One Housing Group Limited (202123092)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202123092

One Housing Group Limited

17 October 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 handling of repairs and remedial work required in the resident’s property following a leak.

Background

2. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is a flat within a block of similar properties.
3. The resident had experienced historical leaks into her property from flats above hers. On 4 May 2021, she reported that water was entering her property through a light switch which was causing a buzzing sound. Operatives attended on the same day and confirmed that the electrics were not affected. After a series of no access appointments to the properties above, the leak was identified in the property two floors above the resident’s on 17 May 2021. The leak was identified to be coming from the bath and works to resolve the issue were completed on 23 May 2021.
4. The resident raised a complaint in May 2021 as she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of the ongoing leak which was affecting a bedroom and her hallway. She did not feel that the landlord had taken necessary steps to prevent the leak from occurring, and added that she had attempted to report another leak earlier in the year but that the staff member had advised that it was not considered an emergency. She explained that the leak had caused damage to her ceilings, walls and flooring and sought compensation for the damage caused to her carpet and decorations as she did not have home contents insurance.
5. In response to the resident’s complaint, the landlord initially provided a timeline of works undertaken since her report of a leak in November 2020 and acknowledged that she had experienced intermittent leaks since 2016. It acknowledged the resident’s comments regarding staff conduct and apologised for the level of service received. It noted it had provided feedback to the member of staff responsible as a work order should have been raised at the time. It confirmed that following the resident’s reports of a leak on 4 May 2021 it had experienced difficulties gaining access to the relevant property. It confirmed that the issue had been resolved on 23 May 2021 and offered £100 compensation by way of apology for the delay in resolving the leak. It explained that the resident would usually need to claim via her home contents insurance for any damaged items as it was not responsible for these, but agreed to replace the damaged carpet as a gesture of goodwill.
6. Following an inspection of the property on 4 June 2021, work to stain block and decorate the resident’s bedroom as well as plastering the hallway ceiling were completed on 4 August 2021. A post-inspection was carried out on 19 August 2021 which found that further works were required to the paintwork and the bedroom carpet needed to be replaced. The decoration works were completed on 22 November 2021, however the carpet replacement remained outstanding.
7. The resident escalated her complaint in November 2021 as she was dissatisfied that remedial works to replace her carpet following the leak had not been fully completed. She also requested compensation for not being able to use the room and for her clothes and cupboard which had been damaged by the leak. In response, the landlord acknowledged that it had not carried out the remedial works within a reasonable timescale or accurately tracked the follow-on works required. It confirmed that it now had staff in place to track actions from complaints and resolutions to ensure the complaint was resolved. It apologised to the resident for the delay and offered an additional £150 compensation, comprised of £50 for the slight delay in issuing its complaint response and £100 for the delay in completing the remedial works required.
8. The resident referred her complaint to this Service in January 2022 as she remained dissatisfied with the overall time taken by the landlord to complete the initial works to resolve the leak and complete the remedial works to the decoration. She added that she had spent significant time and trouble pursuing her concerns and remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s overall offer of compensation. She wanted the landlord to complete the outstanding decoration works and offer additional compensation for her belongings which had been damaged as a result of the leak. 

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of repair and decoration work required in the resident’s property following a leak.

9. The resident’s tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for repairs required to the structure of the property, including walls, floors and ceilings (excluding painting and decoration). It is also responsible for repairs needed to installations for the supply of water, including pipework. The landlord’s repairs policy provides timescales for different categories of repairs. Emergency repairs should be made safe within 24 hours, any follow-on works would then be raised within the appropriate category. Urgent repairs should be completed within five working days and routine repairs should be completed within 20 working days. If a repair is likely to take longer, the landlord is responsible for explaining the reason for this and providing an estimated completion date to manage a resident’s expectations. The landlord’s repairs policy also confirms that the resident would be responsible for insuring their home contents against damage or loss. 
10. In this case, it is not disputed that the resident experienced several delays following her report of a leak into her property on 4 May 2021. Following the resident’s report of a leak entering her property, the landlord acted appropriately by attending on the same day in line with its emergency timescales to ensure the electrics were safe. There was a delay in tracing the leak until around 17 May 2021 due to the landlord not being permitted access to the property affected. Following this the issue was rectified on 23 May 2021 within the landlord’s urgent repair timescale. The delay in resolving the leak was somewhat outside of the landlord’s control in this case, due to the need to access multiple properties above the resident’s and access not being granted. However, the landlord acted appropriately by acknowledging the delay and offering compensation to the resident by way of apology.
11. It is noted that an appointment to assess the damage to the resident’s property was carried out on 4 June 2021. Following this, there was a delay in raising the relevant repair orders until 13 July 2021. The landlord has explained that it needed to wait to ensue that the leak was resolved before proceeding with decoration works which was reasonable in the circumstances. The work to redecorate the resident’s bedroom and hallway was then completed on 4 August 2021 which was reasonable and in line with the landlord’s 20 working day routine repair timescale. However, following a post-inspection where further works were identified on 19 August 2021, there was a delay in completing additional works to the decoration until 22 November 2021 which was approximately 67 working days later. This timeframe is not considered reasonable when considering the nature of the decoration works required. The landlord has acted appropriately by acknowledging the delay and apologising to the resident for any inconvenience experienced. It also offered compensation in recognition of the delay and demonstrated that it had taken points of learning from the complaint by confirming that it had hired staff who were solely responsible for ensuring complaint actions were followed through to completion to prevent errors in future. 
12. The landlord initially agreed to replace the carpet within its stage one complaint response on 28 May 2021, however, it is noted that this had not been completed as of August 2022. It was reasonable for the landlord to offer to replace the carpet as a gesture of goodwill given the resident’s concerns that she did not have home contents insurance. However, it was not strictly obliged to do so as it would be the resident’s responsibility to insure her belongings in case of damage and the landlord was not responsible for the carpeting in line with the tenancy agreement.
13. The evidence shows that works to replace the carpet were raised following the post-inspection of the property on 19 August 2021. A contractor reported that they could not proceed with the carpet replacement as there was a large wardrobe in the bedroom that required clearing. The landlord’s records also show that the resident, at one stage, advised that she had not received carpet samples. Another sample pack was provided and the resident confirmed receipt of these in October 2021. The evidence suggests that the resident was not satisfied with the quality of the samples provided and conversations continued.
14. The landlord has advised this Service that it did not have any evidence to confirm whether the resident had confirmed a choice of carpet. However, it has not provided this Service with any additional evidence such as communication logs between the resident and the contractor responsible for the carpet replacement to confirm the reason as to why the carpet replacement did not progress. Any delay in replacing the carpet as a result of the resident’s dissatisfaction with the samples provided was somewhat outside of the landlord’s control. However, due to the lack of available communication logs, the landlord has not demonstrated that the delay in progressing the carpet replacement was fully outside of its control, or reasonable.
15. In addition, the landlord did not comment on the carpet replacement within its stage two complaint response in December 2021. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have addressed the resident’s concern and confirmed its position in order to progress the repair. Given that the landlord had advised that it now had staff in place to ensure that complaint actions were carried out, the Ombudsman would have expected to see evidence to suggest that the landlord was also proactively trying to progress the repair with the resident in view of her concern that the work remained outstanding, but there is no evidence to suggest that it did so. 
16. It is noted that following contact from the Ombudsman, the landlord carried out an inspection of the property on 8 August 2022 and progressed works to replace the carpet as well as other decoration work. The evidence indicates that as of 18 August 2022, the landlord was waiting for a response from the resident regarding her choice of carpet. It is unclear as to whether the carpet replacement works have since progressed. As such, the landlord is to contact the resident to discuss the carpet replacement and arrange for the works to be completed if it has not already done so.
17. The resident has also expressed concern that she had spent significant time and trouble pursuing her concerns. As part of this investigation, the landlord was asked to provide documents, correspondence, and any other evidence relevant to the resident’s complaint. Only limited communication logs were provided. The omissions indicate poor record keeping by the landlord and has prevented the Ombudsman from assessing whether the level of contact required by the resident was excessive, or likely to have caused her additional inconvenience. It is therefore recommended that the landlord conducts a review of its record keeping processes, ensuring that there is a clear audit trail for complaints, which provides details of specifically when contact was made, what was said and what the agreed next steps and expectations were so that this can be provided to the Ombudsman when requested.
18. The resident has asked for additional compensation in view of the damage caused to her personal belongings as a result of the leak. The landlord would not be expected to compensate the resident for any damaged belongings as it would be the resident’s responsibility to insure her personal possessions against damage or loss. The landlord’s repair policy confirms that the landlord may have discounts available for home contents insurance and it is recommended that the landlord provides the resident with this information so that she is able to insure her items in the future if she wishes. The resident also requested compensation to account for the loss of her bedroom whilst remedial works remained outstanding. The evidence shows that the repairs required in the property were aesthetic and there is no other evidence to suggest that the resident was otherwise unable to use the bedroom. As such, the landlord would not be expected to offer additional compensation to the resident on this basis. 
19. In summary, the landlord acted appropriately by acknowledging the delay in resolving the leak, carrying out remedial works and also for the slight delay in issuing its stage two complaint response, which was issued one working day outside of its complaint policy timescale of 20 working days. However, its overall offer of £250 compensation is not considered proportionate given the impact on the resident as a result of the additional failings identified. In view of this, the landlord is to offer the resident an additional £100 compensation in recognition of the delay in progressing works to replace the carpet as agreed and its failure to confirm its position regarding the carpet replacement within its stage two complaint response. This brings the total level of compensation to £350. This amount is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which states that amounts between £100-£600 are considered reasonable in instances of considerable service failure or maladministration but where there was no permanent impact on the resident. Examples include failure over a considerable period of time to act in accordance with policy – for example to address repairs, or failure to meaningfully engage with the substance of the complaint,

Determination

20. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs and remedial work required in the resident’s property following a leak. 

Orders

21. The Ombudsman orders that the following actions are taken within four weeks:
    1. The landlord is to pay the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the inconvenience caused by the additional delay in completing the agreed carpet replacement. This is in addition to the landlord’s previous offer of £250 which should also be paid if it has not already done so.
    2. The landlord should contact the resident to discuss the carpet replacement and arrange for the works to be completed if it has not already done so.

 Recommendations

22. It is recommended that the landlord conducts a review of its record keeping processes, ensuring that there is a clear audit trail for complaints, which provides details of specifically when contact was made, what was said and what the agreed next steps and expectations were so that this can be provided to the Ombudsman when requested.
23. It is recommended that the landlord provides the resident with information regarding any discounts it may have available for home contents insurance as detailed in its repairs policy so that she can insure her items if she wishes.
24. It is recommended that the landlord considers carrying out staff training for complaint handlers to ensure that it addresses each aspect of a resident’s complaint within its complaint responses and ensures that response actions are seen through to completion.