London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202012367)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202012367

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

1 September 2021

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 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. Response to the resident’s concerns over fire safety in her property.
   2. Response to the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB) from her neighbours.
   3. Associated complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

Policies and procedures

2. As per section 2 of the landlord’s complaints policy, it will:
   1. Be clear about its timescales to respond to stage one and final stage complaints within 10 and 20 working days, respectively, and keep the resident informed about what is happening, including on any delays to the above timescales within a further 10 working days.
   2. Say sorry and sort the issues out as soon as it can.
   3. Help to resolve issues causing concern to the resident and to the community.
3. As per section 4 of the landlord’s corporate health and safety: fire safety policy, it should:
   1. Carry out a fire risk assessment every five years on properties up to two storeys high.
   2. Following a fire, either review the previous fire risk assessment or carry out a new one.
   3. Complete fire risk assessments that detail the risk posed from its findings, determine whether any interim measures are required, and provide a suitable timescale for completion.
4. As per section 4 of the landlord’s ASB policy, it should:
   1. Keep in regular contact with the resident, agree an action plan to address the reported concerns, and keep them updated throughout the case.
   2. Take prompt, appropriate and decisive action to prevent the problem from escalating, for example the use of warning letters and mediation.
   3. When considering taking legal action, first ensure that the case satisfies the required legal conditions.
   4. Not normally consider minor personal differences or falling outs between neighbours to be ASB.
5. Section 3.2 of the landlord’s compensation policy following the corona virus pandemic confirms that it will pay £10 compensation for failing to response to a formal complaint within its published timescales. Compensation payments can also be made to acknowledge impact, distress, inconvenience, time and trouble.
6. As per section 3 of the landlord’s complaints policy, it will respond to stage one complaints within 10 working days, and to final stage complaints within 20 working days. If it needs an additional 10 working days to respond, it will explain this to the resident in writing.

Background

7. The resident is a tenant of the landlord, residing in a first-floor flat within a converted house.
8. The landlord’s records showed that the resident’s building was subject to a fire on 12 November 2019. The fire service had raised concerns over the use of the rear bedroom window of the resident’s property to escape fire. This was necessary as the layout of the property meant that there was no alternative escape route from the bedroom in case of fire. The resident had also raised concerns that, following cyclical external paint work, both her and the fire brigade had been unable to open the property’s windows.
9. After reportedly carrying out a previous fire risk assessment on 1 January 2016, a new fire risk assessment was subsequently completed by the landlord for the resident’s property on 19 November 2019. It had assessed the layout of the property to be compliant with current guidance; however, it did think that consideration needed to be given to the type of occupancy there. This was because children were less likely to hear a fire alarm, and needed instructions on what to do in such circumstances. It confirmed that the landlord should make the resident aware of the escape strategy via the bedroom window and connect her fire alarm to the communal system.
10. The landlord recorded that the resident had been reporting concerns over ASB from her neighbours to it since 2016, which resulted in the neighbours being issued with three warning letters. In response, the neighbours raised concerns about ASB from the resident. The landlord asked the resident to collect evidence via the completion of diary sheets to document the specific examples of the neighbours’ ASB, and suggested sound recording software for the resident to use.

Summary of events

11. The landlord’s stage one complaint response to the resident confirmed that her stage one complaint about the above issues was received by it on 5 January 2020.
12. On 18 January 2021, the landlord issued its stage one complaint response to the resident, stating the following:
    1. It had received a report of ASB from her on 5 June 2020. This was in respect to her neighbours slamming doors, banging on the ceilings and playing loud music. In response to this, the landlord had warned the neighbours, and had asked the resident to collect evidence in the form of the diary sheets, so that it had “up to date” evidence of this. It was also satisfied that it was continuing to support the resident.
    2. It confirmed that it would consider her for priority re-housing if she met the criteria for this, and that it would arrange for her to receive advice on her other re-housing options if she did not.
    3. She was also advised to report any allegations of harassment to the police.
13. On 25 January 2021, a relative of the resident emailed the landlord. They wanted to give “another person’s view of [the resident’s] situation”, and were concerned that it was inappropriate to ask a child to escape via a first-floor window in the event of a fire. In respect to the reports of ASB, the relative explained that the resident’s daughter could not invite friends to her house “because it might upset [the neighbours]”.
14. On 19 February 2021, the landlord issued another stage one complaint response to the resident. In respect of fire safety, it confirmed that its surveyor needed to carry out three inspections; two had already taken place, and the final inspection was scheduled for 3 March 2021. In respect of the reported ASB, the landlord would continue to monitor the evidence collected by the resident.
15. On 19 February 2021, the resident requested the escalation of her complaint to the final stage of the landlord’s complaints procedure. She reported that she had been advised “early last year” that it needed to change her property’s layout to improve fire safety there. The landlord had also sent the resident a decant form, which she stated represented a “massive step forward” in addressing her concerns. However, she explained that she did not wish for a temporary decant while the above fire safety work was carried out, as she wanted her daughter to have “a new start”. In respect to the resident’s reported ASB from her neighbours, she agreed that she would continue to send the evidence that the landlord had requested of this to it, as she has done “for a long time”.
16. On 26 March 2021, the landlord’s solicitor completed a review of the resident’s case for ASB. They did not feel that the case satisfied the legal conditions to take legal action. The solicitor advised the landlord to send an “official letter before action” to the neighbours, to warn them of legal proceedings if their behaviour did not improve. They also suggested mediation between the resident and the neighbours.
17. On 8 April 2021, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s final stage complaint, and it confirmed that it would respond to this by 14 April 2021.
18. On 12 April 2021, the landlord’s records confirmed that it had notified the resident of the fire escape route from the first-floor window at her property, although further work was required to reconfigure the flat for this.
19. On 14 April 2021, the landlord issued its final stage complaint response to the resident, which is summarised as follows:
    1. It acknowledged that its service to her in relation to fire safety and complaint handling was not in line with its service standards, with the decision to amend the layout of the property taking longer than anticipated, which required three inspections and assurance around the layouts of similar neighbouring properties before proceeding.
    2. It confirmed that had reviewed the evidence of ASB from her neighbours provided by the resident; however, this was deemed insufficient to take legal action. The landlord’s solicitor would be sending “a strongly worded letter” to her neighbours, and in the meantime, she should continue to collect diary sheets to evidence the reported issues. It also suggested that the resident and her neighbours try mediation.
    3. It offered her £710 total compensation, which was made up of the following:
       1. £25 for its late response to the resident’s stage one complaint.
       2. £25 for its late response to the resident’s final stage complaint.
       3. £50 for its complaint handling.
       4. £50 for the resident’s time and effort to seek updates.
       5. £320 for its delayed decision on how to proceed with the fire safety work to her property.
       6. £140 for the delay in linking the resident’s fire alarm to the communal system.
       7. £100 for its failure to ensure that the windows could be opened following cyclical decorations.
20. On 21 May 2021, the landlord’s records confirmed that the resident’s request for permanent re-housing had been approved by it. Her complaint was also referred to this Service to consider by her designated person. The resident complained to us that her property was not previously inspected properly for fire safety, and that this lacked the correct layout or linked fire alarms to notify her of and enable her to escape the latest fire in her building without waiting for smoke that was too thick to see through. She added that the property’s windows had been painted shut by the landlord, so that these had taken three weeks to open following the latest fire that had affected her health and destroyed her belongings, and that she disputed that it had previously completed a fire risk assessment there on 1 January 2016.
21. The resident also complained to this Service that her household had experienced over five years of ASB from her neighbours, for which she had provided the landlord with diary sheets and recordings and had involved the police, but she felt that this was “never handled properly or taken seriously” by it. She reported that this had affected her health and wellbeing, and she queried why it had taken “so long for any action to be taken”. The resident additionally explained that she had experienced damp and plumbing issues at her property, which might have contained asbestos in the communal floor.

Assessment and findings

22. The resident raised concerns over the effect of the complaint on her health and wellbeing. The Ombudsman does not dispute her comments regarding her health, but we are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing or to award damages for these. This because we do not have the authority or expertise to do so in the way that a court or insurer might. However, we have considered the general distress and inconvenience which the situation has caused her.
23. The resident has also disputed the landlord’s actions in her fire safety and ASB cases from over five years ago, but these are outside of the scope of this investigation. This is because the Ombudsman cannot consider complaints that were not brought to the landlord’s attention as a formal complaint within a reasonable period of normally within six months of the matters arising, and her stage one complaint was received by it on 5 January 2020. We are additionally unable to investigate complaints that are made prior to exhausting the landlord’s complaints procedure, and there is no evidence that a complaint from the resident concerning damp, plumbing or asbestos issues at her property has done so.

Fire safety

24. Following the fire in the resident’s building on 12 November 2019, the landlord was obliged by its corporate health and safety: fire safety policy above at paragraph 3 to review the suitability of her property for a new fire risk assessment. It then completed a new fire risk assessment for the property on 19 November 2019, which concluded that the layout was compliant with its current guidance. The landlord therefore demonstrated that it acted fairly in arranging this to understand the fire safety issues that it needed to address there in line with its policy.
25. Although the fire risk assessment found the property to be compliant, this did advise the landlord to communicate the escape strategy to the resident, and to connect her fire alarm to the communal system. It is understood from its final stage complaint response of 14 April 2021 that it had other properties in the area which could also have had a similar layout. Therefore, the landlord needed to establish the most appropriate course of action to address the concerns about this, including by carrying out three inspections and obtaining assurance as to the other properties’ layout before proceeding with works for this.
26. However, the landlord had not completed its above works at the resident’s property at the time of its final stage complaint response of 14 April 2021. This meant that she resident had waited over 17 months since the fire in her building on 12 November 2019 for it to decide how best to proceed with regard to the property’s layout, which was inappropriately excessive. It is understood that the landlord needed to assess how widespread the layout issues were, in order to adopt the best strategy to address these. However, this was still an unreasonable timescale to wait for this to be completed. This was not fair on the resident, and there was a failure on its part for its delay in completing this necessary work.
27. The landlord nevertheless offered the resident compensation totalling £610 on 14 April 2021 for this aspect of the complaint. This recognised her time and effort taken to seek updates with £50, and its delays in carrying out the necessary window opening works with £100, in establishing the best course of action to take for the property layout works with £320, and in connecting her fire alarm to the communal system with £140.
28. This compensation offer was reasonable because the landlord’s compensation policy above at paragraph 5 gave it discretion to award the resident compensation to acknowledge the impact, distress, inconvenience, time and trouble that she had experienced from its above delays, and its above offer did so. This was also in line with this Service’s remedies guidance, which recommends compensation awards of £250 to £700 for failures over a considerable period of time to act in accordance with policy, for example to address repairs.
29. The landlord additionally demonstrated that it sought to put right its above failings by confirming on 12 April 2021 that it had notified the resident of the fire escape route from the first-floor window at her property. It also confirmed on 21 May 2021 that it had agreed to her request for it to permanently re-house her due to the above fire safety works at the property, which was appropriate.

ASB

30. The resident has reported that the situation with ASB from her neighbours has been distressing for her, and that she disputes whether the landlord responded appropriately to the reports of ASB that she made to it. However, the role of the Ombudsman is not to establish whether the ASB reported was occurring or not. Instead, our role is to establish whether the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of ASB and harassment were in line with its legal and policy obligations, and whether its response was fair in all the circumstances of the case.
31. In accordance with the landlord’s ASB policy above at paragraph 4, when it receives reports of ASB, it should carry out an investigation and seek to assist in resolving the situation. For it to take formal action in respect of ASB, it requires corroborative evidence of the alleged behaviour to support such formal action. In this case, the landlord demonstrated that it took reasonable steps to investigate and seek the above evidence in line with its obligation to do so in order to take formal action for the resident’s reports.
32. For example, the landlord requested in its stage one complaint response of 18 January 2021, and prior to this, that the resident complete diary sheets, and use sound recording software as evidence of the ASB that she had reported from her neighbours. Because of the counter-allegations claims made against her resident by the neighbours, this approach to enable it to intervene was reasonable in the circumstances and was in line with its ASB policy.
33. However, this did not resolve the ASB issue, and the resident reported that she had involved the police in this, as the landlord had advised her to do on 18 January 2021 for any allegations of harassment. In situations where there has been police involvement, a landlord would be expected to act on the findings of the police. In this instance, there is no evidence that the police concluded that offences were found.
34. As the above ASB allegations were made by both parties against each other, the landlord’s decision not to take formal action against the resident’s neighbours was reasonable, as this was based on the police’s conclusions. Nevertheless, it did offer the parties mediation to try and resolve the ASB on 14 April 2021. This showed the landlord’s continued willingness to find a resolution to the issue and accorded with its ASB policy, which required it to use measures such as mediation to try to prevent the problem from escalating further.
35. The landlord also evidenced its attempts to use other suitable measures available under its ASB policy to try and resolve the resident’s ASB reports. Where it was unable to resolve her concerns, it provided an explanation to her. For example, in the landlord’s final stage complaint response to the resident of 14 April 2021, it confirmed that it had reviewed the evidence provided, which was not sufficient to take legal action against her neighbours. It therefore confirmed that its solicitor would issue “a strongly worded letter” to the neighbours in line with the policy. In the absence of suitable evidence, this was a reasonable action for the landlord to take to seek to address the resident’s concerns.
36. In short, without corroborative evidence the landlord would not be able to take formal action against the resident’s neighbours. It did investigate her reports of ASB, and it intervened where possible, in line with its obligations under its ASB policy. Ultimately, there was not strong enough evidence to support formal action, and the landlord’s solicitor’s review of 26 March 2021 had concluded that this did not satisfy the legal conditions for it to take legal action as required by the policy, following its investigation into the resident’s ASB reports. In light of the above, this Service has not found any failings in the way that the landlord responded to the resident’s reports of ASB.

Complaint handling

37. As per the landlord’s complaints policy above at paragraph 6, it will provide a stage one complaint response within 10 working days. The landlord received the resident’s complaint on 5 January 2020, and it provided her with its stage one complaint response over one year later on 18 January 2021. This meant that its response was significantly outside of its policy’s published timescales for complaint handling, which was inappropriately excessive.
38. In respect to the resident’s final stage complaint of 19 February 2021, the landlord did not respond to this until 16 working days later than the complaints policy’s 20-working-day timescale for it to do so on 14 April 2021, which was unreasonable, particularly in light of its previous delay above. This meant that both of its complaint responses to her were, taken together, significantly outside of its policy’s published timescales for complaint handling, which was inappropriate.
39. It is noted, however, that the landlord’s final stage complaint response recognised the delay in both of its complaint responses to the resident, together with its poor handling of her complaint. It therefore exercised its discretion under its compensation policy above at paragraph 5 to offer £100 total compensation to her to acknowledge this, by awarding her £25 for its late response to her stage one complaint, a further £25 for its late response to the final stage complaint, and £50 for its poor complaint handling.
40. This compensation offer from the landlord was fair in respect of this aspect of the resident’s complaint because it recognised its above complaint handling delays proportionately, as permitted by the compensation policy. This was also in line with this Service’s own remedies guidance, which recommends compensation awards from £50 for repeated failures to reply to residents.

Determination (decision)

41. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect to its response to the resident’s reports of ASB.
42. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaints about its:
    1. Response to the resident’s concerns over fire safety in her property.
    2. Associated complaint handling.
43. This decision is dependent upon the landlord following the below recommendations.

Reasons

44. The landlord acknowledged its fire safety failures in establishing a timely strategy and carrying out the required work for this at the resident’s property, which it subsequently arranged, notified her of the property’s fire escape route and agreed to permanently re-house her. It also offered her proportionate compensation in recognition of this which was in line with its compensation policy, and this Service’s remedies guidance.
45. The landlord investigated the resident’s reports of ASB, and took appropriate steps to seek to address her concerns in accordance with its ASB policy, under which there was not strong enough evidence for it to take further action.
46. The landlord acknowledged and offered the resident proportionate compensation, in line with its compensation policy and this Service’s remedies guidance, which fairly recognised the detriment experienced by her from its excessively lengthy complaint handling delays.

Recommendations

47. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Re-offer the resident the £710 total compensation that it previously awarded her, if she has not received this already.
    2. Review its staff’s training needs in relation to their application of its policies and procedures with regard to fire safety and complaints to seek to prevent a recurrence of its above failings in the resident’s case. This should include the completion of our free online dispute resolution training for landlords, if this has not been done recently, at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/landlords/e-learning/.
48. The landlord should contact this Service within four weeks to confirm whether it will follow the above recommendations.
49. The Ombudsman accepts that, because of the present restrictions due to the corona virus pandemic, the timing of the above actions will depend on what is reasonable in the light of Government guidance regarding the health of the resident and of the landlord’s staff.