Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (202009220)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202009220

Metropolitan Housing Trust Limited

16 June 2022


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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s property following a leak from the property above.
    2. The landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

  1. The resident occupies the property, a 5-bedroom flat, under an assured tenancy agreement between his mother and the landlord.
  2. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord in November 2020 about a leak from the balcony of the flat above, which he stated had been ongoing since September 2020. He reported that damage to the ceiling, walls and floors had occurred due to the landlord’s failure to act. The resident had attempted to contact the landlord numerous times but had not been able to speak to someone with knowledge of the situation, did not receive call-backs as promised, and was repeatedly told that chaser emails would be sent but received no update. The resident expressed frustration and concern for his 5–month–old baby, who was also living in the property, due to the impact of damp and mould on their health.
  3. In its complaint responses, the landlord explained that it was unable to complete the required repairs to address the leak as it was not the freeholder of the building. The landlord was liaising with the management company and had requested that they visit the resident’s property to investigate the required works. The landlord apologised for the delay and inconvenience. At stage 2, the landlord acknowledged that the situation had become very frustrating for the resident and reiterated that it was not responsible for completing the repairs but was working with the management company to address the issue. A dehumidifier had been delivered to help minimise damp and mould within the property and the landlord provided details of a point of contact. The landlord offered £260 compensation for time and trouble, poor complaint handling and the additional cost of running the dehumidifier.
  4. The resident reported to this Service in October 2021 that the leak was ongoing, and that remedial works were still outstanding. The landlord stated that inspections had taken place and some remedial works had been carried out, however, it noted that some further works were required.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The Ombudsman usually considers the landlord’s actions up to the date of the final complaint response, which in this case was 2 February 2021. This is because the landlord must be given an opportunity to comment and to put things right via its formal complaints process before the Ombudsman investigates. Events after the date of the final complaint response should usually be the subject of a new complaint, even though they may be related to the original issue. The Ombudsman will sometimes make findings about the landlord’s actions after the final complaint response if, for example, it has failed to progress the resolution promised in the complaint response.
  2. In this case, following the final complaint response, there is no evidence of further communication between the landlord and resident about an ongoing leak until 17 August 2021, when the landlord’s internal emails show that the resident called to discuss ongoing repairs. It is unclear from the information provided whether the ongoing issues relate to the original leak, as the landlord’s records indicate that further issues were identified with the balcony doors and windows.
  3. This investigation is focussed on the landlord’s handling of the matter until the date of the final complaint response, although the Ombudsman has also made recommendations to the landlord to take action to resolve the ongoing issues.

Handling of the repairs

  1. Paragraph 2.3 of the resident’s mother’s tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for maintaining the structure and outside of the property. The landlord would also be responsible for making good any internal damage caused by the leak. Although it is acknowledged that the landlord is not the freeholder of the building and so cannot arrange the repairs, it is expected that it would work with the freeholder to ensure that repairs are completed within a reasonable timeframe and keep residents updated.
  2. The evidence provided to this investigation does not include copies of emails, or system or phone records predating the formal complaint of 20 November 2020. It has not therefore been possible for the Ombudsman to investigate the landlord’s communication with the resident about the leak prior to this time. The landlord is reminded of the need to keep accurate records of contact with residents, and to present this information to the Ombudsman’s investigation when requested. The landlord did, however, accept in its complaint responses that its communication with the resident was poor. It offered an apology, which was appropriate in the circumstances.
  3. In some cases, it will be reasonable for the landlord to delay internal remedial works pending completion of the external repairs. If the cause of the leak has not been addressed, the internal damage is likely to reoccur. In such cases, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to keep the resident updated. Following contact from this Service in December 2020, the landlord agreed to complete unspecified remedial works at the resident’s property to minimise the impact of the ongoing leak. The landlord did provide a dehumidifier some time prior to the final complaint response and accounted for its running costs in its offer of compensation, evidencing that it took some steps to address the damp and mould.
  4. Having indicated that it would progress internal repairs, the landlord failed to follow the requirements of its Repairs Policy, which states that an inspection should take place and any routine repairs identified should be completed within 28 working days. Although the landlord has reported to this Service that works were raised to ‘make good’ the areas affected by the leak in October 2020, it has failed to provide contemporaneous records evidencing that these works were completed. The works were not referenced in the final complaint response and the Ombudsman cannot see evidence that an inspection of the resident’s property took place until May 2021, which was unreasonable.
  5. It is not known when the freeholder completed the works it was responsible for and there is no evidence that the resident was provided with updates between the date the complaint was made and 2 February 2021. In the final complaint response, the landlord offered £100 in recognition of the delays, frustration and time and trouble taken to pursue the repairs. Whilst this went some way to provide redress to the resident for the landlord’s failings, it was insufficient to reflect the landlord’s poor communication, including its failure to do what it said it would and to provide regular updates to the resident. The Ombudsman also notes the incomplete records provided to this investigation and so makes a finding of service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint until the date of its final response.
  6. The landlord identified outstanding works to the resident’s property after further contact was made with this Service in October 2021. It is understood that some works were completed in August 2021 to address water penetration, although it is unclear from the information provided whether the outstanding works relate to the original leak and whether that original leak is now resolved. It is therefore recommended that the landlord contact the resident to confirm whether there is ongoing water penetration at the property, whether any further works are due to be completed by the freeholder, what follow-on works have been raised by the landlord and when these will be completed. If on receipt of this information the resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of the ongoing issues, he can make a new complaint to the landlord about his concerns. 

Complaints handling

  1.  The landlord’s Complaints Policy requires it to provide a response to the resident within 10 working days at stage 1, and 20 working days at stage 2. In its final response the landlord acknowledged that the response had been provided outside the stated timescales and offered £100 compensation for the delay.
  2. The landlord missed an opportunity to manage the resident’s expectations about completion of the works and to set out an action plan in the complaint response. Although the landlord noted that it was not responsible for arranging the external works, it did not provide sufficient assurance to the resident about how it would work with the freeholder to progress the repairs or give details of the frequency with which it would provide updates going forward. The resident was left with no indication as to when the issue would be resolved, or what the landlord would do to address further delays, which increased his frustration. The Ombudsman does, however, consider that £100 was a reasonable and appropriate amount of compensation to reflect the landlord’s failings. This amount is in line with the recommendations set out in this Service’s Remedies Guidance, taking into account the impact on the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of repairs following a leak at the resident’s property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Scheme, the landlord made a reasonable offer of redress to the resident, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion satisfactorily resolves the complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 28 days of the date of this report, the landlord must evidence compliance with the following Orders to this Service:
    1. Pay the resident £100 compensation, in addition to the £100 offered in the final complaint response, in recognition of the landlord’s poor communication and record keeping. The total amount awarded should therefore be £360.
    2. Review its record keeping processes to ensure that full and accurate records are kept of all contact with customers, and that these can be made available to the Ombudsman’s investigation.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that:
    1. The landlord contacts the resident to confirm whether there is ongoing water penetration at the property, whether any further works are due to be completed by the freeholder, what follow-on works have been raised by the landlord and when these will be completed.