Ongo Homes Limited (202231174)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202231174

Ongo Homes Limited

9 May 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. The resident’s reports of damp and mould
2. The decant of the resident and level of compensation.
3. The complaint.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord with the tenancy assignment dated August 2018. The property is a 3-bedroom semi-detached house. The resident has vulnerabilities in relation to mental health and her children have vulnerabilities in relation to Autism.
The landlord had been aware of damp and mould issues and the associated repairs within the property since February 2018. The repair log shows the resident reported damp and mould in the property 5 times between February 2018 and November 2022, with the most recent report before her formal complaint being 13 January 2021.
Repair orders raised and detailed in the repair log related to the following:
1. Leaking guttering
2. Loose brickwork
3. Gaps between door frame allowing water ingress.
4. Leaking toilet and sink
5. Leaking roof
6. Replacement of extractor fans
7. Repointing and rendering around windows.
The repair log shows a mould wash was carried out on 15 February 2021, with additional notes for the same day saying, “needs roof, needs vents fitting into chimney in bedroom, inside work to wait until outside sorted, around all windows hack and patch with damp proof outside”.
Urgent roof repairs were raised on 1 April 2021 and 27 September 2021 with the case notes evidencing the works were carried out on 15 April 2021 and 28 October 2021.
Whilst some but not all the repairs identified were attended to, the resident raised a formal complaint on 14 November 2022. She said that despite contractor visits, she was unhappy with the condition of the property in relation to damp and mould.
An inspection was carried out on 16 November 2022 with the inspection notes saying that whilst some repairs had been “completed, a number are still open”. Recommendations were made for repairs to remedy the damp and mould issues within the property.
A multi-agency meeting was held on 21 November 2022, which discussed the “substantial works” and the need to decant the resident for “around 6-12 months”. It noted the need to “deal with the mould issue temporarily to minimise risk to the children.” A decant request was submitted on 24 November 2022 and an internal email of 25 November 2022 said that the resident was “a lot happier now that the mould has been cleaned and no longer visible inside the property” and she was “happy to move for a temporary decant but would like to return to the property once the planned works have been completed”.
The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 12 December 2022. It said that due to the complexity of the case, the deadline for a response was extended. It went on to say that no repairs were logged relating to mould from August 2021 up until receipt of her complaint, although repairs were logged for other areas. The landlord outlined an action plan to deal with the damp and mould and upheld the resident’s complaint.
The case notes show that on 31 January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord and “was quite upset that no one had come back to her with any progress of times for works” and the decant property she had requested had been allocated to someone else.
On 9 March 2023, the resident was decanted with the temporary housing agreement outlining the resident’s expected return date of around 12 February 2024. It went on to say all works would be carried out on the property before the resident returned with some final external works to be completed with her in situ. However, the case notes said the resident expressed for all work to be completed before she and her family returned.
The resident requested to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 24 March 2023, saying that she was unhappy with the lack of communication regarding the complaint and that she was advised she would receive compensation, but the landlord had “not followed this through”.
The landlord responded the same day saying it was happy to offer the resident £200 in financial redress as an outcome to the stage 1 complaint to cover any inconvenience and distress of having to move. It went on to say it would have reasonably asked that any dissatisfaction be raised within 14 days of receiving the stage 1 response. It continued; it could not confirm her complaint would be considered at stage 2 given her concerns were raised over three months later. However, it would raise the resident’s concerns to its head of service who would respond within 20 working days.
On 22 May 2023, an inspection was carried out however no details were provided. In addition, an energy rating assessment was carried out the same day.
This service contacted the landlord in June 2023 requesting the landlord respond to the resident. On 27 July 2023, the landlord provided its final response. It said that there had been little physical work undertaken to date and the main reason was the extent of the issues within the property which required further specialist advice. It offered the resident a total of £300 made up of £225 contribution towards fuel costs for travelling to school and £75 for the inconvenience caused in respect of her complaint.
In August 2023, a damp survey was carried out and internal emails evidence the landlord chasing matters with regard to the progress of the works. It said “are we anywhere nearer to forwarding the scope to us? We have a tenant that is chasing us to get back into her property, she has been out of the property for over 6 months, and we haven’t moved forward a great deal to getting her back in. Sorry to push but there is a threat that she is taking this further.”
The resident chased matters in September and October 2023 saying she was very frustrated. The landlord responded saying “if all goes to plan” the resident would be back in the property “before Christmas.” Internal emails and case notes show the works on the property began 13 November 2023 and were completed on 15 January 2024.
Following recent contact with the resident she explained that she returned to the property on 21 February 2024 and a new roof was installed from the week commencing 22 April 2024.
The landlord’s statement to this service said that the case was “extensive and complex in nature,” requiring extensive works to remedy the damp and mould. It said it offered the resident £1615 for assistance with additional petrol costs following her decant to another property. This was worked out at £40 extra per week x 46 weeks £1840 minus £225 paid at stage 2. In addition, it said it was purchasing:
1. A double bed
2. Sofa
3. x4 chest of drawers
4. Carpets, curtains, and blinds.
The landlord also identified learning outcomes from this case and what it would do in the future to prevent further failings. It provided this service with a copy of a damp and mould matrix which it says is to be “used when assessing our response to reports of damp and mould”. This document rates the risks and included photos of mould as examples to assist its staff with this. It also provides response timescales and action required. In addition it provided a copy of its self-assessment exercise when understanding and addressing mould.

Assessment and findings

The evidence shows that the landlord was aware of the damp issues within the property from February 2018 and carried out some repairs. Whilst this information provides a contextual background to the complaint, this report focused on the residents reports of damp and mould leading up to her formal complaint of November 2022.

Policies

Under the Housing Health and Safety rating system (HHSRS), the landlord has a responsibility to ensure its properties are free from hazards, such as damp and mould. It outlines preventative measures for mitigating any such hazard, including:
1. Properly installed rainwater goods, including gutters and rainwater pipes capable of removing rainwater from the roof and carrying it away from the property into proper means of disposal.
This Service’s spotlight report published in October 2021 outlines that landlords should take a pro-active, zero tolerance approach to damp and mould, ensuring that their responses to damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue.
The landlord maintenance policy outlines repair priorities as followed:
1. Same Day Priority – these repairs will be carried out the same day as the customer requests the repair, these repairs consist of emergency works that be of a significant detriment to the customer or their home.
2. Next Day Priority – these repairs are ones which are of an urgent nature but do not fall into the same day priority in terms of customer and/or property detriment.
3. Appointment – these repairs will be offered to the customer as an appointment based on customer requirements and the availability of resources to attend the appointment.
4. These categories offer emergency repairs to tenants either on the SAME day, or the NEXT day. These will be diagnosed with vulnerabilities in mind and call handlers will be given the discretion to move jobs within priorities to suit the circumstances. All other jobs will be appointed.

The resident’s reports of damp and mould

The evidence shows that the resident reported damp and mould in the property in the winter months of 2018, 2019 and 2020. On 13 January 2021, the resident made another report of damp and mould in the property and a mould wash was carried out on 15 February 2021. At the time, and if a first time report of damp and mould, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to carry out a mould wash. Nevertheless, the report of January 2021 was not a first time report and thus the landlord should have considered alternative action to address the problem.
HHSRS places a legal duty on landlords to assess and regularly review the condition of their properties to ensure that properties are safe and free from hazards. The continued reports of damp and mould at the property do not demonstrate the landlord was monitoring the situation as per its obligations under HHSRS and was not appropriate.
Although additional works were identified, and a works order was raised on 15 February 2021 for the repointing, rendering and damp proofing outside, this work was not carried out. This is despite the resident chasing matters on 30 March 2021 saying she wanted to “complain about the communication and lack of works that have taken place at her property”. This was not appropriate, especially given the landlord was aware of the reoccurring damp and mould issue at the property which was occupied by a vulnerable family.
An urgent roof repair was raised on 1 April 2021 with the works being evidenced as complete on 15 April 2021 which was 9 working days later. Although a repair of this nature would not be a routine repair, it would be unreasonable to consider it under its urgent timescales which says repairs of an urgent nature would be dealt with as next day priority. This is because scaffolding may be required to carry out the repair and there was no indication as to the severity of the leak or how it was affecting the property.
However, a further report of a leaking flat roof was logged on 27 September 2021, this was marked “urgent”. The case notes said the leak was coming through the flat roof into bathroom on first floor then into ground floor hallway and was “dripping fast”. This was not evidenced as completed until 26 October 2021, which was 38 working days later. This was not appropriate because the leak was coming through a flat roof with no need for scaffolding and was affecting 2 floors of the property. This is particularly concerning as the landlord was aware of the ongoing damp and mould issues within the property and the 4-week delay in carrying out the necessary repair likely contributed to the damp and mould in the property.
Environmental health contacted the landlord on 29 October 2021, on behalf of the resident who said the mould had come back in the ground floor bedroom. They advised the residents to contact the landlord which she said she had done. The landlord responded on 11 November 2021 saying it had not received any recent reports but would contact the resident. There is no evidence to suggest the landlord contacted the resident which is not appropriate.
The case notes show there was no contact from the resident in relation to damp and mould from October 2021 to her raising her complaint in November 2022. Whilst it would be reasonable for the landlord to assume there were no issues during this time as there was no contact, it should have been proactive given the vulnerabilities and contacted her. Especially considering it said it would on 11 November 2021. Furthermore, the case history demonstrates that the mould issue is prominent in the winter months and thus no need for the resident to report damp and mould over the warmer months throughout 2022.
The resident raised a formal complaint on 14 November 2022 in relation to the damp and mould in the property. The landlord responded by visiting the property on 16 November 2022. It was at this point that the landlord was proactive in its response to dealing with the resident’s reports. Whilst it demonstrated it was following this service recommendations in the spotlight report of October 2021 on damp and mould to respond to damp reports in a timely manner and treat the reports with the urgency they suggest, it does not mitigate the delay in carrying out the identified repairs throughout 2021.
Following the inspection a multi-agency meeting was held on 21 November 2022. This was prompt and appropriate when considering the resident and her family’s vulnerabilities. Furthermore, it noted the need to “deal with the mould issue temporarily to minimise risk to the children.”
The landlord responded to the resident at stage 1 on 12 December 2022, outlining an action plan to deal with the damp and mould and upholding the resident’s complaint. Nevertheless it said that no repairs were logged relating to mould from August 2021 up until the resident made her formal complaint in November 2022.This was not appropriate as it was not correct. It has been evidenced,the landlord receivedan urgent report of disrepair to the roof in September 2021 and should have been aware of the affect the leaking roof would have had on any damp and mould in the property. Furthermore it received contact from environmental health in October 2021 saying that the resident said the mould had returned for which the landlord said it would contact the resident in relation to this report but it did not.
In summary, this service acknowledges the positive steps the landlord took from November 2022 in implementing the spotlight reports recommendations, however, it does not mitigate the delay in carrying out the identified repairs throughout 2021.It is evident that the delay had caused the resident and her family distress and inconvenience. The landlord was not proactive in dealing with the resident’s reports of damp and mould, despite knowing the previous history of it being a reoccurring problem. It delayed in carrying out repairs to the roof in September 2021 despite this being marked as urgent. Furthermore, it identified the need to carry out repointing and rendering works to the outside but this was not carried out despite the resident chasing the matter. All the repairs outlined, if completed, could have prevented or mitigated the damp and mould. Whilst the landlord did uphold the resident’s complaint, it failed to acknowledge its failings in relation to dealing with the repairs. Therefore as outlined above there is maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
In recognition of the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident during the period of 13 January 2021 and 11 November 2021, £1100 has been awarded to the resident. This is broken down into £50 per month for 11 months.

The decant of the resident and level of compensation

The landlord’s decant policy says:
1. When coming to a decision it will consider the expected duration of the works.
2. If any services will be unavailable and the level of disruption and inconvenience caused to residents.
3. Where possible it gives its tenants at least two months’ notice to move and will keep tenants informed of the progress throughout the duration of the works providing regular updates.
4. It wants to minimise inconvenience and / or financial loss as a result of the disturbance. Each case will be assessed on individual circumstances.
5. It will where the tenant is deemed to be vulnerable, purchase essential household items and deduct the cost from the home loss payment with the prior agreement of the tenant.
Following the resident’s formal complaint of 14 November 2022 an inspection was carried out 16 November 2022, and a multi-agency meeting was held on 21 November 2022. These steps were appropriate in assisting the landlord in making a decision if a decant may be necessary. The resident was decanted from the property on 9 March 2023 as it said there were significant works required to the property and outlined the resident’s expected return date of around 12 February 2024. This was appropriate and in line with its policy.
The resident remained dissatisfied saying she was unhappy with the level of communication and compensation, requesting to escalate her complaint on 24 March 2023. Following correspondence from this service, the landlord sent its final response on 27 July 2023. It said that there had been little physical work undertaken and this was due to extensive issues within the property which required further specialist advice.It was appropriate for the landlord to seek specialist advice, and demonstrated the landlord was actively following the recommendation outlined in this service spotlight report which says landlords should identify where an independent, mutually agreed and suitably qualified surveyor should be used.
The landlord accepted in its final response that it could have “engaged with the resident more affectively in terms of the position regarding the situation with the ongoing works” and offered the resident its “sincere apologies.” It offered the resident a total of £300 compensation made-up of £225 fuel contribution and £75 for inconvenience caused in respect of the complaint. Whilst this demonstrated the landlord had accepted this failing and apologised and took steps to put things right by offering compensation. The amount offered does not reflect the impact on the resident, as £225 was for reimbursement and £75 was for inconvenience caused in respect of the complaint.
In August, September, and October 2023 the resident inquired as to when she could return to the property, saying she was very frustrated. The landlord advised the resident at the time of the decant that the return date to the property would be February 2024. Though it was appropriate for the landlord to reiterate the return date to the resident as outlined in the decant agreement, it was unfair that the resident had to chase updates, which was not in line with its policy that says it “will keep tenants informed of the progress throughout the duration of the works providing regular updates”.
From the time the resident was decanted in March 2023, there was very little progress in carrying out the repair work, which was evidently frustrating for the resident, especially as the works in the property did not start until November 2023.
The landlord’s witness statement to this service said it had purchased furniture for the resident and in total offered £1840 for assistance with additional petrol costs following the decant. This was appropriate and in line with its policy which says it wants to minimise financial loss as a result of the disturbance.
The resident said having to remain in temporary accommodation for an extended period of time(March 2023 to February 2024) was particularly distressing for her children who had vulnerabilities in relation to autism.
In summary, the landlord did follow it’s decan policy by considering the level of disruption and inconvenience that would be caused to resident and her family, and deciding a decant was the most appropriate course of action given the extent of the work required. However, as accepted by the landlord, its engagement with the resident could have been better, and it could have been more proactive in carrying out the works, which would have reduced the amount of time the resident and her family were away from their home. The landlord was aware of the families vulnerabilities and the resident had said how difficult it was.
It offered the resident £1840 in financial assistance which was in line with its policy but did not offer sufficient compensation for any distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident. Therefore there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the decant of the resident and level of compensation and £150 compensation has been awared.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s complaint policy says stage 1 complaints will be responded to within 10 working days. If it is unable to do this, it will inform the resident explaining the reasons why and agree a new date to complete the complaint.
The resident raised her stage 1 complaint on 14 November 2022. The landlord responded on 12 December 2022, which was 20 working days later. Although the response was 10 working days outside of its policy timescale, it had explained to the resident it would not meet the deadline, which was appropriate.
The resident requested to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 24 March 2023. The landlord said it was unsure whether it could escalate the resident’s complaint to stage 2 given her concerns were raised over three months after it’s stage 1 response. Its complaints policy says stage 2 complaints must be escalated within two weeks of receiving its decision under stage 1. However, the complaint handling code says a landlord must not take a blanket approach to excluding complaints; it must consider the individual circumstances of each complaint. Therefore, it’s comments in relation to not escalating the resident’s complaint were not appropriate. It was unfair to the resident given she had just been decanted and the situation was not resolved, thus denying her a resolution.
The resident remained unhappy and contacted this service. We contacted the landlord on 30 June 2023 requesting it respond to the resident with its final response. This was provided on 27 July 2023 following an agreed extension. It apologised and offered the resident £75 for the inconvenience caused. This amount did not reflect the impact of the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident in pursing the complaint. It was only after this service intervention was a final response provided, which was 4 months after she tried to escalate the matter.
In summary, the landlord was late in its responses, although it had requested extensions. It refused to escalate the resident complaint to stage 2, denying her a resolution and delaying access to this service. Whilst it offered the resident £75 compensation, accepted its failing and apologised, this does not reflect the impact experienced by the resident.
As evidenced above there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling, therefore £200 has been awarded to reflect the impact on the resident.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
1. The residents reports of damp and mould.
2. The complaint.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the decant of the resident and level of compensation.

Orders

Within four weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to take the following action and provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with these orders:
The landlord to write to the resident to apologise for the service failures identified in this report, in line with this service’ apologies guidance. https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/centre-for-learning/key-topics/our-orders/apologies-guidance/.
Pay directly to the resident compensation totalling £1450 made up of:
1. £1100 for the distress and inconvenient caused to the resident by itshandling of the residents reports of damp and mould.
2. £200 in recognition for the distress and inconvenience in relation to its response to the resident’s complaint.
3. £150 in recognition for the distress and inconvenience in relation to its response to its handling of the decant of the resident and level of compensation.
Contact the resident to ensure there are no further issues in relation to damp and mould at the property and take prompt action if necessary. The landlord to confirm in writing to this service once it has done this.
Carry out a self-assessment against the recommendations in this service’ spotlight report on complaints about repairs. If already done some time ago, carry out a gap analysis covering the time since the self-assessment. Room for improvement: Spotlight on… complaints about repairs (housing-ombudsman.org.uk).
Review its staff training needs in relation to their understanding and application of the new Complaint Handling Code following its implementation on 1 April 2024.