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

Stonewater Limited (202214298)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202214298

Stonewater Limited

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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
    1. Response to reports of leaks causing damp and mould.
    2. Handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has lived in the property as an assured tenant since September 2010. The property is a 4-bedroom house.
  2. A report of a fault with the extractor fan in the shower room was made on 26 April 2022. The landlord’s contractor attended the following day and found the fan working properly but said the shower room needed mould treatment. In response to a report of a leak, the contractor attended the property again on 1 June 2022, and resealed the shower tray. It recommended to the landlord that the shower tray should be replaced.
  3. Records show the landlord agreed on 19 July 2022 to fit a new shower tray. On 25 July 2022, the landlord said the damp problem was not related to the shower tray. It said damp was due to moisture from the number of people using the shower in an unvented room.
  4. The landlord discussed options with the contractor and proposed works that included removing the shower enclosure, drying the room, reinstalling the shower, and fitting hygiene panels. When the contractor attended the resident’s property on 20 September 2022 to carry out the works, the landlord said the resident refused the work because he was concerned about the cost of running a dehumidifier and he did not approve the works being proposed.
  5. On 4 October 2022, the resident complained the shower room had mould and damp for more than 6 years. He said his brother had a health condition and the landlord was trying to solve the issue at the lowest cost.
  6. In its complaint response on 21 October 2022, the landlord said reports of damp and mould started in December 2020. It said it had responded to the reports and had done various work to try to resolve the problem. It said the latest planned work had been refused by the resident. It apologised if this work had not been communicated effectively and said a surveyor had since attempted to contact the resident. It apologised for delays and said it would use the complaint to review processes and ensure clear communication.
  7. The resident escalated the complaint on 22 October 2022. He said it was wrong to say reports had only been made since December 2020, and he had been reporting this for 6 years. He said the shower tray was still leaking and there were other problems including a leak from toilet pipes, damp walls, a gap between the shower door and wall, leaking taps on the basin, and mould between tiles and on the ceiling. He said he felt he was being discriminated against because of his ethnicity and the landlord had not taken his brother’s health condition seriously.
  8. The Ombudsman contacted the landlord on 15 February 2023, as the resident had not received a complaint response. In its final response on 6 March 2023, the landlord said it should have told the resident it would have supported the running costs of the dehumidifier. It said it had arranged for the contractor to attend on 28 February to carry out initial works. It explained there would then be a period of drying out, with the rest of the work done on 20 and 21 March 2023. It apologised that it had not made it clear that it would support the cost of the dehumidifier as this could have allowed work to take place in September 2022. On the complaint about discrimination, the landlord said a resident’s ethnicity would never alter its response, and it was sorry if he felt it had. It said its head of equality, diversity and inclusion would contact the resident to discuss this. The landlord also apologised for a lack of response to the escalated complaint. It offered a total of £500 compensation for its failures, which comprised of £150 for communication failures, £200 for delays, and £150 for complaint handling failures.
  9. The resident escalated his complaint to the Ombudsman as he was unhappy with progress on the agreed work. In April 2024, he confirmed the work had been carried out.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The Ombudsman has noted the resident said in October 2022 that he had been reporting damp and mould for 6 years. Under the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider matters that were not brought to the landlord’s attention as a formal complaint within a reasonable period.
  2. As the resident made a complaint in October 2022, the Ombudsman will investigate the landlord’s actions from 12 months before that time until it issued a final response on 6 March 2023. However, the Ombudsman has noted that the resident continued to raise concerns about progress with the repairs after the final response and will consider the landlord’s response to these reports.

The landlord’s response to reports of leaks causing damp and mould

  1. Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act (1985), the landlord is responsible for keeping in repair the structure and exterior of the property. This means the landlord has a general obligation to repair and maintain the property. This obligation includes repairs to pipes and fittings, such as showers. The landlord accepted it was responsible for the repairs.
  2. The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation policy says it has a “zero-tolerance” to damp and mould, and is committed to ensuring residents are provided with targeted and proportionate support. It says high risk homes will be identified based on the volume and regularity of contact, property type and outcomes of calls. Surveyors will attend the property to identify required remedial works for urgent completion.
  3. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould says landlords should ensure their response to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue. They should share the outcome of surveys with residents to help them understand the findings and be clear on the next steps. They should also act on accepted survey recommendations in a timely manner.
  4. When a report was made about a fault with the shower room extractor fan on 26 April 2022, a contractor attended the following day and found the fan was working properly. However, the contractor identified that mould in the shower room needed to be treated and carried out treatment. The contractor then attended the property on 1 June 2022 to repair a leak from the shower tray. The contractor found the shower tray needed to be replaced and carried out a temporary repair, which was reasonable in the circumstances.
  5. The contractor recommended to the landlord that the shower tray needed to be replaced. However, in an email to the landlord dated 12 October 2022, the contractor said an appointment to replace the shower tray should have been booked but this did not happen. The Ombudsman has seen no explanation of why the landlord did not follow up the contractor’s recommendation with an appointment. The Ombudsman has found that the failure to follow up the recommendation was a service failure by the landlord.
  6. Records provided by the landlord show that on 19 July 2022, the landlord agreed work to fit a new shower tray, wall tiles, and basin taps. However, in an internal email on 25 July 2022, the landlord said the damp and mould was not related to the shower tray but caused by the number of people using the shower in an unvented room. It said to resolve the problem it would install a humidity fan.
  7. On 11 August 2022, the landlord asked the contractor whether the fan could be fitted in 1 working day. The contractor told the landlord the resident was expecting other works to be undertaken and was unhappy with the proposal just to install a fan. The contractor then spoke with the resident and agreed to send an electrician and a surveyor to assess the work and said it would then book any required appointments. Following this, the landlord agreed to remove the whole shower enclosure and tiles, dry the room with a dehumidifier for up to 2 weeks, reinstate the shower, and fit hygiene panels. It said it would also repair damaged walls and skirting and paint the room with fungicidal paint. It would also repair the basin.
  8. The contractor arranged for work to start on 20 September 2022. However, records provided by the landlord show that when the contractor attended the property, the resident refused the work because he was concerned about the cost of running the dehumidifier and he did not approve the works being proposed. The contractor closed the repair order and asked the landlord for advice on how to proceed.
  9. When the resident complained about a lack of progress on 4 October 2022, he said he was concerned about the affect the damp was having on his brother, who had a heart condition. In its response the landlord apologised that it had not communicated effectively about the planned works and said its surveyor would contact the resident and agree a solution. The resident escalated his complaint on 22 October 2022.
  10. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence of the landlord communicating with the resident or progressing repairs after 4 October 2022, until the Ombudsman contacted the landlord 4 months later, in February 2023. The landlord was aware of a significant damp and mould problem in the property, and the resident had told the landlord about the concerns for his brother’s health. Because of this, the Ombudsman has found that the landlord failed to follow its general obligation to repair and maintain the property under the Landlord and Tenant Act (1985). The landlord also did not fulfil the commitment it made in its damp, mould, and condensation policy. Although a surveyor attended the property to identify required remedial works for urgent completion, the landlord did not carry out the repairs.
  11. In mitigation, the resident did refuse the works. However, this appears to be due to a failure in communication on the landlord’s part. This is acknowledged in the landlord’s final response on 6 March 2023, where it said it should have told the resident in September 2022 that it would support the cost of running the dehumidifier. It apologised that it had not made this clear and said this could have enabled the repairs to take place in September 2022.
  12. Because of this, the Ombudsman has found that the failure to communicate effectively with the resident led to a 6-month delay in carrying out the work, which had a significant detrimental effect on the resident and his family. This was maladministration. The landlord acknowledged its failures in its final response, where it apologised and offered £350 compensation, consisting of £150 for failures in communication and £200 for delays in carrying out repairs. It is the Ombudsman’s view that this is insufficient in the circumstances.
  13. The resident was significantly inconvenienced and was concerned about the effect the damp and mould were having on his brother who had a heart condition. The resident also had to contact the Ombudsman about the outstanding repairs, causing further inconvenience. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, maladministration is identified in cases where the Ombudsman has found a significant failure. Because of this, the landlord is ordered to compensate the resident with an additional £400 for the delay in carrying out the repairs. Taken with the £200 already paid, this amounts to £100 per month compensation for the delay in carrying out the repairs.
  14. After the final response, the contractor carried out the agreed work in February and March 2023. The resident raised further concerns with the landlord and Ombudsman about the work taking longer than he was told. He was also concerned about the contractor leaving “smelly” tools in his home, which he said made the bathroom “unusable”. The resident also raised concerns about follow up work to resolve “snags”. The Ombudsman has found that it was understandable that the job took longer than expected due to unforeseen issues, and it was reasonable for the contractor to return to deal with snags. However, the landlord should have communicated this clearly with the resident. Permission should also have been sought to leave tools on the premises. The Ombudsman has found this was a further service failure by the landlord. Because of this, the landlord is ordered to compensate the resident with an additional £100 for failure to communicate clearly during the period the work was taking place.
  15. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord said it would use the complaint to review its processes and ensure clear communication. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence of learning from the complaint, and after the stage 1 response, there is evidence the landlord continued to communicate ineffectively with the resident. Because of this, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to provide evidence of the learning it has made from the way it dealt with the reports of damp and mould in this case.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy says it will provide a response at stage 1 within 10 working days. Where a complaint takes some time to investigate, it will keep residents updated with the progress of the investigation. When the resident is dissatisfied with the stage 1 response, it will send a final response within 10 working days. The Ombudsman has noted that the response time at stage 2 is shorter than the time of 20 working days set out in the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
  2. The resident initially complained on 4 October 2022 about the repairs. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 10 October 2022, and responded on 21 October 2022. This took 13 working days and was slightly outside the landlord’s policy and the Complaint Handling Code.
  3. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and escalated the complaint on 22 October 2022. The landlord has provided the Ombudsman with no evidence of communication with the resident until it sent a final response on 6 March 2023. This was after the Ombudsman contacted the landlord about a lack of response on 15 February 2023.
  4. It took the landlord 135 working days to respond to the resident’s escalated complaint. This was a significant failing by the landlord. The Ombudsman has noted that the landlord apologised for the failure to respond to the escalated complaint in line with its service standards and offered £150 compensation for this failure. It is the Ombudsman’s view that this was reasonable redress in the circumstances.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its response to reports of leaks causing damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord in respect of its handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £850, inclusive of £350 compensation already paid for poor communication and delays. Compensation should be paid directly to the resident, and not offset against any arrears. The compensation comprises:
    1. £250 in recognition of failure the to communicate effectively, inclusive of £150 already paid.
    2. £600 in recognition of the delays in carrying out repairs, inclusive of £200 already paid.
  2. The landlord is ordered to provide evidence of the learning it has made from the way it dealt with the reports of damp and mould in this case.
  3. The landlord is ordered to confirm to the Ombudsman that the above orders have been complied with within 4 weeks of this report.