Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV) (202319099)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202319099

Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV)

12 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 communal lift repairs at the resident’s building, and its resulting support for her.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord of a fourth floor flat in a building that is accessible via either a communal lift or 10 flights of stairs, which she has described as technically being on the building’s fifth level. She has multiple serious mental health conditions, was unable to use the stairs at the time of her complaint due to a foot injury, and lives with her neurodivergent older child and 2 younger children. The landlord has a lease of the resident’s property and it pays a managing agent to manage items including repairs to the communal lift.
  2. In early May 2023, the landlord recorded emergency repairs due within 24 hours on consecutive days for the communal lift at the resident’s building, as this had a damaged ceiling and was buckling, which were passed to a contractor. It then noted in mid May 2023 that the lift was out of service again but was still needed by residents including with children, so it once more recorded repairs for this on consecutive days due within 28 working days by late June 2023. The landlord also noted the latest lift repair requests were sent to both its housing and mechanical and electrical teams but residents continued to chase it about the incomplete repair.
  3. As the resident’s communal lift repair was still outstanding, the landlord communicated with her about this from mid to late May 2023. It offered to temporarily decant her and other vulnerable families with disabilities to a hotel for 4 nights until it was confident that the managing agent had repaired the lift. However, the resident explained to the landlord that her worsening mental ill-health was preventing her from leaving her property, including since January 2023. She instead told it she needed the lift fixed as soon as possible to receive grocery deliveries, which could not be delivered up the stairs to her property that her foot injury prevented her from using.
  4. The landlord therefore recorded the resident’s difficulties and her family’s status, registering her to receive the managing agent’s lift repair updates. It also agreed to refer her for its assessment and support team’s assistance, including signposting for mental health telephone counselling and online workshops. The resident nevertheless made a stage 1 complaint in late May 2023 about incomplete communal lift repairs restricting her mobility, access to essential grocery deliveries, and appointments and support for her mental ill-health. She explained this meant she was housebound and her mental and physical health had worsened, requesting immediate repairs and compensation for distress, inconvenience, ill-health, missed appointments, and increased food costs.
  5. The resident added she was dissatisfied the landlord offered to pay £150 to her rent account for the broken communal lift due to her rent arrears, as she followed an agreed payment plan for these. She also needed the money to pay her increased costs for immediate essential needs. The managing agent then arranged the lift repair in early June 2023, and the landlord’s mid June 2023 stage 1 complaint response apologised for the resident’s inconvenience, dissatisfaction, and frustration. It further acknowledged her lack of mobility, access to essential services and mental ill-health, but it found the lift was repaired in its service standard’s 28-day timescale, so it partially upheld her complaint and again offered to pay her rent account £150 for time and trouble.
  6. The resident subsequently chased the landlord in June and July 2023 disputing its offer to pay her rent account before her August 2023 final stage complaint. She complained the communal lift repair caused severe discomfort, distress and ill-health, including as she was unable to attend counselling, psychiatric appointments or get groceries delivered, and the offer to pay her rent account caused hardship instead of helping with this. The resident added the landlord had not responded to her communications and its offer was not sufficient to cover her difficulties, seeking to resolve this and its staff’s mental health and communication training. It then noted that issues between it and the managing agent had delayed them arranging the lift repair.
  7. The landlord’s subsequent August 2023 final stage complaint response noted its stage 1 response’s lack of detail, discussion of the resident’s difficulties, and its later lack of communication with her. It also described the managing agent as responsible for the communal lift repair, its regular contact with them and updates to residents about this, and its temporary decant offer she declined. However, the landlord upheld the resident’s complaint and apologised for her inconvenience and its poor service, which it provided feedback for to improve its future service and offered another £150 to her directly for its poor complaint handling, as well as repeating its previous offer to pay £150 to her rent account. It later offered to pay her £500 directly after her complaint to the Ombudsman.
  8. The resident declined the landlord’s increased offer and told the Ombudsman she sought £800 to be paid to her bank account for her pain and suffering and its lack of care, consideration, poor complaint handling, disregard for her mental health, and lift repair delay. She also asked to be reimbursed for her takeaway food deliveries when she could not have groceries delivered to her property, which she offered to provide evidence of on the exact dates it requested. The resident added the landlord’s staff needed training to be sensitive to avoid triggering severe mental ill-health like hers. It told us it was unaware of her vulnerabilities or support needs at the time of her complaint and had offered her a decant for her foot injury, children, and lack of grocery deliveries.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. It is very concerning the resident has reported her severe mental-ill-health was worsened by outstanding communal lift repairs at her property and the landlord’s handling of the resulting support for this, as well as that she had worsened physical health and increased costs. This investigation nevertheless cannot determine its liability for damages to her mental or physical health or finances in the way that a court or insurer might because we do not have the authority or expertise to do so. This is in accordance with paragraph 42f of the Scheme, which states the Ombudsman may not consider complaints concerning matters where it is quicker, fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts or other tribunal or procedure.

Lift repairs and support

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement obliges her to pay the landlord service charges for services including communal lifts provided by the managing agent on its behalf. It is required to take reasonable care to maintain lifts to ensure these are fit for her and other residents and visitors to use. The landlord’s guide to repair responsibilities in its residents’ homes (the guide) states communal lifts maintained by a managing agent are the agent’s responsibility, but that the only lift breaking down is an emergency to be attended within 24 hours. If more significant work is required, this is to be done as soon as possible, while routine repairs by appointment are due within 28 calendar or 20 working days, and it is to update residents on the status of repairs taking longer than its timescales.
  2. The landlord’s additional customer requirements policy obliges it to provide advice, support, and tailor its services in response to residents needing additional requirements to enable them to successfully remain in their properties or live well and prevent harm. It is to check that the right services are being delivered to them whether by it or by other external agencies and partners, and to aim to mitigate risks residents may be experiencing. The landlord commits to using all available information to identify and record vulnerable residents and their support needs, appropriately referring or signposting them for in-house or external support, and making any necessary individual adjustments to its service, such as its communication.
  3. The landlord initially responded to a communal lift repair at the resident’s building around the time of her case in line with her tenancy agreement and the guide. This is because it responded to reports of the lift’s ceiling being damaged and buckling on 4 and 5 May 2023 by treating these as emergency repairs due by the next day on each occasion, which were referred to a contractor. This was in accordance with the agreement’s and the guide’s obligations for the landlord to ensure the lift was maintained to be fit for use and attended as an emergency within 24 hours when the only lift broke down.
  4. It is therefore of concern the landlord responded to the next report of the resident’s communal lift not working, being out of service, and needed by residents including with children on 16 May 2023 by instead treating this as a routine repair due within 28 working days by 26 June 2023. This was contrary to the guide’s above 24-hour emergency repair timescale for when the only lift broke down, as well as its requirements to complete more significant work as soon as possible and routine repairs within 28 calendar or 20 working days and not within 28 working days. However, the landlord continued to incorrectly categorise the lift repair as due within 28 working days when this was reported as still outstanding on 17 and 24 May and 2 June 2023, which was unsuitable.
  5. While the landlord’s managing agent did then repair the resident’s communal lift within the guide’s 28-calendar or 20-working-day routine repair timescale after 20 calendar or 13 working days on 5 June 2023, it gave no explanation as to why it did not treat this as a 24-hour emergency repair as it had previously. This was inappropriate and meant the emergency repair timescale was exceeded by 19 calendar or 12 working days, which was a particularly excessive delay for an essential service for residents such as her on upper floors with children and vulnerabilities. It would have been understandable if more significant work meant it was unavoidable that the lift could not be repaired within 24 hours, as permitted by the guide, but the landlord gave no indication this was the case.
  6. Moreover, the guide still required more significant emergency communal lift repairs that could not be done within 24 hours to be completed as soon as possible. There is nevertheless no evidence the landlord sought to do so because, as well as incorrectly categorising the repair as due within 28 working days for the entire period this was outstanding, it subsequently noted this was delayed due to an issue between it and the managing agent, which was completely unacceptable. The Ombudsman does not have permission to reveal the internal correspondence we received confirming the agent was delayed arranging the lift repair by a contractual issue with it, but it was extremely improper for this to hold up emergency repairs to residents’ essential services.
  7. It is noted that, in line with the guide, the landlord did seek to update residents on the status of the outstanding communal lift repair that was taking longer to complete than its timescales. This was including by contacting the resident on 18 and 24 May 2023 and agreeing to pass on her details to be added to and receive updates from the managing agent’s portal on 30 May 2023. However, it is concerning that the landlord’s updates did not give her a timescale for the lift repair or explain why this was taking longer to complete than the guide’s 24-hour emergency repair timescale, which was unsuitable.
  8. The landlord additionally sought to follow its additional customer requirements policy on the above dates to provide the resident with advice, support, and tailor its services in response to her need for additional requirements. This is because it initially offered her and other vulnerable and disabled families a temporary decant to a hotel for 4 nights on 18 May 2023 until it was confident the managing agent had repaired her communal lift, which she declined on 23 May 2023. It was appropriate that the landlord offered to do so, as the policy obliged it to seek to enable the resident to live well and prevent harm, including if her foot injury, children, and inability to receive grocery deliveries until the lift was repaired meant she could not successfully remain in her property.
  9. The landlord’s additional customer requirements policy also obliged it to check that the right services were delivered to the resident, aim to mitigate her risks, and refer or signpost her for support. It was therefore suitable that it responded to her report of her worsening mental ill-health on 23 May 2023 by agreeing on 24 and 30 May 2023 to refer her for its assessment and support team’s assistance, including signposting for mental health telephone counselling and online workshops. The landlord further sought to comply with its policy by agreeing on the above dates to record the resident’s difficulties and her family’s status, as the policy committed it to using all available information to identify and record her support needs as a vulnerable resident.
  10. It is therefore of concern the landlord told the Ombudsman it was unaware of the resident’s vulnerabilities or support needs at the time of her complaint, as this was contradicted by the above communication with her at that time, and its additional customer requirements policy obliged it to identify and record these. Moreover, it is especially concerning it did not assist her with not receiving grocery deliveries after she explained on 23 May 2023 her worsening mental ill-health prevented her from leaving her property to be decanted, as it was aware there were no deliveries up the stairs her foot injury stopped her from using. However, the landlord neither accelerated the resident’s communal lift repair for this, as she requested, nor considered any other help for her with groceries.
  11. The landlord’s lack of further assistance to the resident at the time her communal lift was broken included its offer to pay her rent account £150 for her this. This is because she explained on 31 May 2023 that she required this to be paid to her directly to meet her increased costs for immediate essential needs, as she was housebound, her physical and mental health had worsened, she missed appointments, and her food costs increased without grocery deliveries. The landlord nevertheless only offered to directly pay the resident another £150 almost 2 months later on 22 August 2023. This was unreasonable, particularly because she previously chased it for this on 13 June, 13 July, and 6 August 2023, but it did not respond to her until 22 August 2023.
  12. While the landlord’s compensation policy says it usually credits compensation to rent accounts with arrears not due to be paid by housing benefit, it was not obliged to do so and this was not appropriate in the circumstances of the resident’s case. This is due to her explaining from 31 May 2023 she was already following a payment plan agreed with it to pay the arrears and needed the compensation to pay her increased costs for immediate essential needs, including food. There is also no evidence the landlord discussed the resident overcoming this by reducing her rent or arrears payments to reflect the compensation, and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance recommends direct payments to residents in arrears out of pocket due to its actions or inactions.
  13. It was therefore appropriate that the landlord’s complaint responses apologised to the resident for her inconvenience, dissatisfaction and frustration, as well as for its poor service and complaint handling. It further suitably acknowledged her lack of mobility, access to essential services and mental ill-health, in addition to its lack of detailed responses, discussion of her difficulties, and subsequent lack of communication with her. Moreover, the landlord sought to follow the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles to put things right and learn from outcomes by increasing its compensation offer to the resident to £300 and then £500 to be paid to her directly after she complained to us, and by providing feedback to improve its future service, respectively.
  14. However, the landlord’s above actions were not proportionate to fully put things right or learn from the outcome of the resident’s case in accordance with its compensation policy and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance. This is because it did not recognise or remedy the further failings in its handling of her communal lift repair and resulting support needs identified by this investigation. As well as not addressing its incorrect categorisation of and contribution to the lift repair delay via its contractual issue with the managing agent, and its lack of repair information to the resident, the landlord also did not respond to her requests for compensation for her increased food costs and worsened health.
  15. The landlord’s compensation policy allows residents to seek to be reimbursed with up to £300 by it for evidenced quantifiable losses caused by its actions, including paying for takeaway meals, when it fails to meet its obligations. The resident has explained that she had to pay increased food costs for more expensive takeaway food deliveries when she could not have groceries delivered due to her communal lift repair, but it did not respond to her about this or invite her to provide it with evidence to consider her increased food costs. This was unreasonable and so was the fact that it did not respond to her requests for compensation for her mental ill-health worsening, including due to her lack of access to psychiatric appointments and counselling.
  16. The resident has subsequently described her physical ill-health as worsening from takeaway food rather than grocery deliveries while she was awaiting the communal lift repair and being referred for surgery for this. However, the landlord did not follow its compensation policy in response to her seeking damages for her ill-health by inviting her to provide evidence of this to make a claim to its insurance company, which was inappropriate. It is additionally of concern that the resident reported being dissatisfied with the landlord’s staff’s mental health and communication training, who she has explained needed to be sensitive to avoid triggering severe mental ill-health like hers, and that it did not respond to her about this either, which was unsuitable.
  17. The landlord has therefore been ordered below to pay the resident’s bank account £800 compensation, broken down into the £500 it previously offered her plus another £300. This is in recognition of the further failings in its handling of her communal lift repair and resulting support identified by this investigation, which it has been ordered to write to her to apologise for. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, which recommends awards in this range to recognise failures that had a significant physical and/or emotional impact on the resident. This also accords with our guidance’s statement that our orders should be treated separately to any existing financial arrangements and should not be offset against arrears, regardless of landlords’ compensation policies.
  18. The landlord has been further ordered below to contact the resident to invite her to provide it with evidence of her increased food costs due to its handling of her communal lift repair and resulting support for it consider reimbursing her for these. Moreover, it has been ordered to invite her to provide it with evidence of the damages to her ill-health that she sought from it to make a claim for these to its insurance company. The landlord has additionally been recommended below to review its staff’s training needs in relation to the application of its additional customer requirements and compensation policies and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance to appropriately consider mental health, communication, and remedies in every relevant case.
  19. The Ombudsman has found maladministration (including severe maladministration) following several investigations into complaints raised with the landlord involving repairs, complaint handling, and record keeping. As a result of these, the Ombudsman issued a wider order to the landlord under paragraph 54f 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.
  20. The Ombudsman ordered the landlord to carry out a review of its practices, processes, and procedures in relation to responding to repairs, complaint handling, and record keeping. Some of the issues identified in this case are similar to the previous cases and so we have ordered the landlord below to incorporate the learning from this complaint into the wider review, ordered as part of case 202011109. In addition to this, we have not made any orders or recommendations as part of this case that would duplicate those already made to landlord as part of the wider order.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of communal lift repairs at the resident’s building, and its resulting support for her.

Orders and recommendation

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident’s bank account £800 compensation within 4 weeks, which is broken down into:
      1. £500 it previously offered her.
      2. Another £300 in recognition of the further failings in its handling of her communal lift repair and resulting support identified by this investigation.
    2. Write to the resident within 4 weeks to apologise for the further failings in its handling of her communal lift repair and resulting support identified by this investigation, take responsibility for these, acknowledge their impact on her, and outline exactly how it proposes to prevent these from occurring again in future.
    3. Contact the resident within 4 weeks to invite her to provide it with evidence of her increased food costs due to its handling of her case for it consider reimbursing her for these, and of the damages to her ill-health that she sought from it to make a claim for these to its insurance company.
    4. Incorporate the learning from this complaint into the wider review, ordered as part of case 202011109, of its practices, processes, and procedures in relation to responding to repairs, complaint handling, and record keeping due within 12 weeks.
  2. The landlord shall contact the Ombudsman within 4 and 12 weeks to confirm that it has complied with the above orders and whether it will follow the below recommendation.

Recommendation

  1. It is recommended that the landlord review its staff’s training needs in relation to the application of its additional customer requirements and compensation policies and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance to appropriately consider mental health, communication, and remedies in every relevant case.