Hyde Housing Association Limited (202211524)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202211524

Hyde Housing Association Limited

31 January 2024 Amended report

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:
1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s report of a fly infestation in the property.
2. The landlord’s handling of a leak under the kitchen sink.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident has an assured shorthold tenancy with the landlord. The tenancy started on 10 September 2018. The landlord is a housing association.
The property is described as a new build 1-bedroom ground floor flat.

Policies

The landlord’s tenancy agreement states that it is responsible for the structure and outside of the property. It is also responsible for keeping in working order fixtures and fittings which include sinks in the property. It will carry out repairs within a reasonable time frame of receiving a report of a problem.
The landlord’s responsive repairs procedure states that its repairs will be completed in line with its tenancy agreements. It will complete emergency repairs within 24 hours and other repairs within 20 working days.
The landlord’s pre and post inspection procedure sets out the circumstances in which these will be carried out such as pest control issues and reoccurring faults. Post inspections are carried out on an individual basis. However, 100% of repairs which relate to a complaint will be investigated and the surveyor should advise the resident of their findings. If the inspection reveals that the work has not been completed to an acceptable standard, a recall should be issued to the contractor and a further inspection arranged.
The landlord’s contractor code of conduct sets out the standards expected of the contractors working for the landlord. It states that work should be carried out to the highest standard and completed within agreed timescales where possible.
The landlord’s pest control and identification procedure aims for action to be taken where pests are affecting adjacent properties. Estate services cleaning contractors should carry out a visual inspection for any pest activity and record this on the cleaning inspection sheets.
The landlord’s ground maintenance and communal cleaning technical specification states that communal refuse bins should be cleaned so that there is no evidence of infestation by pests. On a monthly basis between May and October, the contractor should scrub/pressure wash all floors, walls, ceilings and bins. Also, the refuse disposal facilities should be cleaned weekly.
The landlord’s complaints and compensation policy statement states that complaints must be answered within 10 working days at stage 1 and within 20 working days at its final stage.

Scope of investigation

In her complaint, the resident has said that her concerns about the leak to the kitchen sink and cleaning of the bin store have been unresolved for at least 5 years. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords at the time the event happened. This is because with the passage of time, evidence may be unavailable which makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out and for informed decisions to be made. Taking this into account, this assessment has focused on the period from March 2022 to January 2023 when the landlord issued its final complaint response.
The Ombudsman is aware that the resident made a new complaint to the landlord in May 2023 regarding the leak in the kitchen and pest control which were considered under the landlord’s complaint procedure. At the time of writing this report, that complaint is been separately considered for investigation by this Service. Therefore, such matters will not be considered as part of this case.

Summary of events

The landlord recorded on 24 February 2022 that operatives had attended on 4 separate occasions since 2018 regarding the leak under the kitchen sink.
On 4 March 2022, the resident reported that she had drain flies in the property. The works order was completed on 6 May 2022. The landlord’s records do not show the action it took.
The records show that an operative attended on 15 March 2022 and replaced the washer and rubber seal to the kitchen sink and undertook a water test. The resident contacted the landlord regarding the conduct of the operative. The resident stated he was unprofessional and had turned up without the correct equipment.
The landlord’s pest control service attended on 16 March 2022. The report from pest control stated that the resident had advised that she had experienced drain flies for the past 10 days. It also noted:
1. Drain flies can occur in a building which has standing water.
2. The resident had a leak under her kitchen sink and when the kitchen cupboards were opened, there was a mouldy smell.
3. There was likely to be an issue under, or at the back of, the kitchen unit that was attracting flies into the property.
4. A damaged tap in the bin store was leaking, there was standing water on the floor and drain flies were observed on the wall next to the tap. As the bin store was located next to the resident’s property, it noted that this could be the cause of the smell to the kitchen sink.
The landlord’s pest control report recommended that:
1. The kitchen sink be removed to check for standing water, or mould that could be attracting the drain files.
2. The leak under the sink be resolved.
3. The broken tap on the wall in the bin room be repaired to stop attracting the drain flies.
4. The landlord remove the kitchen cupboard to see what was located behind it.
The landlord’s pest control officer advised the resident to contact the landlord if she did not hear anything after a week.
The resident emailed the landlord on 17 March 2022 and followed this up with a phone call on 22 March 2022. During the conversation, the landlord agreed to contact pest control to obtain a copy of the report and get its contractor to repair the leak to the kitchen sink. Later that day, the resident stated that the landlord called to confirm it had the report from pest control and would arrange for the leak in the bin store to be repaired and for the bin store to be jet washed. Another team would be in contact regarding the leak under the kitchen sink.
The resident told this Service that on 24 March 2022 and 11 April 2022, she contacted the landlord regarding the smell from the kitchen sink and the attendance by pest control. The landlord contacted her the same day (11 April 2022) to advise that the leak in the bin store had been repaired the previous week. The resident disputed that the leak to the bin store had been resolved and the landlord agreed to look into the resident concerns.
The landlord records show that on the same day (11 April 2022), it raised a repair to resolve the leak under the kitchen sink and to investigate any other leaks and mould behind the kitchen sink. The works order notes show that the dripping tap outside the bin store needed repair and was marked as completed on 14 April 2022.
On 26 April 2022, the resident reported that the tap in the bin store was damaged and dangerous. The landlord’s records show that its contractor attended the site on 23 May 2022 and stated that the tap was not leaking, and the bib tap worked if the operative had the correct tools. He was not able to shut off the water as a squeeze tool was required to do so. He recommended that the bib tap should be changed for a normal tap to enable residents to use it. A squeeze tool was required to turn off the water.
The resident reported a leak under the kitchen sink on 3 May 2022. The operative attended on 12 May 2022. He noted that he could not overhaul the sink and a new double bowl, trap and waste was required. A temporary repair was made until the double bowl was available from the suppliers.
During May 2022, the resident informed us that:
1. She requested that the property manager get the bin store cleaned to resolve the flies that were present.
2. She contacted the contractor on 10 May 2022 regarding replacing the tap in the bin store and was informed that the operative was unwell, therefore the appointment would be rearranged. It would attend the next day to resolve the leak under the kitchen sink.
3. The landlord informed her on 18 May 2022 that a morning appointment had been arranged for the tap in the bin store to be replaced on 23 May 2022.
4. The operative informed her on 23 May 2022 that the tap in the bin store could not be replaced as the water could not be disconnected. Also, once the tap had been replaced, this should resolve the smell from under the kitchen sink.
On 27 June 2022, the resident advised that she rang the landlord to chase the replacement tap in the bin store. The landlord said that the operative was working on another contract so it was unable to contact him but the resident would be updated once it had further information.
The landlord’s records show an extract from minutes of a meeting held on 28 June 2022. This recorded that it had received a complaint that the bin stores had not been cleaned and that a previous resident used to open the bin store for the cleaning company. It noted that its contractor had made requests on several occasions to obtain fobs and there was a delay in the fobs being issued.
The resident advised that she rang on 11 July 2022 to chase the replacement tap in the bin store and the repair to remedy the leak to the kitchen sink. The landlord agreed to update her.
The resident complained to the landlord on 30 August 2022 that it had not acted on the advice it had obtained from pest control and the infestation in the bin store continued to affect her property. The resident provided a timeline of her contact with the landlord since 16 March 2022 when pest control attended and requested that the landlord clean the bin store. The resident stated that the flies returned to the property on 28 August 2022 and that she was unable to open her windows due to the infestation. The resident went on to say that the bin store was full of flies and rodents and that the cleaning firm had not cleaned the bin store even though this had been recommended by pest control. Furthermore, the cleaners did not have a fob so they were unable to access the bin store.
The following day, the landlord’s internal records show that the complaints investigator communicated with the property manager. The property manager was informed that the resident advised that she could not enter her home without walking through a “sea of flies.” Also, the resident stated that she had reported this in March 2022 but the landlord had not acted as the bin and the store room had not been professionally cleaned and the property manager had not responded to the messages.
In response, the property manager asked whether the resident had raised the leak in the kitchen cupboard which she advised could be related to the issues that the resident had raised. The property manager also agreed to contact the cleaning contractors to obtain the date that the bin store had been jet washed and obtain the date that the tap in the bin store had been replaced.
The landlord spoke to the resident on 31 August 2022 and emailed her on 1 September 2022. It apologised for the inconvenience that she had experienced and advised that the bin store had been jet washed on 2 June 2022 and maintained to a satisfactory standard. The resident’s contact details had been given to its repairs contractor to arrange for an operative to attend and resolve the leak under the sink. It advised that once the repairs had been completed, it would take any further necessary action.
The same day (1 September 2022), the resident emailed the landlord to enquire whether the email she had received was its complaint response. The resident advised that she remained dissatisfied with its response for the following reasons:
1. She disputed that the bin store had been jet washed on 2 June 2022 as she had before and after pictures of the bin store on that date. These showed that droppings were present in the bin store on both dates.
2. The leak responsible for the sewer flies was due to the lack of maintenance over the previous 5 years.
3. The issue with the blue bottle flies remained which meant that she had not been able to open her windows all summer.
The resident was contacted by the landlord on 7 September 2022 to advise that it would provide her with a date to fix the leak to the kitchen sink. It confirmed that the complaint had been progressed to the final stage of its complaint procedure.
The next day, the resident informed this Service that she spoke to the cleaning manager and gave him a fob so he could access the bin store to clean it. The resident stated that the cleaning manager had agreed that the bin store had not been cleaned as he did not have a means of access. Also, the droppings had been in the bin store for a long time.
The resident also informed this Service that later that same day (8 September 2022), the company attended to jet wash the bin store. She said that despite their attendance, the maggots and the flies remained in the bin store and the cleaning company had advised that the bin store had not been jet washed on 2 June 2022.
The landlord emailed the resident on 12 September 2022 to confirm that the complaint was escalated on 6 September 2022 to the final stage of its complaints procedure. It advised that it had a backlog of complaints and the resident would be notified once the complaint had been assigned for investigation.
The resident contacted this Service on 21 November 2022 to advise that the landlord had not responded to the complaint. Also, she said that the leak to the bin store remained outstanding and the flies had recently stopped entering her property. She advised that she had been unable to use her oven or turn the lights on after dark as the flies were attracted to the light.
The resident told this Service that the property manager called her on 25 November 2022 about the flies in the property. The resident advised that she informed the property manager that she had not seen the flies since the end of September 2022.
The landlord raised a follow-on works order on 25 November 2022 to replace the double bowl trap and waste. This was recorded as completed on 13 December 2022.
On 1 December 2022, the landlord’s records show that it raised an order to remove the kitchen base unit, carry out a mould wash and resolve any leaks. In addition, it was to fix a house union bib tap outside the property. The record shows the order as completed on 13 December 2022.
This Service wrote to the landlord on 5 December 2022, requesting that it respond to the resident’s escalated complaint within 10 working days.
In response, the landlord contacted this Service on 7 December 2022 to advise that it had spoken to the resident who had said that the flies had not been seen for the previous 8 weeks. It had jet washed the bin store in June 2022 and was arranging for it to be jet washed again. It was of the view that the leak to the kitchen unit was not mentioned in the original complaint. However, a works order had been raised and contractors were attending on 12 December 2022.
The landlord’s records show that on 13 December 2022, the kitchen waste was replaced. The operatives note stated that the basket trap to the sink was replaced with a combined waste plus the missing fittings were replaced to the bin store bib tap.
On 14 December 2022, the landlord’s records show that it raised a works order to attend and rectify a water leak underneath the kitchen sink. The resident informed the landlord on 19 December 2022 that due to a hospital appointment, the appointment was not convenient and this was changed to 29 December 2022.
The resident contacted this Service on 21 December 2022 to advise that the landlord had not responded to the complaint.
On 29 December 2022, the operative attended and replaced the drainer waste to the kitchen unit. The operative took pictures of the backboard and advised that the resident requested a like for like replacement. The resident requested that the pipework behind the unit be insulated to prevent condensation. The operative sent the images and the request to the landlord for consideration.
On the same day, the resident stated that the landlord attended to fix the leak and requested a replacement backboard and insulation for the pipe to reduce the condensation.
The landlord raised a works order on 29 December 2022 to attend and install foam insulation around the pipework underneath the kitchen sink to stop the condensation. The landlord arranged an appointment for this to be carried out on 18 January 2023 and its records show that the pipework was lagged on that day.
The landlord provided its final complaint response on 12 January 2023. It accepted that there were delays in responding and resolving the concerns that the resident had raised. It also acknowledged that she felt let down by its response. The main findings were that:
1. During the conversation on 25 November 2022, the resident had advised that the flies had not been present for the past 8 weeks.
2. Pest control would contact the resident to agree works to the bin store.
3. The area would be monitored. It was too cold for flies to appear as they were usually seen in late May and in high frequencies in August and September.
4. The resident should contact the property manager if she had future concerns.
5. The bin store was checked regularly and evidence had been seen showing it was in good condition.
6. Jet washing of the bin store happened between July 2022 to October 2022. As the resident had not reported further sightings of the flies, it did not intend to undertake another jet wash. It explained that it could not justify the cost to the resident or leaseholders.
7. An appointment had taken place on 12 December 2022 to resolve the leak and fit a new kitchen base unit.
8. It offered £200 for its complaint handling delays.
The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated the complaint to this Service.

Events after the complaint process

The resident made a new complaint to the landlord regarding the re-emergence of the flies to the property in May 2023. This has been escalated to this Service and is being addressed by us under case reference 202320375.
The landlord reviewed its response to the resident’s complaint on 27 July 2023. It informed her that it had increased the compensation award to £850. This was broken down as: £250 for complaint handling failures, £200 for patience throughout the complaint process, £50 for customer effort, £150 for delays completing the repairs and £200 for distress and inconvenience. The landlord stated that the overall compensation award of £850 included the £200 offered during the complaint process.
The review also stated that on 3 August 2023, it intended to replace the external tap, trace and remedy a leak underneath the kitchen sink and jet wash the communal bin store. It acknowledged that its initial complaint response did not comply with the Complaint Handling Code and that the delay in repairs being progressed would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident. It also said that its previous compensation award did not take into account the impact on the resident as she had not been able to open the windows. The review also acknowledged the unacceptable length of time that the work had been on going and the frustration experienced by the resident. It concluded that it should have considered much earlier whether further compensation was warranted.
The landlord informed this Service on 29 January 2024 that:
1. In 2022, it experienced difficulty carrying out services to the bin store adjacent to the resident’s property so this was not regularly cleaned. It had implemented changes since April 2023 in the management of the bin and bin store.
2. It assessed in April 2023 that it had checked the pipework to the kitchen sink and there was no sign of leak. However, there was mould in the resident’s property which remained unresolved.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s report of a fly infestation in the property.

The landlord’s ground maintenance and communal cleaning technical specification requires the bin store to be regularly cleaned with jet washing between May and October.
Following the resident’s report of flies in the property and the attendance by pest control in March 2022, the landlord submission to this Service did not provide evidence of the cleaning schedule for the bin store. Later, the landlord acknowledged to this Service that its cleaning contractor did not have a fob to access the bin store during 2022 which meant that cleaning was not carried out according to its cleaning schedule.
This is contrary to the information contained in its complaint responses where it informed the resident that it had undertaken jet washing to the bin store on 2 June 2022. The resident disputed the information provided by the landlord but it has not demonstrated that it considered the information provided by her beyond asking for pictures of the bin store for its review. This was not reasonable.
Following another report from the resident on 11 April 2022, an operative attended to resolve a leak to the tap in the bin store. This was 18 working days from the resident’s original report. Nevertheless, the resident maintained that the tap in the bin store had not been repaired and the landlord subsequently acted appropriately by arranging an inspection. The operative attended on 23 May 2022 and assessed that the tap was not leaking but he recommended that the style of tap be changed to allow residents to use it.
As the resident disputed that the tap was repaired, the landlord agreed to raise a further repair to assess the condition of the tap. However, it demonstrated a lack of ownership of the resident’s concerns as when the resident chased the repair in June 2022, the landlord advised that its operatives were working on a different contract and it had no means of contact. This also demonstrated a lack of action to resolve the repair as this was not fully completed until 13 December 2022, when the missing fittings were installed. Therefore, the tap was not fully operational between March 2022 to December 2022 – nine months. This was not reasonable.
The resident advised that the drain flies had returned in August 2022 and consequently she was unable to open her windows. Following the resident’s report, the bin store was jet washed on 8 September 2022. Overall, it took from mid-March 2022 to early September 2022 (176 working days) for the landlord to jet wash the bin store. Based on the evidence available, it is not possible to say with certainty the exact period that the resident experienced the drain flies at her property.
However, the drain flies were evidenced on 16 March 2022 by pest control and the resident advised that they had returned in August 2022 just before she made her complaint. Although the resident reported that they were gone by September 2022, the landlord accepted in its follow up letter in July 2023 that during the complaint process, it had failed to recognise how the situation had impacted her.
With regard to the smell under the kitchen sink, pest control gave 2 different possibilities for the cause. It recommended that the leak to the tap in the bin store be resolved and that the landlord remove the kitchen sink to determine if that was the cause of the smell. The landlord’s records show that on 12 May 2022, an operative attended to remove the kitchen sink and made a temporary repair until a replacement sink could be obtained.
The kitchen sink was replaced in December 2022 and the pipework to the kitchen sink was insulated that same month. From May 2022, following the temporary repair, the landlord’s records do not show that the resident raised issues with it during the complaints process regarding the smell from the kitchen sink. It is noted that the resident’s complaint in May 2023 relates to mould in the kitchen cupboards. This element will be considered when that complaint is investigated by this Service.
Through its July 2023 review response, the landlord made compensation awards of £200 for the resident’s patience during the complaint process, £50 for customer effort and £200 for distress and inconvenience. The landlord did not explain the breakdown of these awards between its handling of the kitchen sink (assessed below) and the report of the fly infestation.
It was reasonable for the landlord to make compensation awards for repairs delays and the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by factors such as not being able to open her windows. The overall compensation awarded by the landlord in July 2023 for the fly infestation and kitchen sink repairs failings combined was proportionate. However, this was not offered through the complaints process and a finding of maladministration is therefore appropriate.
The landlord informed this Service in January 2024 that it had implemented changes to the management of the bin store. The landlord has not provided further information about these changes so it is not possible to assess how this has helped it to learn from this complaint – a recommendation has been made below in this regard.

The landlord’s handling of a leak under the kitchen sink

The landlord’s repairing obligations are set out in law, namely the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. These are also set out in the resident’s tenancy agreement.
When a repair is reported, the landlord may need to inspect to determine who is responsible for completing the repair. When the landlord uses a contractor, it retains responsibility for ensuring that the repair is completed.
It is not disputed that the resident reported a leak to the kitchen sink though the exact date is not given. The landlord’s contractors attended on 15 March 2022 and replaced the washer and rubber seal to the kitchen sink. This did not resolve the leak as when pest control attended the following day, the leak was still present. The landlord issued a follow-on works order and the waste to the kitchen sink was eventually replaced on 13 December 2022. This meant that the resident experienced an unacceptable delay of 190 working days before the leak was resolved; this was inappropriate and exceeded the landlord’s repair time standards.
Once the kitchen waste was replaced, the landlord attended on 29 December 2022 to install insulation to prevent condensation on the pipe and to repair the waste to the drainer unit. Overall, the delay in completing works to remedy the leak was 200 working days.
The landlord’s repair policy states that it will carry out repairs within a reasonable timescale which it defines as 20 working days. The repair was not completed within this timescale and there was no explanation offered by the landlord for this delay in obtaining a replacement kitchen sink. There is no evidence of regular communication or updates to keep the resident informed during this period or of the landlord providing an indication when it expected to complete the repair.
The landlord’s pre and post inspection procedure states that it will carry out an inspection for all repairs which are escalated to a complaint. There is no evidence that the landlord did so in this case. If it had, this may have reduced the delay experienced by the resident in the diagnosis of the cause of the leak at the property. An inspection undertaken by a surveyor, particularly following the resident’s assertion that the operatives who attended had not been plumbers but were carpenters, may have given the resident assurance that her concerns had been taken seriously.
In its final complaint response, the landlord did not consider whether a compensation award was appropriate for the unacceptable delay that the resident had experienced. This was not reasonable considering the length of time that the leak to the kitchen sink remained unaddressed and the landlord did not proactively take steps to satisfy itself that the resident was satisfied with the repair carried out to the kitchen sink. It did not show that it had identified what had gone wrong or why there were unacceptable delays in obtaining a replacement kitchen sink.
After the complaint process was exhausted, the landlord wrote to the resident 6 months later in July 2023. It acknowledged that it had not kept the resident up to date, and that this contributed to the inconvenience experienced by her. It made a compensation award of £150 for the delays experienced in completing the repairs. As above, it is noted that the landlord made further awards of £200 for her patience during the complaint process, £50 for customer effort and £200 for distress and inconvenience. The landlord did not explain the breakdown of these awards between its handling of the kitchen sink and the report of the fly infestation.
While it was reasonable for the landlord to make a separate compensation award for repairs delays and the level of compensation for this combined with the fly infestation failings was proportionate, this was not offered through the complaints process. A finding of maladministration has therefore been made.

The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

The landlord’s complaint procedure states that it will respond to complaints within 10 working days at the first stage and within 20 working days at the final stage.
The resident complained to the landlord on 30 August 2022. After speaking with the resident, the landlord emailed her on 1 September 2022 but she contacted it the same day to enquire whether this email was its complaint response. The landlord later accepted that its first response to the complaint did not comply with its complaint procedure or with this Service’s Complaint Handling Code. This was appropriate as it acknowledged that the response did not inform the resident that the communication was its complaint response and did not provide her with a full response to her concerns. Further, it did not give the resident her escalation rights, setting out the action she should take if she remained dissatisfied with the complaint response.
The resident escalated her complaint on 1 September 2022. The landlord confirmed to the resident on 7 September 2022 that it had received her escalation request. It also advised that it had received a large number of complaints and that it would contact her once the complaint was assigned. The landlord contacted the resident on 12 September 2022 to confirm to her that her complaint was being investigated. This took 7 working days which was slightly outside the timescale outlined in the Complaint Handling Code for acknowledging a complaint.
The resident contacted this Service on 21 November 2022 as she had not received a response to her escalated complaint. Following the intervention of this Service, the landlord provided its complaint response on 12 January 2023. It took the landlord around 91 working days to inform the resident of its position on the complaint. This was not reasonable as this resulted in the resident experiencing an unacceptable delay and this was outside the landlord’s published complaint handling time targets.
The landlord informed this Service that the leak to the kitchen sink did not form part of the resident’s complaint. The landlord’s position was correct as the resident’s initial complaint was about the fly infestation that the resident had experienced. However, as the resident had raised concerns about the kitchen sink in her property and this was potentially linked to the fly infestation, it was appropriate for the landlord to investigate the resident’s concerns about those matters at the final stage of its complaint procedure.
In its complaint responses, the landlord stated that the bin store had been jet washed in June 2022. This was disputed by the resident and this Service has not seen evidence to support the landlord’s position. Also, after the complaint process had been ended, the landlord provided evidence to this Service to support the resident’s contention that its cleaning contractors did not have access to the bin store. Therefore, it was unlikely that the bin store had been cleaned in June 2022. The Ombudsman expects that the landlord’s complaint responses to contain accurate information and in this particular case, this did not happen.
In its final complaint response, the landlord awarded the resident £200 compensation for its complaint handling failures. The landlord’s further review in July 2023 increased the compensation award to £850 – with the specific amount for its complaint handling failures increased to £250.
This complaint handling compensation of £250 was within a range that the Ombudsman would recommend for failings of this kind and it was appropriate that the landlord acknowledged its complaint handling failures, such as not providing a first stage complaint response in accordance with the Code and the overall delays. However, the landlord’s review of the complaint occurred 6 months after the complaint had exhausted its complaint procedure and it has not explained why it did not conduct the review earlier to assess and understand its failings.
While the totality of the compensation award is in line with this Service’s Remedies Guidance, this was offered too late to prevent a finding of maladministration.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s report of a fly infestation in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord handling of a leak under the kitchen sink.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration as the landlord has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Reasons

The landlord has not demonstrated that the bin store was cleaned in accordance with its cleaning schedule nor that the work to remedy the leaking tap was completed within a reasonable timeframe. This caused the resident to experience an infestation of flies in her property and she was unable to open her windows in the summer. Although the landlord later apologised and awarded compensation for its failings, it did not offer appropriate redress through its complaints process.
The landlord’s contractor attended on multiple occasions regarding the leak to the kitchen sink. There were delays of 9 months and there is no evidence that the landlord monitored its contractor’s progress in resolving repairs or explained the unacceptable delay in replacing the sink. Although the landlord later awarded compensation for its failings, it did not offer appropriate redress through its complaints process.
The landlord did not meet its published time targets outlined in its complaints policy when it responded to the resident’s complaint. The first complaint response to the complaint was not in line with the Complaint Handling Code and the resident experienced an unacceptable delay in obtaining the final complaint response. The landlord subsequently increased its offer of compensation (for the complaint handling, fly infestation and kitchen sink) but this only occurred 6 months after the end of the complaints process.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is to:
1. Send the resident a written apology for the service failures identified in this report.
2. If it has not already done so, pay the resident the £850 it outlined in its communication on 27 July 2023.

The landlord should reply to this Service within 4 weeks of the date of this report to evidence compliance with these orders.

Recommendations

The landlord should write to the resident and this Service to confirm how the changes it has implemented to management of the bin store will prevent failings in future.
The landlord should reply to this Service within 4 weeks of the date of this report to advise of its intentions in regard to these recommendations.