The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

Hammersmith and Fulham Council (202225426)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202225426

Hammersmith and Fulham Council

23 January 2024


Our approach

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

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

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about delays in the landlord installing a fan in the bathroom.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Jurisdiction

  1. What the Ombudsman can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Scheme. When a complaint is brought to this service, the Ombudsman must consider all the circumstances of the case, as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
  1. The resident submits that there were a number of repairs issues in the property which she asked the landlord to address, in addition to the installation of a fan. She states that she raised these issues with the landlord as part of her formal complaint and that she pursued them all through the full complaints process.
  2. However, whilst the resident did raise various repairs as part of her stage 1 complaint, the evidence demonstrates that the landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 21 November 2022, and said in its email to her “after speaking with you this morning, you mentioned your only concern for this stage 2 complaint reference 2023309 is the fan installation.” This position is reflected in the stage 2 response of 22 November 2022, which only addressed the fan installation. There is no evidence of the resident challenging the contents of the stage 2 complaint at that time.
  3. Paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure. As the resident did not pursue the other repairs in her stage 2 complaint, they have not exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. As a result, the landlord has not had a reasonable opportunity to resolve those issues internally prior to the Ombudsman’s involvement. Therefore, these matters are outside of this Service’s jurisdiction and are not considered further in this report.
  4. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the resident has continued to experience difficulties with repairs and contractor appointments, and there have been further issues which have developed in the time taken to install the fan. If the resident remains dissatisfied with the service provided by the landlord on these issues, she may wish to consider raising a new complaint in that regard.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a council, and her tenancy started in 1996. The property is a two-bedroom terraced house.
  2. Following an inspection of the property after reports of rising damp on 5 April 2022, the landlord’s damp and mould surveyor made recommendations to have an air vent installed in the bathroom, dehumidifiers to be delivered and a CCTV survey of the foundations to assess if there were any issues prior to repair work starting in the property. On 7 April 2022 the landlord’s repair log says ‘CCTV survey and minor works, Dependant on CCTV survey, extra works order to be issued.’ It had a target date of 10 May 2022.
  3. The resident called the landlord on 20 April 2022 stating that the damp surveyor had told her he would raise a job for an air vent in the bathroom. The landlord then emailed its repairs contractor for an update on the CCTV survey and asked for a response by 25 April 2022. It also emailed the surveyor, as it could not see a repair job had been raised for the air vent, before noticing the installation of an infinity fan was included in the job raised for the CCTV survey. The Ombudsman has not seen evidence of a repair job including the installation of a fan. It then sent a second email to the surveyor seeking clarification whether this was the ‘air vent’ the resident referred to on the call. There is no evidence the surveyor replied to either email.
  4. The landlord chased its repairs contractor for a response on 29 April and 4 May 2022. The contractor ultimately responded on 6 May 2022, apologised for the delay, and outlined its plan for some repairs, but did not address the CCTV survey or fan installation. The landlord emailed asking for a CCTV survey date, and said the contractors need to drill into the bathroom wall for the infinity fan on 9 May 2022. The repairs contractor called the resident to apologise for delays and discuss the outstanding repairs. It emailed the landlord and said the CCTV survey was on one system, but not another, and asked the landlord to request the job be raised again so it could arrange attendance.
  5. The landlord raised the CCTV survey and fan installation job again on 10 May 2022. It asked its repairs contractor for an update when the job had been received. It said a number of jobs had been raised by the damp surveyors which the repairs contractors had not received on their system, and said there may be an issue. There is no evidence the repairs contractor provided an update to the landlord as to whether the re-raised job appeared on its system.
  6. The resident chased the landlord for an update, this time threatening legal action, on 23 May 2022. This prompted the landlord to chase its repairs contractor, reiterating that the job to install the fan was included on the CCTV survey job.
  7. Regarding the fan, an internal repairs contractor email dated 24 May 2022 noted that there was no job raised in that regard. They said a job would need to be raised and the works could then be completed alongside some plumbing work on 16 June 2022. There is no evidence of the contractors contact with the landlord, but the landlord emailed its contractor the same day and reiterated that the fan was raised as part of the same job number as the CCTV survey.
  8. The resident sent an email to the landlord on 27 May 2022 listing the outstanding repairs and requesting her complaint be escalated to stage 2, however there is no evidence of a stage 1 complaint being raised. A landlord internal note said the resident cannot have a stage 2 response without a stage 1 response being issued, and it would contact her.
  9. The resident sent another email on 30 May 2022 as she had not heard anything. She said the CCTV survey was due between 1pm-6pm that day, but she had called the contractors and they had said they had attended at 11am and had called her. The resident submits she had been in all day, no one attended the property and no one called. A new date of 7 June 2022 was booked. There was no mention of the fan installation.
  10. The resident contacted the landlord on 17 June 2022 and said the situation was “past being unacceptable.” She said a repairs contractor had attended the previous day and she had been under the impression it was to install the fan, as the landlord had confirmed this to her the previous week. However, the contractor said he was there to do a CCTV survey of the drain but did not have the tools so someone else would attend later that day.
  11. An electrician did then attend to inspect the drain. The resident explained he did not need to, as the inspection had already taken place and they were waiting for the CCTV survey contractor to arrange a follow-up appointment as the initial inspection was not sufficient, due to the machine not being able to reach the area adequately. The Ombudsman has not been provided with evidence, but the resident submits the landlord said the electrician that attended was supposed to have carried out an inspection of where the fan was going to be placed in the bathroom.
  12. The repairs contractor contacted the resident on 23 June 2022 to discuss outstanding works and said it would call the resident the following day. However, no call was received. It called her on 30 June 2022 after the resident chased on multiple occasions. The resident submits she spoke about the fan on this call. She asked it to speak with the landlord about the name of the fan, and said the job was on the same reference as the CCTV survey.
  13. The contractor emailed the landlord following the call, said there was meant to be a repair order for a fan, and asked it to raise an order so they could schedule the work. The landlord replied the following day to say the job had already been raised and provided a job reference.
  14. The resident sent an email to the landlord’s head of housing on 10 August 2022 asking for help as a matter of urgency as the repair issues were impacting her mental health and wellbeing, and she felt she did not have the capacity to deal with it anymore.  
  15. In the landlord’s emailed response of 25 August 2022, the subject line said ‘stage 1 complaint’, but it appears to be only an interim response. It apologised for not responding earlier, said it was working hard to resolve the outstanding repairs (including the fan), and offered an interim compensation payment of £300. 
  16. The landlord raised a repair job for the fan a third time on 8 September 2022 and emailed the contractor as there was no availability to book an appointment. It requested the installation be either booked in, or incorporated into the scheduled repair appointments of 10 and 11 October 2022. Its contractor replied the same day and said the job had not come through on their system, but once they could see it, they would book it for the same dates.
  17. The repair log shows the landlord raised the job again on 13 and 30 September 2022.
  18. The resident called the landlord for an update on 30 September 2022. It said dates were booked in for the installation of the fan, and it had asked its contractor for confirmation of work to be completed on 10 and 11 October 2022 by email. In the absence of a response from the contractor, the landlord chased again on 5 October 2022. The contractor ultimately replied on 25 October 2022, said it had spoken to the resident, and had booked multiple repair appointments for the outstanding work, including a job for the fan to be ‘renewed’ on 1 November 2022.
  19. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 28 October 2022. It apologised that the repairs had been ongoing for so long, and said it was not the level of service it wanted to provide. It said some of the delays were caused by a change in contractor and an appointment had been booked for the fan. It offered £1,650 compensation for inconvenience and delays in respect of various repairs (£850 of which had already been paid to the resident), which the resident accepted.
  20. An operative attended on 1 November 2022 to install the fan. However, he thought he was replacing an existing fan so was unable to install a new one as he either needed a masonry operative to drill a hole in the wall, or a glazer to cut a hole in the glass of the bathroom window.
  21. The resident called the landlord to express her distress that, after multiple visits, the fan was still not installed. She could not understand how the contractor did not know the operative sent could not drill a hole in the wall, or why it gave the operative the impression he was replacing an existing fan. The resident then asked to escalate her complaint to stage 2.
  22. The contractor emailed the landlord and said the job was raised as ‘please fit infinity fan’ and the vague description caused the issue. The contractor said it had not been made aware the resident did not already have a fan, could not see any electrical works raised prior to this repair, and was unaware there was no hole for the fan to be installed. The landlord said the first two repair jobs had been closed down incorrectly as the work had not been completed.
  23. The contractor replied to say the wording for both initial repair jobs was noted as ‘CCTV survey and minor works. Dependent on CCTV survey extra works order to be issued.’ It said it is imperative all works required are included in the description for the job, the Schedule Of Rates codes to include the location, and the description should say whether it is a replacement or a new installation. The repairs contractor said it would escalate these issues internally for higher management to address, booked the fan installation for 14 December 2022, and said it would look whether they could bring this forward.
  24. The landlord spoke to the resident on 21 November 2022 (as detailed under Jurisdiction above) when she said she was not happy to wait until 14 December 2022 and she wanted to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on that basis.  The landlord asked the repairs contractor if the repair could be brought forward but it said the earliest opportunity to allow both a carpenter and electrician to attend was 14 December 2022.
  25. In the landlord’s stage 2 response of 22 November 2022, it apologised for the inconvenience and discomfort the delays installing the fan had caused. It recognised failings with communication and explained the actions it would be taking to prevent similar issues arising in the future. It advised that its contractor did not have an earlier date to install the fan, and acknowledged the wait was unacceptable. It offered an additional £350 for delays, inconvenience and lack of communication regarding the fan, which the resident accepted.
  26. The resident called the contractor on 14 December 2022. She submits 2 appointments were scheduled for that day, one for an operative to drill a hole, and one for an operative to fit the fan. The operative fitting the fan arrived, but the second operative did not arrive at the same time. The operative that attended first called the office and was told the second operative was off sick, so the job was re-scheduled for 1 February 2023. Approximately half an hour later, the second operative arrived to drill the hole for the fan. The resident emailed the landlord and said its contactor was “failing its tenants.”  The fan was not installed that day.
  27. An operative attended on 1 February 2023 but said it could not fit the fan as the bathroom window was double glazed. It is unclear why the contractor decided to install the fan in the window, when initially it was going to drill a hole in the wall. Another appointment was made for 15 March 2023.
  28. It is not clear whether operatives attended on this date, but in an email to this Service, the resident said operatives attended on 31 March 2023, a glazer to replace the glass, and an electrician to fit the fan. They were again unable to complete the work as scaffolding was required (so the glazer could access the rear of the property) and this did not arrive. The operatives waited 90 minutes before abandoning the job.
  29. An operative attended on 12 September 2023 to carry out an external inspection of the area where the fan was to be installed.

Assessment and findings

Delays installing the bathroom fan

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy says its response time for planned work is within 60 working days. Given that the original job to install a fan was identified by the surveyor on 5 April 2022 and the works remained outstanding in September 2023, some 17 months later (and beyond), it is clear that there have been significant and unacceptable delays in this case.
  2. A major fact in the delays was the information given on the job orders and poor communication between the landlord and its contractor regarding the specific requirements of the jobs. Whilst the landlord submits that it initially advised the surveyor a repair job had expressly been raised for the installation of a fan, the Ombudsman has not seen evidence to support this. Instead, the job descriptions were often vague and unhelpful and, on that basis, it is understandable that the fan installation was missed on several occasions.
  3. It was not until the unsuccessful appointment to install the fan on 1 November 2022, some 7 months after the job was first identified, that the contractor emailed the landlord to say the job wording used when the surveyor originally raised the job did not specifically note the installation of a fan. The lack of detail in the job descriptions contributed to delays and was a failing. It is, therefore, encouraging to note that the level of detail required in repair jobs has been escalated to higher management to address, to avoid similar problems occurring in the future.
  4. The contractor asked the landlord to re-raise the job on 10 May, 30 June and 8 September 2022. Each time was an opportunity for the landlord to take accountability to get the fan installed, by revising its instructions and making its requirements clear. The landlord missed a further opportunity on 30 May 2022 to chase up the fan installation when the resident called in relation to the CCTV survey.
  5. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the landlord always acted promptly to contact its contractor when the resident called for an update, but it did not do enough to proactively manage progress itself. In an email to the contractor on 30 September 2022, the landlord said it had told the resident it had dates booked in for the fan. However there is no evidence its contractor confirmed the fan could be installed on 10 and 11 October. This led to the resident’s expectations falsely being raised which caused her inconvenience and was a failing. The landlord’s lack of urgency or action contributed to delays getting the fan installed and inconvenience to the resident, who repeatedly had to chase for updates.
  6. A further issue that contributed to the delays was the poor communication between the landlord and its contractor. The evidence demonstrates that there were numerous examples of:
    1. The landlord frequently having to chase its contractor for updates.
    2. The contractor failing to provide information and updates requested of it by the landlord.
    3. The contractor failing to return telephone calls from both the landlord and the resident, despite several follow up calls being made.
    4. The landlord missing opportunities to clarify the specific requirements of the works, when the contractor had clearly misunderstood the request.
    5. The contractor giving incorrect information about the whereabouts of its operatives.
  7. Following months of difficulties and delays, and the resident expressing her extreme frustration at the situation, a failed appointment on 14 December 2022 led to the job being re-scheduled for 1 February 2023 and then 31 March 2023, 3 ½ months later. Given the job history, it would have been more appropriate for the contractor to prioritise the fan installation and give the resident an earlier appointment, or for the landlord to intervene and ensure she got an earlier appointment by some other means.
  8. The installation of a fan should be a relatively straightforward job and, whilst it is accepted that these works formed part of a larger repairs requirement, there is nothing in the evidence to justify the significant delay in the fan being installed. Instead, a series of errors and miscommunications have caused a delay of almost 2 years, during which period the resident has been regularly and proactively seeking completion of the works.
  9. The landlord has paid £800 for inconvenience caused by delays with the various repairs jobs (including the fan), and an additional £350 specifically for the delay installing the fan. However, this was only taking into account events up to 21 November 2022. The Ombudsman therefore makes a finding of maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the installation of the fan and makes orders for further compensation below. 
  10. The landlord’s compensation policy says it will offer compensation over £700 for time/trouble and inconvenience to the resident for extensive disruption i.e extended time to complete actions and failure to follow procedure. Taking into account the compensation already paid to the resident, alongside the ongoing delays, the Ombudsman orders a further £500 for inconvenience caused to by the delays installing the fan.

Complaint Handling

  1. The landlord has a 2 stage complaints policy. It aims to issue its stage 1 response within 10 working days (which can be extended by a further 10 days for complex cases) and its stage 2 response within 20 working days.
  2. The resident sent an email to the landlord which said she wanted to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 27 May 2022. An internal note said the landlord would contact her, but the resident sent a follow up on 30 May 2022 as she had not heard anything. It is unclear what the landlord said to the resident regarding its complaint handling process, but it had 2 chances to log a stage 1 complaint at this stage (27 or 30 May 2022) and it failed to do so.
  3. This ultimately led the resident to write to the landlord’s chief housing officer on 10 August 2022 to complain about the ongoing repairs. It was only at this point, 51 working days after her first expression of dissatisfaction, that the landlord raised a complaint. The resident said the situation was impacting her mental health and the failure to log a stage 1 complaint caused unnecessary delays to the complaint handling process, which was a failing.
  4. The landlord’s email of 25 August 2022 was titled ‘stage 1 complaint’ but the actual nature of this email is not clear given that a further, more comprehensive stage 1 response was issued subsequently. In its first response, the landlord apologised for not sending a response earlier, and said it was working hard to resolve the outstanding repairs. It offered a ‘further’ interim payment of £300 for the delays. The resident had already received £800 for delays caused by the change in contractors.
  5. The landlord sent its full stage 1 response on 28 October 2022, 56 working days after the complaint was raised. This is outside of its stage 1 response time, but the Ombudsman does note the complaint was sent to the Chief Housing Officer, rather than the complaints team, which may have slowed down its response. However, this is still a failing.
  6. The response apologised and addressed the difficulties the resident had had with repair appointments and explained its repairs contractor had changed. It said an appointment had been booked for 1 November 2022 for an infinity fan to be fitted to the bathroom. It offered a compensation payment of £1,650 as a goodwill gesture for the inconvenience and delays which included £800 for delays caused by the contractor change and £150 for the resident to redecorate her kitchen that she had already received, leaving a balance to pay of £850.
  7. The resident escalated her complaint to Stage 2 on 1 November 2022 and the landlord issued its response on 22 November 2022, within 15 working days and in accordance with its target timescales.
  8. The Ombudsman notes that the landlord has acknowledged failings and made some attempt to put things right by offering compensation for inconvenience. It also said it is striving to improve its communication when dealing with complaints to provide a better experience and recognised the need for improvement. However, the compensation offer did not specify what amount, if any, was intended to address the complaint handling failures specifically
  9. Given the failings identified above – the landlord not raising a stage 1 complaint on 2 occasions, unclear communication regarding its stage 1 response, and delays issuing its stage 1 response – the Ombudsman makes a finding of maladministration and makes an order for further compensation.
  10. The landlord’s compensation policy says it will pay between £26-£75 for failure to follow complaints procedure resulting in inconvenience and effort to rectify. As there has been no clear payment made for this issue to date, the Ombudsman is minded to award compensation at the higher level, to recognise the additional distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the complaint handling failures. As a result, an order for a further £75 compensation is made below.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of:
    1. The installation of a fan in the bathroom. 
    2. The formal complaint.

Orders and recommendations

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident from a senior member of the landlord’s staff for the failures detailed in this report.
    2. Pay directly to the resident further compensation of £575 made up of:
      1. £75 to reflect the impact on the resident of its complaint handling failures.
      2. £500 to recognise the further delays installing the fan and the distress, inconvenience and time and trouble incurred by the resident.
    1. If it has not done so already, install the fan as a priority. 
    2. Hold a meeting with its contractor to discuss this report, the failings identified, and improvements that can be made going forward.