Newlon Housing Trust (202016860)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202016860

Newlon Housing Trust

18 November 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 resident complains about:
   1. The landlord’s handling of repair works to the property, standard of the service provided in relation to this, and level of compensation offered.
   2. The lack of reimbursement for the costs incurred.
   3. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling

Background and summary of events

Background

2. The property is a two-bedroom basement flat let on an assured tenancy since May 2010.
3. The resident has a medical vulnerability recorded which prioritises heating and hot water repairs.
4. The complaints policy at stage 1 states it will investigate and provide a full response within 10 working days of the complaint. Its target for reviewing Stage 2 complaints is 30 days, the Panel meeting should be held within 30 days of the appeal.
5. The landlord’s compensation policy states personal injury claims need to be made formally by the claimant in writing with details of the claim. Particulars of the claim must still be recorded and emailed to the insurance team.
6. It also states if loss or damage has occurred as a result of the landlord not fulfilling its obligations, i.e., where it is shown that it has failed to carry out a repair which is its responsibility and which the tenant has reported. The matter is generally referred to its insurers, who will normally settle directly with the tenant. The landlord should provide details of any inspections, repairs history, receipts and any other evidence provided by the resident.

Summary of Events

7. In July 2019 the landlord raised works to carry out a mould wash and redecorate affected areas including bedroom wall, area around staircase towards toilet and kitchen wall. Internal records noted that roofing works were ongoing and therefore this works would need to be placed on hold.
8. In early August 2019 the resident rescheduled two appointments to carry out the mould wash and redecoration. Following the mould wash taking place mid-month the resident attended head office and formally complained to the landlord about the length of time taken overall to rectify and resolve the issues as it was advised that the leak was still present. The landlord advised at the end of August that an inspection had been booked for 2 September, following which works were approved to repair the windows and cracks on 23 September.
9. In October 2019, the resident advised she had been away and asked the landlord to request contact by its contractors. The works were passed back to the landlord and towards the end of October it was confirmed that a structural engineer was required. This was not communicated to the resident, and she chased an update in November 2019, and was told a specialist inspection was needed.
10. There are no records of works or communication between the parties between November 2019 and March 2020.
11. In March 2020 records note that temporary works were carried out, but additional works were needed.
12. Following the national lockdown works raised and issued in April 2020 were unattended. At the end of June 2020, the landlord sought an update from its contractors as to when it would attend. The resident formally complained again in relation to various outstanding repairs including a leaking gutter, mould and a damaged wall and ceiling and outstanding works to the window. She noted that the issues had been ongoing for two years and sought compensation. The landlord acknowledged the complaint and explained it sought to provide a response within 10 working days, however due to the pandemic and working arrangements, it could encounter delays in obtaining information which could affect its ability to provide a full response within the published timescales.
13. On 16 July 2020, the landlord responded accepting that the resident had had to chase various repairs including the gutter, which was leaking, repairs to the bathroom along with walls damaged by mould, damp, and cracks. It noted that much of the works related to subsidence and as a result had been passed to insurers to organise repairs. It stated it would consider compensation with its insurers once all repairs were completed. It apologised for any trouble or inconvenience that the poor service had caused.
14. The resident escalated the complaint on the same day, due to the delays in completing the works and the stress and impact it had on her health. She noted that there were several outstanding works which had been ongoing for two years including mould, gutter leaking, damage to bay windows, kitchen fan and kitchen.
15. In August 2020, internal records note the landlord advised its team that urgent works were required to the soffit and fascia and scaffolding was required as a matter of urgency
16. In October 2020 the resident advised the landlord of a foul smell coming from the drain and it arranged a drain clearance. In December 2020, the resident advised the landlord that the leaks continued in the bathroom, kitchen and bedroom caused from the neighbours leaking ceiling and mould continued to form.
17. In January and February 2021, internal notes evidence the landlord chasing works due under both the insurance claim and its internal contractors.
18. Following a panel hearing, the landlord issued its final response on 21 February 2021. The panel apologised for the service failure in communication and accepted the resident repeatedly chased for updates and should not have had to. It acknowledged that the repairs were extensive and regular updates should have been provided. It noted that whilst the landlord believed a decant was not  necessary, consideration should have been given to all elements of the repairs and a discussion had with the resident.
19. The panel apologised for the service failures and noted the landlord was in discussion with the insurers to finalise repair dates. It accepted that the situation had been exacerbated by the landlord’s poor management of the repairs.
20. The panel awarded £450: £50 for poor communication, £50 for failed appointments, £325 for the prolonged inconvenience and extensive delay in addressing the repairs, £35 for the delay in the panel addressing the complaint. It advised the resident to contact this service if she remained dissatisfied.
21. In March 2021 a further inspection was carried out and it was noted that the property was awaiting structural repairs to be carried out following the tree removal from the neighbouring property on 17th March. The lounge and basement were suffering from several cracks due to the subsidence. The rest of the property was inspected for other repairs needed outside of the scope of the insurance work. Extensive works were noted to the bedroom, kitchen, hallway, bathroom, and back garden.
22. It further stated the property had been well maintained by the residents and was not suffering from any signs of neglect even with the on-going issues. The residents had been repairing the internal damp issues themselves as they had not had any help from the landlord.

Assessment and findings

Landlord’s handling of repair works standard of service and compensation

23. The landlord has accepted that its handling of the repairs to the resident’s property have fallen far short from where it should be. It is accepted by all parties that the resident has been chasing the completion of repairs for a significant period of time. While the landlord attributes the majority of the delays to the repairs which concern the insurance claim, the Ombudsman finds that there were internal repairs which were also delayed. The resident repeatedly complained that internal repair issues had been ongoing for 2 years. This is supported by the report in March 2021 which sets out that extensive works were noted to the bedroom, kitchen, hallway, bathroom, and back garden. These works were not covered by the insurance claim.
24. The Ombudsman has considered the pandemic and lockdown period from March 2020; however, it is clear that works had remained outstanding  prior to this.
25. While the panel acknowledged the service failures and offered compensation,  given the extent of the repairs outside of the insurance claim, the Ombudsman deems that this offer did not adequately address the delays and repairs, nor the impact the inconvenience and stress had upon the resident, given that the landlord was aware of her medical vulnerabilities. Additionally, the offer of compensation for failed appointments/ repairs did not adequately reflect the resident’s experience. From the evidence provided there were several occasions when the landlord had to reattend to the same repair.
26. Taken all together the Ombudsman deems there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the situation and the redress offered was insufficient. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance notes compensation will be offered where it is found that there has been failure over a considerable period of time to act in accordance with policy – for example to address repairs. This also includes those which have already been recognised to a degree by the landlord. In ordering compensation, the Ombudsman has considered many different factors and considerations, as well as the cumulative impact of a landlord’s failures in the case on the resident and the landlord’s knowledge of her vulnerabilities.

Reimbursement for costs

27. The resident has requested that the landlord reimburse her for damage caused to her belongings and also the cost of electricity used during the repairs being completed. The landlord has advised that it will consider compensation with its insurers once all repairs were completed. This is in line with the landlord’s compensation policy.
28. The resident has also noted that the condition of the property has had an impact on her health. The Ombudsman is unable to make a causal link between events complained of and injury to health. This is better suited by way of a personal injury claim and the landlord’s compensation policy notes that this can also be claimed via its insurance. The resident should therefore contact the landlord to pursue this matter.

Complaint Handling

29. The resident formally complained in August 2019. The landlord responded noting that works would be carried out to the outstanding issues, but failed to log the complaint or provide a response in line with its complaint’s procedure. The resident was left to reiterate the complaint almost a year later in June 2020.
30. While the Ombudsman accepts that the resident did not chase the complaint, the landlord was aware at all times that she had made a formal complaint and was obliged to provide a response. The landlord did not address this in either of its responses, although it is accepted it addressed the delay in the stage 2 response to which it provided adequate redress. However, the initial delay in registering and responding to the complaint amounts to service failure.

Determination (decision)

31. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure by the landlord in respect of the handling of the repairs, delay and compensation offered.
32. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of reimbursement of costs.
33. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Reasons

34. The landlord failed to offer adequate redress for the handling of the repairs which should have been completed outside of the insurance claim and the length of time these had been ongoing.
35. The landlord correctly advised the resident that she could claim reimbursement through an insurance claim.
36. The landlord failed to address the 11-month delay in registering and responding to the formal complaint.

Orders

37. The Ombudsman orders that the landlord within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
38. Pays the resident a total of £900 comprised of the following:
    1. £350 for the delays in the handling of repair works, the failings in the standard of service and the stress and inconvenience this caused.
    2. £100 for the complaint handling failures
    3. £450 previously offered in the stage 2 response if it has not done so already.
39.  Contact the resident in order for her to pursue the insurance claim.
40. Ensure its staff are provided training on logging complaints formally when they are raised