Lambeth Council (202126158)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202126158

Lambeth Council

10 July 2023

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. request for the resident to install carpets in the property.
   2. handling of the resident’s management transfer.

Jurisdiction

2. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
3. In accordance with paragraph 42 (a) of the Scheme, the following aspect of the complaint is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction:
   1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s management transfer.
4. Paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme says that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which ‘are made prior to having exhausted a member’s [landlord’s] complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale’.
5. In this instance the resident would need to log a complaint with the landlord about it’s handling of her management transfer as the Ombudsman has not seen evidence that this complaint has exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure.

Background

6. The resident is a secure tenant and lives in a flat.
7. Following complaints of noise nuisance from the resident’s neighbour, the landlord determined the laminate flooring in the resident’s property did not meet the obligations set out in her tenancy agreement. The landlord’s records show it was provided with medical evidence that stated any carpets, including hypoallergenic carpets, would have an adverse effect on her son’s asthma in January 2021.
8. On 1 December 2021 the resident raised a complaint following the landlord’s requests to have carpet installed in the property. The resident advised hypoallergenic carpets would have a negative impact on her son’s health because of his allergies and she did not want to put it at risk by installing the carpets. The resident stated the noise being transferred from the property was normal living noise and not a nuisance. She felt her neighbour was making malicious accusations against her and her family.
9. The landlord wrote to the resident on 1 December 2021 to state that while it understood the resident’s child had asthma and other health conditions installing hypoallergenic carpets designed for her son’s health condition was the best way forward. The landlord advised the floors in the property should be covered with flooring of a suitable material in order to prevent the transmission of noise. The landlord asked the resident to ensure that adequate flooring was laid to reduce the noise transference, which was causing distress to her neighbours and impeding their ‘quiet enjoyment’ of their home.
10. The landlord provided a stage one complaint response on 11 January 2022. The landlord referred to the resident’s tenancy agreement regarding laminate flooring not being allowed in the property. It advised it was the resident’s responsibility to ensure adequate flooring was laid throughout her home to limit any noise that could affect her neighbour. It stated the resident could fit thick underlay, which would help to reduce the noise or install thick underlay lino flooring. The landlord advised the terms and conditions of the resident’s tenancy agreement needed to be adhered to.
11. The landlord provided the resident with information on how she could take independent legal action against her neighbour. It also advised it had a very high demand for a limited number of available properties and the resident was on the correct priority banding for rehousing. The resident was advised to actively bid for all available properties and to register for a mutual exchange.
12. On 13 January 2022 the landlord advised the resident that the flooring required in the property would be hypoallergenic with a thick underlay. The landlord advised if the resident believed her child’s condition could not cope with hypoallergenic carpet, she should submit an application for a transfer to a ground floor property on medical grounds.
13. A stage two complaint response was provided on 10 March 2022. The resident remained unhappy because she felt the landlord had not read the medical advice concerning her son and the unsuitability of hypoallergenic carpets, she had previously provided. The resident felt she already had adequate flooring because the laminate flooring in the property had soundproof underlaying. The resident advised the only way forward would be for the landlord to rehouse her.
14. The landlord advised the resident of the obligations of her tenancy agreement and asked her to remove all laminate flooring in the property and lay down adequate floor coverings. It stated heavy duty rubber should be installed as an alternative to carpet and asked the resident to do this by 8 April 2022. The landlord also asked the resident to report any antisocial behaviour (ASB) she may be experiencing.
15. The resident installed carpet within the property in April 2022. The resident contacted the Ombudsman because her son’s allergies have worsened since the installation of the carpets. The resident states her family left in debt after being forced to install the carpets, which led to rent arrears. The resident does not feel the landlord considered the provided medical advice regarding son’s condition or addressed her concerns about the potential hazard to her baby with installing rubber tiles. The resident would like to be moved to a ground floor property.

Assessment and findings

16. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
    1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes;
    2. put things right, and;
    3. learn from outcomes.
17. The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.

Policies and procedures

18. The landlord’s tenancy enforcement policy states it will carry out a number of prevention and intervention measures to tackle reported ASB. These include:
    1. Use of mediation.
    2. Acceptable Behaviour Agreements (ABAs).
    3. Referral to ACS and/or CYPS including referrals to Family Intervention Projects/Parenting Support Projects and youth diversionary schemes.
    4. Multi Agency Partnerships.
    5. Good Neighbour Agreements.
    6. CCTV / Mobile CCTV equipment.
19. Under the heading “Alterations and Improvements” the tenancy agreement states the resident must not install laminate floor covering or sanded floorboards in the Property, other than: (a) on the ground floor; and then (b) only if there is no-one living beneath the resident, without first obtaining written permission from the landlord.
20. Under paragraph 14.3 it states “Any existing laminate flooring and sanded floorboards can remain only if there are no complaints from the neighbours or a nuisance to others living in adjacent properties. If there are complaints, then we would have to ask you to remove the floor covering in the property or take measures to minimise noise being transmitted to adjacent properties”.
21. Paragraph 14.4 states the landlord recognises that there may be circumstances where carpet and additives in alternative floor coverings may exacerbate some health conditions. The landlord will develop mitigating policies and procedures to reduce any adverse impact on residents under such circumstances.

The landlord’s request for the resident to install carpets in the property

22.  The landlord had initially advised the resident she should still install hypoallergenic carpet that was designed for her son’s health conditions. The Ombudsman understands how this would have caused significant distress and frustrations to the resident. The medical evidence previously provided to the landlord had stated the resident’s son was allergic to dust mites that can still dwell in hypoallergenic carpets. By still asking the resident to install hypoallergenic carpets, the resident understandably felt the landlord was not considering the information she had provided regarding her son’s health. The landlord acknowledged this by apologising for any upset it had caused to the resident in trying to resolve the matter. An apology was reasonable under the circumstances as a resolution to this complaint.
23. The landlord should have made it clearer that it had considered the medical evidence previously provided, in its initial requests for appropriate flooring to be installed. However, the landlord had ultimately taken reasonable action to ensure adequate flooring was installed in the property that was in line with the resident’s tenancy agreement. It had provided the resident with alternative flooring options, such as rubber tiles, that were more suitable to her son’s health condition.
24. The resident had stated she could not fit rubber flooring because of potential hazards to her baby. The resident has not provided medical evidence to show why this type of flooring would be unsuitable for her baby. In the absence of such evidence, it was reasonable for the landlord to recommend rubber flooring.

Complaint handling

25. The landlord’s corporate complaints policy states if a complaint cannot be responded to within 20 working days, an interim response should be sent to the resident explaining the reason for delay and advising when the resident could expect to receive a response. The landlord would aim to provide a stage two complaint response within 25 working days. This is not in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (published on our website), which states a stage one complaint response should be provided within 10 working days and a stage two complaint response within 20 working days.
26. The resident expressed her dissatisfaction with the stage one complaint response on 14 January 2022. The landlord did not provide a stage two complaint response until 10 March 2022, 40 working days later. The Ombudsman can see the landlord corresponded further with the resident in January 2022 but it did not explain why there was a delay in providing the response. The landlord did acknowledge and apologise to the resident for the delay. Whilst any delay would have caused some level of inconvenience to the resident, an apology is sufficient redress in this case based on the length of the delay.
27.  Going forward, the landlord should make every effort to provide complaint responses within accordance of it’s policy timeframes or proactively update residents if the complaint response is delayed.

Determination

28. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of it’s request that the resident install carpet in the property.

Recommendation

29. The landlord needs to check any medical letters on record before telling residents that they are in breach of their tenancy.
30. The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord amend its corporate complaints policy, so that its complaint response timescales are in line with the timescales set out in the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.