Sanctuary Housing Association (202218488)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202218488

Sanctuary Housing Association

29 June 2023

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 response to:
1. Reports of damp and mould.
2. Vibrations the resident reported.
3. Handling of the complaint.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the property as of 4 February 2021; the landlord is a housing association.
The resident has some vulnerabilities, including autism and some mental health issues.
Under the terms of the tenancy agreement, the landlord is responsible for maintaining and keeping in proper working order: the structure and outside of the property including the roof, outside walls, outside doors, window frames, windowsills, drains, gutters, external pipes and chimneys. The landlord says it will undertake any necessary repairs within the timescales it promises.
The landlord has provided information to residents about condensation in its tenant handbook. This includes information about the causes, prevention, and treatment of mould. An information leaflet and online video provide further guidance to residents. It says an inspection from a surveyor or specialist contractor to work out what is causing damp and mould may be required.
The landlord says that if a repair cannot be diagnosed over the phone, it will arrange a pre-inspection of the property. This should be arranged and completed within 10 working days. All appointed repairs aim to be completed within 28 calendar days.
The landlord has a 2 stage complaints policy. The first stage, which it refers to as ‘front line resolution’, is focused on taking swift action to resolve residents’ concerns effectively. It will contact the resident within 5 working days and provide a written response within 10 working days. The second stage is an independent investigation into a resident’s concerns and a full written report of the findings is provided within 20 working days. The landlord will not investigate issues that occurred more than 6 months previously, unless there is evidence that this has been raised to staff and no action has been taken. It will not investigate complaints which have already been investigated and a final response has been given.
During the complaint process, the landlord commits to putting customers at the heart of the process by:
1. Accepting complaints in any format, including verbal, written and online.
2. Making reasonable adjustments so customers can access the process.
3. Giving customers opportunities to share evidence and suggest solutions.
4. Using records and evidence to inform decisions rather than speculation.
5. Signposting customers to other organisations for support where needed.
The landlord has also provided its reasonable adjustment guidance, setting out how its staff will make reasonable adjustments to the complaints service to ensure that residents are not discriminated against, or treated unfairly, as a result of a disability, as required by the Equality Act 2010.
The landlord says that it considers compensation only where there is evidence that there has been a service failure and this has had an impact on the resident. Compensation for time, trouble and inconvenience will be offered by the landlord, considering both the impact that the service failure has had, and the effort the resident has had to make to get the issue resolved. Payments of up to £400 may be made in recognition of time, trouble and inconvenience of a service failure.
Compensation for poor complaint handling will be considered only where there is evidence that a complaint has not been handled in accordance with the landlord’s complaints policy and procedure. Offers will reflect the effort made by the resident in order to resolve the issue and the impact that this has had on a them. Payments of up to £150 may be made in recognition of time, trouble and inconvenience of a service failure in respect of the complaint handling.

Summary of events

The resident contacted the landlord on 2 October 2021 about vibrations and high pitched sounds. He stated that after several attempts to try and obtain recordings of the high pitched sounds, his phone was unable to pick these up. The resident said he had taken recordings of the vibrations using his phone and asked the landlord to visit so he could provide this evidence to it.
The resident contacted the landlord several times throughout October 2021 about the vibrations. He said that the housing officer had visited and said he could not feel anything. The resident said he was often awake because of these vibrations. He said he would like the police to be involved as he thought a “bug or bugs” had been planted near the flat. The resident said he was speaking to the Citizens Advice Bureau due to disrepair in his property such as damp, the vibrations, and rotten and very draughty windows.
The resident reported to the landlord on 27 October 2021 that he could feel vibrations inside and outside of the property. The landlord contacted the resident to apologise that, due to an emergency, it was unable to attend as planned on 1 November 2021 to investigate the vibrations and it rebooked the appointment for 15 November 2021.
The resident made a complaint on 10 November 2021. He said that his complaint was about vibrations, damp and mould, a build up of water outside the flat and no heating. The resident said it was making him ill and he did not want to be there anymore. The resident complained that the landlord cancelled the appointment on 1 November 2021, and he was not satisfied that he had to wait until 15 November 2021. The resident said he would be taking legal action against the housing officer.
The landlord attended on 15 November 2021 and could not feel the vibrations the resident said he was experiencing.
On 6 January 2022, the landlord records show that an inspection was required for the resident. The resident had contacted the landlord to enquire whether there were any plans for it to address vibrations he could feel in the flat, and the damp and mould. The resident said that the situation was negatively impacting his mental health.
The resident contacted the landlord on 21 January 2022. He said he thought the vibrations in the property could be caused by an air blockage in his heating system. The resident said that could explain why no other residents could feel the vibrations.
The landlord’s log states the housing officer advised that the vibration issues had been investigated previously and the complaint closed. However, it raised a job for a heating engineer to attend on 3 February 2022 and investigate the vibrations. The landlord tried to contact the resident to advise him of the appointment to check the heating system but the phone went to voicemail so it left a message to advise him of the appointment date. He was not in when the landlord attended for the appointment.
There is a note on the landlord’s system on 6 April 2022 that the housing officer had spoken to the resident on previous occasions about the vibrations and that he visited to investigate them and had not been able to detect anything. The landlord emailed the resident to advise an operative would attend to service and repair the boiler on 29 April 2022 to check if the heating system was the source of the vibrations.
There is also a note on the landlord’s repairs log on 6 April 2022, stating the contractor had tried to contact the resident multiple times on the phone without success to make an arrangement to complete the damp and mould survey. The landlord emailed the resident and was told to look out for the call from the contractor.
A specialist contractor completed the damp and mould survey on 11 April 2022. They provided their report to the landlord on 25 April 2022. The survey said:
1. The windows and doors needed to be repaired and seals replaced.
2. Visible condensation was found on the windows in the bedroom.
3. Mould was forming on surfaces in the bedroom. Humidity readings confirmed the presence of condensation.
4. Higher damp readings were taken in the external corner in the bedroom. This meant rising damp could not be completely ruled out until the condensation was brought under control and a suitable drying time had elapsed.
5. The resident used candles to heat the property as he found the central heating was too expensive to run.
6. The resident was not using the 2 extractor fans as they were too expensive to run. The kitchen extractor fan was working but the one in the bathroom was not and needed repair or replacement.
7. It recommended that the existing extractor fans were replaced with humidity tracking extractor fans.
8. There was insufficient passive ventilation within the property and recommendations were made to undercut the internal doors.
9. It recommended treating the mould affected areas with anti-condensation paint.
The resident contacted the landlord on 22, 24 and 28 June 2022. He wanted to know whether there was a date for any repairs in relation to the vibrations following a visit made on 15 June 2022. The notes on the contact log indicated the water board had attended and found no leaks and that the resident had reported similar issues at his previous address.
The resident made a formal complaint on 29 June 2022. He said that for the past 17 months he had been reporting vibrations in his flat. He said the landlord refused to send anyone out. The resident said an engineer of the landlord found some loose pipework behind a cover in the bedroom and said there could also be some loose pipework under the floorboards. The resident said he had needed to replace personal property and his teeth had been ruined due to the vibrations. The resident also complained about the damp and mould that he said he had been experiencing for the last 18 months which he thought was due to rising damp.
The complaint was acknowledged by the landlord on 4 July 2022. The landlord said an order was raised on 19 May 2022 to install humidity tracking extractor fans and supply 5 litres of anti-condensation paint, and that it would chase this up. The landlord said it would provide the resident with an update on or before 14 July 2022.
The stage 1 complaint response was sent to the resident by email on 14 July 2022. The landlord stated a post inspection of the damp and mould works was raised on 21 June 2022, but had not been completed as the landlord was not able to contact the resident to arrange it. The landlord was not able to establish whether the contractor had completed the work and asked the resident to confirm whether he had heard from them.
In the response, the landlord stated works were raised for the gas team and property service repair team to inspect the reports of vibrations. The housing officer also attended previously, and no vibrations had been detected. The response also said that the resident had advised it that the water board had attended on 29 June 2022 and told the resident to report the issue to the landlord. The landlord asked the resident for a report from the water board so this could be reviewed before it would agree to complete further investigative work.
The landlord contacted the resident by email on 18 July 2022 and advised him that his complaint was being dealt with at the investigation stage (the final stage) of the landlord’s complaint procedure. It advised it would consider the resident’s concerns regarding damp and mould and vibrations in his flat, including his request for compensation for damage caused to personal items. It advised it would respond by 11 August 2022.
On 23 July 2022, the resident sent an email to the landlord to say the extractor fans would not turn off, he asked for them to be removed as they were “useless”. The landlord replaced the extractor fan in the kitchen and bathroom later that month. The resident sent another email on 26 July 2022 about the same matter. The landlord replied and advised him that a repair job was booked for 27 July 2022. The resident requested this was raised as a stage 2 complaint. The landlord confirmed that it had not been recorded as a complaint as the issue with the extractor fans had not previously been reported and therefore there was no failure in service.
On 5 August 2022, the landlord raised works to treat the mould, apply stain block and mould paint, and install an air vent.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 11 August 2022. It advised that the officer reviewing the case was due to go on leave for 2 weeks and was also waiting for further information from the maintenance team. The landlord said it would provide its response no later than 9 September 2022. The resident confirmed his agreement to this.
On 16 August 2022, the resident advised the landlord that it had got the incorrect mobile number on the system. He told the landlord not to use this number and said that he could be contacted by email only.
On 2 September 2022, the landlord arranged work in the bedroom of the property to treat 2 affected walls with antifungal wash and paint the walls.
The landlord provided its final stage complaint response on 9 September 2022 which said:
1. It expressed its sincere apologies for the problems the resident had experienced with damp and mould in his flat and the inconvenience this had caused.
2. In respect of the damp and mould:
  1. The resident raised concerns about damp and mould on the walls in November 2021.
  2. In January 2022, the resident phoned to ask whether there were any further actions being planned to help resolve the damp and mould in the property. The landlord then requested its specialist contractor attended to carry out a damp survey and provide their recommendations.
  3. The work to help address the damp and mould issues had taken longer than it should have done, in part due to approval being required and also because it encountered difficulties in contacting the resident to make an appointment for the surveyor to attend.
  4. A surveyor from the specialist contractor attended on 11 April 2022. They reported that the mould issue in the property had been caused by condensation and provided the landlord with their recommendations to treat the affected areas in the bedroom with anti-condensation paint and install humidity tracking extractor fans which were put forward for approval.
  5. The specialist contractor also proposed that one of the landlord’s surveyors attended to assess the condition of the windows and doors and look at the bathroom flooring. The landlord apologised for the delay in this being organised which it said was due to the availability of its surveyors in the area.
  6. The landlord attended on 28 July 2022 and reported that although the timber windows were in a poor condition the replacement of all the windows and doors was being arranged for during the current financial year.
  7. 2 affected walls were treated with anti-fungal wash and painted with anti-fungal paint, and a new passive air vent was installed through the external wall.
3. In respect of the vibrations the resident reported, the landlord said:
  1. The resident had contacted it on 27 October 2021 to report an issue with vibrating water pipes that he said were causing vibrations inside and outside the flat.
  2. An operative attended on 15 November 2021 to investigate this issue, however they reported that they could not find any faults with the water pipes and could not feel any vibrations at the time of their visit.
  3. The resident contacted the landlord again in January 2022 to ask whether there were any further actions being planned to address the vibrations and the landlord arranged for the gas contractor to investigate any vibrations or noises coming from the heating system. The landlord said it was unable to gain access to the resident’s home when it attended on 3 February 2022.
  4. The landlord did not find any issues with the boiler or the pipework causing vibrations when it attended to carry out the annual gas service on 29 April 2022.
  5. The resident contacted the landlord on 12 April 2022 to report that there were water pipes that were making loud noises all around the flat.
  6. A maintenance operative visited the property on 15 June 2022. At the visit, the resident reported that 3 mains water pipes had been identified by the water board as a possible cause of the vibrations and proposed that the boxing in covering to pipes on the wall was removed and floors were lifted to investigate this further. The landlord however did not agree that further investigative works were necessary as it had attended on several occasions previously and did not sense any noise or vibrations. The landlord requested the resident provide it with a report from the water board detailing their findings to be able to investigate this further.
4. The landlord said whilst the initial damp survey was delayed due to the contractor being unable to make contact with the resident, it offered him a payment of £200 in recognition of the inconvenience he had experienced due to the delays.
5. The landlord said it was unable to consider the resident’s claim for compensation for the personal items he stated had been damaged due to the vibrations.
6. The landlord offered a further payment of £100 to the resident in respect of the delay in sending its response to the complaint at stage 2 of the process.
On 15 September 2022, there were several emails between the landlord and resident who was dissatisfied with the compensation amount. The landlord asked the resident to specify the reasons why he believed an increased payment was warranted. The resident responded but did not provide further information. The landlord confirmed it had therefore closed the complaint.
The resident reported on 13 October 2022 that the landlord previously attended to fit an extractor fan without an appointment, so he refused entry. The resident requested appointments were made by email.
The resident then said on 16 October 2022 that the landlord had attended to carry out repairs for the damp and mould but was not satisfied that the landlord would not undertake any further work to solve the vibrations.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould

The resident initially reported the damp and mould issues in November 2021. The landlord did not respond to that issue in the actions that followed, and it responded to the vibration reports only. It was not until January 2022 when the resident reported the issues again that the landlord acknowledged an inspection was required. The landlord therefore missed an opportunity to carry out an investigation of the damp and mould at an earlier point, which was unreasonable as this led to an unnecessary delay and caused the resident extra time and trouble to report the issues again.
There was a note on the landlord’s records on 6 April 2022 that the contractor had not been able to contact the resident by phone to make the inspection appointment. This was 3 months after the landlord initially recognised an inspection was required. There is no evidence that the landlord had tried to liaise with the resident at an earlier point to arrange access or considered alternative contact methods. It was inappropriate that the landlord contributed to excessive delays beyond the commitments within its repairs policy to arrange and complete a ‘pre inspection’ within 10 working days.
The landlord received the report and recommendations from the contractor on 25 April 2022 to install humidity tracking extractor fans and supply 5 litres of anticondensation paint. The landlord raised this order on 19 May 2022, and this work was carried out on 28 June 2022. Due to delays in arranging the initial inspection and then agreeing to follow up the recommended repairs, overall, the resident had to wait 7 months for these to be completed, which was inappropriate.
The survey also recommended that the windows were repaired and sealed. The landlord did not undertake these repairs as the windows were due to be replaced in the same financial year. It is not clear from the evidence when the replacement was scheduled, but the resident had expressed concerns about heating costs. As the landlord was responsible for repairing the windows, it would have been appropriate for it to carry out the recommended repairs as an interim measure to ensure maximum energy efficiency, particularly if renewal of the windows was not due until after the winter period.
The landlord then carried out a further inspection with its own surveyor on 28 July 2022 following recommendations of the contractor. The landlord agreed further follow up work for the damp and mould, including washing down mould with fungicidal wash and installing an air brick. The recommended work from this inspection was completed on 2 September 2022. The landlord advised this further inspection delay was due to resource issues. However, it was inappropriate that the resident waited a further 3 months for another inspection, and over a month for the further recommended work to then be completed.
The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s diagnosis of the damp and mould and stated he thought the cause was rising damp. The landlord appointed a specialist contractor to complete the survey who identified the issue was caused by condensation, and then sent out its own surveyor for a further follow up visit. The landlord is entitled to use its own experts, and specialist contractors where required, and rely on their findings. Its approach to the diagnosis was therefore reasonable.
All the correspondence provided by the landlord is in the form of contact logs. As there are no repair records, it is difficult to know when repairs had been raised and completed. Through the first complaint stage response, the landlord was unclear whether the contractor had completed work raised and requested information from the resident. However, from the evidence provided, the resident waited approximately 10 months for the landlord to carry out its inspections and follow up work.
There were several failures by the landlord in meeting the inspection and repairing timescales within its policy over the course of those 10 months and the landlord failed to manage the expectations of the resident while he waited. In its final stage response, the landlord recognised that there had been delays in the process of arranging the inspections and follow up work and awarded the resident compensation of £200 for the delays. This was not proportionate considering the delays the resident experienced during the period and the significant impact this would have had.
The resident reported to the landlord that the situation was making him ill and was having a detrimental impact on his mental health. The survey from the contractor indicates the resident was not using the central heating or extractor fan due to the running costs. A landlord would usually be expected to provide support to a tenant experiencing difficulties managing in their home or make a referral to a specialist support agency where appropriate. It is a commitment of the landlord to signpost customers to other organisations for support where needed as part of its complaint policy. It is unreasonable that the landlord has not acknowledged the resident’s vulnerabilities or explored what support he required.
Although the landlord provides information to its residents on actions they can take to help prevent condensation and treat mould, it is not clear whether this information was passed to the resident to help him manage the issue while he waited for the inspection and work to be carried out by the landlord.
The landlord carried out a self assessment in March 2023 in response to the recommendations of the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould (‘It’s not lifestyle’). It has provided a copy of the self assessment for this investigation. The landlord states it will devote more resources to triage reports of damp and mould through a new referral process. This will ensure, where needed, initial property visits happen faster, and issues are followed through to resolution more effectively. This is designed to ensure that, in future, residents reporting issues of damp and mould will not experience delays in having their reports assessed and actioned by the landlord when required.

The landlord’s response to vibrations the resident reported

The landlord responded to the resident’s concerns about the vibrations by sending 3 different representatives out to visit over the course of several months, including a heating engineer. It could find no fault that would indicate a cause for the vibrations and none of the representatives could feel the vibrations during the visits. The resident stated that no other occupants of the block of flats could feel the vibrations either. Given the lack of evidence of vibrations that the landlord attempted to collect during several visits, it was reasonable that no repairs were raised. Its repeated visits demonstrated that it was willing to conduct further investigations in an effort to diagnose a potential fault.
The water board attended the property and the resident said they suggested the landlord could take up the flooring to investigate the pipework underneath. The landlord said it would not carry out this exploratory work and requested further information from the water board visit first, requesting a copy of their report. Given the lack of evidence from its own efforts and that no water board recommendations were provided directly to it, the landlord’s decision not to conduct further invasive investigations was reasonable.
The resident said that he had lost personal property and his teeth had been ruined because of the vibrations. The landlord said it was not able to offer compensation to the resident in respect of the vibrations. This was a reasonable response from the landlord as no service failure in respect of the vibrations was identified.

Handling of the complaint

The resident made a complaint by email on 10 November 2021 about the damp and mould and the vibrations as an officer had cancelled an earlier appointment and was not able to visit until 15 November 2021. He reported that the issues were taking too long to resolve. The resident had previously reported vibrations in October 2021. Due to the nature of the complaint, which referred to the resident taking legal action, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have dealt with this as a formal complaint. The evidence suggests no formal response was provided, which was inappropriate given the landlord’s commitment to accept complaints in any format. This also meant that there was an unnecessary delay of around 7 months in the landlord conducting a complaint investigation.
In the first stage response in July 2022, the landlord asked the resident to confirm whether he had heard from the contractors about the work it had raised with them. This is indicative of the landlord not keeping up to date repair records or an audit trail of contractor repairs and it was unreasonable that the landlord put the onus on the resident to confirm the actions its contractor had taken. The landlord said it intended to complete a post inspection of the work but had been unable to contact the resident to do so. Irrespective of this, any queries the landlord had about the work should have been raised with the contractor so it could provide an accurate and informative formal response to the resident.
During its investigation of the complaint at the final stage of its process, the landlord liaised with the resident during August 2022 and updated him when it was unable to meet its target in the complaint policy. The landlord subsequently apologised for this delay and awarded £100 compensation in recognition of the inconvenience caused to the resident. Given the delay was for around 1 month and the landlord was in contact with the resident during this period, this level of compensation was proportionate.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in its response to vibrations the resident reported.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the complaint.

Reasons

The landlord identified the cause of damp and mould using a specialist contractor and carried out the recommended work. It identified further work in a follow up visit with its own surveyor and carried out further work, but did not follow the recommendation to repair the windows. The process took 10 months in total and the landlord therefore fell short of the timescales set out in its repair and maintenance policy and did not provide appropriate redress for the delay.
The landlord also failed to keep accurate up to records of repairs and it has not provided evidence that it updated the resident during the period of delay. Similarly, the landlord failed to demonstrate how it considered offering support to the resident given the advice he gave it about the impact of damp and mould on his health and living conditions. Although the landlord awarded compensation for its delays, this was insufficient given the circumstances of the case.
The landlord responded to the resident’s reports of vibrations by conducting a visit to the property on 3 separate occasions and was not able to identify a repair issue. The landlord explained that it would not undertake any further exploratory work until it received the report from the water board with their findings and would not pay compensation as requested by the resident. This was a proportionate response considering it was unable to detect vibrations and the upheaval associated with further exploratory work.
The landlord did not raise a formal complaint when the resident first made a complaint about the damp and mould and vibrations in November 2021. The landlord’s first stage response in July 2022 did not provide the resident with sufficient information and reassurance that it had completed the agreed actions recommended in the damp and mould inspection.

Orders

The landlord should write to the resident to:
1. apologise for the failures identified in this report;
2. check whether he continues to experience any damp and mould issues at the property and whether window repairs have been adequately completed.
The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident a total of £550, in addition to the £300 compensation offered in its final stage response, made up of:
1. £600 in recognition of the failures in arranging the damp and mould inspections and repairs (including the £200 the landlord offered through its complaint process);
2. £250 for the inconvenience caused to the resident in the way it handled the complaint (including the £100 the landlord offered through its complaints process).
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within 4 weeks of this report.

Recommendations

The landlord to consider the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management (May 2023) and self-assess against the recommendations in that report.
The landlord should reply to this Service with its intentions in regard to this recommendation within 4 weeks of this report.