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

NSAH (Alliance Homes) Limited (202108062)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202108062

NSAH (Alliance Homes) Limited

26 January 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 the landlord’s response to a reported pigeon infestation and the mess this causes at the resident’s property.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is a house with sole use of a garden.
  2. The resident emailed the landlord on 17 May 2021 to raise concerns about pigeons nesting on her roof under solar panels and leaving a mess. She explained that she could not use her garden or leave her back door open due to the mess being left by the pigeons, which was of particular concern given that her baby was crawling. She said she had previously raised the matter with the landlord but had been told that it did not have the funds to provide a solution. She said the property did not meet safety standards and referred to the Housing Health and Safety Rating System.
  3. On 25 May 2021, the resident received a response from the landlord which explained that it would respond via email in a couple of days.
  4. The landlord responded to the resident’s report on 4 June 2021 and explained that it did not have the budget to take action. It further explained that this was not covered in the tenancy agreement. It advised the resident that “deterring pigeons from your property can sometimes help”. It acknowledged that this was a problem and would be looking to resolve the concerns raised by the resident.
  5. The resident emailed the landlord on 7 June 2021 asking it to escalate the complaint. The landlord responded on the same day stating that the complaint would be escalated.
  6. The resident subsequently chased the landlord for a response on 1 July 2021. The landlord sent its stage two complaint response to the resident later that day. In this it explained that it stood by its original decision and it would continue to monitor the issue regarding the pigeon mess, although this was not part of the tenancy agreement. It did however acknowledge the problem and had escalated the issue internally. It said that it would try to support the resident where it could and provided the resident with the Ombudsman’s contact details.
  7. On 2 September 2021, the landlord made contact with the resident to reassure her that it was in the process of finding a contractor to fit cages around the solar panels. It confirmed that the fitting of the cages would be completed once a contractor had been awarded the contract and the budget had been allocated to complete the work. It explained that the process would have to be completed as a competitive tender due to the value of the work and it could not therefore, give a timeline for completion. The landlord also explained that it would keep in contact with the resident to check that the amount of disruption caused by the pigeons was acceptable and it would try to support the resident in the interim.
  8. During January 2022, both parties updated the Ombudsman on the situation with fitting the cages. The landlord has confirmed that the works had been completed, however the resident has advised that the cages have not resolved the problem with the pigeon mess.

Assessment and findings 

Policies and procedures

  1. Under the title learning lessons from feedback, the customer feedback policy states that the landlord is keen to learn the lessons from customers when “they have been dissatisfied with the service that they have received from us. We will hold lessons learned sessions following a complaint investigation to ensure that things change, and we handle similar situations better in the future as well as inform any changes to our procedures and policies where necessary”.
  2. In the landlord’s customer feedback policy it states that the landlord aims to follow principles that enable it to “provide a quality service by putting things right within agreed timescales, keep customers informed and be consistent, open and fair in the way we deal with complaints and comments”

 

 

Assessment

  1. The tenancy agreement is silent on whose responsibility it would be to address a pest infestation at the property and the landlord does not have a specific pest control policy. Therefore, the landlord was not obliged by either the tenancy agreement or its policies to take action to remedy the issue with pigeons nesting. The pigeons are nesting under solar panels on the roof and the landlord would not be obliged by its repairing obligations set out in the tenancy agreement and Section 11 of the landlord and tenant Act 1985 to install a net or some other deterrent. This is because such works would be regarded as an improvement and not a repair.
  2. The landlord does, however, have an obligation to remedy any category one hazards in its properties under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Domestic hygiene, pests, and refuse is one of the defined hazards, and therefore, the landlord was obliged to consider whether the pigeons nesting and consequent mess amounted to a hazard that it needed to remedy. The landlord is also responsible for treating pests that are deemed a statutory nuisance in accordance with the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
  3. It is not possible for the Ombudsman to make a decision on whether a category one hazard or a statutory nuisance existed in the property as a result of the pigeons nesting. This is because this would be for the local authority to assess as it is responsible for taking action in relation to the HHSRS and Environmental Protection Act, and there is no evidence to suggest that the local authority has carried out any such assessment. Nevertheless, the landlord would be expected to consider whether it had any obligation to stop the pigeons nesting and to remove the pigeon mess.
  4. In this case, the landlord considered its obligations under the tenancy agreement, but there is no indication in the complaint responses that it considered its obligations to prevent any hazards or nuisance caused by the pigeons nesting. Therefore, the landlord did not take reasonable action to consider its obligations in the circumstances and this was a service failure. While the landlord stated in its stage two complaint response that it had attended the property and had tried to help alleviate the immediate problem, it has not provided any evidence to the Ombudsman to show what this entailed and that any action was being taken to remove or minimise the pigeon mess.
  5. After the complaint concluded the complaints procedure, the landlord confirmed that it would be installing cages to prevent pigeons from nesting and it took appropriate steps to review its policy as it recognised that a long-term solution was required to resolve this. The change in policy demonstrates that the landlord was keen to learn lessons from its customers in line with its customer feedback policy above. While the works have now been completed, the resident has raised concerns about the effectiveness of these works and therefore a recommendation has been made to address this, as detailed below.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to a reported pigeon infestation and the mess this causes at the property.

Reasons

  1. The landlord failed to respond adequately to the resident’s initial report about the pigeon infestation and to her formal complaint about the matter. While it considered its obligations under the tenancy agreement, there is no indication in the complaint responses that it considered its obligations to prevent any hazards or nuisance caused by the pigeons nesting.

Order and recommendations

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £250 compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of her reports about the pigeon infestation. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance recommendation where there has been service failure which had an impact on the resident.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord does the following:
    1. Arranges for a surveyor to inspect the property and assess the effectiveness of the cages that have been installed to the solar panels. The landlord should report its findings to both the resident and the Ombudsman and confirm whether any further works will be carried out.
    2. Takes steps to draft a policy and procedure on pest infestations, setting out its responsibilities in this regard and the steps it will take in response to a resident reporting a pest infestation.
  3. The landlord shall contact the Ombudsman within four weeks to confirm that it has complied with the above order and whether it will follow the above recommendations.