delay in its handling of the complaint. Its apology and £100 compensation award offered sufficient redress for this failing.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within four weeks of this report, the landlord is to write to the resident to apologise for the service failures identified within this report.
Within four weeks of this report, the landlord is to:
1. Organise a damp inspection of the resident’s property to check all works identified in its November 2021 complaint response have been completed and whether these have resolved all sources of water ingress and damp.
2. Provide written confirmation of the inspection outcome to this Service and the resident, including an action plan, including timescales, for completing any outstanding works.
The landlord to pay the resident compensation of £1000 (including its previous offer of £500, if it has not already done so) within four weeks of the date of this report, in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to her by the failures in its handling of damp reports and repair requests at her property. This should be paid direct to the resident and not offset against the rent account.
Within eight weeks of this report, the landlord to:
1. Review its handling of repairs at this property and provide this Service with an action plan as to how it intends to improve its repairs service with particular reference to:
  1. Ensuring it has systems in place to track damp and mould-related repairs to completion.
  2. Ensuring that repairs that require scaffolding are progressed in accordance with its repairs policy timescales.
2. Provide this Service with updates on outstanding actions that it proposed when it completed its self-assessment against the recommendations within the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould.
3. Review this case in relation to its record keeping and advise this Service how it intends to improve. Particular reference should be made to the Ombudsman’s Knowledge and Information Management report of May 2023.
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.