Haringey London Borough Council (202119831)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202119831

Haringey London Borough Council

12 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:

a. handing of repairs to the resident’s glass roof;

b. handling of reports of a leak, and;

c. communication and complaint handling.

This Service has also considered the landlord’s response to reports of disrepair of the resident’s windowsill.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant with the landlord of a three-bedroom house. She was the main carer for her partner who was suffering from an aggressive cancer.
In February 2021, the resident reported damage to a glass roof in a rear extension to the property. In October 2021, the resident reported that the issue was ongoing and reported a further issue of a leak into her bedroom, making the room unsuitable to sleep in. The landlord repaired the glass roof in August 2022.
The resident complained to the landlord about its delay in repairs and its communication with her. She advised that she could not use her washing machine and dryer and that her partner had to move out as the property was not suitable to accommodate his illness because of the leak into the bedroom. The resident stated that this caused additional stress, expense, and time, as she had to commute approximately 30 minutes by train to attend to her partner and she had to use a laundrette for her laundry.
In its complaint response, the landlord upheld the resident’s complaint. It apologised that it did not treat the first repair as an urgent repair, apologised for the delay and its poor customer service, and offered compensation of £240. The landlord raised work orders for both repairs.
When the resident brought her complaint to this Service, she advised that the landlord had not completed the repair to her roof and as a resolution she wanted it to do so.

Assessment and findings

When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only three principles driving effective dispute resolution:

a. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes;

b. put things right, and;

c. learn from outcomes.

The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.

Scope of investigation

The complaint issues raised by the resident continued beyond the timeframe in which the landlord agreed to carry out the repairs, after its final complaint response. For completeness, and fairness to the resident, this Service has increased the scope of the investigation beyond the landlord’s final complaint response. This Service has also included the landlord’s response to the disrepair of the resident’s windowsill as it was related to the initial complaint.

Handling of repairs to the resident’s glass roof

In accordance with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, and its policy, the landlord is responsible for the repair of the structure of the property. As part of the tenancy agreement the resident has a right to have repairs done within a reasonable period. The landlord’s repairs policy categorises repairs in four ways; out of hours, emergency, agreed appointment, and planned. Each categorisation has different timeframes depending on the urgency of the repair. Out of hours and emergency repairs have a 24-hour turnaround, agreed appointment 20 working days and planned repairs 60 working days.
In February 2021, the resident reported to the landlord damage to the glass roof in the rear extension and raised concerns that rainwater was leaking on to an electrical light. Approximately one week later, the landlord taped up the hole in the glass roof as a temporary repair and noted that it required a contractor to complete the job. The landlord failed to consider the potential health and safety risk to the resident. This was an unreasonable response by the landlord, and it failed to follow its own repair policy to complete urgent repairs within 24 hours.
On 25 May 2021, the landlord marked the job as complete, however, no further repairs were complete at this stage. It is unclear to this Service why the landlord marked this repair as complete. This resulted in further delays to the repair which caused distress to the resident.
On 05 October 2021, the landlord raised a further repair order to repair the glass, as the issue was ongoing, and water was penetrating towards the electrics. The landlord raised this as a responsive repair and not an urgent repair, despite the potential health and safety risk. This was unfair and unreasonable to the resident. The landlord has a responsibility to ensure the safety of its resident and make safe any potential hazards.
In its complaint response, the landlord accepted that concerns of leaks in or near electrics should be treated as urgent. The landlord apologised to the resident and shared the resident’s complaint with its out of hours team to ensure it identifies urgent repairs in future. These were reasonable steps for the landlord to take when it identified the error during its complaint investigation.
On 16 December 2021, the landlord attended the property and confirmed that a glazing contractor was required to repair the roof. On 25 August 2022, the landlord’s repair notes show that the glazing works were complete. This Service acknowledges the landlord’s explanation that it had difficulty in obtaining a glazing contractor due to the demand after the national lockdown. However, a significant reason for the delay was because of the landlord’s poor handling of the repair request. Based on the repair notes, it is unclear to this Service if the landlord carried out any temporary repairs to ensure the resident’s safety until the repair was complete. The initial repair request was made in February 2021 and the repair was not complete until August 2022. This delay was unreasonable and failed to consider the impact on the resident.
The landlord did not dispute that the delay was unreasonable. In its complaint response it offered compensation of £240 representing a 12-month delay. It was appropriate for the landlord to offer compensation for the delay, however, the amount offered does not align with its compensation policy.
For an urgent repair, its compensation policy states it will offer a £10 one off payment, plus £2 per day up to three weeks. After that it will offer £10 per week until resolved. Between 15 February 2021, when the repair order was raised, and 25 August 2022, when the repair was complete, there is 79 weeks. This Service orders the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £812 for its delay in carrying out an urgent repair based on its compensation policy.
The resident advised the landlord in her complaint that she was unable to use her washing machine or dryer for months as it was beneath the leak, and she was concerned for her safety. This caused inconvenience as she had to use laundrettes. The landlord did not account for this loss of amenity in its complaint response. This Service finds £10 per week to be a reasonable calculation for the loss of this amenity and orders the landlord to pay the resident £790 compensation for this loss.
This Service finds that there was severe maladministration in the landlords handling of repairs to the resident’s glass roof. The landlord did not treat the repair as urgent. It failed to consider the potential health and safety hazard when the resident reported water penetrating towards the electrics and its repair records do not demonstrate that it took sufficient action to ensure the resident’s safety. The landlord did not complete the repair in line with its own timescales, and it should have.
This Service orders that the landlord pay the resident a further £200 for the time and trouble caused to her by the landlord’s failure to carry out the repair in a reasonable timeframe, taking into consideration the resident’s stressful circumstances.

The landlord’s handling of reports of a leak

The landlord’s repair policy states it will inspect a planned repair within 28 days. It clarified to this Service that its turnaround time for responsive planned works is 60 working days.
On 5 October 2021, the resident first reported a leak from the roof into her bedroom. Since then, the resident contacted the landlord on several occasions to chase the repair. In its complaint response, the landlord advised that it carried out a temporary repair to the roof on 15 February 2022. However, the resident is of the opinion that repairs were not sufficient as the leak still occurred in the same place in her bedroom when it rained.
Based on the landlord’s repair records, it raised three separate repair orders to inspect and repair the roof leak. On 5 October 2021, the landlord raised a responsive planned repair order to inspect and repair the roof leak. On 18 August 2022, it raised another repair order to inspect and rectify the roof leak, this order is outstanding. On 07 November 2022, it raised a further repair order to inspect and remedy the roof leak, this repair order remains outstanding.
On 14 March 2023, the initial repair order for repairing the leak was marked as complete. It is unclear to this Service why the repair is marked as complete as the repair records do not show any repair having taken place. On 23 March 2023, the resident called the landlord and advised that the leak from the roof into her bedroom when it rains was ongoing. The landlord raised a new repair order to get scaffolding for the roof. On 17 April 2023, the resident advised this Service that the leak is ongoing, and she has been sleeping on the couch. Her partner moved out of the property as the bedroom was not suitable because of the leak and she had to commute to visit him. She stated that this caused stress and inconvenience.
Based on the landlord’s repair records, this Service has found no evidence that the landlord repaired the resident’s roof. In its complaint response, the landlord advised that it carried out a temporary repair only. It did not return to permanently repair the roof. This was unreasonable as the landlord has not complied with its obligations or its repair policies.
This Service finds that there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s handling of reports of a leak. This is because it did not adhere to its repair policy, its actions were unreasonable and unfair, and it did not consider the resident’s circumstances.
If the landlord adhered to its repair policy and inspected the roof within 28 days and then subsequently repaired the roof within 60 working days, it would have repaired the leak, at the latest, by 28 January 2022. The landlord’s records did not demonstrate any reasonable delays with repairs to the roof.
This Service finds that the resident lost enjoyment of the bedroom, attributable to the landlord’s delay, from 28 January 2022. This Service orders the landlord to pay compensation of £1901.37 to the resident based on 20% of the weekly rent of £125.09, in line with its compensation policy, for 76 weeks, from 28 January 2022 until the date of this determination.
This Service orders the landlord to pay further compensation to the resident based on 20% of the weekly rent, in line with its compensation policy, from the date of this determination until it completes the repair.
This Service notes that the resident was caring for her partner who had to move out of the house as the room was unsuitable for his care due to the leak. This Service orders the landlord to pay compensation of £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s failure to carry out the repair in a reasonable timeframe, taking into consideration the resident’s stressful circumstances.
This Service orders the landlord to carry out a survey of the roof to find the source of the leak and carry out any recommendations for repair.

Complaint handling and communication

The landlord operates a two stage complaints procedure. It will acknowledge a complaint within two working days. At stage 1, the landlord will respond within ten working days. If a resident remains dissatisfied, they can escalate the complaint to stage 2. At this stage, the landlord will reply within 25 working days. If the resident remains dissatisfied, they can escalate the complaint to the relevant Ombudsman.
On 02 November 2021, the resident complained that repairs to her glass roof extension remained outstanding for 6 months and it was a health and safety issue. She advised that she had attempted to chase up the repair on three occasions between February 2021 and November 2021 but there were issues with the landlord’s phone systems. She also complained that she reported a further repair for a leak into her bedroom in October 2021 that has not been addressed and this was causing her stress.
On 19 November 2021, the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response. It agreed that it should have treated the repair as urgent and apologised to the resident. It apologised for the poor customer service and advised it had been experiencing technical issues with its phones as staff were working from home. As a resolution to the complaint, the landlord raised repair orders and provided appointment dates for both repairs. It also offered £120 for the time and trouble caused to the resident. It was a reasonable response by the landlord to apologise, offer compensation, and raise the repair orders. However, the landlord did not consider the distress and delay caused when calculating the compensation offer.
On 22 November 2021, the resident replied to the landlord and advised that the landlord put her and her family at risk and the offer of compensation was disrespectful. She also advised that she had not had the use of her washing machine and that her sick partner has had to move out as the house was unsuitable due to the leak into the bedroom.
On 11 February 2022, the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. This was outside of its complaints policy to reply within 25 working days. The landlord provided a further update with regards the repairs and increased its compensation offer to £365 to include the delay in repairs, inconvenience, and distress caused.
This Service finds that there was maladministration with the landlord’s complaint handling and communication. This is because it did not respond to the resident within its timescales, and it should have. The resident attempted to telephone the landlord on three occasions to chase the initial repair but was unable to due to technical issues. The landlord should have open communications for receiving reports of repair requests.
This Service orders the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £100 for the time and trouble caused by its poor complaint handling and communication.
If it has not already done so, this Service recommends that the landlord train its staff in line with this Service’s Complaint Handling Code to ensure that complaints are actioned within required timescales.

The landlord’s response to reports of disrepair of the resident’s windowsill

The resident did not raise this issue as a complaint with the landlord, but for completeness this Service decided to investigate this issue as it is linked to the initial complaint and recent evidence demonstrates that it is an ongoing issue affecting the resident.
In accordance with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 the landlord has an obligation to keep the structure of the property in good repair. In accordance with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), structural collapse and falling debris represents a health and safety hazard that the landlord has an obligation to assess. If the hazard requires a remedy the landlord should act as necessary.
On 15 February 2021, the landlord raised a repair order for the glass roof as something fell on it and smashed the glass panels. The landlord carried out a temporary repair to the glass roof approximately one week later. Based on the landlord repair records, it is unclear if the landlord established at this stage, that part of the windowsill on the second floor had come loose and fell through the glass roof. However, it had a responsibility, in accordance with HHSRS, to assess the hazard and establish if there was any risk to the resident. There is no evidence that the landlord completed an assessment of the building’s structure.
On 24 November 2021, after the resident’s complaint, the landlord raised a work order to inspect an external concrete windowsill. This work order was marked as complete on 03 December 2021 and there is no evidence of a follow-on repair order at this stage. It is unclear from the repair notes why the landlord did not follow up and repair the windowsill at this stage. This was unreasonable and unfair, and it is unclear if the landlord considered the potential health and safety risk.
On 27 July 2022, the landlord raised a work order to inspect six windows of the property as they were rotten. On 14 November 2022, the resident called the landlord to chase an update on the repair as it remained outstanding.
On 17 and 18 January 2023, the resident advised the landlord that parts of the windowsill were falling on the glass roof, and she was concerned that the remaining concrete on the windowsill would fall through the glass again. The resident advised that this was affecting her mental health. The landlord’s repair evidence dated 26 April 2023, show that this repair remained outstanding. This was unfair and unreasonable, and the landlord has failed in its obligations in accordance with HHSRS to assess any potential hazard which may pose a risk to the resident’s health and safety.
This Service finds that there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s response to reports of disrepair of the resident’s windowsill. After the initial report of debris falling, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to find the source of debris to consider the resident’s health and safety. The landlord missed two further opportunities to assess and remedy the potential hazard.
This Service orders the landlord to carry out a survey of the building, including the concrete windowsill, and act to remedy any potential hazards in line with its obligations.
This Service orders the landlord to pay the resident £500 for distress caused by its failure to consider the potential health and safety risk and provide assurance to the resident that the structure of the building is safe.
This Service recommends that the landlord provide training to its staff to assess potential hazards in accordance with the HHSRS and have systems in place to remedy any identified hazards.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s glass roof.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s handling of reports of a leak.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration with the landlord’s complaint handling and communication.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s response to reports of disrepair to the resident’s windowsill.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

It is ordered that the landlord issue an apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
It is ordered that the landlord pay the resident compensation of £4803.37 (inclusive of its previous offer of £365), compromising:

a. £1901.37 for the loss of enjoyment of a bedroom for 76 weeks.

b. £812 for delay in carrying out an urgent repair on the glass roof and its delay in dealing with the report of a leak.

c. £790 for the loss of amenity of the washing machine for 79 weeks.

d. £200 for the time and trouble caused by the landlord’s failure to carry out the first repair in a reasonable timeframe.

e. £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to carry out the second repair in a reasonable timeframe, taking into consideration the resident’s particularly stressful circumstances.

f. £100 for the time and trouble caused to the resident by its poor communication and complaint handling.

g. £500 for distress caused by its failure to consider the potential health and safety risk and provide assurance to the resident that the structure of the building was safe.

This Service orders the landlord to pay further compensation to the resident based on 20% of the weekly rent, in line with its compensation policy, from the date of this determination until it completes the repair. The landlord must provide the resident and the Ombudsman with the data used to calculate the compensation payment (including rent level for the period and date of repair completion).
It is ordered that the landlord surveys the roof to find the source of the leak and carry out any recommendations for repair.
It is ordered that the landlord carry out a survey of the structure of the building, including the concrete windowsill, and act to remedy any potential hazards in line with its obligations.
The landlord should provide evidence to this Service that it has complied with the above orders within 28 days of the date of this report.

Recommendations

If it has not already done so, it is recommended that the landlord train its staff in line with this Service’s Complaint Handling Code to ensure that complaints are actioned within required timescales.
It is recommended that the landlord provides training to its staff to assess potential hazards in accordance with the HHSRS and have systems in place to remedy any identified hazards.