The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

Orbit Group Limited (202215754)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202215754

Orbit Group Limited

31 July 2023

 

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 the resident’s requests for repairs to be completed.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlords complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has a fixed term assured tenancy with the landlord, which began in September 2016. The landlord is a housing association, and the property is a one-bedroom ground floor flat.
  2. The landlord has recorded that the resident has mental health issues. The resident has also told this Service that he has several health issues.

Policies and procedures

  1. The landlord has a repairs policy that sets out its responsibility under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for maintaining the structure and exterior of its properties (including drains, gutters, and external pipes) and installations in the property for the supply of water, gas, and electricity; and for sanitation (including basins, sinks, baths, and sanitary conveniences). It also recognises that it has a legal duty, as a landlord under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, to make sure that its rented houses and flats are ‘fit for human habitation’, which means that they are safe, healthy, and free from things that could cause serious harm. Emergency repairs (any repair that is required to sustain the immediate health, safety, or security of the customer at risk, or that affects the structure of the building adversely) will be responded to within four and twenty-four hours. Routine repairs will be responded to within twenty-eight calendar days.
  2. Regarding damp and mould, the repairs policy says that it will conduct a risk assessment before determining if a repair is required, and repairs will be issued in line with its damp and mould policy. It also sets out that it provides a “high priority response” to residents identified as having acute physical or mental health vulnerabilities, which might include treating routine repairs as an emergency where the circumstances constitute a risk to the health and safety of that customer.
  3. The landlord has a separate damp and mould policy that refers to legislation changes brought about by the introduction of the Homes for Habitation Act and Social Housing White Paper, and notes the guidance given in the Housing Ombudsman’s report, ‘Spotlight on damp and mould – It’s not lifestyle.’ It says that it takes a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould; it ensures that support is offered to residents to ensure that any issues are resolved satisfactorily, and that its response to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue.
  4. The landlord has a two stage complaints process. Complaints will be acknowledged at stage one of the process within three working days and will be fully responded to within ten working days. Residents are also able to request that their complaint be reviewed at stage two of the process, and the landlord aims to respond at stage two within twenty working days.

Summary of events

  1. The landlord has submitted evidence that a damp survey was carried out on 4 May 2021 by a specialist contractor. The survey found that the property was “suffering from general coldness, high humidity, and condensation.” It noted that the issue was exacerbated by a lack of mechanical ventilation and constant warmth. It recommended that the following works were completed:
    1. Install cavity wall insulation to external walls.
    2. Install humidistat-controlled extractor fan in bathroom.
    3. Install humidistat-controlled extractor fan in kitchen.
    4. Householder to heat the property on a regular basis and maintain comfortable temperatures throughout the day.
    5. Householder to ventilate the property regularly.
    6. Remove ivy growth from rear elevation to expose damp proof course.
  2. The resident referred a previous complaint to this Service that was determined on 19 May 2022. While this was being investigated, the resident continued to engage with the landlord regarding issues with damp and mould in his property, and he raised a further complaint with it. This Service notes that the landlord has not sent a copy of the resident’s initial complaint or a date when it was logged. However, it is not disputed that the landlord issued its response at stage one on 25 April 2022, that upheld the complaint and confirmed that a private contractor had been contacted to arrange an appointment to carry out the works required.
  3. In recognition of the issues identified, the landlord offered £200 compensation, which was made up of £50 for service failure; £100 to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused, and £50 in recognition of the delays responding to the complaint. The landlord also invited the resident to request a review of the response if he was not satisfied with the decision.
  4. The resident discussed the situation with his landlord on 26 April 2022, and the landlord confirmed that while compiling the evidence to send to the Ombudsman, it discovered that it had not dealt with the issues fully. Therefore, it had dealt with the resident’s complaint by way of a new stage one, so that it could address the issues of damp and mould, cavity wall insulation and replacement of fire doors. The resident requested a review of the complaint and refused the £200 offer of compensation. The landlord acknowledged the review request on 3 May 2022.
  5. On 24 May 2022, the landlord contacted the resident to say that it was extending the due date for his complaint response by ten working days. The response date was extended by another 10 days on 23 June 2022;9 July 2022; 21 July 2022, and 4 August 2022, when it said that it was arranging to carry out works at the resident’s property.
  6. The landlord sent its reviewed response, which this Service acknowledges as its stage 2 response, to the resident on 18 August 2022, it apologised for the delays he had experienced regarding the damp and mould issues and acknowledged that it “should have acted more quickly to address these issues”. It also increased the offer of compensation to £532 which it broke down as follows:

a. For the delay in implementing temporary measures to address the damp and mould at the property – £70.

b. For the upset, frustration and inconvenience experienced because of its service failings – £100.

c. For poor complaint handling which resulted in significant delays – £200.

d. For repairs exceeding its usual timescales – £162.00.

  1. The landlord also confirmed that all the outstanding repairs were booked to start on 22nd August 2022 and would take about four days to complete. It confirmed the list of works to be completed included an overhaul of storage heaters; renew fire doors, install extractor fans, and to carry out cavity wall insulation by injection, as set out in the original damp survey.
  2. The landlord has provided work sheets as evidence that it completed all the required repairs between 22 August 2022 and 25 August 2022. However, the landlord has also said that contractors have not been able to gain access to the property to carry out the cavity wall insulation.
  3. The resident contacted this Service on 19 October 2022, and said that his complaint was about the landlords handling of around twenty repairs in the property. Some of the repairs had been completed, however the main repairs remained outstanding. He also said that he had smelt damp when he first viewed the property before moving in, he raised this with the landlord at the time and was told that the “musty” smell was due to the property being empty. He explained that he had been in hospital and was recovering from major surgery to his left lung and the discovery of COPD and felt that the damp and mould had worsened his condition. He also felt that it had taken too long for the landlord to do the work required, despite him making complaints and this Service determining his case. He said that the situation was impacting on his “physical, mental, spiritual health.” He had also been affected financially because of the cost of running the “anti-damp electrical equipment” and he said that he saw “no end to the loss of property due to it being damaged by damp.” He said that the main repairs which remained outstanding were:
  1. To install cavity wall insulation.
  2. To resolve the issue of damp and mould which was still affecting his clothes and personal belongings.
  3. To repair fire doors.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident has had historical issues with damp and mould in his property resulting in an investigation by this Service, which was determined in May 2022, report reference 202103417.To avoid any duplication, this investigation will concentrate on issues raised since the date of the previous determination but may refer to evidence provided by either party that predates the determination which is relevant to the current case.
  2. The resident has also referenced how the landlord’s failure to remedy the damp has impacted his health. It is outside the role of the Ombudsman to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be more appropriately dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts or insurance. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident. This is an accordance with paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme which states the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal, or procedure.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s repair requests.

  1. The landlord was obliged to assess the damp and mould in the property and identify any required works, as in line with its repairs policy it is “responsible for repairing and maintaining buildings and any fixtures and fittings originally provided.”
  2. It should be noted that the repairs required to resolve the issue of damp and mould were the subject of an investigation by this Service in May 2022. The determination at that time would have resulted in maladministration had the landlord not made an offer of compensation and said it would put things right. This Service considered this to be reasonable redress. However, the landlord failed to address the outstanding issues for a further three months and it is, therefore, regrettable that these repairs were not prioritised and monitored to completion given the findings in the report dated 16 May 2022, and the orders made by this Service, one of which was to:
  1. Complete any outstanding repairs identified within the damp inspection, in line with its repair times. The resident should be provided with any relevant updates on the progress of the works.
  1. The Ombudsman has also considered that a specialist damp survey was carried out on 4 May 2021, which made recommendations to deal with the issues of damp and mould. The recommendations were not complied with until August 2022 (and even then, not complied with in full), which was some 15 months after the survey and three months after the date of the previous Ombudsman determination. This was not in line with the landlord’s repair responsibilities, its own repairs policy, or its responsibilities under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018. It is unreasonable for any resident to suffer the impact of damp and mould over a long period of time; however, it was especially unreasonable for the resident, who was known to suffer from poor physical and mental health, and therefore, would be increasingly vulnerable to the situation he was left to endure for too long, with little or no acknowledgment of his vulnerabilities.
  2. When the resident had to make a further complaint to his landlord in early 2022, the landlord upheld the complaint in its response sent on 25 April 2022, and said that it was arranging for the required works to be completed. Yet, the work was not carried out until August 2022, which was three months after the stage one response was issued. The landlord did not give any timescales for the work to be completed in its stage one response which undoubtedly left the resident feeling uncertain which added to his frustration and distress.
  3. The landlord’s repairs policy says that it will give a “high priority response” to residents identified as having acute physical or mental health vulnerabilities, which might include treating routine repairs as an emergency where the circumstances constitute a risk to the health and safety of that resident. The landlord has not provided any evidence that it considered this and therefore failed to follow its own policy in this respect.
  4. The landlord has accepted that it failed to meet its service standards and offered £200 in compensation at stage one, which was increased to £532 at stage two of the process. This is not reasonable redress as the landlord has not demonstrated any learning from the previous complaint the resident had made, and as such a finding of severe maladministration has been made.
  5. The landlord acknowledged its failings in both its handling of the repairs and the complaint and offered a total of £532 compensation, of that amount £332 was for repair issues and £200 was for poor complaint handling. While this Service notes that the landlord did take steps to put things right, in the Ombudsman’s view repairs required took too long and compensation offered was not proportionate to the failings identified by this investigation. In particular, the time and trouble the resident expended in having to chase the landlord for updates and the distress, and uncertainty he experienced because of the lack of progress, particularly given the previous investigation by this Service. Taking these factors into account the Ombudsman makes a finding of severe maladministration and considers that an award of £1200 is appropriate in the circumstances.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. This Service acknowledges that the landlord attempted to rectify issues that it acknowledged had been missed from a previous complaint and did this by starting a new complaint at stage one of the process. While this might have caused confusion for the resident, who was left dealing with the same issues over a long period of time, it was a reasonable approach to take to ensure all parts of the resident’s complaint were considered. However, at both stage one and two, the responses are lacking in that they do not identify any learnings by the landlord from the complaint and do not acknowledge the resident’s vulnerabilities or consider any support required.
  2. The residents request to have the stage one response reviewed was acknowledged on 3 May 2022. The complaints policy sets out a response time of twenty days, with the ability to extend further to allow further investigation. The landlord’s extension on 23 May 2022, was reasonable and complies with its policy by updating the resident. However, it was not reasonable for the landlord to further extend on an additional three occasions, before finally providing its final response on 18 August 2022. This was not customer focussed and did not consider the ongoing frustration and distress experienced by the resident who was left not knowing when a final response would be issued or indeed, and perhaps more importantly, when repairs would be completed.
  3. Considering the absence of any learning on the landlord’s part in its stage one and two responses, the excessive and unreasonable number of extensions to provide the final response and the lack of acknowledgment of the resident’s vulnerabilities, the Ombudsman finds that there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination (decision)

  1. In line with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was severe maladministration in the way in which the landlord responded to the resident’s repair requests.
  2. In line with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration with the landlord’s complaint handling.

Reasons

  1. The landlord failed to carry out, repairs that were recommended by a specialist contractor, and which were required to prevent any further harm being caused to the resident and his possessions. It also failed to give a “high priority response” to residents identified as having acute physical or mental health vulnerabilities, which might include treating routine repairs as an emergency where the circumstances constitute a risk to the health and safety of that resident. Which is not in line with its damp and mould policy. It also did not carry out repairs as ordered in the Ombudsman’s report of May 2022 for an additional three months which resulted in the resident waiting longer to have the issues resolved.
  2. The landlord did not fully consider the repairs history when responding to the resident’s complaint, the residents’ vulnerabilities were not acknowledged and there were significant delays in providing its stage two response. Further, the landlord did not set out that it had learned anything because of the complaint. This taken altogether, meant that the resident experienced distress and frustration as he felt that the landlord was not listening to him, which left him having “no faith” in his landlord’s ability to deal with the issues responsibly.

Orders

  1. Within 28 days of the date of this report the Chief Executive to apologise to the resident for its failure to respond appropriately to his repair requests.
  2. Within 28 days of the date of this report the landlord to pay a total of £1200 compensation, which is made up of
  1. £400 for the delays to repairs, the lack of monitoring of the situation and the failure to recognise the impact of the situation on the resident.
  2. £200 for the resident’s time and trouble in chasing updates.
  3. £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
  4. £300 for its complaint handling failures.
  5. This Service notes that the landlord has already offered the resident £532 at stage of the complaints process and the resident has confirmed that he has accepted that before bringing his complaint to the Ombudsman. The total amount payable by the landlord, (adjusted to reflect the previous payment) is £668.
  1. Within seven working days of the date of this report, the landlord to contact the resident and agree a date for any outstanding work from the damp and mould survey to be completed within 28 days of the date of this report. If this is not possible due to the complex nature of the works or supply of the materials, the landlord should explain this to the resident and work to get this done at the earliest opportunity, which should be no later than three months after the date of this report.
  2. Within 28 days of the date of this report the landlord to review its repairs service considering the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Damp and Mould (housingombudsman.org.uk). The landlord’s review should as a minimum clearly define the service level expectations for damp and mould in its publications. It should also review its processes to ensure identified works are completed in a timely manner and set out how it monitors the works particularly post work. The outcome of the landlord’s review should be shared with the Ombudsman in writing within six weeks of the date of this report.
  3. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, senior management of the landlord, carry out a review of this case which includes how it receives assurance that repairs committed to during the complaint’s procedure are completed.
  4. Within six weeks of the date of this report the landlord to review its complaint handling practice in this case and implement any necessary remedial action to ensure it complies with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code going forward.