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

Hyde Housing Association Limited (202203800)

Back to Top

 

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202203800

Hyde Housing Association Limited

15 November 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

  1. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Water leaks into the resident’s flat.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder. The property is a 3-bedroom flat on the 2nd floor.
  2. The resident has reported water leaks from the upstairs flat on a substantial number of occasions since 2015. Between 2015 and 2022, the resident made six separate claims on his housing insurance related to this issue. The resident reported water leaking through his ceiling to the landlord on 9 December 2021, which he believed was caused by the upstairs flat flooding. He reported this issue was causing extensive damage to the inside of his property and his electrics to fail.
  3. The resident raised a complaint about the landlord’s handling of this matter on 22 December 2021. He requested an investigation into the frequent cause of the flooding. The landlord acknowledged this complaint on 25 February 2022 and requested an extension to provide its response on 9 March 2022. On 27 March 2022, the resident reported another flood to the landlord, with a subsequent further leak occurring on 28 March 2022 caused by the neighbour using the kitchen water.
  4. On 5 April 2022, the landlord sent the neighbour a letter. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 8 April 2022. It upheld the resident’s complaint because of the regular leaks he had been reporting but did not offer the resident any compensation. It agreed that leaks from the above flat had affected the resident. The landlord said its surveyor and contractors would be overseeing repairs to the above flat. It said it would monitor the situation moving forward but it was unable to provide any further details about the flooding due to data protection laws. It also confirmed to the resident that if a leak happened again, this would not result in a move for the above tenant.
  5. The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 on 5 May 2022. He was unhappy that the landlord had not provided a report as to the outcome of its investigation as to why there had been so many leaks. He was also unhappy at the landlord not providing negligence insurance details as he wanted to seek damages. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 25 May 2022. It said it would not be changing its decision as it believed it had fairly responded at stage 1. The landlord also said that if the resident believed the neighbour was flooding the property deliberately, he would need to report this as antisocial behaviour to the relevant team.
  6. The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 25 May 2022, advising he would like to refer his complaint. He was unhappy with how the landlord investigated his reports of leaks in the property and the subsequent complaint. To resolve his complaint, he wanted the landlord to investigate and determine if this was the fault of the neighbour, to refund the excess fees for the building insurance claims he had previously had to make, to provide information on the relevant insurer for him to claim damages, and to confirm that the issue was resolved and he would not suffer any further leaks. In a recent call to the Ombudsman, the resident advised that the upstairs neighbour had now left the property, whilst repairs to the inside of his property were involved in an ongoing insurance claim made through the landlord’s insurer.

Assessment and findings

The scope of this investigation

  1. This investigation is focused on the landlord’s handling of the leaks in December 2021 and March 2022. Although earlier leaks have been noted for context, these have not been fully reviewed as part of this investigation. This also applies for any leaks which happened after the conclusion of the landlord’s internal complaints process.
  2. Under Paragraph 41b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, this Service is unable to consider complaints which do not relate to the actions or omissions of a member of the Scheme. Given this, the Ombudsman cannot consider any events or issues in relation to the resident’s ongoing insurance claim.

The landlord’s handling of water leaks into the resident’s property

  1. The lease says it is the landlord’s responsibility to repair and maintain ‘all structural parts of the flat including the roof…all walls bounding the flat…any conduits within the building and which do not exclusively serve the flat’.
  2. Both leaks reported by the resident came through the ceiling of the property from the above flat. The landlord in its complaint responses appeared to confirm that it believed this had been the cause of both leaks.
  3. The landlord has provided little evidence to the Ombudsman about the actions it has taken to investigate the leaks into the resident’s property, or the steps it took to complete repairs. In correspondence provided, it mentioned that its surveyor and contractors would both be visiting the neighbouring property. The landlord has not provided evidence to this Service that any survey was undertaken, or that the necessary works to resolve the issue were completed.
  4. The landlord also mentioned in its internal correspondence that an earlier leak was caused by a washing machine. The leaks in March 2022 were also said to have been caused by an excess of fat being poured down the drains. Given different causes of leaks were being discussed internally as recently as May 2022, the landlord should have thoroughly investigated if there was a larger issue with the plumbing in the upstairs neighbour’s flat. Further, given the repeated distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and his reports of electrical issues, the landlord should also have investigated and surveyed the neighbour’s flat to ensure that there were no further issues that could potentially cause more damage to the resident’s property.
  5. The landlord acknowledged that the resident had suffered a series of leaks into his property. Although it was bound by data protection legislation, it was unreasonable that it did not go further to offer reassurance to the resident that it intended to take pro-active action to prevent continuation of these issues. Its stage 1 complaint response simply advised that it would pass on details to a surveyor and its tenancy team if further leaks occurred and that this would be monitored. Other than sending a letter to the neighbour, there is no evidence that the landlord sought to establish if there were ways it could limit the likelihood of any floods entering the resident’s property and it was unreasonable that it did not offer a point of contact to liaise with the resident as part of the monitoring (and insurance claim) process.
  6. It is noted that the neighbour has apparently now vacated their flat. Nevertheless, the landlord should undertake a survey of resident’s property to investigate if the leaks caused any damage to aspects of the property which would fall under its repair obligations. It should also undertake a full survey of the neighbouring property to ensure that the chance of any future leaks or damage is minimised as far as possible.
  7. It should then undertake any necessary work that would fall under its repair obligations recommended by these surveys, within the timelines specified by its repairs policy. It should share a copy of both surveys with the resident, redacting any potential data protection issues in the survey for the neighbouring property.
  8. The resident also requested the landlord’s negligence insurance details. The landlord has now provided details of its insurer to the resident and a claim has progressed. However, the landlord’s complaint responses were largely silent on this issue, and it failed to provide the resident with clear information about the insurance options open to him. The landlord should ensure it is providing the details of the relevant insurance policies it holds to residents as soon as possible. It should also inform residents of the necessary information they need to make a claim.
  9. The landlord should also consider making all its staff aware of the necessary insurance policies it holds and the situation under which residents may be able to make a claim on these.
  10. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the water leak into the resident’s property. The landlord failed to thoroughly investigate the resident’s concerns or the damage that leaks to the property may have caused. For its failing, the landlord should pay the resident £600 compensation. This amount is in line with this Service’s remedies guidance which recommends figures in this range for a failure which adversely affected the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy says that it will provide a complaint response in 10 working days at stage 1. At stage 2, it aims to provide its response within 20 working days.
  2. At stage 1, it took the landlord 74 working days to provide its response which was well outside of its policy timelines. It took a significant amount of time to acknowledge the resident’s complaint, failing to do so until 25 February 2022. It did request an extension on 9 March 2022 but failed to provide its response by the deadline it had set itself (24 March 2022). The time taken to deal with the complaint at this stage represented maladministration by the landlord.
  3. At stage 1, the landlord upheld the resident’s complaint, acknowledging that he had been affected by leaks on several occasions. However, the response did little to explain to the resident the actions it would be taking to prevent further leaks, or to consider the distress and inconvenience that the situation had on him, and it did not offer any compensation. Given the landlord upheld the complaint, the Ombudsman would expect to see more information or detail about how it intended to put things right for the resident.
  4. At stage 2, the landlord took 15 days to provide its response. This was within the timelines set out in its policy. The landlord’s responses were fair in tone.
  5. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. It failed to provide its response at stage 1 in the timelines it sets out in its policy and that it outlined to the resident. It also failed to provide compensation to the resident or outline what steps it would be taking after upholding his complaint. For this failing, the landlord should pay the resident £100 compensation.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of water leaks into the resident’s flat.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. It is ordered that within 4 weeks of the date of this letter, the landlord:
    1. Write to the resident to apologise for the service failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £700 compensation, consisting of:
      1. £600 for its failure to fully investigate the water leaks;
      2. £100 for the unreasonable complaint handling delay.
    3. Appoint a surveyor to perform an inspection of both the resident’s property and the flat above to ensure that no damage has occurred to the resident’s property which it is responsible for repairing, and to establish any continued faults in the neighbour’s property which could cause damage to the resident’s property.
  2. Within 8 weeks of the date of this letter, the landlord should ensure that all repair and complaint handling staff are aware of insurance options available to leaseholders so that they can promptly and accurately signpost residents who have experienced damage that they attribute to its own service failings.
  3. The landlord should write to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.