London Borough of Ealing (202225737)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202225737

London Borough of Ealing

28 August 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 handling of:
    1. A leak into the resident’s property from a neighbouring property.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder of the property, and the landlord is the freeholder. The resident is registered blind, and the landlord is aware of this. The resident is being represented by her daughter in this complaint. For ease of reference, the resident and her daughter will both be referred to as “the resident” in this report.
  2. In March 2022, the resident reported to the landlord a leak entering her property. There was a delay by the landlord responding to the leak. The landlord’s contractor eventually visited the resident’s property in May 2022 to identify where the leak was coming from. However, it was unable to identify the cause of the leak. In addition, the landlord’s contractor also visited the resident’s property in June 2022, however it was still unable to identify the cause of the leak.
  3. On 30 September 2022, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord. She explained that she and her family had been living with an on and off leak since March 2022. The resident stated her ceiling was damp, and the walls were ruined, and explained that she wanted the leak to be resolved.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 25 October 2022. It apologised for the delay in responding to her complaint. The landlord explained that its area surveyor visited the resident’s property in October 2022 and the affected areas had dried out. In addition, it stated that the surveyor visited the leaseholder property located above the resident’s property to inspect for the leak, but it could not complete a thorough inspection due to the type of flooring at the property.
  5. On 24 January 2023, the resident requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process. She explained the leak was still ongoing and taking too long to be resolved. The resident stated she wanted the issue to be identified and fixed, and she wanted compensation for the distress caused.
  6. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 14 April 2023. It explained that its contractor carried out work to trace and resolve the leak. The contractor identified that there were blockages and leaks under the bath and basin waste pipes. The landlord stated the blockages were cleared, and the waste pipes were renewed, and it explained that the building insurer had been in contact with the resident about the remedial works and she was waiting to receive an appointment date. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for the delays in completing the repairs to resolve the leak and offered the resident £150 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused.
  7. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated that her desired outcome was for the landlord to pay her additional compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused due to the delays in repairing the leak.

Assessment and findings

A leak into the resident’s property from a neighbouring property.

  1. The resident’s lease agreement explains that the landlord is responsible for keeping the property in good condition, and, whenever necessary, to rebuild, reinstate and renew all worn or damaged parts.
  2. In addition, the landlord’s repairs and maintenance responsibilities document for leaseholders explains the landlord is responsible for communal pipes and the leaseholder is responsible for blocked waste pipes.
  3. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance responsibilities document does not contain timescales for responding to repairs, however, good practice is that emergency repairs should be attended to and made safe within 24 hours. Non-emergency repairs should be attended to within 28 days. It is recognised that some repairs may take longer than 28 days due to the need to order parts etc.
  4. On 14 March 2022, the resident contacted the landlord and reported a leak entering her property. The landlord’s repairs notes indicate that other properties within the same block of flats were also experiencing a leak. The Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to attend the resident’s property within 24 hours to make the area safe. However, the landlord failed to do this and as a result, the resident chased the landlord in March and April 2022, requesting the landlord to inspect the leak. The delay by the landlord was unreasonable.
  5. On 4 May 2022, the landlord’s contractor eventually visited the block of flats to  identify where the leak was coming from. However, the cause of the leak was not identified as the resident contacted the landlord on 9 May 2022, explaining that there was still water leaking into her property. In addition, the resident also contacted the landlord on 13 May 2022 and explained that the leak had worsened, and it had turned into 2 leaks, which included a leak in the hallway next to the bedroom and a leak in the hallway next to the bathroom. She also reported that there was extensive water damage in the hallway and explained she believed the leak was coming from the property located above. The landlord failed to take the necessary steps to identify and resolve the leak, and this resulted in further damage to the resident’s property. The Ombudsman recognises it must have been very difficult for the resident living in the property with an ongoing leak.
  6. The landlord also failed to attend the resident’s property within a reasonable timescale when she had informed the landlord that the leak had spread. The repair records show that the landlord’s contractor did not attend the property to inspect the cause of the leak until 8 June 2022, which was a considerable delay by the landlord. From the inspection completed on 8 June 2022, the landlord’s contractor identified that the occupier of one of the neighbouring properties were carrying out repairs inside their bathroom and stated that the leak could possibly be due to this. However, the landlord confirmed in its notes that the cause of the leak was unknown and still under investigation. The repairs note also stated that the resident had informed the landlord that she would hire her own plumber to trace the leak.
  7. The resident has provided the Ombudsman with a copy of a letter from the plumber she hired to attend her property to trace the leak. The plumber attended the resident’s property in July 2022, and he identified that the water leak was coming from the flat above the resident’s property and requested the landlord to inspect the neighbouring property. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the leak had been ongoing for several months, so recognises why the resident hired her own plumber to investigate the leak. It would be appropriate for the landlord to reimburse the plumbing costs incurred by the resident, which was around £250, as the landlord should have carried out further steps to identify and resolve the leak when it was first reported. The resident should provide the landlord with a copy of the invoice/receipt from her plumber, so it can reimburse the costs.
  8. After the resident’s plumber attended her property in July 2022. There were further delays by the landlord in resolving the leak and there are no records to suggest that it contacted the leaseholder at the flat located above the resident’s regarding the leak. The resident contacted the landlord twice in September 2022, explaining that the water was still leaking into her property from the upstairs flat. The landlord’s repair records also state that the resident had recently undergone an operation and was in a very vulnerable state. The landlord should have looked at whether it could prioritise repairs in view of the resident’s circumstances but there is no evidence that it did so.
  9. The landlord’s surveyor visited the resident’s property on 6 October 2022 in response to the leak. The notes state the surveyor inspected the resident’s hallway and bathroom and the affected areas had dried out. In addition, the surveyor also inspected the neighbouring leasehold property above the resident’s flat, which was where the leak was coming from. However, the landlord confirmed in its stage 1 complaint response sent in October 2022, that it could not carry out a thorough inspection due to the type of flooring, which was installed at the resident’s neighbour’s property, and informed the resident to contact its homeownership team for advice. The landlord responded appropriately by inspecting both properties to identify the cause of the leak. However, it was unreasonable for the landlord to ask the resident to contact its homeownership team because it could not inspect the floor in the neighbouring property. The Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to take the necessary steps to arrange for further inspection at the resident’s neighbour’s property to identify the cause of the leak and confirm that it had been resolved.
  10. The landlord contacted the leaseholder at the property located above the resident’s regarding the leak between October and December 2022. The leaseholder informed the landlord that it had added silicone to secure the pipes and filled the bathroom tiles to prevent any water leaking through. The landlord acted appropriately by communicating with the neighbouring leaseholder to identify and fix the leak, as it was the leaseholder’s responsibility to resolve the leak as it was coming from the inside of their property. Leaseholders are responsible for repairs within their individual property and the landlord is responsible for maintaining the outside of the building and communal areas.
  11. After the neighbouring leaseholder had completed the repairs, the evidence suggests that the resident and her neighbour believed the repairs had resolved the leak. However, this was not the case, and the resident contacted the landlord in December 2022 explaining that there was still water leaking into her flat from the property above. Following the report, the landlord attended the resident’s property and neighbouring property at the end of January 2023, and it identified that there was a leak from the neighbour’s bath and sink waste pipe. The blockages were cleared, and waste pipes renewed, and the leak was resolved.
  12. The landlord also confirmed in its stage 2 complaint response sent to the resident in April 2023 that the leak had been resolved, and the building insurer had been in contact with the resident to book an appointment to complete remedial works to the inside of her property. The landlord also acknowledged in its stage 2 complaint response that there were delays in resolving the leak. It offered the resident £150 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused. Considering there were substantial delays in the landlord resolving the leak and the resident had to chase the landlord on multiple occasions for it to investigate the leak, the compensation offered by the landlord is not sufficient to recognise the distress and inconvenience its errors caused. Therefore, there has been maladministration by the landlord in its handling of a leak into the resident’s property from a neighbouring property.
  13. It would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident an additional £350 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in resolving the leak. The Ombudsman’s approach to compensation is set out in our remedies guidance (published on our website). The remedies guidance suggests awards of £100 to £600 where there has been a failure by the landlord which adversely affected the resident, but there was no permanent impact. In this case, there was no permanent impact as the leak was eventually fixed, although there was distress and inconvenience for the resident before the repair was completed.

The associated complaint.

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states that a stage 1 response should be provided within 10 working days of the complaint. It also explains that a stage 2 response should be provided within 20 working days from the request to escalate the complaint. The landlord’s complaints policy on its website states the landlord will aim to respond to a stage 1 and stage 2 complaint response within 20 working days. The landlord’s response timescale for a stage 1 complaint is not compliant with the Code.
  2. The resident submitted her complaint to the landlord on 30 September 2022. Following this, the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 25 October 2022. The response was 7 working days late and not compliant with the timescales referenced within the Code and the landlord’s complaints process. However, the landlord apologised for the delay in its stage 1 complaint response, which was a reasonable resolution for this error as the delay was short.
  3. It took the landlord around 57 working days to provide its stage 2 complaint response. On 24 January 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of its complaints process. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 14 April 2023. The response was late and not compliant with the timescales referenced in the landlord’s complaints policy or the Code. The landlord apologised for the delayed response. However, it did not provide any reason for the delay to the resident at the time. The delay would have caused inconvenience, and the resident was delayed in progressing her complaint to the Ombudsman as she needed to wait for the landlord’s final response before contacting our service.
  4. Given the delay in the landlord providing its stage 2 complaint response, there has been a service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint. It would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. The amount of compensation awarded is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance. The remedies guidance suggests awards of £50 to £100, where there was a minor failure by the landlord in the service it provided, and it did not appropriately acknowledge these and/or fully put this right.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a leak into the resident’s property from a neighbouring property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was a service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £350 compensation for its handling of the leak. This amount is in addition to the £150 compensation the landlord offered in its stage 2 complaint response.
    2. Pay the resident £100 compensation for its complaint handling errors.
    3. Reimburse the resident £250 for the plumbing costs she incurred from hiring her own plumber. The resident should provide the landlord with a copy of the invoice/receipt for the plumbing costs.
  2. The landlord must comply with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.