Longhurst Group Limited (202001266)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202001266

Longhurst Group Limited

8 April 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 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:

1. The resident’s request to bring forward the planned replacement of her bathroom.
2. The resident’s reported concerns about the condition of her bathroom.
3. Complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, residing in a three-bedroom house.

Summary of events

3. The landlord’s records confirmed that it had visited the resident’s property on 27 August 2019 to inspect the bathroom. It had assessed that a bathroom replacement was due in one to five years, and it informed the resident of this. In the meantime, it suggested carrying out repairs to the bathroom instead.
4. In response to the resident’s reports of a tap leaking under the bathroom sink on 12 November 2019, the landlord attended this on 2 December 2019. To address the issue, the pipes underneath the sink were tightened to stop future leaks.
5. On 4 November 2019, the landlord’s records also confirmed that it had identified that the waste pipe from the bathroom was broken and needed repositioning, which it said was the only way to address the hand basin blockage. The landlord did attend this on 22 November 2019; however, it was unable to carry out the required work as it needed a plumber.
6. The landlord noted that it subsequently visited the property again on 19 December 2019 and assessed the work, concluding that it needed two people and ladders. It was therefore unable to complete the required work at that time.
7. On 24 January 2020, the landlord’s records confirmed that it attended the resident’s property once more. It was again unable to complete the job at the time, as it would take six hours and there was not enough time to do the work. It sealed the bath to stop further damage and secured the hand basin back to the wall.
8. On 24 January 2020, the resident raised concerns in a stage one complaint that, following the landlord’s visit to the property in August 2019, the above work had not been completed. This was to repair the waste pipe and address the bathroom disrepair. She was also disappointed that, following its visit earlier that day, it was unable to complete the required work.
9. On 29 January 2020, the landlord wrote to the resident to acknowledge the stage one complaint.
10. On 25 February 2020, the landlord wrote to the resident to apologise for the delay in its response to her complaint. It confirmed that it would include a goodwill gesture of £25 once the complaint was closed. It nevertheless offered no timescales for it to provide a further complaint response.
11. On 7 May 2020, the landlord’s records confirmed a discussion that it had with the resident on that date. It had hoped to close off the complaint on the basis that all of the required work had been completed. However, during this call, it was established that, due to the continued leaks from the hand basin in the bathroom, the floor around this was “caving in” as a result of being wet, with this issue first being seen in August 2019. The work to the external waste pipe had been completed, however.
12. As a consequence, the landlord noted that an appointment for further works to the resident’s bathroom was booked by it for 4 June 2020; however, due to an operative’s sickness absence, the appointment was missed, and was therefore cancelled that morning. This added to the disappointment for the resident, who informed it on 5 June 2020 that she had taken a day off work to accommodate this.
13. The landlord’s records confirmed that, on 18 June 2020, the outstanding work was completed to the resident’s bathroom. It noted that it was also confirmed by the resident that she had a “functional bathroom”. She had nevertheless raised concerns that the wall tiles did not match, that the bathroom suite looked “tired”, that lino was torn by the leak and pulled up every time operatives attended, and highlighted that she wanted a new bathroom rather than compensation for this. The resident was aware that a new bathroom was scheduled in the next financial year, but she was unhappy with this timescale.
14. On 24 June 2020, the landlord provided its stage one complaint response to the resident. It apologised for the delay in carrying out the repairs and for the inconvenience caused. Furthermore, it offered her £150 compensation as a goodwill gesture.
15. On 7 October 2020, the landlord issued its final stage complaint response to the resident. This confirmed the same information from its stage one response, along with confirming that the resident’s bathroom was to be replaced for the year 2021/2022.
16. Following a complaint by the resident to this Service, she agreed to engage in our mediation process. As part of this process, she explained that her desired outcome was for the landlord to agree to replace the bathroom in April 2021.
17. The landlord declined to take part in mediation, however. It also explained that it could not commit to replacing the bathroom in April 2021, as it was changing its contractors in the same month.

Assessment and findings

Request to replace the bathroom

18. As per the landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy, planned maintenance is defined as major work, and is carried out when building components have reached the end of their life. Examples include bathrooms, with the work being determined by the age and condition assessed during a stock condition survey.
19. The landlord has evidenced its assessment of the condition of the bathroom on 27 August 2019 and communicated this to the resident at that time and subsequently on 18 and 24 June and 7 October 2020.
20. Following the landlord’s completion of the remedial bathroom work on 18 June 2020, it recorded that the resident acknowledged that the bathroom was “functional”. Ultimately, it relied on the findings of its qualified staff and contractors, who deemed that the bathroom had been successfully repaired and was not yet in a condition that warranted a full replacement before the planned programme date.
21. In the absence of any other expert evidence to the contrary, the landlord was entitled to rely on the conclusions of its appropriately qualified staff and contractors, and accordingly the decision to not install a new bathroom earlier than 2021/2022 was reasonable in the circumstances. This is also because there is no evidence that this decision caused any detriment to the resident, as it noted that she sought for the “functional” bathroom to be replaced seemingly for aesthetic reasons, including for mismatched wall tiles, a “tired” bathroom suite and torn and pulled up lino, rather than for functionality.

Condition of the resident’s bathroom

22. As per the landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy, “appointed repairs are defects or faults which do not put the health, safety or the security of a [resident] at risk or cause harm to the structure of the property and are repairs that [residents] can reasonably live with for a period of time.” It further confirms that it aims to complete such repairs within 21 calendar days.
23. The landlord had identified the work required to address the leak in the resident’s bathroom during its survey on 27 August 2019. Despite three visits to her property on 22 November and 19 December 2019 and 24 January 2020, however, it was unable to carry out the work. As a result, the resident raised her stage one complaint on 24 January 2020. Following this complaint, the leak had reportedly got worse from at least 7 May 2020 onwards and had resulted in damage to her bathroom flooring. The required work was not completed until 18 June 2020, after the landlord had missed a scheduled repair appointment on 4 June 2020 with the resident.
24. Although some of the reasons for the delayed work were outside of the landlord’s control, such as its operative’s sickness absence for the missed appointment on 4 June 2020, it was very excessive for the resident to wait over nine months from August 2019 to June 2020 for the work to be completed. Under the circumstances, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have monitored the progress of the required work, kept the resident updated on this, and increased the priority of the required work once a delay had been identified.
25. As per the landlord’s compensation procedure, under its repair guarantee, in the event that it exceeds its 21-day timescale for repairs, it will pay the following:
    1. A £10 one-off payment for the first day after the expected completion date (day 22).
    2. £2 for each further day that the repair is outstanding, up to a maximum of £50.
26. In the landlord’s total compensation offer of £150, £115 was therefore applied for the leak in the bathroom, as it agreed to award the resident £25 on 25 February 2020 for its delayed complaint response and she was entitled to £10 compensation for its missed repair appointment on 4 June 2020 under its compensation procedure. This level of compensation was therefore consistent with its own policy in recognising the delay in the completion of the repair, and for it having missed a scheduled appointment with the resident.
27. The landlord acted appropriately in apologising to the resident for the delay in completing the repairs to her bathroom. It clearly recognised that its service had been poor, and the actions that it took to remedy that by repairing the bathroom on 18 June 2020 and offering her compensation for this were reasonable and appropriate.
28. However, although the level of compensation that the landlord offered to the resident was in line with its compensation procedure for its delay and missed appointment, it was disproportionately low when the impact of the length of these repair delays on her is considered. This being from 27 August 2019 to 18 June 2020 for the hand basin and waste pipe repairs, and from at least 7 May to 18 June 2020 for the bathroom leak. Accordingly, while the landlord acknowledged its failures in service and awarded compensation to the resident for its delay and missed appointment, its omission in not considering exercising its discretion under the compensation procedure to offer her further compensation for the impact of these on her was also a service failure.
29. As per both the landlord’s compensation procedure and this Service’s remedies guidance, awards between £50 and £250 may be used for instances of service failure resulting in some impact on the resident, but may not have significantly affected the overall outcome. Examples include a failure to meet service standards for actions and responses. The impact experienced by the resident could include distress and inconvenience, time and trouble, disappointment, loss of confidence and delays in getting matters resolved. The landlord has therefore been ordered to pay the resident further compensation in recognition of this below.

Complaint handling

30. As per the landlord’s complaints policy, it would issue its stage one complaint response within a maximum of 20 working days. It further advises that where this timescale is not possible, it would regularly communicate with the resident until the complaint is resolved.
31. The landlord received the resident’s stage one complaint on 24 January 2020 and responded to the resident to advise of a delay on 25 February 2020, therefore exceeding its stated timescale and offering her £25 compensation for this.
32. Furthermore, there is a gap in communications during the months of March and April 2020. This is supported by the landlord’s comments on 7 May 2020 where it had hoped to close off the complaint, before being informed by the resident that the work had not been completed, and it only subsequently responded to her stage one complaint 84 working days later than its above maximum timescale on 24 June 2020.
33. As a result, the landlord failed to adhere to its complaints policy in either communicating regularly with the resident or in responding to her stage one complaint within the policy’s maximum response timescale, and this contributed to the further delays in the work being completed. Therefore, to put matters right, the landlord should have recognised the impact of these delays upon the resident with a more proportionate level of compensation than the £25 that it awarded her for this, as permitted by its compensation procedure above at paragraph 29.

Determination (decision)

34. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of the resident’s request to bring forward the planned replacement of her bathroom.
35. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reported concerns about the condition of her bathroom.
36. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Reasons

37. The landlord arranged for a survey to be completed in August 2019, which was consistent with its own records in respect of the scheduled replacement of the resident’s bathroom. Following completion of the repairs it had suggested, it had provided the resident with a functional bathroom prior to its replacement in 2021/2022. It was therefore under no obligation to bring forward the scheduled replacement of the bathroom.
38. It was unreasonable for the resident to have waited nine months for the bathroom repairs to be completed by the landlord, which should have monitored and kept her updated on the progress of the works to completion, particularly once this was subject to a stage one complaint that it delayed responding to by 84 working days. This would have reduced the delay in the completion of the work, and the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident.
39. Accordingly, the compensation offered by the landlord was not proportionate in addressing both the failures in service and the impact on the resident of its repairs and complaint handling delays, in line with its compensation procedure and this Service’s remedies guidance.

Order

40. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Pay the resident £250 further compensation in total in recognition of any distress and inconvenience caused by its delays in resolving the resident’s repairs and any unnecessary time and trouble caused by its delays in responding to her stage one complaint. This award is broken down into the following:

i. £150 for the impact of the failures in the repairs service on the resident.

ii. £100 in recognition of the impact of the complaint handling delay on the resident.

iii. This should be paid within four weeks of the date of this determination.

Recommendations

41. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Pay the resident the £150 compensation that it previously offered her, if she has not received this already.
    2. Review its staff’s training needs in relation to their application of its complaints policy and compensation procedure, to seek to prevent a recurrence of its above service failures. This should include consideration to this Service’s guidance on remedies at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/corporate-information/policies/dispute-resolution/policy-on-remedies/ and the completion of our free online dispute resolution training for landlord’s, if this has not been done recently, at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/landlords/e-learning/.
    3. Review its procedures in relation to outstanding repairs, in order for it to identify repairs subjected to prolonged delays, and to enable it to consider taking further action where appropriate.
42. The landlord shall contact this Service within four weeks of the date of this determination to confirm that it has complied with the above order and whether it will follow the above recommendations.
43. 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.