Sanctuary Housing Association (202230980)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202230980

Sanctuary Housing Association

18 April 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

The complaint is about:
1. The resident’s reports of issues with:
  1. The windows and front door.
  2. The storage heaters.
  3. The bathroom.
2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

The resident holds an assured tenancy of the property, a one bedroom flat. Her tenancy commenced in May 2015.
On 16 September 2022 the resident complained to the landlord and said that:
1. There was no heating and an issue with the hot water.
2. There were draughts coming through the windows and front door.
The resident said that the issues were affecting her health and that she wanted to be compensated for the lack of heat. She also requested the installation of a shower in the bathroom.
The landlord responded to the complaint on 17 October 2022 and said:
1. That its contractor attended on 29 September 2022 and found that the heaters were working and noted that the storage heater in the living room was missing. It noted this would be a re-chargeable repair to replace this.
2. That following an inspection in November 2021 its contractor confirmed that the windows and front door needed to be replaced. On 30 March 2022 the landlord confirmed that the front door had been added to a planned programme of works for the next financial year. On 17 May 2022 it confirmed that the windows had also been added to the programme of works for the next financial year.
3. That the resident had reported an issue with the hot water on 26 November 2021 but the work had not been sent to its contractor. It acknowledged that the resident chased this in January 2022 and its contractor attended on 21 April 2022. The landlord did not confirm the outcome of this visit.
4. That it was offering the resident £125 compensation, comprising £100 for the time, trouble and inconvenience and £25 for the delay in responding to the complaint.
The landlord closed the complaint at stage 1 in November 2022 as it did not receive a response from the resident. Paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme explains that we may not consider complaints that are made prior to having exhausted a landlord’s complaints procedure. We also expect residents to raise complaints within a reasonable time of the issue occurring.
In this case, following receipt of the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response on 17 October 2022, the resident did not make a request to escalate the complaint further and therefore, the complaint did not exhaust the landlord’s complaints procedure. The landlord opened a new complaint following contact from the resident on 8 March 2023. This investigation will not assess the landlord’s response to the complaint made on 16 September 2022 as the complaint was not escalated after the landlord provided its stage 1 response.
The landlord has provided evidence noting the issues with the windows, door and heating date back to November 2021. We will not comment on the landlord’s handling of the previous reports or complaints, although we may consider this information in context when assessing the landlord’s response to the complaint made on 8 March 2023.
In parts of her complaint the resident has referred to the impact on her health. The Ombudsman cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be more usually dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

Summary of events

The resident reported various repairs to the landlord on 7 February 2023, including issues with the storage heaters, bathroom repairs, a damp patch in the hallway, front door and windows.
The landlord arranged a damp and mould inspection for 21 February 2023. The landlord noted the result of the inspection as “slight intermittent penetrating dampness due to degradation of mortar pointing to the porch roof/canopy flashing”. The landlord noted that re-pointing around the entrance porch would be required.
On 8 March 2023 the resident complained to the landlord that:
1. The windows were rotten and suffering from condensation.
2. The windows and front door needed replacing.
3. One of the outer windowpanes had smashed and not yet been repaired.
4. The storage heaters did not work.
5. The bathroom needed replacing.
6. The issues were affecting her health.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 10 March 2023 and provided its stage 1 response on 15 March 2023. The landlord said it had addressed some of these issues in the previous complaint that it responded to in October 2022. It clarified that it would only be investigating issues raised during the last 6 months. The stage 1 response is outlined as follows:
1. It said that it had already informed the resident that the windows and the front door were due for replacement in the next financial year ending March 2024. It confirmed that the smashed pane was reported on 7 February 2023 and an appointment had been booked for the repair on 19 April 2023. Regarding the front door, the landlord said that it had not received any contact from the resident regarding any repairs required in the meantime.
2. With regards to the storage heaters, the landlord said that when its contractor attended on 29 September 2022 it found that the living room storage heater was missing. It said that the operative also reported that the other heaters in the property were turned off. The landlord said that the operative reported that they turned the heaters on and found them to be in full working order.
3. The landlord noted the resident had reported a repair specific to the hallway heater on 7 February 2023 and said an appointment had been booked for 17 March 2023. The landlord acknowledged this was outside of its published repair timeframe.
4. The landlord said repairs to the bathroom had been raised on 7 February 2023 and an appointment had been made for 8 March 2023. This appointment was rearranged for 19 April 2023 as the resident was not available.
5. The landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s comments about her health. It offered £25 for the delayed appointment to repair the hallway storage heater.
On 15 March 2023 the resident rejected the stage 1 offer stating she had reported the issues multiple times and that £25 was not enough considering how much she was spending on electricity to heat the property.
On 31 March 2023 the landlord called the resident and offered temporary heaters. The resident refused based on the amount the landlord would compensate for the additional electricity costs. The resident told the landlord that the property was affecting her health and requested it install a shower as recommended by her GP. The resident said she was living in a cold draughty property and felt the landlord didn’t care.
The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 4 April 2023 and reiterated that it would not investigate issues that had formed part of the previous complaint made in September 2022. It said that there was no change to the findings in its stage 1 response regarding the windows, front door, storage heaters or bathroom. The landlord noted temporary heaters had been offered but the resident had refused.
The landlord made no comment on the resident’s remarks about her health and increased the compensation offer to £75, comprising £25 for time and trouble, £25 for the delayed appointment for the storage heater and £25 for a complaint handling error at stage 1.
The resident rejected the landlord’s stage 2 response on 13 April 2023 and informed the landlord she would be escalating the complaint to this Service.

Events after the completion of the internal complaints process

On 24 April 2023 the landlord issued a new stage 1 response for a complaint about repairs to the windows, bathroom and heaters. In this response, the landlord confirmed there had been a repair appointment for the issues on 19 and 20 April 2023 and offered £150 compensation for the time and trouble. Neither the initial complaint nor any subsequent communication about this complaint have been provided to this Service.
There is evidence the landlord sent an order for the roofing work to the entrance porch to resolve the intermittent dampness in the hallway to its contractor on 27 April 2023 but there is no evidence of the work being completed.
The resident referred the complaint to this Service on 8 June 2023. When referring the complaint, the resident said:
1. The windows and doors had not yet been replaced and the landlord had informed her the planned programme of works has now been moved to the next financial year.
2. There was still an issue with the heating and the property was cold. She said it was too expensive to use temporary heaters in the meantime.
3. The landlord has not completed all the repairs listed in its final response and the repairs completed in the bathroom had not worked.
4. She was unhappy with the offer of £75 compensation and requested an increased offer.
The broken pane of glass was replaced on 8 December 2023. The resident reported the bathroom window had “collapsed” on 4 January 2024. The landlord attended on 19 February 2024 and said it was unable to complete the job safely due to the slope of the roof below. There is no evidence of any other repairs being carried out to the windows.
The resident reported the downstairs of the property had flooded on 22 January 2024. She said this was because the door was not watertight. The landlord’s internal communication on 29 January 2024 shows the landlord cancelling the job and noting “nothing can be done as this needs a new door”. There is no evidence of any repairs being carried out to the front door.
The landlord inspected the storage heaters on 8 December 2023. The storage heater in the hallway was found to be faulty and all other heaters were noted as working. The living room heater was noted as still missing. The storage heater in the hallway was booked in for replacement on 23 February 2024.
On 8 December 2023 the landlord attended to complete repairs to the bathroom. The landlord’s operative reported that no issues were found in the bathroom. The landlord inspected the bathroom again on 14 February 2024. It referred the job to its contractor on 16 February 2024 for further investigation into whether there was a leak under the bath or if there was an issue with the porch roof contributing to the water penetration in the hallway.
This Service has been made aware that as of the date of this report, the planned works programme has not been completed and has been delayed to the next financial year, ending March 2025. The landlord informed us that the windows and front door were measured on 14 February 2024 and that it was waiting for a quote for the work.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the repairs to the windows and front door.

On 8 March 2023 the resident reported the windows were rotten and draughty and that the front door was allowing water penetration and cold air through. The resident reported the property was “freezing” on a number of occasions and told the landlord that these issues were having an impact on her health.
The landlord’s repairs policy states it may group major works into planned programmes if there is no health and safety risk to the resident and if the issue is not disrupting the resident’s quality of life. The landlord acknowledged the windows and front door required replacement in November 2021. In its complaint response of 15 March 2023, it told the resident the work had been put on a planned programme for completion by the end of March 2024. The landlord told the resident to continue to report repairs in the meantime. This was a reasonable approach.
The resident reported issues with the windows and front door on 7 February 2023 and in her complaint of 8 March 2023. There is evidence that the resident reported these issues a further 7 times following the landlord’s final response of 4 April 2023. There is no evidence of the landlord completing any repairs to the windows or front door following the resident’s reports and there is no evidence of the landlord offering any alternative solutions. It is evident the issues were disrupting the resident’s quality of life and it is unclear what steps the landlord took to assess whether the issues posed a health and safety risk. The landlord may have considered the issues as low risk upon initial assessment in November 2021 but there is no evidence of the landlord monitoring or reassessing the risk as time passed and this is a service failure.
The landlord had a duty to ensure the property remained fit for habitation throughout the tenancy and it was put on notice of the issues from November 2021. It is reasonable to assume the condition of the windows and door may have deteriorated since November 2021. The landlord failed to inspect upon receipt of the resident’s complaint of 8 March 2023 and has not evidenced any attempts to proactively monitor the situation. If the landlord had exhausted all options for repairs, it should have discussed this with the resident and agreed an approach to managing this. This may have included agreeing an amount of compensation to run the temporary heaters it offered on 31 March 2023 or offering a temporary decant if the situation was unsustainable.
The resident has reported the windows as rotten, draughty and suffering from condensation. The resident also reported the damp patch on her entrance hallway separately. The landlord does not have a damp and mould policy and instead offers information in a damp and mould leaflet and on its website. The landlord’s leaflet says it may send a specialist to diagnose the issue and it may take several visits to treat the issue. It further notes that sometimes damp can only be eliminated with ongoing treatment.
The landlord carried out a damp and mould survey on 21 February 2023. The surveyor reported there was an external issue with the flashing and mortar around the front entrance porch and the area required re-pointing. Landlords should take reports of mould growth in properties seriously. There is no evidence of the landlord completing any of the work identified in the survey nor is there evidence of the landlord completing any works specifically in relation to mould, such as mould washes on the windows. This lack of action is a service failure.
The resident continued to report the windows were rotten and suffering from condensation in a cold flat. The landlord completed a further damp and mould survey on 14 February 2024. An ongoing programme of preventative work to manage the issue whilst awaiting the commencement of the planned programme would have been a mitigating factor in minimising the adverse effect of any damp or mould on the resident.
Under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) excess cold, damp and mould growth are listed as hazards and preventative measures of these hazards include “properly fitted […] doors/windows” and “external fabric kept in good repair to avoid rain penetration”. In this case, the condition of the windows and front door should have been treated as posing a potential risk to the resident. Extra regard should have been given to this considering the resident’s reported health issues and potential vulnerability. The landlord has failed to act appropriately in consideration of the HHSRS.
In its stage 2 response of 4 April 2023, the landlord offered £25 for time, trouble and inconvenience. The landlord’s compensation policy outlines that it will calculate any offer of compensation on a scale based on the level of effort the resident had to put in and the impact experienced by the resident. The scale ranges up to £500. One of the Housing Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles is to put things right. The required work to the windows and front door has still not been carried out and the issues put right. The £25 offered was not proportionate to the time, trouble and inconvenience incurred by the resident as a result of the landlord’s response to her reports of issues with the windows and front door and did not satisfactorily resolve the complaint.

Storage heaters.

The resident reported the heaters were not working in her complaint on 8 March 2023. In its stage 1 response, the landlord referred to a repair appointment on 29 September 2022 and said the heaters were found to be working at that appointment. The landlord’s stage 2 response only mentions the hallway heater and does not address the resident’s claims that the heaters were not working properly throughout the property. There is no evidence of the landlord inspecting the heaters between receiving the resident’s complaint on 8 March 2023 and issuing its stage 2 response on 4 April 2023. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 requires the landlord to keep space heating in good repair. There was no way for the landlord to know if the heating was in good repair without inspecting the heaters. The landlord has acted inappropriately in basing its response on an inspection 6 months prior to the reported issue.
The resident claimed the heaters were not adequately heating the property and that the hallway heater in particular was faulty. When the landlord inspected on 29 September 2022 it noted that the living room heater was missing. The landlord said the resident had removed this and it would be a rechargeable repair to refit the heater. The resident said the heater had never been there. The landlord has not provided its policy or process for dealing with rechargeable repairs.
It is not for this investigation to determine who removed the heater, only to determine if the landlord acted fairly when it became aware of the missing heater. There is no evidence of the landlord discussing the issue with the resident when it became aware or of it explaining the process for rechargeable repairs. The resident reported the property was cold on a number of occasions and there is no evidence that the landlord linked this with the missing heater or made attempts to refit the heater.
When the landlord first identified the heater was missing, it would have been reasonable for it to have investigated what had happened and discussed the process for rechargeable repairs with the resident if appropriate. Ultimately, the landlord is responsible for ensuring the property is appropriately heated and for keeping the property free from excess cold under the HHSRS. Considering the time that has now passed, this investigation has found that the landlord missed the opportunity to recharge the resident for refitting the heater and it would be reasonable for the landlord to install a new heater at its own expense.
In its stage 1 response the landlord said that the heaters were turned off when it attended on 29 September 2022 and that the resident was not using the storage heaters correctly. There is no evidence of the landlord demonstrating how to operate the storage heaters or offering any further advice on how to maximise the use of the heaters. It is noted that the landlord’s Repairs Handbook details useful tips on operating storage heaters and it would have been reasonable for the landlord to refer the resident to this.
The evidence does not show when the issue with the heating was first reported but in its stage 1 response, the landlord refers to reports in 2019 regarding the heating. This Service has not investigated the handling of any repairs completed during this time but understands that an ongoing concern around heating would have caused significant distress and inconvenience to the resident. The landlord has made no reference to the length of time the issue has been ongoing and has evidenced no attempts to resolve the issue in the long term with the resident.
The landlord has since found the hallway heater to be faulty and booked an appointment to replace it on 23 February 2024. This investigation cannot draw a conclusion on whether the heater was faulty prior to this point.
There is no evidence of the landlord exploring alternative possibilities for the cause of the reported cold temperatures in the property. As above, under the HHSRS the landlord is obligated to keep the property free from excess cold so if the landlord was satisfied that the heating was working as it should be, it should have surveyed the property to identify any other issues potentially contributing to this. There is no evidence of the landlord surveying the property until February 2024 which is 10 months after it issued its final response. This is considered to be an unreasonable delay in acting on the resident’s reports of cold.
The landlord failed to identify any failures and gave no consideration for redress for the issues with the storage heaters. As above, the landlord should have made an offer in line with the effort and impact scale in its compensation policy and an order has been made with regard to this.

Repairs to the bathroom.

In the initial complaint of 8 March 2023, the resident reported that the bathroom required repairs and she felt it needed replacing. She specifically reported that the bath enamel was chipped, the bath was coming away from the wall and the taps were rusting. In its stage 1 complaint response of 15 March 2023, the landlord acknowledged that these issues had been raised on 7 February 2023 and that an appointment had been booked for 8 March 2023. The resident was not available at that appointment and this had been rebooked for 19 April 2023. In its stage 2 response the landlord clarified that the repairs were not classed as urgent and therefore this was within their published repair timeframes.
On 19 April 2023 the landlord attended and reported back that the bath had been overhauled and resealed. The landlord has acted reasonably in responding to the resident’s reports of repairs however there is no evidence of the landlord sharing the outcome of the appointment with the resident or explicitly confirming that the bathroom was not considered in need of replacement at that time. The landlord should have managed the resident’s expectations in this regard and shared information about whether the bathroom would be due for an upgrade in future.
The resident told the landlord that she wasn’t sure if the small damp patch in the hallway was coming from a leak under the bath or from the external issues to the porch. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to thoroughly inspect the area upon first report to ensure the issue was resolved in a timely manner.
The landlord inspected the damp patch on 21 February 2023 and identified works were required to the porch. As set out above there is no evidence of this work being completed. There is also no evidence of the landlord inspecting under the bath. The damp patch has since developed some mould growth. It is noted the landlord booked an appointment to check under the bath on 22 February 2024. The landlord acted unreasonably in not thoroughly inspecting under the bath when the resident raised her concerns.

Complaint handling.

In its stage 1 response, the landlord told the resident it would not be investigating issues that had already been addressed in a previous complaint, namely the issues with the windows, front door and storage heaters. The landlord closed the previous complaint in November 2022 after it received no further contact from the resident regarding the matters.
Upon receiving the new complaint on 8 March 2023, the landlord had 2 options: escalate the previous complaint or raise a new complaint. The landlord’s complaints policy states that residents must make contact within 10 working days if they wish to escalate their complaint. The landlord chose to open a new complaint based on the length of time that had passed since the previous complaint. This was an appropriate approach as it was in accordance with its policy.
Having decided to treat the issues as a new complaint, the landlord failed to investigate the issues reported in March 2023 and simply referred the resident back to its response in October 2022. This is a contradictory approach and did not offer the resident the opportunity of a full and thorough investigation. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the investigation into the new complaint.
The landlord’s complaints policy states that a stage 2 response “focusses on providing more detailed independent investigation into customer concerns and providing a full written report of their findings”. In its stage 2 response, the landlord failed to demonstrate any investigation and simply reiterated what had already been said at stage 1. At the time of sending the stage 2 response, the landlord had not inspected the property and it is unclear how the landlord could determine the outcome of the investigation without having inspected the current situation of the issues the resident complained about.
The Ombudsman encourages landlords to use complaints as a source of intelligence to identify issues and introduce positive changes in service delivery. The landlord’s final response is lacking in any acknowledgment of its failing to investigate the complaint and simply repeats information already shared with the resident. The landlord has missed the opportunity to identify failings in its repairs service, specifically the evident failings in managing planned works and carrying out interim repairs.

Review of policies and practice

The Ombudsman has found maladministration (including severe maladministration) following several investigations into complaints raised with the landlord involving damp, mould and leaks. As a result of these, a wider order was issued to the landlord under paragraph 54(f) of the Scheme. This was for the landlord to review its policy or practise in relation to the service failures identified, which may give rise to further complaints about the matter.
It is noted that the Ombudsman received evidence of compliance with this order and as this case pre-dates the wider order, we have not made any additional orders or recommendations as part of this case, which would duplicate those already made to the landlord as part of the wider order.
In this case, the resident has not explicitly complained about damp and mould within her complaint. However, damp and mould has been raised as an associated issue to the repairs raised within the complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the reports of repairs to the windows and front door.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the reports of repairs to the storage heaters.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the reports of repairs to the bathroom.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Reasons

The investigation found that although the landlord informed the resident that the works were due to be completed on a planned programme of works, the landlord did not take reasonable steps to mitigate any adverse effect the resident might experience in the interim. The landlord did not carry out any form of risk assessment or take into consideration that the situation may have deteriorated over time.
While the landlord did attend to repairs with the storage heaters on a number of occasions, it failed to inspect them on receipt of the complaint and made a finding based on an inspection from 6 months prior. The landlord was aware that the living room storage heater was missing but failed to take any action to reinstate it and it failed to acknowledge the distress the ongoing issues with the heating may have had on the resident.
On receipt of the repair request for the issues with the bathroom, the landlord failed to inspect under the bath when the resident was reporting a suspected leak causing the bath to drop and causing the damp patch in the hallway below.
While it was reasonable for the landlord to have treated the complaint of 8 March 2023 as a new complaint, the landlord then failed to treat it as such and did not carry out a full and fair investigation but repeated the response it issued to the resident in October 2022.

Orders

Within 4 weeks, the landlord must:
1. Provide the resident with written confirmation of when the planned works to replace the windows and front door will start.
2. Agree an action plan with the resident to manage the situation in the interim (for example, providing temporary heaters or regular mould washes) and provide a written copy of the plan to the resident and this Service.
3. Install a new heater to the living room.
4. Pay the resident £800, inclusive of the £75 offered in its stage 2 response, made up of:
  1. £250 for distress and inconvenience incurred by the resident as a result of its handling of the windows and front door replacement.
  2. £400 for distress and inconvenience incurred by the resident as a result of its handling of the issues with the storage heaters.
  3. £50 for the failures identified in managing the bathroom repairs.
  4. £100 for failing to fully investigate the complaint.

Recommendations

The landlord should contact the resident regarding her request for a shower to be installed at the property.