Flagship Housing Group Limited (202004372)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202004372

Flagship Housing Group Limited

27 October 2023

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example, whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice, or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman, and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the following repairs at the resident’s home:
1. Damp and mould;
2. Roof;
3. Doors and windows;
4. Fencing;
5. Drive/path.

Background and summary of events

Scope of Investigation

The complaint relates to multiple repairs at the resident’s home and although the resident reports some of the repairs to have been ongoing for many years, this investigation deals with events starting from when the complaint began in 2020.

Background

The resident lives in a 3-bedroom detached bungalow on an assured tenancy that began in 1999.
The resident refers to vulnerabilities of mental health in his correspondence with the landlord and this Service.
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the tenancy agreement places repair obligations on the landlord to carry out maintenance of its properties that include the structure, fixture and fittings. These responsibilities are outlined on its website. It is currently finalising its new repairs policy to give more clarity to residents on its repair timescales.
The Housing Act 2004 ensures landlords are responsible for assessing hazards and risks within its rented homes. When assessing any such hazards and risks, the assessment should be considered in line with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) and damp and mould growth are potential hazards that may require remedy.

Summary of events

To give context, the complaint commenced in March 2020 predominately about missed plumbing and electrical appointments that were addressed within the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response at the end of March 2020. Within this response, it referred to wider resident concerns of damp and mould, chimney repairs and the fencing.
There was a gap of over a year before the resident requested that the landlord escalate his complaint in June 2021 and by that time, it had become clear that the issues had evolved and more repairs were added to the complaint. Although the landlord has confirmed it initially dealt with some repairs as service requests (outside of its complaints procedure), it did respond to the additional repair issues in its stage 2 complaint response of 14 July 2021. Therefore, this report investigates the full range of concerns raised by the resident and addressed within the landlord’s complaint responses.

Damp and mould

The landlord’s records show that reports of damp and mould were assessed by a carpenter on 9 March 2020. The landlord recorded there was no issue at that time.
When the landlord responded to the resident’s formal complaint on 23 March 2020, it said it had previously assessed the damp and mould on 9 March 2020 but it would conduct another assessment.
The landlord contacted the resident on 17 April 2020 and he raised concerns that the damp and mould was getting worse. He referred to carpets, curtains, clothes, furniture becoming damaged and the damp and mould was causing health concerns. At that point, the landlord did not have the damp and mould issue logged as outstanding and it agreed to contact him by the end of the day with an update. There is no evidence that the landlord did make contact that day. However, it has evidenced that it did attempt to contact him on 22 April 2020.
On 10 August 2020, the landlord did record information relating to the impact of the damp and mould, the same as it had previously recorded in April 2020. The landlord has not provided any records of action it had taken during the previous 4 months.
The landlord’s records of 11 August 2020, refer to an internal meeting to discuss the case and propose action. It confirmed it had discussed all outstanding concerns with the resident and agreed it would contact him regularly and confirm its action plan. Its records suggest it tried to make contact with the resident the same day and it was going to confirm its plan of action in a letter to the resident by the end of the week.
On 14 August 2020 ,the resident sent this Service a letter regarding the lack of repairs at his home. He was concerned that the damp and mould at the property was affecting both his and his wife’s health and he referred to discrimination by the landlord due to their poor health and vulnerabilities.
The landlord completed a damp assessment on 24 August 2020. However, the record of the assessment has not been provided to this Service. A plan of work was agreed and on 8 September 2020, the landlord sent a letter to the resident apologising for any distress caused through repairs not being completed in a timely manner. It confirmed appointments for 21-25 September 2020 in relation to repointing work and a mould treatment.
In October 2020, a further works order was raised by the landlord for a mould treatment to the bedroom. The notes showed that further investigative work was required to the cavity wall. It later confirmed that the cavity was clear and an order was raised to repoint the damp proof course and spread loft insulation into the corners.
On 16 December 2020, the landlord raised a work order to replace some radiators. The completion date was 31 January 2021.
Further works orders were raised 19 January 2021 to assess the damp and carry out the required repairs. Notes show “damp at low level around the bungalow. All internal walls were checked with a damp meter and no damp was detected.” The cavity wall was also checked and no problem was found.
Between 22 and 24 January 2021, the landlord raised additional works orders for plaster repairs to the rear bedroom and the installation of a heating control device.
The landlord requested a damp survey on 9 February 2021 that was completed 10 March 2021 and it received the corresponding report on 18 May 2021. The survey recorded “very minor evidence of mould due to poor ventilation”. The landlord noted there was no issue with the height of a concrete path around the property (that may have potentially affected the damp proof course). The recommendations associated with the damp and mould were made for the following works:
1. Clean (replace if necessary) the kitchen and bathroom extractor fan.
2. Insulate and draught proof the loft hatch.
Further works were then ordered on 25 March 2021 to install a ‘nuair’ unit (to assist with damp control) and it noted this was to be installed 10 May 2021.
On 13 April 2021, the landlord confirmed with the resident that another surveyor would attend in May 2021 to assess all of the resident’s outstanding concerns (including any work that was not related to the damp and mould) and arrange a schedule of work. At this point, the resident was happy to continue to work with the landlord and it noted that he did not want his complaint escalated.
The landlord reviewed the survey findings at the end of June 2021 and updated the resident on the required works as outlined at paragraph 20.
The work was completed throughout June and July 2021 along with other associated work to improve ventilation that involved adjusting the doors. The landlord also appointed a named officer to oversee the works.
The resident sent a letter to the landlord on 26 July 2021 about outstanding work at his home and the landlord acknowledged this on 3 August 2021. It agreed to contact him week commencing 16 August 2021 to arrange an appointment for its surveyor and officer to visit the resident and talk through the report findings.
The resident sent a letter to the landlord on 23 September 2021 concerned about health issues. He enclosed a note from his doctor to support his concerns. The landlord arranged to visit the resident mid-October 2021. However, it is unclear if this visit went ahead as the landlord has not provided a record of the discussions.
On 14 December 2021, the surveyor attended the property to work with the resident to resolve the issues he had raised. The landlord has not provided the record of its discussion during the visit.
In the landlord’s final complaint response letter to the resident of 8 February 2022, it confirmed the actions and repairs completed that included the cleaning of the extractor fan, insulation to the loft hatch, improving the air flow by carrying out work to ‘undercut’ the doors, replacement of the bathroom and kitchen radiators and the installation of an energy usage device. It also confirmed that it would arrange for cavity wall insulation to be installed and apologised for the length of time the work had taken to be completed.

Summary of events after the landlord’s final complaint response – Damp and mould

29. On 11 May 2022, the landlord visited the resident and was satisfied that all damp works were completed and it noted the resident’s satisfaction at that point.

30. In March 2023, the landlord offered compensation of £50 to the resident in recognition of the damage caused to the curtains.

31. The resident raised new reports of damp and mould and the landlord arranged for an external contractor survey to be undertaken in August 2023 and the landlord has stated that all recommendations are being actioned.

Roof leak

32. The landlord raised a repair order for a leak through the ceiling on 9 March 2020. It noted that the ceiling was falling down and it required equipment to complete works to the roof. Further works were booked for the end of March 2020 to carry out a closer inspection but the landlord confirmed to the resident that the work was cancelled due to Covid-19 restrictions.

33. When the landlord called the resident to discuss the complaint on 17 April 2020, the resident referred to water damage to the ceilings in the lounge and kitchen. There is no record to confirm what the landlord did to resolve the issue at that point.

34. From mid-April 2020 to mid-August 2020, there is a gap in records and no evidence of the landlord taking any proactive measures during this period is recorded. On 10 August 2020, the landlord’s records refer to the “ceiling falling down” in the living room. The following day, the landlord suggested an internal meeting to discuss the case and propose actions. It also agreed regular contact with the resident from thereon.

35. On 27 August 2020, the landlord’s records showed it was organising roof repairs to address the water ingress and this work showed as complete on 14 September 2020. A follow-on works order refers to plastering and ‘mist coat’ to be completed 23 and 24 September 2020. The landlord’s records do not confirm that these works were completed.

36. The landlord sent a letter to the resident on 8 September 2020 when it apologised for any distress caused through the repairs not being completed in a timely manner and it confirmed that in its assessment of 24 August 2020, it arranged for works to be completed to the living room ceiling and a water mark to the wall.

On 30 October 2020, the landlord confirmed the following work orders and appointment dates with the resident:
1. Replaster ceiling – 12 November 2020

The landlord’s notes showed when it attended, the resident requested work to be completed to the whole of the ceiling. The landlord recorded this was outside of this schedule of works it had previously agreed. It is unclear how it resolved the matter.

‘Mist Coat’ paint to fresh plaster – 17 November 2020
It confirmed it was putting together a plan to resolve the water ingress.

On 20 and 21 January 2021, further works were ordered by the landlord to investigate a possible leak from the pipes in the loft. Notes show that no leak was found.
During the landlord’s weekly catch up with the resident early and mid-February 2021, the resident had said painting work remained outstanding to the lounge and the landlord chased this up internally. It later confirmed that it was due to attend the property on 3 March 2021, to ‘mist coat’ the ceiling but it appears that the work was not carried out on this date as the resident had suggested to wait until a surveyors report on the property was received.
The landlord has provided this Service with the survey report dated 18 May 2021 in which it was recommended that the chimney be repointed. It was not until 16 August 2021, that the landlord was due to attend the property with equipment to complete the works. Due to apparent delays with the required equipment the scheduled appointment could not go ahead. The landlord apologised to the resident for the delay and requested its contractor make contact to rearrange the appointment. The landlord agreed to evaluate the inconvenience of the situation in its stage 2 complaint.
On 9 September 2021, the landlord’s internal email confirms it received a quote for recommended work to remove the disused chimney noting it was in a bad condition. The quote was accepted and it noted that it had tried contacting the resident to give an update but it was unable to make contact.
The landlord’s records showed that on 22 November 2021 it contacted the resident and advised him that it would arrange for the removal of the chimney stack on 14 December 2021 and its records showed that work was completed on this date.

Doors and windows

The landlord made a carpentry appointment for the resident on 25 February 2020. It did not contact the resident prior to arrival to confirm the time as agreed and it apologised for this in its stage 1 complaint response. It is unclear if any work was carried out at this point.
Various works orders were then raised by the landlord at the beginning of March 2020 for the window handles, seals, frames and internal door handles to be repaired/replaced. It recorded the works as complete.
There is a gap in records until 24 July 2020 when the landlord raised another works order to ease the windows and rear door. At that point, the work was recorded as complete.
In September 2020, the landlord ordered further works for a new bathroom door, a repair to the bathroom window and reseal of the front bedroom window.
The landlord sent a letter to the resident on 8 September 2020 and confirmed an appointment for 23 September 2020 for various carpentry works as follows:
1. Hole in bathroom door.
2. Airing cupboard door handle loose.
3. Back door top and bottom locking bolts were not aligned.
4. A new bathroom window handle was required.
5. Adjustment of the bathroom door.
6. The kitchen cupboard door hinges required tightening.
7. Gaps to be filled near the front bedroom window.
Various works orders were raised in October 2020 to the rear door, bathroom window and follow on works for the new bathroom door to be painted. It is unclear when the work was completed. However, a further work order was raised for the painting of the bathroom door on 17 November 2020.
The landlord’s survey report of 18 May 2021 recommended various carpentry work to the following:
1. 3-bedroom doors required under cuts to provide a gap of 10mm to ensure better airflow;
2. Replacement windows;
3. Replace seals on the rear door;
4. Replace the front timber single glazed door with a thermally efficient door to reduce the heat loss into the unheated front porch.
The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident 14 July 2021 when it confirmed that it would be replacing the windows and an external door giving an approximate timeframe for completion of 6-7 months.
The landlord’s records confirm that the window replacement works were completed on 21 October 2021.
The landlord’s records in relation to when the front door was replaced are unclear. In one record, it refers to the front door being replaced on 7 February 2022. However, in the resident’s later communications with the landlord at the end of April 2022, it appeared the door had not been replaced at that point.

Fencing

On 23 March 2020, when the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint, it confirmed that it had an outstanding work order for fencing. The landlord stated it aimed for a provisional date to complete works at the end of March 2020, however, the order had to be cancelled due to Covid-19 restrictions.
During the landlord’s contact with the resident on 17 April 2020, the resident mentioned concerns regarding the rear fencing. However, it is unclear from the landlord’s records of the response.
On 10 June 2020, the landlord spoke to the resident and it noted he was unhappy as an operative sent by the landlord had turned up to repair the fence, however, did not seem to know what they were there for and subsequently, did not carry out any work.
The landlord’s internal email of 16 June 2020 showed it called the resident and explained the general plan of the work for the fencing, confirmed an appointment slot and duration of works of 2-3 days to complete.
On 18 July 2020, another landlord internal email said it had spoken to the resident that day and he was very unhappy with the service he had received about the conduct of the fence work. It said the resident had requested that the operative did not go to his property again as he had left the resident’s chicken run gate open. The resident stated the operative’s attendance should have been mid-morning and not early morning as had occurred. The resident said that the landlord’s service was making him very ill.
The landlord’s records refer to the fence work being outstanding on 10 August 2020. It noted that when operatives attended site, they did not have the equipment for breaking up the ground. Another works order was raised (September 2020) by the landlord to reinstate the rear fence.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 8 September 2020 when it confirmed work to the rear fencing was booked to be completed between 21 and 25 September 2020 and the landlord has confirmed to this Service that work was completed on those dates.

Summary of events after landlord’s final complaint response – Fence works

In October 2022, as part of a new stage 1 complaint about the installation of fencing by his neighbour, £250 compensation was offered to the resident in relation to the inconvenience of that work. However, it is unclear, if that incident was in any way linked to this original fence complaint outlined above.

Drive/path

The landlord’s first record of an issue with the drive/path was within the inspection report dated 18 May 2021 when observations were made about the concrete path around the perimeter of the property. At that point, it noted that no issue was identified.
On 4 June 2021, when the resident requested escalation of his complaint, he referred to an issue with an uneven path leading up to and beyond the back door. He said that he had fallen on 2 occasions. When the landlord responded to the resident on 6 June 2021, it referred to the completion of various remedial works but it did not respond to the path issue.
The resident sent a letter to the landlord on 16 November 2021 and referred to the drive at the rear of his home stating that he had fallen 3 times resulting in hospital treatment. The landlord’s records showed that it contacted the resident on 19 November 2021 and it would be arranging a meeting to agree actions from a survey.
On 22 November 2021, the landlord’s internal emails gave a list of its actions in relation to work at the property. It stated that the drive would be inspected when it visited the resident on 14 December 2021. However, the record from this survey has not been provided and the landlord has not mentioned its position in relation to if any work was required to the drive/path in its correspondence with the resident.

Summary of events after landlord’s final complaint process – Drive/path

In the resident’s correspondence with the landlord at the end of April 2022, he confirmed that work remained outstanding to the drive.
In later correspondence between this Service and the landlord, it has confirmed that works to the driveway leading to the kitchen were to take place on 26 September 2022. However, it is unclear what work was carried out.

Assessment and findings

The resident mentions that he and his wife’s health conditions had deteriorated as a result of the property condition. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments regarding his health and the health of his wife, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impact on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim.

Damp and mould

The initial assessment of damp and mould at the resident’s home took place early March 2020 and at that point, no issue was found. Within the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response letter to the resident, it acknowledged the resident’s concerns and agreed to arrange another assessment of the damp and mould. This was an appropriate response by the landlord that demonstrated it was taking the resident’s concerns seriously and was prepared to take action if it found an issue.
Mid-April 2020, when the landlord made contact with the resident, it was noted that damp and mould were worsening, possessions were becoming damaged and the resident reported that his and his wife’s health were affected. The landlord confirmed at that point that no jobs were on order for the damp and mould even though in March 2020, it had agreed to undertake an assessment. Although the landlord acted appropriately at that point by keeping in touch with the resident, it was unreasonable to delay in arranging the assessment of the damp.
By mid-August 2020, the landlord had recorded that there was still an issue with damp and mould and it had noted again the resident’s health issues and damage to personal possessions. At this point, the landlord demonstrated that it was actioning the resident’s concerns by holding an internal meeting to discuss all outstanding issues and propose an action plan to resolve the concerns. It also demonstrated a customer focus approach by agreeing to make regular contact with the resident to keep him informed from thereon.
There was a 5-month delay from the landlord arranging a damp assessment in March 2020 and agreeing a plan of works in August 2020. It was inevitable that the impact of Covid-19 restrictions caused some delays as landlords were reduced to providing a ‘health and safety’ repair service at that time. However, given the concerns raised by the resident of the impact of the damp on mould on health and possessions, it was unreasonable that the landlord having acknowledged reports of health concerns, did not thereafter prioritise the assessment in accordance with its repairs policy and its obligations under the Housing Act 2004 in relation to ensuring homes are free from hazards such as damp and mould.
The landlord demonstrated that it continued its communications with the resident and in early September 2020, it sent a letter to advise him of its plan of action. An appointment was arranged for the end of September 2020 for repointing work and mould treatment. It became apparent that further repairs were required to treat a damp patch in the corner of the bedroom. In October 2020, further investigative work was completed to the cavity, it had repointed the damp proof course and insulation had been spread in the corners of the ceiling. It then carried out wider upgrades to replace some radiators. This demonstrated that the landlord was taking a holistic approach by exploring wider investigations to resolve the damp and mould issues.
The resident was concerned that the issue of damp and mould continued and requested a second opinion. The landlord continued its communications with the resident throughout February 2021 and instructed a second damp survey mid-February 2021 that was completed mid-March 2021. It also arranged further works in March 2021 to the bathroom paintwork and it installed a ‘nuair’ unit (to help control the damp). This demonstrated that the landlord acted appropriately by arranging the survey and seeking a second opinion to ensure that it had thoroughly explored all issues to get to the root cause of the problem as well as listening and being proactive to the concerns of the resident.
The survey report dated mid-May 2021 (3 months later) gave a thorough assessment of the property by each room and recommended various works orders, summarising very minor evidence of mould due to poor ventilation. The landlord reviewed these findings at the end of June 2021 (1 month later) and updated the resident on the remedial work required. Given the seriousness of the resident’s concerns, it was unreasonable that there was a 4-month delay from requesting the second survey to the review of the findings and this undermined its previous proactive work.
The landlord itemised the full list of works and throughout June and July 2021, it demonstrated that it attended to various work orders to clean out the extractor fans and carried out work to the doors and insulation of the loft hatch. At that point, it also demonstrated a customer focused approach by appointing a named officer to oversee the works.
The resident had escalated his complaint to stage 2 and early August 2021, the landlord wrote to the resident to arrange to talk through the damp report findings. It continued to demonstrate that it attempted to contact the resident, however, there were some difficulties in making contact. In mid-October 2021, it had arranged a visit to the resident. It is unclear if the visit went ahead at this point as no records have been provided as confirmation and in mid-November 2021 the resident sent a letter to the landlord in which he was still concerned about some outstanding work.
The landlord sent the resident its final stage 2 complaint closure letter at the beginning of February 2022 when it itemised all work it had carried out including dates of completion. However, the resident’s concerns continued and it was not until mid-May 2022, after the landlord’s final complaint process had ended that it visited the resident and confirmed all damp works were completed.
The resident’s dissatisfaction continued and after the landlord’s final complaint response, it offered £50 compensation payment in recognition of damaged curtains and later in early August 2023, it arranged for an external damp and mould survey and it confirmed that it had completed actions and discussed these with the resident.
In summary, the landlord has demonstrated that it has attempted to resolve the damp and mould issues, taking a holistic approach by carrying out various investigative work including repointing, surveys, joinery works, cleaning out fans and the fitting of a ‘nuair’ unit in attempting to control the damp. While the landlord has demonstrated that it did fulfil its obligations under the Housing Act 2004 and Housing, Health and Safety Rating (HHSR) it did delay unreasonably, initially for 5 months from ordering an assessment of the damp to reviewing the findings. Although Covid-19 restrictions proved challenging for landlord’s and no doubt caused some delays in repairs, the health and safety concerns raised by the resident should have escalated the risk to the landlord to prioritise the damp assessment. There were then further delays of 4 months in receiving the second damp survey report and this no doubt exacerbated the resident’s frustrations and caused additional distress in what was already a challenging time for the resident.
While the landlord acknowledged the damage to the resident’s personal possessions when it offered £50 compensation for curtains, it is of concern that it did not offer advice at an earlier point on whether or not it would consider a compensation claim or a liability claim through its insurance route for this type of damage. It is not for this Service to decide whether or not a claim would be successful but the Ombudsman expects the landlord to have demonstrated that it considered the evidence and give appropriate advice to the resident on pursuing such a claim.

Roof leak

Early March 2020, the landlord recorded a repair for water penetrating the ceiling, noting the ceiling was falling down and at the first visit, it identified that further works were required. Shortly after, a further order was raised for it to attend with equipment to carry out a closer inspection of the chimney. This demonstrated that the landlord had appropriately taken the necessary steps to investigate the chimney issue but it is unclear at this point whether it carried out an internal inspection of the damaged ceiling.
In the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response at the end of March 2020, it explained that the appointment had to be cancelled due to Covid-19 and in April 2020 it contacted the resident and agreed to update him on the situation. This was a reasonable step for the landlord to take considering it was at the start of Covid-19 restrictions when there were major disruptions to landlord services.
Mid-August 2020, after the resident reported concerns that the outstanding repairs were impacting on health and he raised concerns that the ceiling was falling down in the living room, the landlord demonstrated that it acted on his concerns and called an internal meeting. It also agreed to contact the resident regularly with an action plan. However, given the health and safety risk in relation to the resident’s concerns about the stability of the ceiling, it was inappropriate that the landlord did not demonstrate that it inspected the ceiling or asked the resident additional questions to determine whether immediate repairs were required.
Although the landlord’s records show it attended to roof repairs mid-September 2020, and ceiling repairs at the end of September 2020 it is unclear why a further order shows attendance mid November 2020 for ceiling repairs. At the visit in November 2020, there were discrepancies in the ceiling works order between the resident and landlord and it is apparent that work did not go ahead at this point. However, the landlord has not demonstrated how it addressed these discrepancies with the resident.
Late January 2021, the landlord appropriately carried out further investigations to eliminate any leaking pipes from the loft area. The landlord then evidenced that the ‘mist coat’ work to the ceiling was booked for early March 2021. However, the work was delayed (at the request of the resident) until the damp survey results were known.
The landlord’s survey report of May 2021 recommended that the chimney was repointed. However, it was unreasonable for the landlord to delay in attending to the works until mid-August 2021 and even then, it could not complete any work as there was a delay with the equipment and therefore the work had to be rearranged. It appears that the repointing work was not carried out as in early September 2021, the landlord decided to arrange for the chimney stack to be removed. The landlord appropriately confirmed the work with the resident and arranged the work for mid December 2021 and its records evidence the work to be complete at that point.
In summary, while the landlord initially acted appropriately on the resident’s reports of roof defects within a reasonable timeframe, it failed to demonstrate that it appropriately assessed a potential health and safety risk in relation to the stability of the living room ceiling. There were then further delays, (partly due to Covid-19 restrictions) of 5 months in the landlord agreeing an action plan of works but even then, it had not demonstrated that it had attempted to ascertain the condition of the ceiling and it was not until mid-September 2020 that roof works were completed and it attempted to carry out work to the ceiling.
The resident experienced further delays with the ceiling works (partly due to discrepancies between the resident and landlord as to the extent of works and then partly due to the resident’s request to delay works) which were due to commence March 2021. In total, the full duration of works extended for nearly 2 years and it is unknown if or when the ceiling works were fully completed. Although the landlord demonstrated that it attended to assess and carry out some work during this period, these delays amount to maladministration given the uncertainty of the roof leaks, the potential safety risk to the affected ceilings and the impact on the resident in relation to distress and inconvenience this caused.

Doors and windows

The landlord first made a carpentry appointment for the resident at the end of February 2020. There is no evidence to confirm specific details of the works order and it is unclear if any work was completed at this point. However, the landlord did not contact the resident prior to arrival and the landlord appropriately apologised to the resident when he raised a complaint.
The landlord demonstrated that it acted appropriately by raising various works orders for windows and door repairs early March 2020. Later at the end of July 2020, a further works order was completed to ease the windows and rear door.
In September 2020, the landlord confirmed in its letter various carpentry works to the internal doors and windows, advising that they would all be addressed later that month and it gave a specific appointment date. It appropriately apologised for the delays that it said were Covid-19 related. Given the impact of Covid-19 restrictions on landlord services and the fact that the carpentry repairs were not classified as health and safety related, the landlord was acting reasonably in accordance with government guidelines.
The landlord continued to raise various works orders in September and October 2020 relating to the doors and windows and in November 2020, a works order was raised for the painting of the bathroom door following its replacement. This demonstrated that the landlord was acting on the resident’s concerns and fulfilling its repair obligations (albeit delayed due to Covid-19 restrictions).
When the landlord received the survey report of May 2021, it recommended replacement windows, front door and work to replace the seals on the rear door as well as work to 3-bedroom doors. The landlord demonstrated that it acted appropriately by considering these recommendations and in early July 2021, it agreed to replace the windows and a door. Given that this type of work is not routine day to day repairs, the landlord demonstrated that it made its decision within a reasonable timeframe considering the cost implications involved and it managed the resident’s expectations by setting out realistic timeframe for completion of the works.
It appears that the issue with the replacement of the door was still ongoing in April 2022 despite the landlord’s expected completion date of December 2021. This is outside of the estimated timescale the landlord communicated to the resident by 2 months. Further, there is no evidence that the landlord kept the resident informed about the delay and given he had been waiting since May 2021 for the landlord’s decision in relation to the door there was service failure in the replacement of the front door as the resident had been waiting nearly a year for it to be replaced.
In summary, the landlord delayed in carrying out carpentry works to windows and doors which it appropriately apologised for and explained to the resident it was due to Covid-19 restrictions. This was a reasonable response by the landlord and considering there were no known health and safety issues (albeit some recommendations were to alleviate the damp and mould), it was acting within the government guidelines at the time by prioritising work orders. However, the landlord carried out various works during September and October 2020 and then in July 2021 demonstrating that it was fulfilling its repair obligations.
After the survey of May 2021, when the window and front door was recommended for replacement, it acted promptly and completed work to the windows within its timescales communicated to the resident. However, it did delay in completing the replacement external door and there is no evidence it provided regular updates to the resident during the delayed period of 2 months. This delay and the lack of communication was unreasonable and amounts to service failure.

Fencing

The landlord confirmed to the resident in its stage 1 complaint response (March 2020) that it had outstanding work orders in relation to the fence and gave a provisional date of the end of March 2020 for completion. However, due to Covid-19, it had to cancel the appointment. This was a reasonable action by the landlord at that point, considering it was the start of Covid-19 restrictions and that the work was not classified as of urgent priority in regard to health and safety.
In the landlord’s contact with the resident mid-April 2020, it was clear that the fence work remained outstanding. It was not until mid-June 2020, when the landlord spoke to the resident that he expressed dissatisfaction as the works had not yet been completed. In response, the landlord appropriately explained its plan and details of the work to the resident and gave an approximate duration that it would be on site.
Mid-August 2020, the fence work remained outstanding and an order was raised in September 2020 to replace the rear fence. Correspondence suggests the work was completed at the end of September 2020. During the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response in September 2020, it appropriately apologised that repairs had not been completed in a timely manner.
In summary, the landlord delayed in carrying out fence work over a 6-month period. However, given the timing of the works at the start of Covid-19 pandemic when there was major disruption to landlord services and that fence work was classified as non-urgent work or a health and safety risk that would cause significant impact to the resident, these delays were not unreasonable and therefore there is no maladministration.

Drive/path

The drive/path was inspected in May 2021 as part of the landlord’s assessment to determine the cause of damp and mould at the property. Although the inspection was not to determine a trip hazard defect, it is reasonable to conclude that a thorough visual inspection of the drive would have been carried out but it may have concentrated on the area in close proximity to the damp proof course. No defects were noted by the landlord at that point.
In early June 2021, in the resident’s letter to the landlord, he referred to the uneven drive at the rear of his home when he reported that he had fallen on two occasions. However, the landlord has not demonstrated that it acted on the resident’s concerns at that time. When the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident mid July 2021, it failed to address the concerns. Given the seriousness of the report as a potential health and safety issue, it is of concern that the landlord failed to respond.
In the resident’s letter to the landlord mid November 2021, he raised further concerns advising that he had fallen 3 times in total and the landlord confirmed it would inspect the drive mid December 2021. However, there is a lack of landlord records relating to the inspection and therefore it cannot be evidenced if this inspection took place. This is a particular concern given the seriousness of the report. Record keeping is essential for the effective management of landlord services as outlined in the Ombudsman’s Knowledge and Information Report (KIM) May 2023.
In April 2022, after the landlord’s final complaints process had ended, the resident confirmed work still remained outstanding in relation to the drive/path. Given the resident’s concerns and reports of falls, the landlord should have dealt with the matter promptly from his first report of a fall and recorded details of its visit (even if there was no issue identified) to satisfy itself that the area had not deteriorated. It was therefore inappropriate for the landlord to have delayed in its response and actioning of works.
In summary, the landlord delayed significantly in demonstrating that it acted appropriately to the resident’s concerns of a health and safety risk with the drive/path. From the resident’s initial concern being reported early June 2021, the landlord could not evidence that it assessed the drive promptly and did not carry out any work to the drive/path until a year later. Further, the landlord has failed to demonstrate how it prioritises repairs and although it has outlined its repairs responsibilities to residents on its website, it does not provide priority timescales to give clarity on its assessment of repairs based on health and safety risks.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould at the resident’s home.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of roof repairs at the resident’s home.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the door and window repairs at the resident’s home.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of fencing repairs at the resident’s home.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the drive/path repairs.

Reasons

Damp and mould

The landlord unreasonably delayed to arrange a damp survey at the property, following which it inappropriately delayed its subsequent review of those findings. This resulted in a delay to the required works to repair damp and mould issues that were present. Although the landlord appropriately arranged a second damp survey, there were further delays in receiving the report and reviewing the findings. The net result was unnecessary delays by the landlord to remedy damp and mould present in the property. The landlord also failed to provide all records of visits and inspections at the resident’s home.
The landlord failed to advise the resident on how he could make a claim through its public liability insurance.

Roof

The landlord delayed unreasonably in its obligation to assess the condition of the damaged ceiling and conduct the necessary repairs to the roof at the property.

Doors and windows

The landlord acted appropriately in fulfilling its repair obligations. It appropriately acknowledged and apologised for the delays caused by Covid-19 restrictions. It appropriately assessed and determined the replacement of the windows and door the circumstances where restrictions were in place regarding movement and mixing. However, the landlord delayed in replacing the front door by 9 months (exceeding its communicated timescale to the resident) and did not evidence that it provided updates to the resident during these delays.

Fencing

The landlord acted appropriately in fulfilling its repair obligations. It appropriately acknowledged and apologised for the delays and issues with the work not being completed on time. Considering there were no known health and safety risk, which would require an escalated response, the landlord acted reasonably given the restrictions on movements and contact in place through Covid-19 restrictions.

Drive/path

The landlord delayed significantly in demonstrating that it acted appropriately on the resident’s concerns of a potential health and safety risk with the drive/path.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of this report, for the landlord to write to the resident to apologise for the failures identified within this report.
Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord is ordered to pay compensation of £800 to the resident for its failure in handling of repairs at the resident’s home.
Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord to:
1. Write to the resident to advise him how he can make a claim for damaged possessions under its liability insurance.
2. Confirm to the resident and this Service its intention in relation to outstanding work of the damp and mould, roof, ceiling, and path work at the property including its plan of action and timescales for completion of such work.
Within 8 weeks of this report, the landlord to:
1. Consider the failings identified within this report and review how it will improve its future repair service in relation to damp and mould reports, roof, ceiling and path repairs. Reference should be made to the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report of damp and mould ( October 2021) to demonstrate how it has or will improve its handling of future damp and mould reports.
2. Provide its reviewed repair policy which includes priority timescales for emergency, routine and planned works. This should include how the landlord intends to communicate with residents if planned works are delayed.
3. Carry out a review of its record keeping in relation to its repairs service and in particular in relation to records of visits and inspections. The landlord should refer to the Ombudsman’s Knowledge and Information Report (KIM) May 2023 to demonstrate how it will improve its service.
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with orders within the timescales set out above.