London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202202309)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202202309

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

30 January 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of multiple outstanding repairs, mostly as a result of leaks to the property.
2. Associated formal complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord which is a housing association. She lives in a 2-bedroom house with her 2 children.
The landlord’s records indicate that both of the resident’s children have vulnerabilities.

Policies

The landlord’s repairs policy states:
1. It is responsible for the structure and exterior of the home, fixtures and fittings for water, gas, electricity, heating and sanitation.
2. Routine repairs are completed at the earliest mutually convenient appointment. Emergency repairs are completed within 24 hours and out of hours repairs within 4 hours.
The landlord’s disrepair standard operating procedure states that disrepair is defined as “a fault or problem with a property for which the landlord is responsible, knows about, and does not repair within a reasonable time.”
The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. The HHSRS assesses 29 housing hazards and the effect that each may have on the health and safety of current or future occupants of the property and the best way of dealing with them. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under HHSRS, and they are expected to carry out additional monitoring of a property where potential hazards are identified.
The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints process. Stage 1 complaints are responded to within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.

Summary of events

The landlord’s repairs records between 2012 and 2016 referred to multiple leaks within the property. These included 2 leaks from the attic water tank, renewal of rotten flooring under the bath and multiple leaks from the toilet.
Further repairs logs for 2017 to 2019 referred to the renewal of the bathroom flooring, and the front door had warped leaving a large gap through which daylight could be seen. There were records for repairs to the kitchen, bathroom and living room lights following leaks. There had been a “severe” leak in the kitchen where all cupboards had been removed and a “massive leak” which resulted in the removal of internal doors as they had warped.
The landlord’s records for 2020 referred to the toilet leaking from the base and a leak in the bathroom which had impacted the living room ceiling.
On 17 December 2020 the resident wrote to the landlord to raise a formal complaint. She gave an account of her situation which is summarised below:
1. She had been living in the property for 12 years with nonstop leaks.
2. The most recent leak had started on 15 December 2020 which flooded the living room, dining room and passage to the kitchen. The water had been turned off and she had been left for 3 days with no facilities.
3. She and her children had no choice but to remain in the property due to the pandemic and having nowhere else to stay. The leaks had ruined her home and contents, she had no carpet on the stairs or landing which she had to constantly replace.
4. No one had been able to identify the root cause of the leaks for a long time.
5. Her children had complex needs and she needed understanding and a plan of action. She had requested a move to a more suitable home.
6. She owed £8,000 to the water utility supplier due to the constant leaks. The situation had caused emotional distress to her children due to the change in environment and living conditions.
On 17 March 2021 the resident’s solicitor sent a letter of claim for disrepair to the landlord. It listed repairs in the property including a leak which had been ongoing for over 10 years. The letter stated, but was not limited to:
1. Attempts to trace the leak were unsuccessful and it was ongoing.
2. Information was requested from the landlord, and it suggested a single joint expert be used.
3. The solicitor advised that the resident was open to alternative dispute resolution.
The parties instructed a single joint expert witness who completed an inspection on 27 April 2021 and provided a report on 18 May 2021, recommending as follows:
1. Repairs were required to the joints on the stairs where the tread and riser had failed, resulting in squeaky floorboards.
2. The leak from the bathroom to living room had been caused by a punctured central heating pipe which had been repaired. There was minor penetration to be repaired.
3. The bathroom floor covering was missing and there was damage to the right-hand section of floor adjacent to the door opening. The bath panel was spoiled and required replacement. The timber skirting was missing as was the wash basin splashback. The timber bathroom floor should be repaired, and there should be renewal of the timber skirting, bath panel and splashback.
4. The wash basin was missing which had been removed during works undertaken to the toilet and not replaced. Repairs to the floor were insufficient and floor covering had not been replaced. There was skirting missing and timber ducting to cover service pipes had not been refixed to the wall. It recommended a new wash basin and to check all plumbing connections, repair of the timber floor and renewal of missing skirting.
5. A defective light switch downstairs should be replaced. Also, that the bathroom light was defective and working only intermittently which required replacement. It recommended a full electrical safety test. A recommendation was made to overhaul the exiting extractor fan.
6. The front entrance door had a gap between the frame and door in excess of 5mm through which daylight could be seen. It noted that the landlord’s repairs records confirmed that the door was due for replacement and recommended that this was undertaken.
7. Repairs to the bathroom had not been completed fully or to a satisfactory standard. This had left the bathroom and toilet in a state of disrepair. It found no significant moisture levels, but repair history supported that the bathroom and toilet floors had been repaired and that this suggested that the property had been subject to internal plumbing defects.
8. The resident could remain in occupation whilst the repairs were completed. The estimated value of the works was £2,080 plus VAT and it should take approximately 35 days to complete.
The landlord’s repairs records for June 2021 referred to:
1. Carrying out a full investigation of internal and external water services, including all plumbing connections to the bath, sink, wash basin and toilet, to check the drainage system and carry out a CCTV survey.
2. The bath and wash basin needed to be replaced and the toilet needed fitting correctly along with the flooring and skirting boards.
Records of 15 July 2021 referred to the resident making contact stating that she had been living with disrepair since 2017 due to floods in the property. There was damp and mould and she was using a portable toilet outside that she was paying for. She had no hot water, no lighting, and carpets had been ripped out due to the flooding and mould.
The landlord’s records of 9 November 2021 referred to a legal case which said to carry out a full electrical test and provide certification.
The resident reported that she still had multiple leaks in the property on 11 February 2022. Repairs to the electrics could not progress until these had been resolved.
On 21 March 2022 the resident chased the landlord about the outstanding repairs. She said she had no cold water, no heating or hot water. She had no flushing toilet, and the leak was ongoing. She had had no repairs since 2020. The landlord had a date to complete the disrepair which was 20 December 2021. This date had passed, and no repairs had been done. She had not been given a repair start date and the delay had caused her distress. She said that only subcontractors had attended to quote for repairs. The same day the landlord’s repairs records referred to no cold water supply throughout the property due to an ongoing problem.
The resident requested an update on 13 April 2022 regarding the disrepair of the property. She had been chasing for call backs. She had no electric downstairs and was unable to bath her children. This had been ongoing for more than a year and she asked to make a formal complaint.
On 4 May 2022 the resident contacted this Service as she had received no response to her complaint. The following day this Service contacted the landlord and requested a stage 1 response by 20 May 2022. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 13 May 2022. On 3 June 2022 the resident wrote to the landlord to chase a response to her complaint. This Service contacted the landlord on 14 June 2022 requesting a response by 22 June 2022.
The landlord provided a response on 22 June 2022. It said that as the complaint had come via this Service and the resident currently had an active legal disrepair claim, it was not being handled through its complaints process. It said:
1. The outstanding repairs would be addressed by its contractor on 27 June 2022. It received the disrepair claim on 21 April 2021 and a single joint expert was appointed to carry out an inspection. On receipt of the report, its surveyor and contractor met at the resident’s home to schedule the work. The landlord gave a provisional start date of 29 June 2021, however, this was cancelled by the resident due to her child having COVID-19. While it had instructed its contractor, it was unable to arrange a new date as the resident’s solicitor had requested a detailed breakdown of the work.
2. The schedule of works was provided to the solicitor on 6 April 2022 and confirmed in May 2022. The contractor arranged for works to be carried out from 16 May 2022, but this was not permitted to go ahead until it was decided where the work would commence. As there would be multiple operatives working in different areas at the same time, it agreed to provide an update on the day prior of where works would be carried out.
3. Following a call with the disrepair team on 14 June 2022, the landlord arranged a further inspection to establish if any works could be done to assist with the resident’s children’s vulnerabilities. It was agreed that a door would be installed to the bedroom to reduce the amount of “triggering noise,” and the toilet would be renewed.
4. Due to the tube strikes and increase in traffic the contractor moved the start date from 21 to 22 June 2022. When operatives left to purchase the door, they were asked not to return, by the resident, to do the door and toilet until 27 June 2022 when works were due to start.
5. An appointment was made on 6 May 2022 with the gas contractor but due to COVID-19 had to be rescheduled. An urgent appointment was made and agreed directly with the resident and contractor for 13 June 2022 but again was cancelled due to the resident’s child being unwell.
6. There was a leak on the toilet, but it was still useable and could be flushed and the leak contained.
7. Throughout the property there were working windows which provided ventilation. Works booked for 27 June 2022 included overhauling the extractor fans in both the kitchen and bathroom.
8. A temporary decant had been discussed, however it was decided that this was not suitable given the children’s vulnerabilities. The housing team number was provided to discuss moving options.
This Service wrote to the landlord on 29 July 2022 about the resident’s complaint. As the matter had not been progressed to court the landlord was advised to respond through its complaints process by 15 August 2022.
On 1 August 2022 the landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaints process. It said that, as instructed by solicitors, it had addressed the issues mentioned in the complaint within the disrepair claim. It said:
1. Outstanding repairs to the bathroom, kitchen, stairs, front door and the leaks had all been addressed by its contractor. The contractor was due to attend to complete snagging.
2. With regard to the heating and electrics it had made an appointment for 6 May 2022 with its gas contractor, but this was rescheduled due to COVID-19. A new appointment had been made for 13 June 2022 but had been cancelled by the resident. A further appointment of 12 July 2022 had been cancelled by the resident and rescheduled for 3 August 2022.
3. The toilet had been renewed by its contractor.
4. The extractor fan in the bathroom was being addressed during the contractor visit on 1 August 2022.
The same day, the resident asked to escalate her complaint stating that her living conditions were “appalling.” The landlord responded to confirm that it had escalated the complaint to stage 2. It said it had a new approach to complaints and its customer relations team would be in touch as soon as the complaint was allocated to them. The heating and electrics would be addressed on 3 August 2022. An appointment for the fan repair and snagging would be made and confirmed via the solicitors.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 22 August 2022 advising that she was waiting to be contacted about repairs. She had no washing facilities other than the kitchen sink. The bath was not fitted appropriately and was being held up by a letter box and tiles. The toilet was not in use and the leak would re-occur if she ran any water in the toilet and bathroom. Both children were autistic, and the unnecessary distress caused was not acceptable.
The landlord’s repairs records for August 2022 referred to:
1. No hot water.
2. 8 wooden doors to be installed which were removed by the landlord and needed replacement.
3. Reinstate bathroom fan and living room light.
4. Extractor fan hanging from ceiling in bathroom, isolate living room light from bathroom leak above.
On 24 August 2022 the landlord emailed the resident and said that all outstanding work would be completed. All issues with the bathroom would be resolved. The resident responded the same day to confirm that the electrician had replaced the extractor fan in the bathroom along with the light and the extractor in the kitchen.
This Service wrote to the landlord on 5 September 2022 and requested a stage 2 response by 3 October 2022.
On 7 September 2022 the resident requested a surveyor to attend and confirm outstanding repairs in relation to the expert report.
The landlord’s repairs logs of 15 September 2022 referred to an uncontainable leak from the bath leaking into the electrics.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 16 September 2022 to say that from 11 August 2022 she had been without a working toilet. She had been unable to use the bath as it was propped up by a letterbox and some tiles. The previous night she had to call the emergency plumber and electrician to resolve a leak which had been ongoing since 11 August 2022. The electrician had isolated the light as water was coming through it. The plumber had advised her that plumbing work had been done incorrectly. She said it was urgent and no one was communicating with her. She was also still waiting for a stage 2 response. The same day the landlord’s repairs logs referred to the toilet leaking through the ceiling, and the resident being unable to use the toilet or bath due to ongoing works.
On 18 September 2022 the resident wrote to the landlord stating that she was still waiting for a leak to be resolved. She had no hot water or heating due to no water pressure to the boiler. On 21 September 2022 the resident wrote to the landlord to advise that the electrician was unable to fix the living room light as the leak was ongoing.
The landlord’s records of 27 September 2022 referred to the resident wanting to log another complaint as it had failed to communicate. She had been 6 weeks without facilities and wanted a suitable property for her and her children.
The landlord responded on 28 September 2022 and said that an inspection took place on 23 September 2022 following concerns about the work previously carried out. It said that the wash basin was not leaking but that the water pressure was low and would be investigated. The toilet was not leaking, and it could see no active leak in the living room. The bathroom pull cord had been “smashed” and needed to be repaired. The shower head holder was damaged and left in the bath. It agreed to attend for a day to investigate under the bath to check for a leak and address the repairs. It said that the contractor had attended on 21 September 2022 and left the boiler working, however, it would arrange for a new job to be raised.
On 30 September 2022 the landlord’s records stated, “there are multiple issues on this account which don’t seem to be resolved or completed”. It said that as the issues had been ongoing for some time, a surveyors’ inspection “looked to be the best way forward.”
This Service wrote to the landlord on 5 October 2022 asking for a stage 2 response no later than 12 October 2022. The landlord wrote to the resident, on 6 October 2022, acknowledging the stage 2 escalation.
The landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaints process on 12 October 2022. It apologised for its delay in providing a response due to its increased volume of work. It stated as follows:
1. The resident’s complaint was regarding:
  1. Outstanding repairs to the bathroom, kitchen, stairs, front door, and leaks within the property. No heating, electricity and no functioning toilet.
  2. Poor service and communication.
  3. Distress and inconvenience caused.
2. Repairs were being managed by its legal disrepair team who wrote on 22 June 2022 to confirm all works in the complaint were being addressed by its disrepair contractor on 27 June 2022.
3. As it was a legal disrepair, the complaint case was concluded. Its disrepair procedure was separate to its complaint procedure and superseded a complaint case. The disrepair team would continue to liaise with the resident and co-ordinate remaining outstanding repairs.
4. It recognised the length of time it had taken to resolve the repairs and noted its poor communication and apologised.
5. It was unable to offer any compensation in relation to repairs as this was being considered by the disrepair team. It offered compensation as follows:
  1. £50 for time and effort.
  2. £100 for the delay in providing a stage 2 response.
  3. £60 for inconvenience and distress.
  4. £50 for service failure.
  5. £50 for poor communication.
The resident contacted the landlord on 1 November 2022 requesting a start date for repairs. She said she was still without all working facilities.
On 2 December 2022 the landlord completed a post-works inspection. Both the landlord and resident signed the post inspection schedule of works confirming that all repairs had been completed.
The resident requested a copy of the electrical safety certificate on 6 December 2022. There had been a fire to the electrical socket in the hallway. The contractor had attended and changed the plug socket. The fire brigade had attended and advised the resident to request an electrical safety test and said that a live wire exposed could have caused the fire.
The landlord’s internal emails of 7 December 2022 showed that the electrician had completed a safety check which had been noted as “satisfactory”. It also noted that it had been unable to isolate the electrical supply due to the children in the home. It had limited access to electrical accessories and bedrooms due to lots of furniture. The limitations meant that no “dead tests” were carried out. These tests would potentially highlight any loose connections or anomalies in a circuit. Also, RCD’s (essential safety device) were not tested. It advised that the property needed to be fully tested without limitations to get a full picture of the installation condition.
On 20 April 2023 the resident wrote to the landlord stating that she had no working boiler or heating in the property, and the toilet was still leaking. The electrics downstairs were not appropriately installed with one switch working both lights. She was still waiting for an electrical safety certificate and was informed 2 months prior that this was being investigated. The hand basin was still leaking, the bath was too small, and the shower had broken. She said that while she had signed off the repairs, they remained incomplete.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 4 September 2023, apologising about her situation and the level of works needed to her home.
1. It had raised orders relating to drainage, ground floor electrical installation, and ordered an electrical specialist to attend and complete a full survey and complete repairs for any defects. It had asked for the area surveyor to visit and assess for ceiling repairs, missing internal doors and any other essential repairs. Once the inspection was completed it would send a list of works to the resident for confirmation.
2. It mentioned duplicate complaints, the complaint originally raised and responses at stage 1 and 2 of its complaints process. It said that this was a duplication of the previous complaint.
The resident advised this Service, in December 2023, that she had not received a copy of the electrical safety certificate. She said she still had no light in the living room and that there was a constant buzzing from the electrics. The electrics would go on and off on their own. She had no internal doors apart from on her son’s bedroom. The new bath seemed to be too small. The toilet was still leaking on the floor at the back of the toilet pan. She wanted the repairs to be completed and for her home to be safe with all working facilities.
On 4 January 2024 the landlord provided additional information to this Service relating to the disrepair pre-action claim. This had been concluded, following agreement between the landlord and resident’s solicitor. A payment of £10,500 was made via the resident’s solicitor. The agreement reached between the parties was dated 25 October 2021.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident’s disrepair claim was settled, by agreement, on 25 October 2021. This Service will therefore not assess events up to the settlement date. The evidence sets out the date by which the works were supposed to have been completed and therefore we will consider the outstanding issues beyond that time.
The pre-action protocol claims include setting out the effects of the disrepair on the resident, which means that any impact, such as distress and inconvenience, should have been factored into the settlement payment. This Service will therefore not consider the period up to the payment of the settlement amount.
The resident raised further issues, such as the size of the bath and broken shower. These have not been considered as they were not outstanding matters at the time of the resident’s complaint.

Reports of outstanding repairs

In reaching a decision about the resident’s complaint 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.
Under Section 11 of the landlord and tenant act 1985, the landlord is responsible to keep in repair and proper working order the installations for the supply of water, gas and electricity and for sanitation (including basins, sinks, baths and sanitary conveniences). The landlord should have been aware, from its repair history and resident’s previous complaints, that the property had been suffering from multiple leaks over a long period of time and sought to find the root cause at an earlier stage. This may have resolved the issue and prevented the need for a disrepair claim.
However, it is not disputed that the property was in disrepair. On receipt of the solicitor letter, the landlord followed its disrepair process. An agreement was reached between both parties in full and final settlement. The landlord paid the sum of £10,500 to the resident via her solicitor (this included special damages and general damages to the date of the agreement on 25 October 2021).
An additional £1,000 was paid in August 2022 for “special damages”. This referred to settlement offer made in July 2022. It is not known what the additional payment related to as a breakdown of the settlement figures was not provided as requested by this Service. Reference was also made to a payment of £300, in November 2022 as the resident had stayed with family whilst works were completed to a leak in the bathroom.
There was a long delay from when the disrepair claim was made in April 2021 to when repairs commenced in June 2022. The agreement reached stated “the landlord agrees to perform and complete the necessary work recommended within the building survey report dated 18 May 2021 within a reasonable time, and no more than 56 days from the date of this agreement, subject to access being provided, and any lockdown restrictions, and the availability of resources”. A provisional start date was made for 29 June 2021 but cancelled due to the resident’s child having COVID-19. The landlord said that it was then asked for a detailed breakdown by the resident’s solicitor. According to the landlord’s stage 2 response, this was not provided until 6 April 2022. This Service saw no evidence to explain the reason for the long delay in providing the solicitor with the detailed breakdown.
The aim of the pre-action protocol is to promote the speedy and appropriate carrying out of any remedial works which are the landlord’s responsibility. While this Service appreciates that there may have been access and COVID-19 restrictions, the delay in starting the repairs was considerable. The agreement, dated 25 October 2021, set out for repairs to be completed within 56 days, by 20 December 2021. The repairs were not signed off by both parties until 2 December 2022, 49 weeks later than the agreement stated. The resident then continued to report leaks and other outstanding issues following this date. This delay was wholly unreasonable.
The landlord’s stage 2 response of 12 October 2022 acknowledged the length of time the repairs had been outstanding and that the repairs should have been managed more efficiently. It offered £50 for its service failure. It stated that it was unable to offer compensation in relation to the repairs as this was being addressed by its disrepair team. However, the disrepair claim was settled in October 2021, with a further payment being made in August 2022. It could have therefore detailed this in its response and assessed the delays in completing the repairs.
This Service acknowledges that there were delays caused by both parties however, the amount offered was not proportionate to the length of time the repairs were outstanding. As stated above, repairs should have been completed by 20 December 2021. Taking into account that both parties signed off the repairs on 2 December 2022, 49 weeks of delays could have been considered.
The landlord’s stage 2 response also offered £50 for time and effort and £60 for distress and inconvenience. Given that the resident continued to report her repairs as incomplete and persistently chased the landlord, the amount offered was not proportionate to the time and trouble, inconvenience and distress caused to her and her children.

Events following completion of the landlord’s complaints process.

The resident requested a copy of the electrical safety certificate on 6 December 2022, and said that there had been a fire in the hallway socket. She requested the certificate again on 23 April 2023. This Service appreciates that the landlord had difficulties in completing a full electrical test previously, but on 4 September 2023 it advised the resident it had raised an order for an electrical specialist to attend to complete a full survey. In December 2023, the resident advised this Service that she has still not received a copy of the safety certificate.
There was no evidence that the landlord had considered its obligations under HHSRS and any risks to the resident and her children. The landlord’s repair records indicated that there were multiple electrical issues within the property. The expert report of May 2021 recommended a full electrical test which, the resident advised, remains outstanding. The landlord has not met its obligations in relation to the disrepair or outstanding issues within the property.
The resident advised this Service, in December 2023, that she still had no internal doors. The landlord was aware from 2019 that the internal doors had been removed as they had warped due to a leak. In 2022 it referred to the doors needing replacement, and again in its letter of 4 September 2023 it referred to the missing doors. The landlord has failed to meet its repairing obligations in relation to this matter.
On several occasions over the course of the complaint, the resident voiced her concern about safety in the property, her living conditions, and her wish for the landlord to assist her and her family to move home. While the landlord provided its housing team telephone number, there was no evidence that the landlord had offered any support or assistance in relation to this. It also failed to offer the resident sufficient reassurance regarding her safety concerns.
This Service empathises with the considerable period the resident and her children had been living with leaks and incomplete repairs in their home. This would have been particularly distressing for the resident’s children due to their vulnerabilities.
This Service, therefore, considers that the landlord’s response was not appropriate, and that the landlord has not made redress to the resident, which in this Service’s opinion, resolved the complaint satisfactorily.

Associated formal complaint.

The Ombudsman’s position with regard to complaints that are also the subject of a housing disrepair claim is clear, in that they should be handled in line with the landlord’s complaint policy unless legal proceedings have been issued.
The resident made her complaint to the landlord on 13 April 2022 as no work had commenced in relation to the disrepair. The landlord’s failure to issue a formal response until 1 August 2022, despite the interventions of this Service, was unreasonable and presented maladministration.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 1 August 2022 referring to its new approach to complaints, but failed to provide a response until 12 October 2022, 72 working days later and 52 working days over its complaints timescale.
The Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles are, be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes. The landlord’s stage 2 response of 12 October 2022 acknowledged its delay in providing a stage 2 response for which it apologised. It also apologised for its poor communication. It offered £100 for its late response and £50 for poor communication. The landlord’s offer was not proportionate given that the resident had to repeatedly chase for responses and the need for intervention by this Service. The landlord showed no empathy for the conditions the resident had endured, and it failed to demonstrate any learning from the complaint.
The landlord has not made redress to the resident, which in this Service’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Review of policies and practice

The Ombudsman has found maladministration (including severe maladministration) following several investigations into complaints raised with the landlord involving complaint handling. As a result of these, a wider order has been issued to the landlord under paragraph 54(f) of the Scheme. This is for the landlord to review its policy or practice in relation to the service failures identified, which may give rise to further complaints about the matter.
The landlord has been ordered to carry out a review, within 12 weeks of its practice in relation to responding to complaints. Some of the issues identified in this case are similar so the learning from this complaint should be incorporated into the wider review, ordered as part of case 202223386. In addition to this, we have not made any orders or recommendations as part of this case, which would duplicate those already made to landlord as part of the wider order.
In addition to the above wider order the Ombudsman has found maladministration following this investigation relating to complaints involving disrepair claims. We have therefore decided to issue a wider order under paragraph 54(f) of the Scheme. This is for the landlord to review its policy or practice in relation to the service failures identified in this determination, which may give rise to further complaints about the matter. We have set out the scope of the review below.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Reasons

The landlord failed to meet its repairing obligations and maintain the resident’s home in good condition. There were significant delays in carrying out the repairs some repairs remain outstanding.
The landlord initially failed to raise the resident’s complaint or respond within its complaint policy timescales.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £900 in compensation broken down as follows:
1. £300 for its failure to complete outstanding repairs. (This includes the £50 offered in its stage 2 response if not already paid).
2. £300 for time and trouble and for distress and inconvenience caused. (This includes the £110 offered in its stage 2 response if not already paid).
3. £300 for its complaints handling failures (This includes the £100 offered in its stage 2 response for delayed response and £50 for poor communication if not already paid).
A senior member of staff to apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report.
Within 4 weeks of this determination the landlord should provide evidence of its compliance with the above.
Within 8 weeks of this determination the landlord is ordered to:
1. Inspect the property and establish whether there are any outstanding repairs required in the resident’s home. Provide a detailed list of outstanding repairs to the resident and this Service. Provide a completion date for any outstanding repairs no later than 8 weeks of this determination.
2. Carry out a full electrical safety test within the property and provide the resident and this Service with an electrical safety certificate and confirm that all electrics are safe within the home.
In accordance with paragraph 54(f) of the Scheme, the landlord must carry out a review of its practice in relation to responding to complaints where it also has a disrepair claim. The review should be conducted by a team independent of the service area responsible for the failings identified by this investigation and should include as a minimum (but is not limited to):
1. A review of its staff’s training needs to ensure all relevant officers respond to deal with complaints in accordance with its complaints procedure where a disrepair claim has also been accepted.
2. Review this Service’s guidance on handling disrepair and complaints. https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/2021/11/03/new-guidance-for-landlords-on-disrepair-claims/
3. Carry out a review at senior management level to determine what action it should take to prevent a reoccurrence of the failings identified in this report.
4. Consider within its practices, how it will ensure that work is undertaken in a timely manner preventing long delays in completing repairs.
Within 12 weeks of this determination the landlord should provide evidence of:
1. Its findings and learning following its review.
2. Recommendations on how it intends to prevent similar failings from occurring in the future.
3. Identified training needs and how it will implement this.

Recommendations

68. The landlord should consider the resident’s current living arrangements and offer support and guidance in relation to her housing options due to her need for a 3-bedroom property and the requirements of her children.