Homes Plus Limited (202204960)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202204960

Stafford & Rural Homes

11 September 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:
1. Response to the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property upon moving in and outstanding repairs.
2. Response to the resident’s reports of roof leaks, damp, and the resident’s request to have his bedrooms redecorated.
3. Response to the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs to the garden and fence.
4. Response to the resident’s request for the wet room to be converted into a downstairs toilet.
5. Complaints handling.
6. Knowledge and information management.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is the assured tenant of the property, which is a four-bedroom house. The landlord is a housing association. For ease of reading the resident and his wife, who is also a joint tenant, will both be referred to as the resident in this report. The resident has four children, two of which are foster children.
The tenancy agreement clauses set out that the landlord will be responsible for maintaining and repairing the structure and exterior of the property, as well as installations for heating, sanitation and for the supply of water, gas, and electricity. This is in line with section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The tenancy clauses also state that the resident is responsible for internal decoration and to keep gardens “in a clean and tidy condition, and free of anything which could be a nuisance or danger to yourself, any member of your household or any visitor to your home.”
The landlord’s repairs policy sets out its repairing obligations under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the tenancy agreement. Repairs will be categorised as emergency (attended within four hours), ‘triage repairs’ which are repairs which will take less than one hour to complete (will be attended the same day) or other repairs where the policy does not give a time frame. However, the policy does state that the landlord operates the right to repair provisions, under section 96 of the Housing Act 1985, and includes a schedule of repairs with set timeframes for completion. The policy says that repairs to fencing will be in line with the tenancy agreement and will be limited to addressing health and safety risks.
The Housing Act 2004 introduced the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Two of the 29 identified hazards are damp and mould and falling on level surfaces. Landlords have an obligation to remove or minimise potential hazards within their properties.
Under the landlord’s voids policy, void properties will be inspected, and essential repairs and safety checks will be completed before the property is let. If any minor repairs are still to be completed this will be agreed with the new resident. Works to the property will be carried out to the landlord’s lettable standard and the works will be post inspected and photographed to ensure they meet the lettable standard. The lettable standard sets out the works the landlord will complete before letting the property. The standard includes:
1. Ensuring the kitchen units are secure, doors and draws open and close.
2. Walls will be free of damp and mould.
3. Rear boundary fences or those next to open spaces will be stable and secure, but boundaries between gardens are the resident’s responsibility.
4. Overgrown hedges, lawns and trees will be cut back; ponds will be filled in.
5. The property will be clean.
The Housing Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management sets out 21 recommendations to help landlords improve their management of knowledge and information. These include developing an organisational key data recording standard to set out the minimum standard to which data must be entered in the landlord’s databases, and to make adherence to this part of the service level agreement with third parties, for example contractors.
The landlord’s complaints policy defines a complaint as “an expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standards of our service, actions or lack of action by the organisation, its own staff, or those acting on its behalf, affecting an individual or group of residents.”
Over the relevant period for this complaint the landlord operated two complaints policies. Under the first policy the landlord operated a two stage complaints process with an additional, informal, stage zero preceding this. Under the policy it aimed to resolve stage zero complaints as quickly as possible and usually within one working day. If the complaint cannot be resolved, it is raised at stage one of the landlord’s process. The landlord will acknowledge the complaint within one working day and contact the resident to discuss the complaint. It will then respond “within the agreed timescale confirmed with the complainant”. Its written response will include:
1. A clear statement of the nature of the complaint that the complainant would recognise.
2. A clear statement of whether the landlord had found the complaint justified or not.
3. A short, clear description of the reasoning behind the decision.
4. Reference to any learning points acknowledged from the complaint – including action that will be taken as a result of the complaint.
5. A statement that the period after which the case will be considered closed will be five working days from the date of the response letter.
If the resident wishes to escalate the complaint to stage two they need to “provide evidence of issues they feel have not been considered or resolved”. The landlord will acknowledge the escalation within two working days and agree a date for its complaints panel to meet to review the complaint. The policy says that the landlord will provide a stage two response within two working days of the panel meeting.
The landlord’s complaints policy was amended and updated in April 2021. Under the new policy the landlord operates a two stage complaints process. Stage one complaints will be acknowledged within two working days and will be responded to within ten working days. If an extension of time is needed, the landlord will write to the resident to explain why and provide a new response date. If the resident remains dissatisfied, they can request an escalation to stage two within 20 working days from receiving the stage one response, stating why they remain dissatisfied and the resolution they would like. The landlord will acknowledge escalation requests within two working days and the complaint will be responded to within 20 working days. If the resident remains dissatisfied, the landlord will advise them how to contact the Ombudsman.
The landlord’s compensation policy says that it can consider offering discretionary compensation where there has been service failure, although this is “the exception, not the norm”. The landlord can consider compensation for damage to possessions and or decoration resulting from a service delivery failure or for inconvenience and distress caused by unacceptable delays in resolving service failures. The policy says in relation to decoration it prefers to supply materials, but it may agree to carry out decoration works.

Summary of events

The landlord inspected the property while it was void and produced a schedule of works on 23 June 2020, which included works for plastering and decoration, cleaning, cutting of the grass in the garden, filling in a pond and gully drainage works. The report included before photographs.
Between 13 October 2020 and 16 October 2020, the landlord’s records show that various works were carried out to the property. It is not possible to tell from the records whether all the items raised within the schedule were completed. In addition, the landlord has told this Service that at that time it was not standard procedure to produce a completion report or to take after-works photographs.
The resident’s tenancy started on 30 October 2020. On 11 November 2020 the resident reported to the landlord that the wastewater pipe, known as a ‘soil stack’, was blocked and overflowing sewage outside. The landlord’s records say it repaired this the same day. The resident reported it again on 13 November 2020 and the records say it was repaired on 7 December 2020.
On 25 November 2020 the resident called the landlord to make a complaint. His complaint was about repairs which needed to be completed which included:
1. Removal of old electric heaters.
2. Soil stack overflowing sewage.
3. Leaking tap and pipework.
4. The bathroom and wet room were in poor condition and had not been cleaned.
5. The back garden was overgrown, and the boundary fence was damaged.
The resident also complained that the property did not meet the landlord’s lettable standard.
The landlord’s records show that it categorised the complaint as a stage zero, which was included within its complaints policy at the time. The landlord has told this Service that it did not provide written responses to stage zero complaints.
On 25 November 2020 the resident also reported a leak from the roof with water running down a bedroom wall, which was lifting paint and wallpaper the resident had decorated with. The leak also damaged the living room decoration. The landlord’s repair records show the repair was completed.
The landlord contacted the resident on 15 December 2020 to arrange a surveyor’s inspection for 18 December 2020. On the day the resident cancelled the inspection due to isolating due to Covid-19 and agreed a new appointment for 8 January 2021. The landlord’s records suggest that this inspection went ahead, however this Service has not been provided with a copy of an inspection report, notes or a schedule of works following the inspection.
The resident called the landlord on 3 February 2021 and 8 February 2021 asking for an update in relation to his complaint. It is not clear from the landlord’s records whether the landlord contacted the resident or provided an update. The landlord’s records say that scaffolding was to be erected on 24 March 2021.
On 6 April 2021 the resident called the landlord regarding the works raised in response to his complaint. He said that the list of works the contractors had been given was not complete. This Service has not been provided with evidence of any response from the landlord.
The resident emailed the landlord on 27 September 2021. He said he was still waiting for a response to his complaint and that he had not had a response since his last correspondence in March 2021. He also asked for an update regarding the outstanding works and his email listed:
1. Damage to the upstairs rooms caused by the roof leak.
2. The radiator in the downstairs toilet did not work.
3. An external wall was green.
4. The drainage gully in the front garden was leaking.
5. Two missing radiators which were taken from the living room.
The resident called the landlord on 27 October 2021 regarding his radiators and again on 1 November 2021. He wanted to find out when the two radiators which were taken out for plastering work were going to be replaced. He said this was also part of his complaint, but he had not heard back from the landlord. He also said he thought he was due a new boiler. This Service has not been provided with evidence of any responses from the landlord.
On 23 November 2021 the resident reported a repair was needed to the roof and this was completed on 25 November 2021. The resident also reported that the soil stack was blocked, and he was unable to use his toilets between 31 December 2021 and 6 January 2022.
The resident emailed the landlord on 12 January 2022 to make a formal complaint. The complaint was about:
1. There was damp and water on the bedroom walls and ceilings, and this had damaged the wallpaper the resident had decorated with. He wanted the landlord to redecorate the rooms.
2. A new roof had been fitted but there was still damp on the external walls and ceilings.
3. The damp and leak caused distress to the resident’s household, which included four children, two of which were foster children; he said social services were aware of the issues. The leak had caused distress to the children and had affected their mental health as they had to change bedrooms.
The landlord called the resident the following day to acknowledge the complaint at stage one of its complaints process.
On 17 January 2022 the landlord inspected the property. This Service has not been provided with an inspection report or notes from this inspection.
The landlord’s records state that on 26 January 2022 repairs were completed to repoint brickwork to prevent water ingress.
On 26 January 2022 the landlord provided its stage one complaint response by letter. It upheld the complaint and said:
1. “There has been a failure with regards to the condition of the property as the repairs that had been arranged following the previous complaint have not been completed correctly” and apologised for this.
2. It “fully appreciate[d] the impact dealing with this matter [was] having on [the resident and his] family and can only apologise that you have not been able to settle completely within your home.”
3. Further repairs had been agreed to resolve the issues and it would contact the resident to arrange appointments. They included:
  1. Positive Input Ventilation (PIV) unit, which was designed to improve ventilation and air quality, to be installed.
  2. Loft inspection to ascertain whether there were issues with the insulation not allowing correct air circulation and to check on the requirement for vents in the new soffit boards.
  3. Alco drain to be laid in the front garden to prevent pooling of water when it rains.
  4. Drain inspection to gulley at front of the property as water pooling has been seen on the lounge floor which is the other side of this gulley.
  5. Four edge tiles to be repositioned and fixed.
  6. Repairs to kitchen cupboard door below sink and refit / straighten the boiler cover.
  7. Repairs to leaking soil stack at the rear of the property.
4. That it would investigate further issues the resident raised including:
  1. Repairs to the rear garden and fencing:

(1) Fixing the leaning fence posts/panels.

(2) Removing the tree stumps.

(3) Filling in holes in the garden.

(4) Resolving the flooding issue at the bottom of the garden.

(5) Relaying uneven paving slabs.

(6) Remove the mounds of soil that were left following previous works.

Redecorating the four bedrooms affected by damp.
Arranging a heat loss survey.
The resident’s request to change the downstairs wet room into a toilet.
Conducting a water sample test due to lead piping.

It would contact the resident again on 28 January 2022 regarding these matters.
How to escalate the complaint if the resident remained dissatisfied.

The landlord called the resident on 4 February 2022. Its note of the call says that the resident was not happy as he had not received the promised update on 28 January 2022. The landlord promised to call back on 8 February 2022, which it did; during this call it advised that repairs work was to start week beginning 14 February 2022. The landlord also followed up with an email on 11 February 2022. The works scheduled were:
1. Repair the drain gulley in front left of garden.
2. Inspect the loft space and check that the insulation was not preventing air flow around wall plate / roof.
3. Re hang kitchen sink unit door and fix boiler cupboard unit.
4. Repair external leaking soil stack.
5. Contractor to contact the resident within the next two weeks to arrange to install the PIV.
The landlord’s repairs records state that repairs to kitchen cupboard doors, to inspect the loft and to install a drainage gully in the front garden were completed on 14 February 2022.
The same day the resident called the landlord to escalate his complaint. In an internal email the landlord said the resident was extremely angry that repairs being done are being “bodged”, that the drainage works had not been completed correctly and so was still flooding, and that the kitchen cupboards needed to be rehung. He also said he was still waiting for the fencing to be repaired. The Resident said that if these matters were not dealt with he would take legal action as he was a foster carer and Social Services were not happy with the situation.
On 17 February 2022 the landlord’s repairs records state that a section of the property’s soil stack was replaced and on 25 February 2022 the loft insulation was inspected to check for air flow.
The landlord provided its stage two complaint response by letter on 18 March 2022. It partially upheld the complaint and said:
1. The repairs identified and raised had been completed. These were:
  1. PIV unit to be installed.
  2. Loft inspection to ascertain whether there were issues with the insulation not allowing correct air circulation and to check on the requirement for vents in the new soffit boards.
  3. Alco drain to be laid in the front garden to prevent pooling of water when it rains.
  4. Drain inspection to gulley at front of the property as water pooling has been seen on the lounge floor which is the other side of this gulley.
  5. Four edge tiles to be repositioned and fixed.
  6. Repairs to kitchen cupboard door below sink and refit / straighten the boiler cover.
  7. Repairs to leaking soil stack at the rear of the property.
2. Works to the garden were the responsibility of the resident under the tenancy agreement and no works would be raised.
3. Converting the wet room into a downstairs toilet “falls outside the landlord’s responsibilities” but that the resident could apply for permission to have this done himself.
The landlord did not mention in its response the resident’s further issues of redecoration of the four bedrooms, arranging a heat loss survey for three of the bedrooms, or carrying out a water sample for lead.
The landlord did explain how the resident could escalate the complaint to this Service if he remained dissatisfied.

Events following the end of the landlord’s complaints process

On 18 March 2022 the resident emailed the landlord. He said that the garden had been left in an unsafe condition by the landlord and was a health and safety risk that he could not maintain as a result. He also attached a video of the garden; this Service has not been provided with a copy of this video.
The resident called the landlord on 31 March 2022 and the landlord followed this with an email on 8 April 2022. In its email it said it had considered photographs provided by the resident. It also said:
1. It had made an appointment for 11 April 2022 to install a PIV, which it expected would resolve the damp and mould issues in the property.
2. It would not redecorate as this was the resident’s responsibility, however offered decorating vouchers of £200.
3. It would not agree to change the wet room into a downstairs toilet.
4. It would not carry out any further works to the garden or fencing as this was the resident’s responsibility.
The resident replied to the landlord’s email the same day, to say that he did not accept the offer of decoration vouchers. He also said that he had not damaged the fences which he described as “old and rotten and falling over” and the garden ground had been left in an unsafe state by the landlord’s contractors. The resident provided photographs of the garden when he moved in and after the landlord’s contractors had carried out works. He also said that no-one had inspected the damp in the downstairs rooms and that the landlord had not complied with section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. He explained “we fully decorated the bedrooms before we move in and repaired damaged plaster and replaced rotten skirting board that as a landlord you should of done as this full under the structure of the landlord and tenancy act. £200 will not cover the cost of redecorating one bedroom. I will send you photos and videos of the work we did before we move in and from a leaking roof and damp destroyed what we had done.”
On 21 April 2022 the resident emailed the landlord again to chase a response to his previous email and the landlord replied with a holding response the following day.
The landlord’s repairs records state that a temporary roof repair was completed on 26 April 2022 and again on 19 July 2022. On 17 June 2022 the front garden drainage gully was reported as pooling water.
The resident contacted this Service on 13 June 2022, and we contacted the landlord on 21 June 2022 and 20 July 2022.
The landlord inspected the property and produced an inspection report on 24 August 2022. The report contained several repairs to be completed to the property. The report noted:
1. In relation to the front garden flooding “the drainage has been installed incorrectly and is back falling away from the gulley meaning surface water has nowhere to drain to. The drainage gullies around the property are broken and displaced causing water.”
2. There was “condensation related mould growth to the hallway – a PIV system has been installed to provide whole house ventilation to alleviate this issue.”
3. In the dining room the “skirting board in this room has rotted to the dividing wall with the kitchen pantry. There is missing sections of skirting board throughout the room” and “a number of missing floor tiles”.
4. In the kitchen the door frame to the pantry and skirting board were rotten.
5. In the garden the “boundary fence is leaning, there are four fence panels which are dilapidated and held together with mesh. The lower portion of the garden has a patio area which consists of slabs. The tenant advises they have tripped over the slabs in February 2022 causing him to break his ankle and have 10 weeks off work. There is a step down from the main concrete area to the path which requires relaying to avoid creating a step.”
6. In the bathroom “sealant around the bath is discoloured, the wash hand basin is cracked, the plaster finish has large cracks due to plaster delamination from the surface below. A section of skirting board was rotten adjacent to the bath.”
7. The first bedroom “has condensation related mould growth to the storage cupboard. There are sections of wallpaper which are peeling from the ceiling.”
8. The second bedroom had high levels of mould growth due to condensation. The surveyor noted that a PIV system had been installed to alleviate the issue.
9. The third bedroom had peeling wallpaper and mould growth.
10. There were no defects found in the fourth bedroom.
11. In relation to the roof, which the surveyor noted was new, he concluded “mould growth observed within the bedrooms can be attributed to a lack of insulation at eaves level creating ‘cold spots’ on the ceiling which are more prone to condensation related mould growth. Day light was visible to the gable wall chimney breast indicating an issue with the lead flashing.”
The landlord raised the repairs set out within the report on 21 September 2022 and marked these as “Housing Ombudsman enquiry”. The repairs included works to the drainage gully, fencing, removing the downstairs shower, and treating mould. These were marked as completed on 14 November 2022.
The landlord’s repairs records also state:
1. Plastering works were completed to the dining room on 19 December 2022.
2. Plastering works were completed to the hall, stairs, and landing on 4 April 2023.
3. Radiators were replaced on 3 May 2023.
4. Further repairs were raised on 24 May 2023 following a joint inspection with social services, which were also marked as “Housing Ombudsman enquiry” including:
  1. Renew concrete path.
  2. Repair chimney pot.
  3. Renew worktop.
  4. Prepare wall, fit new plasterboard and skim.
  5. Remove old and lay new ceramic tile floor.
  6. Mould wash walls or ceilings.
  7. Repair or renew water pipework.
The resident has told this Service that at the date of this report repairs remain outstanding; he said that there are still tree stumps and trip hazards in the garden and so his children cannot use the garden safely. He also said that he still has damp and mould and condensation in the bedrooms. He is concerned that the issue has not been resolved. He said that mould was present when he first viewed the property but that he was told by the landlord at the time that the issue had been resolved. He also said that he spent a lot of time and money in decorating the bedrooms, which need to be redecorated due to the condensation and mould and that the landlord will not redecorate the rooms.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property upon moving in and outstanding repairs

The resident initially complained about the condition of the property on 25 November 2020, less than a month after moving in. The landlord has accepted that it did not post-inspect the void works it had completed and this was a failing. The landlord treated this complaint as stage zero at the time, although it would seem it treated it as a request for repairs. The resident also reported the soil stack was blocked and a leak from or through the wall before the landlord agreed to arrange an inspection on 15 December 2020.
The inspection went ahead on 8 January 2021; however, the landlord did not produce a report or schedule of works, or if it did this Service has not been provided with a copy. The landlord also did not update the resident, as he called for an update on his complaint twice on 3 February 2021 and 8 February 2021; the records do not say whether one was provided. Following some repairs having been completed the resident called the landlord again on 6 April 2021 to say there were still outstanding issues. The landlord had failed to provide the resident with information following the inspection or to say what it planned to do to resolve the issues. This resulted in further inconvenience for the resident having to chase the landlord to have the repairs completed.
The resident emailed the landlord again on 27 September 2021 regarding outstanding repairs and called twice about his radiators on 27 October 2021 and 1 November 2021. From the records there is no evidence the landlord replied to the resident’s email or calls, and this was a failing.
By the time the resident raised his stage one complaint on 12 January 2022, 59 weeks had passed since he first raised his first complaint about repairs and issues with the property on 25 November 2022. The landlord did inspect the property following the stage one complaint and provided a schedule of repairs within its response on 26 January 2022. It also accepted there had “been a failure with regards to the condition of the property as the repairs that had been arranged following the previous complaint have not been completed correctly”. However, the further repairs completed were not completed to the resident’s satisfaction, which meant the resident escalated the complaint. In its stage two response the landlord said all the repairs raised had been completed, but this was incorrect.
The landlord completed a full survey of the property, and produced an inspection report, on 24 August 2022. This was after the Ombudsman had contacted the landlord and brought its attention to our investigation. The landlord then completed multiple repairs over the period 21 September 2022 to 3 May 2023. Further works were also raised on 24 May 2023. All the works were marked as ‘Housing Ombudsman enquiry’, and it is reasonable to presume they would not have been arranged had it not been for the resident approaching this Service, which is also a failing.
In relation to the specific repairs:
1. The soil stack was first reported on 11 November 2020 as leaking sewage. It was repaired on that date, and on 7 December 2020, 6 January 2022, and 17 February 2022. The resident and his family of six were unable to use their toilets between 31 December 2021 and 6 January 2022. This would have caused considerable inconvenience and distress as being able to access sanitary provisions is a basic right and having to experience leaking sewage is extremely unpleasant.
2. The resident reported that two radiators were removed from his living room on 27 September 2021. The records states that radiators were replaced on 3 May 2023. It is not clear from the records whether these replaced the ones removed however there are no other records. If this was the case, then the resident had been left without these radiators for approximately 18 months.
3. On 25 November 2020 the resident first reported a leak from the roof through to the bedrooms in his property. This leak caused water damage to the bedrooms, and damp and mould followed. The records show that the roof was replaced on 25 November 2021, one year later. The resident continued to report damp and mould in the property. The landlord installed a PIV unit on 11 April 2022. However, the landlord’s surveyor’s report dated 24 August 2022 noted there was damp, mould, condensation, and pealing wallpaper in three of the bedrooms, as well as mould and rotten woodwork in the dining room, kitchen, and hallway. The resident has told this Service that he still has damp in the property.
4. The resident raised issues with the condition of the fence and his garden being overgrown on 25 November 2020. The landlord carried out works to cut back the garden sometime before January 2022, although there are no records of when this was. This left the garden in an unsafe state. The resident’s complaint about the fence and garden are addressed fully below.
In relation to the failures identified, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. While the landlord has now completed and raised repairs to resolve the issues, it was slow to do so and appeared to only act fully once it was made aware of the Ombudsman’s investigation. The resident has also told this Service that issues remain with damp, mould and the condition of his garden has not been resolved.
The landlord did not meet its lettable standard or comply with its repairs policy. This meant that the resident and his family did not have quiet enjoyment of the property or garden for approximately two and a half years, with some issues continuing at the date of this report. There was severe maladministration, which caused significant distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble for the resident. To reflect the impact this had on the resident an order has been made that the landlord pay £1,500 in compensation.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of roof leaks, damp, and the resident’s request to have his bedrooms redecorated

The resident first reported water running down his wall on 25 November 2020. He said that this had damaged the wallpaper and paint he had decorated with. The landlord’s records show a job was raised for a bricklayer to attend although there is no record of what works were carried out. The landlord inspected the property on 8 January 2021 and the landlord’s records say scaffolding was to be erected on 24 March 2021, however there is no records of what repairs were completed. By this date four months had passed since the resident’s initial report of a roof leak. On 27 September 2021 the resident reported that the external wall was green, likely meaning it had moss growth caused by moisture; he also said he was waiting for decorating works to the bedrooms.
Within his stage one complaint on 12 January 2022, the resident raised damp and water on the bedroom walls and ceilings, and this had damaged the wallpaper. He said that a new roof had been fitted but he was still suffering from damp and mould. In its stage one response the landlord said it would install a PIV unit, however it failed to do this. The landlord did carry out repairs to brickwork and inspected the loft twice in February 2022. In its stage two response the landlord said that it had carried out all the repair works, which was incorrect. Only after the resident continued to contact the landlord, did it make an appointment to install a PIV unit and offered decorating vouchers after the end of its complaints process. The landlord could have taken this action at an earlier stage to show it was trying to put things right.
The landlord’s surveyor inspected the property on 24 August 2022, after this Service contacted the landlord. It then raised and completed various repairs to treat mould, for plasterwork and decoration. The landlord should have acted earlier to fully inspect the property and address the damp however failed to do so. This meant that the resident had suffered from damp for a period of two years, and he has told this Service that he still has damp in his property. His children also suffered inconvenience and distress as their bedrooms had to be changed around which the resident says had affected their mental health and must have been unsettling for them. Overall, there was severe maladministration, which caused distress and inconvenience to the resident and his family. An order has been made that the landlord pay £1,200 in compensation to reflect the of this.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs to the garden and fence

The resident first raised concerns about the garden and fencing on 25 November 2020 as part of his complaint, stating that the garden was overgrown, and the fence was damaged. Under the landlord’s lettable standard on gardens overgrown hedges, lawns and trees will be cut back and ponds will be filled in. After reviewing the void works records provided by the landlord, there is no evidence any work was completed to the garden before the resident moved in. The landlord also failed to complete a post-works inspection.
On 8 April 2022 the resident sent before and after works photographs to the landlord. The resident said that the before photographs showed the garden as it was when he moved in. These photographs show an overgrown garden with a pond. The resident said that the after photographs showed the garden after the landlord’s contractors carried out works. These photographs show the grass cut and a large section of what was bushes had been removed, with stumps and uneven ground left; the pond had also been filled in. It is not clear from the evidence provided by the landlord or resident when the works were carried out, but this was before the first complaint response on 26 January 2022.
Under its lettable standard trees and bushes should have been cut back, however the landlord had decided to remove these but had failed to remove stumps. It also left various holes and mounds of earth, all of which was a trip and fall hazard under the HHSRS. In its stage two response, the landlord said, “under section 7 of the Tenancy Agreement, responsibility for maintaining the garden lies with the tenant, so I have not been able to authorise any further work to your garden”. The landlord had inspected the garden prior to sending its response, but had failed to consider the condition the garden had been left in. Its response that it was for the resident to maintain the garden in the condition it was left in was not fair in all of the circumstances.
The resident also raised the issue of damaged boundary fencing. While under the landlord’s lettable standard, and repairs policy, the resident is responsible for boundary fencing, the landlord should have ensured that the fence was in a good state of repair when the property was let. It is unreasonable to expect the resident maintain something which is in a state of disrepair when he moved into the property. The landlord’s policy is defective, and it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have repaired or replaced the fencing. The landlord failed to consider that the resident had children and foster children and the garden was not left in a safe condition, meaning that it could not be used fully.
The Ombudsman notes that following our contact with the landlord, repairs to the garden and fencing have since been completed.
Overall, there was maladministration. The landlord has failed in its obligations under the HHSRS but leaving the garden in the condition it was left. The resident has children and foster children who would have used the garden and the landlord has not taken this into account. To reflect the inconvenience, time, and trouble in having to pursue a complaint, an order had been made that the landlord pay £1,000 in compensation.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for the wet room to be converted into a downstairs toilet

After the resident made his stage one complaint on 12 January 2022 the landlord called the resident to discuss the complaint, and agreed to investigate whether the downstairs wet room could be converted into a toilet only, by removing the shower as part of its response on 26 January 2022. It promised to provide an update by 28 January 2022, however it failed to do this.
The landlord provided its response to the resident’s request as part of its stage two complaint response on 18 March 2022. It said that this fell outside of its responsibilities, but that the resident could apply for permission to do this himself. The landlord repeated its position in an email to the resident on 8 April 2022. The landlord’s decision was reasonable and in line with its repairs policy; it had no obligation to agree to the resident’s request. There was no maladministration.
However, following contact from this Service, the landlord changed its position and completed works to remove the shower in November 2022. This was again a resolution focused approach where the landlord did not have an obligation to do these works.

The landlord’s complaints handling

On 25 November 2020 the resident made a complaint to the landlord that the property did not meet the landlord’s lettable standards. His complaint was about:
1. Removal of old electric heaters.
2. Soil stack overflowing sewage.
3. Leaking tap and pipework.
4. The bathroom and wet room were in poor condition and had not been cleaned.
5. The back garden was overgrown, and the boundary fence was damaged.
The landlord decided to treat his complaint as a stage zero under its policy at the time. The policy says that it aimed to resolve stage zero complaints as quickly as possible and usually within one working day. By the nature of the resident’s complaint, it was wholly inappropriate for the landlord to have tried to resolve this informally at stage zero; the issues raised were more complex and required investigation to be able to resolve. Further, there is no evidence that the landlord gave any kind of response to this complaint. The landlord has told this Service that it did not give written responses to stage zero complaints, however there is also no record of a verbal response having been given. In addition, the resident chased the landlord for a response to his complaint in calls and emails in February 2021, April 2021 and September 2021 where he referred to his previous correspondence in March 2021 which has not been provided to this Service.
The landlord failed to provide a response, and failed to follow its policy to raise a stage one complaint when it became obvious that the complaint could not be dealt with informally. That was a failing. By the time the resident made his stage one complaint on 12 January 2022 he had been waiting 286 working days for a response to his first complaint. The stage zero had been used by the landlord as a means of avoiding a formal stage one complaint and that was not acceptable.
The resident made a stage one complaint on 12 January 2022 which the landlord acknowledged the following day. It provided its response on 26 January 2022, within its ten working days timeframe. Within its response it promised to provide a further response to additional items raised by 28 January 2022, but it failed to do this. The landlord upheld the complaint and set out the repairs it would do to try to put things right. It did not consider what the impact of its failings had been on the resident and if compensation was appropriate and this was a failing.
The landlord also did not use the complaints process as an opportunity to investigate where there had been failings, which would have given it the opportunity to have put things right more quickly. The repairs raised as part of the ‘Ombudsman’s enquiry’ could have been identified and completed at an earlier stage and this was a failure to properly learn from complaints.
The landlord escalated the complaint when the resident requested this on 14 February 2022 and responded 24 working days later on 18 March 2022, outside of its 20-day timeframe; it did not acknowledge or apologise for the delay. It partially upheld the complaint, however failed to say why or where it had failed. It also only offered decoration vouchers and to complete additional repairs after the end of its complaints process, and only following the involvement of this Service.
Overall, there was severe maladministration in how the landlord handled the resident’s complaints. An order has been made that the landlord pay £1,000 in compensation to reflect the additional inconvenience, time and trouble caused to the resident.

The landlord’s knowledge and information management

When considering the evidence provided by the landlord in relation to this complaint, and the further information we requested, the Ombudsman has noted that there are multiple incidents of missing or incomplete records. These include:
1. No record of the verbal response to the resident’s stage zero complaint.
2. There being an absence of records of the landlord’s replies or responses to the resident’s calls and emails on: 6 April 2021, 27 October 2021, 1 November 2021.
3. No record of the inspection which took place on 8 January 2021.
4. No record of the inspection which took place on 17 January 2022.
5. No record of gardening works the landlord carried out.
6. The landlord failed to carry out a post inspection and take photographs after completing void works.
A landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records of repair reports, responses, inspections, and investigations. Good record keeping is vital to evidence the action a landlord has taken and failure to keep adequate records indicates that the landlord’s complaints processes are not operating effectively. Staff should be aware of a landlord’s record management policy and procedures and adhere to these. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management sets out steps a landlord can take to improve in this area.
In addition, in response to a request for further information for a copy of the inspection sign-off report and photographs after all of the void works were completed to the property, the landlord told this Service that it was unable to provide these records as they did not form part of the process at that time. However, its voids policy which was in operation at the time states works will be post inspected and photographed to ensure they meet the lettable standard. If the landlord had a copy of this report and photographs it would have been easier for it to have responded to the resident’s concerns. The lack of records also hampered the Ombudsman’s investigation. That was maladministration.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration in relation to:
1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property upon moving in and outstanding repairs.
2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of roof leaks, damp, and the resident’s request to have his bedrooms redecorated.
3. The landlord’s complaints handling.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s:
1. Response to the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs to the garden and fence.
2. Knowledge and information management.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for the wet room to be converted into a downstairs toilet.

Reasons

There was severe maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property upon moving in and outstanding repairs. The landlord did not post-inspect the void works it had completed. It was slow to act when repairs were reported and these were not completed properly, meaning issues reoccurred. The landlord failed to keep the resident informed on the repairs it was planning to complete and gave incorrect information on what it had done. It only produced a full inspection report and ordered the majority of repairs after it became aware of the Ombudsman’s investigation. It did not meet its lettable standard or follow its repairs policy.
There was severe maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of roof leaks, damp, and the resident’s request to have his bedrooms redecorated as the landlord was slow to act on reports of a leak, and it was not clear what works it completed. It failed to fully inspect the property for damp and stated it had completed repairs when it had not, which could have been due to its poor record keeping. It only produced a full inspection report and ordered the majority of repairs after it became aware of the Ombudsman’s investigation. The resident still has damp in the property.
There was severe maladministration in the landlord’s complaints handling as it inappropriately raised tried to handle the resident’s first complaint at stage zero. It did not provide a response meaning that the resident had to continue to chase for one. The landlord did not follow its policy and failed to record that complaint at stage one. When the landlord responded to the resident’s second complaint, made at stage one, it did not consider offering any compensation when it upheld the complaint. It also provided its stage two response late, did not apologies for offer to compensate for this. It failed to say why it partially upheld the stage two complaint. In only offered decoration vouchers and other repairs after this Service became involved.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs to the garden and fence as the landlord did not meet its lettable standard. It failed to carry out works before letting the property and failed to identify this as part of a post inspection which should have taken place. Once it did undertake works to the garden, it completed these poorly and left trip and fall hazards. Its complaint response that the resident was then responsible for the garden was not fair in all of the circumstances as it should have made sure the garden and the fence were in good condition before the resident moved in.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping because there were missing records relating to contact, inspections, and investigations. The landlord also failed to post inspect, produce, or retain a copy of a post inspection report following the void works, all of which had it harder to investigate the resident’s complaint.
There was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for the wet room to be converted into a downstairs toilet, as it was not obliged to grant the resident’s request. It followed its policy and suggested that the resident could apply for permission to make this change himself.

Orders

Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Provide a written apology from the Chief Executive to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay direct to the resident additional compensation of £4,700 made up of:
  1. £1,500 for distress, inconvenience, time, and effort for its failure in handling of the condition of the property and repairs.
  2. £1,200 for distress, inconvenience, time, and effort for its failure in handling of the leaks, damp and decoration request.
  3. £1,000 for distress, inconvenience, time, and effort for its failure in handling of outstanding repairs to the garden.
  4. £1,000 for inconvenience, time, and effort due to its service failure in complaints handling.
3. Remove the tree stumps and trip hazards which remain in the garden.
4. Carry out, or instructs a suitably qualified company to carry out, a specialist damp survey within the property, and provide a copy of this to the resident as soon as the landlord receives this.
5. To redecorate the four bedrooms in the property, to include painting and wall papering, to match and reinstate the decoration works as completed by the resident.
6. Complete a review into its record keeping processes around communications, to focus on how it records incoming and outgoing calls with residents, and how it documents the outcome of property inspections and provides this information to residents. The landlord is ordered to provide the outcome of this review, with any recommendations for improvements, to this Service.
7. Complete a self-assessment against the recommendation made within our spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management, which is available on the Ombudsman’s website, and provide the outcome of this to this Service; this could be completed as part of the above order.
8. Report the outcomes of the reviews ordered at 87 f. and g. above to its governing body.
9. Confirm compliance with these orders to this Service.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord:
1. Carry out, or instructs a suitably qualified company to carry out, a water quality test in relation to the presence of lead and provide a copy of the result and/or report to the resident within six weeks.
2. Amend its lettable standard to include that it will ensure all fences, including boundary fences, are in a good state of repair before letting a property. It will then be reasonable to place an ongoing repairing obligation on the new resident.