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

Sage Housing Limited (202210088)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202210088

Sage Housing Limited

26 January 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 the landlord’s handling of:
    1. 2 leaks at the resident’s property which resulted in damp and mould in the bathroom, kitchen and one of the bedrooms.
    2. Repair works to the bathroom door, shower rail, bath panels and light in the bathroom.
    3. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a new-build house.
  2. The resident reported a leak coming from her shower on 2 April 2022. She reported an additional leak from under the sink on 12 April 2022. Both leaks resulted in damp and mould at the resident’s property. In addition, there were repairs left outstanding after the leak was fixed, which included repairs to the bathroom door, bath panels and bathroom light. The resident also reported an issue with her shower rail in May 2022.
  3. On 14 April 2022, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord. She stated that on 12 April 2022 she received 2 calls from 2 different staff members of the landlord advising that someone would be visiting on the same day to fix the leak. The resident explained that 2 of the landlord’s contractors attended her property on 12 April 2022 to fix the leak but stated they would visit the resident’s property the following day to check that the leak had been resolved. She stated that the landlord’s contractor did not return to her property the following day, and no one called her to inform her that they were no longer coming. The resident also stated that the leak was still occurring and had not been fixed, and she also stated that she missed out on a £140 course that she had booked because she was waiting for the contractors to return to her property.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 27 April 2022. It explained that it had passed the resident’s reported repairs regarding leaks to the developer. The landlord stated it chased the developer for an update on the leaks on 20 April 2022. The developer responded and confirmed that it had resolved the leaks. The landlord stated that the developer is responsible for resolving defects in the resident’s home in the defects liability period which normally runs for 2 years after the property was built. It explained that the developer took longer than it would have hoped to resolve the issues.
  5. On 13 May 2022, the resident requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process. Theresident explained that she was unhappy that repairs were still outstanding. She stated that following the leak repair, the landlord’s contractor failed to put the bath panels back in and the light in the bathroom which was removed. She also stated that the shower rail kept fallingdown and required repair.
  6. On 24 July 2022, the resident sent an additional email to the landlord. She explained that she had leaks at her property and the aftermath of the leaks was resolved in the beginning of June 2022. The resident stated the landlord’s contractor needed to replace the bathroom door and check the carpet, but the contractor failed to attend to the resident’s property to do the repairs. She also explained that the landlord’s contractor had attended her property on approximately 3 occasions to fix the shower rail, but it was still falling down.
  7. The Ombudsman chased the landlord on multiple occasions between October 2022 and November 2022 for it to issue the resident with a stage 2 complaint response.
  8. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint to the resident on 21 November 2022. It reiterated that the developer is responsible for resolving defects within the defect liability period. The landlord stated that the developer resolved the immediate issues but failed to follow up on the repair work. It explained that it issued a notice to the developer when it failed to resolve the issues regarding the bathroom door, leak in the kitchen and shower rail in line with the service agreement. However, it stated it did not issue the notice in a timely manner. The landlord stated it had asked its own contractor to inspect the mould and other overdue defect issues due to no response from the developer. The landlord offered the resident a total of £400 compensation to recognise its failure to progress the issues for the time and trouble experienced chasing up the issues.
  9. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated that her desired outcome was to receive £3000 compensation for distress and inconvenience.
  10. The resident confirmed with the Ombudsman in December 2023 that all the repairs had been completed. However, she stated that the bathroom door needed to be repainted. She stated that works to resolve the damp and mould and other repairs such as the bathroom door, shower rail, bath panels and light in the bathroom were completed around September/October 2023. Whereas the landlord has confirmed that the repair works were completed in May and June 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

  1. This report will consider the resident’s initial report of the damaged bathroom door which was raised as part of her complaint in April 2022. It will not investigate the resident’s concern about the type of paint used on the bathroom door which she raised in September 2023 with the landlord. As this issue was not escalated via the landlord’s complaint procedure, it has not been considered in this assessment. This is because the Ombudsman will not consider complaints that are made prior to having exhausted a landlord’s complaint procedure. This is so that landlords have the opportunity to respond to complaints and resolve issues before the Ombudsman becomes formally involved. If the resident wishes to pursue this matter further, she can complain to the landlord. She may be able to refer her complaint to the Ombudsman once it has exhausted the landlord’s complaints process.

2 leaks at the resident’s property which resulted in damp and mould in the      bathroom, kitchen and one of the bedrooms.

  1. The resident’s property is a new build house, and it was built in 2017. New-build properties have a ‘defect period’ where the original builder is responsible for repairing certain issues which would have been present when the property was built. The landlord would be responsible for raising repair issues with the original developer of the property during this period.
  2. The landlord’s defect management procedure explains its procedures to resolve defects through the defect liability period of a new home. The policy explains that if works still remain outstanding with the developer at the end of the agreed service level agreement and find out whether there are valid reasons for the delay. It states if valid reasons are not provided for the delay, the landlord will take further appropriate action, which may include providing the developer with a deadline and taking back works. The policy explains that if the landlord takes back work from the developer, it will appoint its own contractor and look to recover costs from the developer.
  3. The defect policy also states that the landlord would update the resident which would include reasons for genuine delays and an explanation of appropriate next actions.
  4. On 2 April 2022, the resident reported a leak coming from her shower which was causing damage to the ceiling below the bathroom. In addition, she also reported an additional leak from under the sink on 12 April 2022 which resulted in mould in her property.
  5. The landlord confirmed in its stage 1 complaint response that the developer of the property was responsible for repairing both leaks and dealing with the damp and mould. Therefore, due to this, it was appropriate that the landlord passed on the repairs to the developer.
  6. The landlord’s developer attended to repair a leak from the resident’s shower on 5 April 2021, which was 3 days after the resident had reported the leak. The resident reported the uncontainable leak from the kitchen on 12 April 2022 and this was raised with the developer as an emergency repair. The resident stated in her complaint that 2 contractors visited her property on 12 April 2022 to fix the leak located under the sink. They attempted to resolve the leak and told the resident that the leak was fixed. However, the developer’s contractors told the resident they would attend the resident’s property on 13 April 2022 to confirm that the leak had been fixed. The resident explained that the contractors failed to visit her property on the agreed date. In addition, the resident also explained there was still a leak under her sink, and it had not been fixed. The landlord chased the developer for an update on the leak and the developer confirmed on 20 April 2022 that the leak had been resolved.
  7. The Ombudsman recognises that there was some delay in the leak under the sink being repaired. However, the delay was due to the developer and was outside the landlord’s control. The landlord passed the leak repair to the developer promptly and also chased the developer when the repair still remained outstanding. Therefore, the landlord acted appropriately in this instance.
  8. The 2 leaks at the resident’s property resulted in damp and mould in the kitchen, bathroom and one of the bedrooms. The developer was also responsible for resolving the damp and mould at the resident’s property. However, it failed to complete the necessary works. On 8 November 2022, the landlord issued a defects notice to the developer requesting it to provide an urgent update on the outstanding repairs which included the damp and mould. The landlord requested that it arranged an appointment to resolve the outstanding defects at the resident’s property within 3 days. It explained that failure to comply with this would result in the landlord hiring a contractor to complete the repairs and reclaiming the costs from the developer.
  9. The developer failed to respond to the landlord’s defects notice. Due to this failing and the developer’s failure to attend the resident’s property to repair the damp and mould, the landlord explained in its stage 2 complaint response issued on 21 November 2022 to the resident that it would be using its own contractor to complete the works to resolve the damp and mould at the resident’s property. This was in line with its defect management procedure which explained that the landlord may take back works from the developer if works still remain outstanding at the end of the service level agreement.
  10. The landlord arranged for its surveyor to attend the resident’s property on 15 December 2022 to inspect the damp and mould. The surveyor recommended several works to resolve the damp and mould, which included removing and replacing the insulation in one of the bedrooms and bathroom, re-plastering the ceiling and replacing a section of the plasterboard in the bedroom and bathroom, mould treatment and a full redecoration of the bedroom and bathroom. The surveyor also recommended that some of the kitchen units would need to be replaced and the walls behind the units would need to be treated.
  11. Following the surveyor’s inspection there was a slight delay in the landlord arranging an appointment to carry out works to resolve the damp and mould at the resident’s property. The delay was due to the landlord being unable to access the resident’s neighbour’s property located above to confirm whether there was an active leak before they started the works. The landlord was only able to access the neighbour’s property on 2 March 2023, and it was confirmed that no leaks had been found. The Ombudsman acknowledges that part of the delay would have been outside the landlord’s control.
  12. The landlord’s contractor also cleaned mould from the ceilling at the resident’s property and the notes stated that a dehumidifier needed to be installed and works for the plastering, plasterboard and decoration needed completing. The landlord’s contractor installed a dehumidifier and air mover fan at the resident’s property on 2 March 2023 to dry out the resident’s property, so further works could be completed to resolve the damp and mould issue. The air quality in the property was checked by the landlord’s contractor on 13 March 2023 and the dehumidifier and air mover fan were removed.

 

  1. Following this, the landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property on 18 April 2023 to clean the mould and then additional works such as replastering and redecoration of the bathroom and bedroom were completed on 18 and 19 May 2023. The landlord’s contractors also installed a new kitchen sink unit at the resident’s property. The resident stated that the works to resolve the damp and mould were completed around September/October 2023. However, the landlord has provided repair records and invoices to confirm and evidence that the works were completed in May and June 2023.
  2. Overall, the 6-month delay in the landlord’s contractor completing the works to resolve the damp and mould at the resident’s property was unreasonable. The Ombudsman recognises that it must have been difficult for the resident and her family living in the property with damp and mould for a considerable amount of time.
  3. It is acknowledged that the developer’s failure to resolve the damp and mould at the resident’s property would have been outside the landlord’s control. However, the Ombudsman believes that the landlord should have issued the defect notice to the developer much quicker than it did and also taken back the works from the developer at an earlier date. The landlord did acknowledge this failure in its stage 2 complaint response and offered the resident £400 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience the resident would have experienced due to the landlord’s delay in progressing the issues with the defects.
  4. Even though the landlord offered the resident compensation for its delay in issuing a defects notice to the developer and taking back the works. Once the landlord agreed that its own contractor would carry out the works to resolve the damp and mould there were still delays in the landlord completing the works. The works to resolve the damp and mould were not completed until around 6 monthsafter the landlord’s surveyor inspected the property. The delay was unreasonable, and the Ombudsman recognises that it must have been difficult for the resident and her family living in damp and mould conditions for such a long period of time. Therefore, there has been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of 2 leaks at the resident’s property which resulted in damp and mould in the bathroom, kitchen and one of the bedrooms.
  5. The Ombudsman believes it would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident additional compensation of £250 to appropriately recognise the distress and inconvenience the resident would have experienced from the delay in the damp and mould works being completed. The amount of compensation awarded is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website), which sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation. The remedies guidance suggests awards of £100 to £600 where there has been a failure by the landlord which adversely affected the resident, but there may be no permanent impact. In this case, there was a delay in the landlord completing works to resolve the damp and mould at the resident’s property. However, there may be no permanent impact on the resident from this, as the works to resolve the damp and mould were eventually completed in May and June 2023.

Repair works to the bathroom door, shower rail, bath panels and light in the bathroom.

  1. Following the developer’s repair of the 2 leaks at the resident’s property in April 2022, there were remedial repairs outstanding. The repairs included refitting the bathroom light which was removed when the leak was being fixed and also reinstating the bath panels which were also removed when the developer’s contractor was fixing the leak in the bathroom. In addition, as a result of one of the leaks, the bathroom door had swollen and required replacement. Furthermore, the resident also raised in her escalation request sent to the landlord in May 2022 that her shower rail kept falling down and needed repairing. The developer was responsible for all of the repairs referenced above due to the defect liability period still being in place at the time.
  2. Similarly, as with the damp and mould, the landlord’s developer was responsible for refitting the bathroom light, bath panels, repairing the shower rail and replacing the resident’s bathroom door. The developer attended to fix the resident’s shower rail, but it did not resolve the issue. The developer also failed to replace the resident’s bathroom door and reinstate her bath panels and bathroom light. Due to the lack of response from the developer, the landlord issued a defects notice to the developer on 8 November 2022 requesting it to provide an urgent update on the outstanding repairs. The landlord requested that it arranged an appointment to resolve the outstanding defects at the resident’s property within 3 days. It explained that failure to comply with this would result in the landlord hiring a contractor to complete the repairs and reclaim the costs from the developer.
  3. As referenced above, the developer failed to respond to the landlord’s defects notice and as a result, the landlord took back the works from the developer in line with its defect management procedure and arranged for its own contractor to complete the outstanding repairs. The repair of the shower rail, reinstatement of the bathroom light and bath panels and replacement of the bathroom door including painting of the door, were all completed by the landlord’s contractor on 20 June 2023 which was shortly after the works to resolve the damp and mould in the bathroom were completed.
  4. The landlord’s delay in completing these repairs when it took back the work from the developer was unreasonable and the Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to complete the repairs more quickly than it did. It took around 6 months for the landlord to complete the repairs. Therefore, there has been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repair works to the bathroom door, shower rail, bath panels and light in the bathroom.
  5. Considering this, the Ombudsman believes it would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident £150 compensation to recognise the delay the resident experienced. This amount is compliant with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance referenced above.

The associated complaint.

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The code states that a stage 1 response should be provided within 10 working days of the complaint. It also explains that a stage 2 response should be provided within 20 working days from the request to escalate the complaint. The landlord’s complaints policy includes the same timescales which are referenced in the Code.
  2. The resident submitted her complaint to the landlord on 14 April 2022. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 on 27 April 2022. The response time by the landlord was reasonable in this instance and in line with the landlord’s complaints policy and the Code.
  3. However, it took around 6 months for the landlord to provide its stage 2 complaint response. On 13 May 2022, the resident contacted the landlord and requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 21 November 2022. The response was significantly late and not compliant with the timescales referenced in the landlord’s complaints policy or the Code. The landlord did apologise for the delayed response; however, it did not provide any reason for the delay. The Ombudsman had to chase the landlord on multiple occasions between October and November 2022 for it to provide a response to the resident. The delay would have caused inconvenience, and the resident was delayed in progressing her complaint to the Ombudsman because she needed to wait for the landlord’s final response before contacting our service. She also needed to contact the Ombudsman to ask us to chase the landlord which would have added to her inconvenience.
  4. Given the significant delay in the landlord providing its stage 2 complaint response, it would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident £200 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. The amount of compensation awarded is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance referenced above. In this case, although the delay would have been inconvenient, there may be no permanent impact on the resident, as she eventually received a final response letter from the landlord and was able to submit her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of 2 leaks at the resident’s property which resulted in damp and mould in the bathroom, kitchen and one of the bedrooms.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repair works to the bathroom door, shower rail, bath panels and light in the bathroom.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord to pay the resident £250 compensation for its handling of 2 leaks at the resident’s property which resulted in damp and mould in the      bathroom, kitchen and one of the bedrooms.
  2. The landlord to pay the resident £150 compensation for its handling of repair works to the bathroom door, shower rail, bath panels and light in the bathroom.
  3. The landlord to provide a written apology to the resident for its delay in completing the repairs and issuing her with a stage 2 complaint response.
  4. The landlord to pay the resident £200 compensation for its complaint handling errors.
  5. The landlord should comply with the above orders within four weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord reviews its process of communicating with its developer about defects and taking the necessary action within a reasonable time frame against its developer when there are delays.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord responds to the resident’s concern about the type of paint used on her bathroom door in line with the timescales referenced in its repairs policy and takes appropriate steps to resolve the issue.
  3. It is recommended that the landlord pay the resident its original offer made in its stage 2 complaint response of £400 compensation if it has not already done so.