Peabody Trust (202405173)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202405173

Peabody Trust

27 August 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

  1. The complaint is about:
    1. The landlord’s handling of various repairs caused by a leak.
    2. The associated complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy. The property is a 2-bedroom ground floor flat in a low-rise block of flats. The resident told the landlord that one of her two children had asthma.
  2. On 18 January 2024, the resident complained to the landlord about a number of repair issues within the bathroom which linked to an ongoing leak from the property above. These included ceiling leaks, toilet leaks, black mould, issues with the windows closing, no bathroom light, and she also mentioned that the floor had sunk because of the leak.
  3. Following a lack of response from the landlord, the resident contacted this Service for support in making her complaint. On 5 March 2024, the Ombudsman wrote to the landlord and asked it to respond to the complaint.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 12 March 2024. It acknowledged failures in its delayed response to the repairs. It said it had referred the repairs to a surveyor who would contact the resident to arrange an appointment. It also said that it planned to repair the leak within the property above on 14 March 2024. It offered her £200 compensation for her time and trouble, and any inconvenience caused.
  5. On 21 March 2024, the resident escalated her complaint. She said that the landlord had not contacted her to arrange any repairs. She said that while it had resolved the leak from the property above, she still experienced issues within her own property, such as a leaking toilet and ceiling, and a sinking floor, caused by the previous leaks.
  6. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 31 May 2024. It upheld the complaint and acknowledged the significant impact caused by the bathroom flooding with an inch of water as well as raw sewage, a collapsed ceiling, damp and mould, and water damaged electrics. It acknowledged significant delays and service failures in addressing the repairs, and delays in its complaint handling. It offered a total of £1,135.03 compensation to her and agreed to raise the repairs as urgent matters and monitor them through to completion.
  7. The resident escalated her complaint to this Service as she remained unhappy with the outstanding repairs in the bathroom as it had not completed any of the repairs that it said it would within its final complaint response. She said that the bathroom still had a leaking toilet, a sunken floor, rotten ceiling, and it had no electricity. The complaint became one that this Service could investigate on 26 June 2024.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of various repairs caused by a leak

  1. The resident experienced leaks coming through the bathroom ceiling from the property above hers. However, due to the landlord’s poor record keeping, it is unclear when the resident first reported the ceiling leaks. She also reported that the landlord replaced her bathroom in 2022 which resulted in leaks from the toilet. However, the landlord’s repairs records do not show any works completed in the bathroom in 2022.
  2. In the landlord’s repair records, the first report of a leak in the bathroom was on 15 December 2023, where the resident reported a leak from the toilet with water on the bathroom floor. On 5 January 2024, the resident contacted the landlord again and asked it to attend to the leak. It is unclear why the landlord failed to respond to the leak originally, and it is also unclear when it attended to the repair after the resident chased this in January 2024.
  3. The landlord’s repair records note on 23 January 2024 that the resident asked for a surveyor to inspect the bathroom and for it to repair the bathroom flooring before it replaced the toilet. It is unclear whether it had this conversation during an appointment or not. On 28 January 2024, the resident reported further leaks from the toilet and the landlord’s repair records state that it needed to arrange a surveyor’s inspection before arranging any works. However, it is not known whether the landlord communicated this with the resident due to its poor record keeping.
  4. During this time, on 8 January 2024, the resident reported that leaks from the property above had caused water to enter the bathroom light fixture. The landlord’s repair records refer to appointments on both 8 January 2024 and 11 January 2024, and it is unclear which date it actually attended to the repair. As such, the Ombudsman is unable to assess whether the landlord responded appropriately to this repair, in line with its emergency repair timescale of attending on the same day.
  5. At the appointment, the landlord’s contractor disconnected the bathroom lighting to make it safe, but it failed to arrange any temporary lighting which left the bathroom in darkness. The resident remained without lighting in the bathroom following this appointment and it is unclear whether the landlord has yet reinstated the electrics for the lighting in the bathroom.
  6. Following this visit, the landlord’s repair records noted that the bathroom flooring felt “very spongy and soft” and that it was “likely to break through”. This should have prompted the landlord to respond to the flooring concerns with urgency given the potential risk of the floor collapsing. However, despite noting this, it only raised a repair to investigate the flooring along with other bathroom repairs on 28 February 2024, almost 6 weeks later. This delay would have understandably added unnecessary distress to the resident who had concerns about the safety of her bathroom. Additionally, given that the resident raised a complaint about these issues on 18 January 2024, it is a failing that it did not investigate the resident’s concerns much sooner than it did.
  7. While the landlord raised the works on 28 February 2024, it is unclear when, or if, the landlord scheduled an appointment for these works, which is a failing.
  8. On 3 March 2024, the resident reported that the bathroom had flooded with an inch of water, which also meant that her children were unable to bathe before school. She advised that the landlord said it would send a plumber within 4 hours, but it failed to do so. She also said that her bathroom was close to falling apart because of the sinking floor, toilet and ceiling leaks, no electricity in the bathroom and black mould.
  9. In addition to raising the repairs, the resident was concerned about the mould, specifically because one of her children had asthma. The landlord has failed to evidence whether it appropriately considered the impact of the outstanding repairs on the health of the household, which is not appropriate. The landlord’s contractor inspected the leak and associated issues on 5 March 2024. It is a failing that it did not raise works for a mould treatment in the bathroom and it also failed to escalate the repairs or offer reassurance despite the resident being concerned about her bathroom falling apart.
  10. At the appointment on 5 March 2024, the landlord noted that the bathroom floor was “soft” and needed repairs. It is evident that the landlord’s contractors attended the property on 8 March 2024 with intentions to make the ceiling safe, however, the repair records state that the resident failed to provide access.
  11. The landlord has failed to evidence whether it had informed the resident of this appointment on 8 March 2024 – not doing so would have added further distress and inconvenience to the resident after already waiting for it to complete the bathroom repairs. There is no evidence to suggest that the landlord rearranged this repair, which is a failing, especially given that this was the second report of concerns with damaged flooring and its contractor had previously noted it may break through.
  12. In the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, it acknowledged it had failed to appropriately respond to the emergency repair on 3 March 2024. It informed the resident of an appointment scheduled for 14 March 2024 where it intended to repair the leak in the property above. It is evident it was later successful in resolving the upstairs leak. However, it is unclear why the landlord delayed in arranging the repair to resolve the leak from the property above given that it was aware of the impact it had on both the resident and the living conditions.
  13. The landlord said within its initial complaint response that it would monitor the progress of the repairs to the bathroom and that a surveyor would contact the resident to arrange an inspection. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the landlord proactively managed the repairs. The continued lack of communication prompted the resident to escalate her complaint and after further contact from the resident chasing the repairs, it booked the surveyor inspection for 24 April 2024.
  14. On 24 April 2024, the landlord raised multiple repairs related to the bathroom ceiling and flooring, the light, window handles and the damaged toilet pan. However, the repair records do not show any appointments made to address these repairs which is of significant concern. This prompted the resident to contact the landlord on 28 May 2024 to chase the repairs, which understandably would have added further distress to her in the circumstances.
  15. In the landlord’s final complaint response, on 31 May 2024, it acknowledged significant delays and service failures in addressing the various bathroom repairs. It said that it had raised the repairs as urgent matters, and it would continue to monitor them through to completion. It also outlined that to learn from this complaint, it would review the need for prompt emergency repairs.
  16. While it was appropriate for the landlord to outline how it would learn from its mistakes and put things right for the resident, the resident continued to experience delays in repairs to the bathroom. In an email between the landlord and its contractors on 23 July 2024, it is evident that it had not yet arranged an appointment for the various bathroom repairs. The landlord’s actions after the final complaint response therefore failed to demonstrate that it had learned lessons to be more proactive and resolve the issues for the resident.
  17. Considering this, the Ombudsman has found that the landlord has not acted in accordance with this Service’s dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. The Ombudsman therefore finds a determination of maladministration appropriate in light of this.
  18. In the landlord’s final complaint response, it offered a total of £1,135.03 compensation to the resident. The total amount offered towards the substantive issue was £985.03 compensation. This includes amounts towards time, trouble and inconvenience caused by its handling of the repairs and its poor communication, as well as amounts for missed appointments, loss of power and other expenses incurred by the resident.
  19. The compensation also included £185.03 for 30 days where the resident’s bathroom was unusable due to the flooding and raw sewage present, which it calculated at 25% of the resident’s weekly rent. Due to the landlord’s poor record keeping regarding the repairs, it has failed to provide evidence as to how long it deemed the bathroom was unusable for and therefore the Ombudsman cannot assess whether this amount was appropriate and in line with its compensation and remedies policy.
  20. Given that the landlord failed to learn from its mistakes and continued to unreasonably delay in arranging the various bathroom repairs, the overall offer of £985.03 compensation is not proportionate to the failings identified within this investigation. The landlord is ordered to pay a further £400 compensation for the additional time and trouble the resident experienced, as well as the distress and inconvenience resulting from its handling of various repairs caused by a leak. It should also offer additional compensation in recognition of any continued loss of use of the bathroom.

The associated complaint handling

  1. The resident made her complaint to the landlord on 18 January 2024. The landlord failed to respond to her and so the resident sought support from this Service in making a complaint. On 5 March 2024, the Ombudsman wrote to the landlord and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint within 5 working days, which it did on 12 March 2024.
  2. The resident then contacted the landlord on 21 March 2024 and asked it to escalate her complaint to stage 2 of its internal complaints process. It responded on 25 March 2024 to advise that it had escalated the complaint, and it would contact her further about this. Despite agreeing to escalate the complaint, it failed to provide timely updates to her which meant that she experienced further time and trouble in making her complaint as she had to request updates on 18 April 2024.
  3. The landlord sent a formal acknowledgement of the complaint to the resident on 1 May 2024. It said it would provide its complaint response within 20 working days and noted that there were delays in responding to complaints due to an increased demand. While it was appropriate for it to update the resident on its likely response time, this would still have added distress to the resident who continued to experience serious problems with the condition of her property during this time.
  4. On 8 May 2024, the Ombudsman wrote to the landlord and asked it to provide its stage 2 complaint response within 5 working days, by 15 May 2024. The landlord failed to meet the timeframe requested by this Service. It provided its final complaint response on 31 May 2024.
  5. Within the landlord’s final complaint response, it acknowledged that it did not handle the complaint in line with its complaints policy, where it should have responded to the initial complaint within 10 working days and the final complaint within 20 working days. It was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge its failures and for it to outline that it would learn from mistakes by providing better communication throughout the complaints process going forward.
  6. The landlord offered £150 compensation to the resident for its complaint handling. It acknowledged that this was for its poor quality stage 1 complaint response, and for the delays in responding to the complaint at both stages of the complaints process. This was an appropriate offer and response to provide redress for its complaint handling failures.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of various repairs caused by a leak.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress offered in the associated complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 28 calendar days of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for its continued failures in its handling of the various repairs after it issued its final complaint response.
    2. Pay the resident the £985.03 compensation for the failings in its handling of repairs that it offered in its final complaint response, if it has not already done so.
    3. Pay a further £400 compensation to the resident for the distress and inconvenience, and time and trouble, resulting from the continued failings in its handling of various repairs caused by a leak. This should be paid directly to the resident and not to her rent account.
    4. Write to the resident and provide a list of repairs it will complete to address the leak and related remedial works. As a minimum, this should include repairs to the bathroom ceiling and flooring, the cracked toilet pan, the bathroom light and the damaged window handles. It should clearly communicate the appointment dates to her to ensure that no further delays are experienced. This should include a commitment of what arrangements it intends to make to post-inspect the works to ensure they are completed to an acceptable standard and a specific point of contact for who will take responsibility to oversee the repairs.
    5. Consider additional compensation for any continued loss of use of the bathroom from the date of the final complaint response to the planned date for completion of the above works. It should set out how it has calculated this amount, writing to the resident with a breakdown of this, and pay it directly to the resident.
  2. The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescale set out above.

Recommendations

  1. If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £150 compensation for complaint handling failings that it offered in its final complaint response. The Ombudsman’s reasonable redress determination is made on the basis that this amount is paid.