Origin Housing Limited (201809019)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 201809019

Origin Housing Limited

11 May 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 concerns:
   1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of banging and dripping noises from the pipework in the property.
   2. The associated formal complaint into the matter.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a flat in a communal building.
3. The resident wrote to the landlord on 6 April 2020 to inform it of dripping noises from the pipework. A complaint into the matter was opened by the landlord following receipt of an email from the resident on 6 July 2020 where he described the noise from the pipework, the effect that this issue has had on his sleep, and his dissatisfaction with how his concerns have been handled by the landlord.
4. In its response to the complaint, the landlord explained that as the property was on the top floor of the building, the resident would be closer to the pipework in the roof space and also noted that no other tenant on the top floor had completed about noise from the pipes. The landlord also noted that it had previously offered a property transfer to the resident and that that option was still available to him. It concluded the response by informing the resident that it was satisfied that it had done everything possible to investigate the issue and raised work to lessen the noise from the pipes in an attempt to resolve the problem. It later confirmed that it had now undertaken all perceivable works to identify and resolve the issue and apologised that it was unable to resolve the matter to the resident’s satisfaction.

Assessment and findings

Relevant policies and procedures

5. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that it will attend emergency repairs within two hours and all other repairs will be attended to within 28 days. The policy defines an emergency repair as a repair that presents “an immediate health and safety risk or is causing damage to the property. These include uncontrollable leaks, dangerous electrics, exposed sewage and unsecure properties”.
6. The repairs policy also describes the landlord’s repair responsibilities and notes that it is responsible for the repair and maintenance of the plumbing, pipework and insulation.
7. The landlord operates a two-stage complaints process. When a complaint is received, the landlord aims to acknowledge the complaint within five working days and provide a response at stage one within ten working days. If the complainant is dissatisfied with the response, they can request an escalation of the complaint to the next stage. The landlord will then undertake a review of the complaint and provide a stage two response within 20 working days. This will be the landlord’s final response to the complaint.
8. The landlord’s compensation policy recommends a discretionary payment of up to £250 when it has not provided good customer service. The policy also recommends a payment of £10 when a complaint response is not provided in a timely manner.

Scope of investigation

9. Part of the evidence sent by the resident included correspondence between himself and the landlord from October 2018 to August 2020 relating to the noise from the pipework. Specifically, the resident has experienced ongoing issues with noise from the pipework in the property since at least 2018. The landlord undertook work to isolate, insulate and box in the pipework in the roof space above the resident’s property. A surveyor’s inspection undertaken in May 2019 stated that no further action was needed.
10. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner, so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and whilst the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events which occurred. As the substantive issues become historical it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as the Ombudsman, to conduct an effective review of the actions taken to address those issues.
11. This is in accordance with paragraph 39(e) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, which states that we will not consider complaints that were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within six months of the matters arising. Therefore, whilst the historical incidents provide contextual background to the current complaint, this assessment focuses on events from January 2020 onward, which is six months prior to the formal complaint being made in July 2020.
12. The resident has also stated his dissatisfaction that the effect the noise issue has had on his health was not properly recognised by the landlord in the complaint process. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts as a personal injury claim.
13. This is in line with paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, which states that “The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion 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”. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident and how the landlord responded.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of banging and dripping noises from the pipework in the property.

14. Following the resident’s reports of concerns over noisy pipework, the landlord was obligated to carry out an inspection within 28 days, to understand whether any repairs were required to address the issue and communicate its findings to the resident.
15. The resident had initially reported his concerns on 6 April 2020, but there is no evidence of an inspection being carried out prior to the landlord’s final stage complaint investigation from January 2021. Although the landlord had responded to the resident’s stage one complaint on 12 August 2020, to explain that it had carried out all possible investigations and repair work, this was based on its historical investigations.
16. The resident’s Member of Parliament (MP) wrote to the landlord of the resident’s behalf on 21 August 2020. The email noted that the resident was still experiencing banging noises from the pipes, but it was not clear if the dripping noises were still an issue. The MP asked the landlord if there was any other action it could take to alleviate the issue.
17. An internal landlord email sent on 29 December 2020 noted that following receipt of the MP’s email, that the complaint should have been escalated, however it was treated as an enquiry. The landlord wrote to the resident on 31 December 2020 to confirm that it had escalated the complaint and that it would install noise monitoring equipment into the property to identify to understand the noise and identify any possible remedies.
18. The landlord installed noise monitoring equipment in the property in January 2021 and again in March 2021. A stage two response was then sent to the resident on 22 June 2021. The landlord described the visits it had taken to the property during the two periods where the noise recording equipment was installed. It explained that no recordings were made that replicated the noise described by the resident.
19. The landlord then informed the resident that an inspection had occurred on 10 May 2021 to investigate the possibility of rerouting the communal pipework, but it was determined that this would not be possible as the pipes had to remain in their current location to supply the properties on the same side of the building as the resident. Further work was raised for 18 May 2021 to remove the boxing of the pipework in the resident’s property to and replace the cast-iron pipes with plastic pipes. The landlord also investigated whether the thermostatic radiator valves in other properties were causing issues of balancing the communal pipe system and causing noise.
20. Section 79 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 concerns noise nuisance and inspections. Section 79(1)(g) of the act states that “noise emitted from premises so as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance” constitutes statutory noise nuisance.
21. As the resident had reported the noise had been getting worse, the landlord would be expected to carry out a further investigation to understand the nature of the issue being reported. Therefore, it was unreasonable for the resident to have waited so long for the landlord to carry out an inspection, and a failing has been identified for this significant delay, which added distress, inconvenience, time and trouble to the resident.
22. The landlord has acknowledged in its final stage complaint response on 22 June 2021 that it had failed to carry out any investigation or repair work following the resident’s reports of noisy pipework on 6 April 2020. Although it apologised to the resident and had sought to learn from the complaint by providing feedback to its relevant team to ensure that there was no reoccurrence in the future, this is inadequate in recognising the detriment caused to the resident. As a result, direct financial compensation has been ordered further below in this report.
23. During the landlord’s final stage complaint investigation, it had installed noise monitoring equipment for a period of two weeks in both January and March 2021, and also had an operative visit the property on three separate occasions for four hours each time. As it was unable to identify any specific instances which explained the resident’s reports, it was reasonable for the landlord to have concluded that the noise was not coming from the resident’s heating system.
24. The landlord’s records state that a further inspection was undertaken on 23 July 2021 and additional work was then raised to soundproof the pipes in the bedroom cupboard of the resident’s property. This work was completed on 6 September 2021 and the resident contacted the landlord on 14 September 2021 to inform it that it had no effect on the noise.
25. In addition to the landlord having investigated the repair, it had carried out repairs to replace the radiator valves in neighbouring properties and replace the iron pipework with plastic in May 2021; these being the only repairs it had assessed that it could carry out to try to improve the issue. Furthermore, following an inspection in July 2021, it had agreed to the resident’s request to box in further pipework in his bedroom and airing cupboard, which it completed by September 2021. Although it is recognised that the resident reported no improvement following these works, these were reasonable and proportionate actions for the landlord to take and demonstrated its desire to try to address the resident’s concerns.
26. The landlord sent a follow-up to its stage two response on 18 October 2021 where it confirmed that it had now undertaken all perceivable works to identify and resolve the issue and apologised that it was unable to resolve the matter to the resident’s satisfaction.
27. In summary, the landlord failed to carry out a proper investigation into the resident’s initial reports of concerns over his noisy pipework during its stage one complaint investigation, which resulted in a delay of some nine months. However, the landlord has taken the opportunity of its full complaints procedure to properly investigate the resident’s reports and carry out repairs to try to reduce the noise from the pipework.
28. It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that financial compensation would provide adequate redress for the service failures identified and is in line with our Service’s remedies guidance (published on our website) as well as the landlord’s own compensation policy in respect to its poor customer service following its delayed investigation into the resident’s concerns. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests awards of between £50 to £250 where there has been service failure which had an impact on the complainant but may not have significantly affected the overall outcome for the complainant. In this case, the delays did not affect the outcome of the complaint as the landlord ultimately carried out a suitable investigation which failed to identify an issue with the pipework, but the delays did have an impact on the resident and compensation is due in view of this.

The landlord’s complaint handling

29. The landlord has not followed its complaint policy at either stage of the complaints process. The stage one response was sent on 11 August 2020, however from the correspondence provided by the landlord it is not clear when a formal complaint was opened following the resident’s email of 6 July 2020 and if an acknowledgment was sent to the resident to inform him that a complaint had been opened.
30. There was also confusion during the escalation of the complaint. The landlord has accepted that it should have escalated the complaint upon receipt of the MP’s email. However, although the landlord wrote to the resident on 31 December 2020 to inform him that the complaint had been escalated, it did not provide a final response until 22 June 2021, almost six months later.
31. The evidence provided by the landlord suggests that it wished to complete its indignations and complete any recommended work before providing the response. Its email sent on 31 December 2020 did not inform the resident of this course of action.
32. Moreover, it is the established view of this Service that landlords should respond to complaints in a timely manner, and it is not necessary to wait for repairs/inspections to be completed before responding to a complaint. A complaint response can be issued whilst repairs are outstanding and compensation can be awarded for any delays which have taken place and which are expected, based on the proposed completion date for any outstanding repairs. If there are further delays after the landlord has issued its final complaint response, the landlord can issue a further response and consider whether to offer additional compensation for the further delays. The significant delays in responding to the complaint would have been inconvenient for the resident as this prevented him from being able to refer his complaint to the Ombudsman sooner for independent review.
33. The landlord’s compensation policy would suggest a payment of £20 for the two delayed complaint responses. However, in light of the length of time it took for the complaint process to be completed, this level of redress is inadequate in the circumstances. Therefore, the total amount of compensation ordered in this report has taken our findings with respect to the stress and inconvenience caused by the landlord in both elements of the case, into consideration.

Determination

34. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of:
    1. Its response to the resident’s reports of banging and dripping noises from the pipework in the property.
    2. Its handling of the associated formal complaint into the matter.

Orders

35. For the service failure and reasons set out above, the landlord is ordered to pay to the resident a total of £250 compensation.
36. The landlord should contact this Service within four weeks of this determination to confirm that it has complied with the above order and whether it will follow the below recommendation.

Recommendations

37. It is recommended that the landlord review its staff’s training needs in relation to their application of its policies and procedures with regard to repairs, complaints and compensation, to seek to prevent a recurrence of its above failures in the resident’s case. This should include consideration of this Service’s guidance on remedies, at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/corporate-information/policies/dispute-resolution/policy-on-remedies/, and the completion of our free online dispute resolution training for landlords, if this has not been done recently, at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/landlords/e-learning/.