Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Islington Council (202107231)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202107231

Islington Council

22 February 2022


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 response to the residents’ repair request following a leak into their wet room.

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant since 5 June 2014 and the property is described as a two-bedroom first floor flat.
  2. The tenancy agreement obliges the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair including the external pipes and in proper working order the installations for the supply of …. sanitation. If the council carries out repairs or improvements that involve damaging the decorations in the property, it will make good the damage or offer a decorations allowance.
  3. The landlord has a repairs policy that shows:
    1. It will complete emergency repairs within two hours, urgent repairs within 24 hours and routine repairs within 20 working days.
    2. if a property is flooded, the landlord will carry out works to restore the property to a liveable condition and dependent on the extent of the damage may provide temporary lighting, heating and cooking facilities and in severe flooding, may offer rehousing on a temporary basis and the choice of accommodation will be limited.
    3. if the flood involves foul water or sewage, the landlord will disinfect the affected flooring and apply a deodoriser.
    4. for some complex repairs a diagnostic surveyor may attend to diagnose the cause of the defect and raise the necessary works within 10 working days or complete a post inspection following works done by the Council within 20 working days of the completion of the works.
  4. The landlord has a two stage complaints policy with complaints answered within 21 days at the first stage. A stage one review will be conducted by the service area before the complaint is escalated to the final stage of the complaints procedure and within 28 days at the final stage of the complaints procedure.
  5. The landlord has a compensation policy that sets out for housing repairs it will consider compensation between a range of £500- £2500 depending on the severity of the disrepair.

Summary of events

  1. The resident reported to the landlord that there was a leak in his wet room and its’ repair records show:
    1. a routine repair was reported on 19 August 2020 for a plumber to inspect and rectify a leak from the shower waste which was completed on 24 August 2020.
    2. an urgent repair raised on 26 August 2020 for an electrician to inspect and rectify the defective walk-in shower. It is noted that the pump was tested and that the water was draining away however the resident reports that within the hour there was a back surge into the shower tray which flooded the hallway. The electrician recommended that the drainage team attend.
    3. an emergency repair was raised on 27 August 2020 to make safe a continuous leak from an unknown source in the bathroom, behind the toilet. It was noted that the subcontractors were required to inspect the wet room floor around the pump waste as water may be gathering under the floor and leaking into the hall and the toilet
    4. a routine repair was raised on 27 August 2020 to investigate the cause of the leak and attend the wet room floor which was lifting. Record was completed on 9 October 2020
    5. an emergency repair raised on 2 September 2020 to make safe leak from under the wet room which had gone into the kitchen and living room floor. It is noted that the plumber carried out a temporary repair and as the waste was loose the subcontractors needed to be notified.
  2. The resident completed an online complaint form on 6 September 2020 reporting that though he had reported an emergency repair on 19 August 2020 the landlord had failed to resolve the leak in his property. The leak  affected his kitchen and living room floor which meant that his family had to stay with relatives as the property was not habitable. In addition, his contents and furniture were damaged by the leak and he had to dispose of the carpets. He requested for a surveyor to attend, that the repair be carried out and compensation for the damaged items.
  3. The landlord responded to the complaint on 28 September 2020, acknowledging that there had been service failures as there had been a delay in completing the repairs and apologised that the resident had been affected by the leak. The complaint response recognised:
    1. that operatives attended to remedy the leaking pipe and faulty pump to the wet room on 24 August 2020, 27 August 2020 and on 18 September 2020
    2. when it attended to rectify the leak to the toilet on 27 August 2020 there was no access.
    3.  it acknowledged its failure in not organising for the drainage team to attend to resolve the faulty pump as recommended by the plumber
    4. it confirmed its supervisor had visited on 23 September 2020 and recommended that a contractor was needed to repair or replace the pump
    5. compensation would be calculated once the repairs were completed
    6. in the first instance, residents are expected to claim on their home contents insurance for damage to personal belongings. However, he could contact Tenancy Services to discuss the available options if he did not have home contents insurance.
  4. The resident wrote to the landlord on 4 October 2020 as the repairs remained outstanding after three months. He advised that he had to find alternative housing for his family as this was not offered by the Council while the work was being carried out and that he did not have insurance. He requested that:
    1. the work be completed
    2. compensation for the inconvenience and reimbursement for the alternative accommodation
    3. an assessment of the damage caused to his property including the carpets.
  5. The landlord’s records show that a routine repair was raised on 6 October 2020 to clear the blocked shared stack pipe. It was noted that the stack was not blocked but that the copper bath waste had corroded in the bathroom wall and needed replacement. A routine repair was raised the following day 7 October 2020 to replace the copper pipe.
  6. The landlord undertook a stage one review and responded on the 26 October 2020 affirming that the complaint was upheld and acknowledged:
    1. the delay in the works to the wet room being completed
    2. the inconvenience and upset experienced by the resident as the repairs took 2 months to conclude

It  awarded compensation of £283.32 for the period 19 August 2020 to 21 October 2020 in recognition of the delay, inconvenience, distress, time and trouble.

  1. The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated his complaint on 4 November 2020 to the final stage of the complaint procedure advising that the compensation did not cover the damage incurred neither the distress or inconvenience his family experienced. He requested that the landlord:
    1. take responsibility for repairing the damage to the property including organising the drying out of the property, decorating the walls and replacing the skirting boards
    2. pay compensation to cover the rent, alternative accommodation, repair to the flat, damaged floor and furniture as it did not offer him alternative accommodation for the two months that the property did not have bathing facilities and for not offering him a rent rebate for that period

He advised that he had contacted tenancy services regarding the insurance claim and no one had been in contact.

  1. The surveyor’s inspection carried out on 21 January 2021 found that following the leak from the wet room shower there was mould growth in the bathroom, toilet, hallway and hallway cupboard. It recommended a mould wash for the affected areas, plaster to the bathroom and toilet, renewing the skirting in the hallway and refixing the toilet basin to the wall.
  2. The landlord’s post inspection carried out on 19 February 2021 agreed to replace the affected skirting boards in the hallway and to offer a paint pack as a gesture to remedy holes in the shelfing caused during the works in the bathroom.
  3. The landlord provided its final stage complaint response on 24 February 2021 and apologised for not responding to the complaint within its published complaint response times. The complaint response reiterated that it agreed with the conclusion in the stage one response that the complaint was upheld due to the delays in the repairs being completed. It also:
    1. apologised that a dehumidifier was not supplied to assist with the drying out process
    2. acknowledged that there were missed opportunities to provide support to the family
    3. considered the property was habitable while the work was being carried out, so a rent refund was declined
    4. advised that alternative accommodation was not necessary so reimbursement of that cost would not be provided,
    5. confirmed that remedial works were competed on 26 January 2021 and the contact details were provided to rearrange the appointment for a surveyor to attend to assess whether any other repairs were required,
    6. advised that damage to his floor and furniture as a result of the flood would be assessed by as a Public Liability Claim and that he would be contacted directly about that and apologised for the oversight in the management of the liability claim form,
    7. agreed to increase the compensation to £791.64 in recognition of the delay, distress, inconvenience, time and trouble the resident experienced. The award also included a compensation award of £25 for the delayed complaint response.
  4. The resident made a further complaint to the landlord on 3 March 2021 outlining his continued dissatisfaction with the complaint response. He maintained that the property was not habitable whilst the work was ongoing, repeated his request for a rent refund and for the amount spent on alternative accommodation. In addition, he advised that he was disappointed with the management of the insurance claim form and that the compensation award was too low as it did not reflect his expenditure or his experience during the period.
  5. The landlord records show a routine repair raised on 12 March 2021 and completed on 17 March 2021 to deliver a dehumidifier to the resident.
  6. The landlord provided a follow up final stage complaint response on 18 March 2021. It clarified that:
    1. it was advised that the bathroom was in use, therefore a rent refund was not payable
    2. the toilet was in a separate room and that if it was advised that the toilet was out action, a chemical toilet would have been provided
    3. following the visit on 11 March 2021, it had agreed to decorate the bathroom, replace the skirting and supply a dehumidifier to dry out the property.
  7. The resident approached this Service on 29 June 2021 as he remained dissatisfied with the landlords’ response. He advised that the landlord took over a month to start the repair and that the bathroom was not useable for a month while the repair was being carried out to rectify the blockage to the waste, hence he had to find alternative accommodation. During the repair, the flat was flooded with sewage, damaging the flooring and furniture and the lack of drying facilities led to an infestation of flies and insects.

Assessment and findings

  1. In reaching a decision we consider whether the landlord has kept to the law, followed proper procedure and good practice, and acted in a reasonable way. Our duty is to determine complaints by reference to what is, in this Service’s opinion, fair in all the circumstances of the case.
  2. The Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles are:

• Be fair

• Put things right

• Learn from outcomes

  1. This Service will apply these principles when considering whether any redress is appropriate and proportionate for any maladministration or service failure identified.
  2. The resident reported that there was a back surge from the shower waste and reported this to the landlord on 19 August 2020. On receipt of the report, the landlord was obliged to inspect and complete the necessary repairs in accordance its repairs policy to ensure that the resident had bathing facilities. Although the landlord carried out repairs in response to the residents’ reports it did not immediately identify the cause of the leak as the resident reported on two further occasions that the leak had reoccurred.
  3. The landlord recognised through the complaints process that there were service failures as it failed to raise the works order for the drainage team to attend and did not initially arrange for a dehumidifier.  It apologised for these errors and arranged for a dehumidifier to be delivered to the resident.
  4. The repair records evidence that by the time the landlord received the report of 2 September 2020, its operatives had attended on three previous occasions regarding the defect to the wet room. The plumber who attended on that day temporarily resolved the issue with the pump and reported again to the landlord that a subcontractor was required to remedy the defective pump. Though it received this report and had the previous report from the electrician who attended on 27 August 2020 that the subcontractors attendance was required, it took almost another three weeks before the supervisor attended on 18 September 2020, to diagnose the problem and recommend a solution. It was unreasonable that it took the landlord over a month for the fault to be diagnosed as it was aware that multiple visits had taken place and the substantive repair had not been resolved.
  5. In October 2020, it was identified that the copper bath waste required replacement as it had corroded in the wall. Though the cause of the pump failure was not obvious, it took a further 4 weeks following the visit from the surveyor for the copper pipe to be replaced with a plastic pipe.
  6. Following the completion of the repairs, the landlord carried out an inspection in January 2021 and agreed to plaster the bathroom and toilet, renew the skirting in the hallway and carry out a mould wash to the affected area. A post inspection of the residents’ home was carried out and the landlord agreed  as a good will gesture to decorate the bathroom  and replace the skirting. It was reasonable for the landlord to reinspect the residents’ home in light of the residents’ concerns and his dissatisfaction with the landlords handling of the repair.
  7. In his complaints to the landlord, the resident expressed that for the period that the work was being carried out, the property was not habitable as he did not have access to bathing facilities. He requested for a rent refund and for the costs of the alternative accommodation his family moved to in early September 2020. The landlord did not accept that the property was not habitable and evidence seen by this Service records that following the temporary repair carried out on 2 September 2020 there were no further defect reports from the resident.
  8. In its complaint responses, the landlord determined that it would not reimburse the resident for the rent paid for the period that the repairs were taking place and that it did not accept that the property was not habitable. However, following its review at the final stage of the complaints procedure, it had regard to the residents’ situation and increased the compensation award for distress and inconvenience to £400 which is in the range that the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance recommends for service failure ‘over a considerable period of time to act in accordance with policy’ and therefore represented appropriate redress.
  9. Throughout its complaints responses, the landlord has been resolution focused as on its first review of the complaint, it concluded that the complaint was upheld, apologised and acknowledged the service failures in the time taken for the repair to be completed. It reviewed and increased the compensation award in recognition of the delay and the inconvenience experienced by the resident from £283.32 to £791.64, arranged a reinspection of the residents’ home and agreed to carry out additional decorative works to the resident’s bathroom.
  10. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord, put things right and resolves the resident’s complaint satisfactorily. This includes the steps the landlord has taken to address the service failures and prevent a reoccurrence. In response to the residents’ complaints, the landlord has taken appropriate steps to acknowledge the failure, apologise and offered appropriate compensation. In doing so, the landlord has offered appropriate redress to resolve the complaint and acted in accordance with Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles.
  11. In summary, the landlord acknowledged that the repair was not handled within its published timescales, apologised, recognised its failures in managing the repair and awarded appropriate compensation for its failures.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of reasonable redress following the Ombudsman’s intervention which, in the Ombudsman opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Reasons

  1. The landlord has acknowledged the service failures in its handling of the repairs to the wet room. However, the landlord has apologised for the service failures and its increased compensation offer of £791.64 was fair given the circumstances of the case

Recommendations

  1. The landlord to reoffer the compensation award of £791.64 as set out in its complaint response on 18 March 2021 and let this Service know once it has done so.
  2. If it has not already done so ensure that the Public Liability claim regarding the damage to the flooring and the furniture is progressed.