LiveWest Homes Limited (202320358)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202320358

LiveWest Homes Limited

30 September 2024

 

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 response to the resident concerning:
    1. The handling of repairs to her previous property.
    2. The condition of her current property at the start of the tenancy.
    3. The handling of repairs to her current property.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The tenancy in the current property commenced at the end of January 2023. The current property is a 3-bedroom house. The resident is recorded to have disabilities that include narcolepsy.
  2. The information provided shows that various repairs were raised at the resident’s previous property. This included repairs after a flood in early 2022, after which the resident was decanted and repairs were completed, and pest reports in late summer 2022 after which drains were baited, a CCTV survey was requested, and advice was provided to the resident on avoiding attracting rats.
  3. The resident moved into her current property in January 2023, before which 2 voids inspections found the property ready to let. No post voids works were noted to be required apart from works for a rear fence and handrail scheduled for late January 2023, and it was noted that hall and stairs carpet were retained.
  4. Between February and mid-September 2023, the resident reported issues with a washing machine plug, rear and front fencing, a front door sticking, a leaking boiler, leaking taps, kitchen cupboards, a fireplace, and floor and door damage from a woodworm infestation affecting the downstairs.
  5. In late September / early October 2023, the resident complained. She raised dissatisfaction with repairs handling at her previous property, and said she lived in a rat-infested property for years, and minimal repairs were done after a flood. She raised dissatisfaction with the condition of her current property when she moved in, and said void works were not done. She said that she was left with cement in a front room after a fireplace was removed, left to dispose of carpets and wallpaper, and left with rubbish in the garden. She raised dissatisfaction with the repairs handling at her current property and that she had had to treat woodworm. She said the issues had impacted her and her family’s mental and physical health and ability to settle in the property, and that she sought compensation for what she had been through.
  6. The landlord provided a stage 1 response on 16 October 2023. It said that for the previous property, it was unable to find any incomplete or non-attended repairs, or any further reports or complaints about the repairs service. It said that for the current property, void works were completed to its void standard, bags of rubbish were collected, carpets at the property were gifted, and it could not locate any outstanding jobs. It detailed open repairs for a fence, a front door, woodworm damage, kitchen cupboards, spongey flooring, and a chimney inspection, and said that the current outstanding repairs were raised from August 2023 onwards.
  7. The same day, the resident requested escalation of the complaint. She said that at her previous property, she had been put in danger and there had been issues obtaining information about works after the flood. She said that at her current property, staff had struggled to book void repairs, and she had concerns about damage to flooring by woodworm. Later the same month, there were attendances for a number of repairs and the kitchen flooring was made safe.
  8. The landlord provided an interim stage 2 response on 8 November 2023, after a call to the resident, and noted her concerns. It confirmed a surveyor would inspect the flooring on 15 November 2023, and appointments to repair the floor and treat woodworm would be confirmed after this. It confirmed actions for a chimney and door. It said it aimed to provide a response on 21 November 2023.
  9. The surveyor’s inspection on 15 November 2023 found that the kitchen flooring was potentially defective, and a further investigation involving exposure of the flooring was recommended. They also found that an adjoining dining room floor area presented with historical/non-active woodworm, but treatment was advised. The surveyor co-inspected with a major works team on 11 December 2023, where the kitchen and dining room floor areas were found to have significant woodworm and rot issues, including active and historical woodworm and fungi to joists and underside of floorboards. Following this there were internal discussions about developing a works specification to remove and replace the kitchen and dining area floor joists and flooring, fit new vinyl flooring and reinstate kitchen units.
  10. On 28 December 2023, the landlord provided a stage 2 response. It agreed with the stage 1 about repairs at the previous property, and the property being to a voids standard and having no outstanding repairs from the voids period. It noted that the resident had raised concerns about her flooring, and that after works were raised to make the floor safe it had been identified that there was extensive woodworm and rot under the floor. It said that a specification of works was being developed for January 2024 for this. It said that while repairs had been raised, the resident had not been effectively communicated with, which had led to her feeling unsafe. It acknowledged the importance of effective communication and said internal steps were being taken to improve future service. It awarded £300, which comprised £100 for the communication issues and £200 for complaint delays.
  11. The landlord subsequently commenced and completed the works to remove and replace the kitchen and dining room floor areas in mid-February 2024. During these, it was identified that other areas would also require woodworm treatment, and it was suggested for there to be an internal meeting after completion of the kitchen and dining room flooring works to plan the delivery of woodworm treatment works. Further works commenced in July 2024, and concerns from the resident about these and delays are the subject of a further formal complaint that the landlord responded to in May and June 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident has said that her dissatisfaction with the landlord’s handling of repairs at her previous property goes back a number of years. She has also since detailed more repairs issues at her current property than was included in the original complaint, and has made a further complaint about issues including woodworm treatment identified during the works committed to in the stage 2 response for this complaint. It is not evident that the more recent stage 1 and 2 complaint responses have been referred to the Ombudsman for investigation.
  2. The Ombudsman’s remit for complaints is set out by our Scheme. This says that we may not investigate complaints that were not brought to the attention of the landlord within a reasonable period (normally 12 months), that are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure, and that have not been brought to the Ombudsman’s attention.
  3. This means that this investigation’s main focus is on events and specific issues raised from late September/early October 2022, 12 months before the resident made her complaint in 2023, up until the landlord’s final response on 28 December 2023. The resident has been informed that she has the option to refer the final response for her more recent complaint to the Ombudsman, if she wishes for us to investigate this. She also has the option to make a complaint to her landlord about any repairs issues that are not included in her existing complaints.

The landlord’s response to the resident concerning the handling of repairs to her previous property

  1. The resident complained that she lived in a rat infested property for years. The first mention of a rat issue in the landlord’s records appears to be 2020, about rats at a neighbouring property. The next reference was in August 2022. Following this, the landlord’s records note that repairs were raised for pest control, drains were baited and a CCTV survey was requested. The next and last reference was then in September 2022, when it was noted that advice was provided about avoiding attracting rats.
  2. The evidence about rat issues shows that this refers to events 12 to 13 months before the resident’s complaint, which makes it hard to investigate this aspect fully and effectively. The evidence indicates the landlord has taken timely and reasonable action when a rat issue was reported. The information provided also indicates that the action taken by the landlord was effective, as no further reports were recorded to have been received after this from the resident in the 5 months before she moved out of the property. The landlord therefore seems reasonable to respond that there were no outstanding rat-related repairs for the previous property.
  3. The resident complained that minimal repairs were done after a flood, that she was put in danger, and that there were issues obtaining information about the related works. The evidence shows that the flood occurred in February 2022. The landlord’s record say that the resident was decanted for this straight away, after which works were completed in mid-March 2022. These were stated to include a bathroom replacement and repairs to a living room ceiling, walls and floor.
  4. The evidence about a flood shows that this refers to events 19 months before the resident’s complaint, which again makes it hard to investigate this aspect fully and effectively. The evidence indicates the landlord responded in a timely manner to rehouse the resident and do works it identified were required. The completed works described seem in line with the landlord’s obligations for remedial works after the flood, and the evidence does not show that any further reports were received from the resident about further or outstanding repairs. The landlord therefore seems reasonable to respond that there were no outstanding flood-related repairs for the previous property.
  5. Overall, the landlord’s response about repairs at the previous property seems appropriate, as it took steps to review its records for outstanding repairs and set out an evidence-based position that seems reasonable on the information seen.

The landlord’s response to the resident concerning the condition of her current property at the start of the tenancy

  1. The resident complained about the condition of her current property when she moved in, and that void works were not done. She said that she was left with cement in a front room after a fireplace was removed, left to dispose of carpets and wallpaper, and left with rubbish in the garden.
  2. The landlord considered the concerns, reviewed its records, and set out a position that the property was to its voids standard and that no void works were outstanding. The landlord reached its position after reviewing its records and reports for 2 void inspections. The reports show that appropriate inspections were done before the resident moved in and show that the landlord had appropriate opportunity to reasonably satisfy itself that the property was to a void standard. The landlord’s reviewing of its records including the reports show that it reached its position on the concerns in an evidence-based way, and its position seems reasonable based on the evidence available.
  3. The landlord leaving some carpet and wallpaper in the property does not seem out of line with its void policy, which says that damaged wallpaper will be stripped where required, and that carpet will be left in situ if in good condition. This provides scope for carpet and wallpaper to be at the property when a tenant moves in if these are in an undamaged and good condition. The resident may have felt that the wallpaper was not undamaged and that the carpet was not in a good condition, however it is not evident that any concerns were raised to the landlord in the 8 months before her complaint, before she disposed of them.
  4. The landlord said that rubbish was collected around the time that the resident moved in, which she has not disputed. The landlord’s void policy confirms that all rubbish must be cleared, but the landlord seemed to deal with this issue in a timely manner at the start of the tenancy. The resident did not seem to live with the rubbish for long, and it is unclear that the issue had a significant impact. However, it is recognised that the issue will have been frustrating to experience and a recommendation is made to the landlord about it.
  5. The landlord’s repairs team invited the resident to provide further information about cement where a fireplace had been. The landlord has an obligation to ensure that the floor structure is free from hazards and allows fitting of floor coverings, but the evidence is unclear if such concerns are applicable and if the issue goes against the landlord’s obligations and void policy. The landlord’s request for information showed a commitment to investigate the issue and seemed a reasonable response for the issue on the evidence available.
  6. Overall, while the Ombudsman understands that it will have been frustrating that there were some issues which the resident felt were the landlord’s responsibility, we are satisfied that the landlord investigated and addressed the concerns reasonably and in line with its policies on the available evidence.

The landlord’s response to the resident concerning the handling of repairs to her current property

  1. The resident raised concern about repairs to her current property. The evidence shows that after a plumbing issue was raised in February 2023 and resolved in March 2023, she reported repairs in August 2023 for rear and front fencing, a front door sticking, a leaking boiler, leaking taps, kitchen cupboards, a fireplace, and floor and door damage from a woodworm infestation affecting the downstairs. The resident chased these in September 2023, after which the information provided shows that the majority of repairs were raised and attended in September and October 2023.
  2. The landlord’s October 2023 stage 1 response detailed open repairs for a fence, front door, woodworm damage, kitchen cupboards, spongy flooring, and a chimney (which it is understood was later brought to roof level and capped). However, the kitchen and dining area flooring required further inspection to assess the extent of works needed, as these developed holes, the flooring was made safe, and the resident had health and safety concerns.
  3. The landlord’s December 2023 stage 2 confirmed that there was extensive woodworm and rot for which a specification of works was being developed for January 2024. It acknowledged issues with its communication and delayed complaint responses, awarded £300, and later completed works to replace kitchen and dining room joists and flooring in February 2024. It identified further woodworm works during these that are the subject of further stage 1 and 2 responses from the landlord.
  4. The evidence shows that after they were actually raised, repairs were followed up in line with the landlord’s 28 day policy for responsive repairs. There were ongoing issues such as the kitchen and dining room flooring that required some further investigation, but these reasonably took longer due to their complexity and were followed up. The landlord completed the kitchen and dining area floor works in February rather than the January 2024 stated in its stage 2 response, but in the Ombudsman’s view this met its stage 2 commitment to develop and complete a specification of works for the kitchen and dining area flooring in a reasonably timely manner. There were communication issues and response delays, which the landlord was appropriate to acknowledge and award compensation for, and it clearly sought to consider and address the resident’s concerns and remedy issues evident with its handling.
  5. However, while repairs seem to have been reasonably dealt with after being raised, the evidence shows that there was an initial delay of almost a month between August 2023, when the resident reported repairs to landlord staff, and September 2023, before repairs were raised on the repairs system. The landlord does not show that it satisfactorily acknowledged this and considered any service improvements to try to stop it happening again. This is not reasonable when this formed part of the resident’s dissatisfaction in her complaint escalation. The issue does not seem to have a wider significant impact, but this meant repairs took longer than necessary, will have caused frustration to the resident, and will have undermined her confidence in the landlord at having this aspect ignored. This leads the Ombudsman to find a service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident concerning the handling of repairs to her current property.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was:
    1. No maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident concerning the handling of repairs to her previous property.
    2. No maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident concerning the condition of her current property at the start of the tenancy.
    3. Service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident concerning the handling of repairs to her current property.

Orders and recommendations

  1. The landlord is ordered to, within 4 weeks, pay the resident £50 for the issues identified with its repairs handling. This is in addition to the £300 it originally offered, which it should pay if it has not already.
  2. The landlord is recommended to ensure that it meets its void policy in respect to ensuring all rubbish is cleared before a tenant moves in.
  3. The landlord is recommended to, if it has not already, review the resident’s concerns about the cement where the fireplace was and set out whether it will take any action for this. If it is not taking any action it is recommended to explain why.