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

Teign Housing (202005333)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202005333

Teign Housing

21 June 2021


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 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 concerns the extent of repair and redecorating works offered by the landlord following a roof leak.

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord and she is disabled.
  2. The property is a semi-detached three-bedroom house.
  3. As per the information provided to this Service, the resident experienced a leak in her roof which then led to various other repairs being needed in the property.

Summary of events

  1. The landlord’s communication records do not show the exact dates that the resident previously reported the leak from the hole in the property’s roof and the associated repair issues there. However, communication notes from 1 June 2020 state that she “ha[d] a hole in her roof which caused damage to wallpaper in dining room, toilet and hallway. Also affected plaster in the lounge.” At that time, the landlord confirmed that works to the roof were scheduled to start on 11 June 2020, it advised the resident that “she should find out from the workmen what work they have been given to do”, and that she should ask it for compensation, for the associated repair issues, in writing.
  2. The resident followed the matter up with the landlord on eight more occasions on 15, 22 and 26 June and 2, 7, 8, 15 and 20 July 2020, informing it on 2 July 2020 that “she wishe[d] to complaint about it”. The Citizen’s Advice Bureau then wrote to it on her behalf on 20 July 2020 to advise “that an independent surveyor ha[d] surveyed the damage to her house through the roof leaking extensively, and the walls of her home ha[d] to be replastered.” The landlord was also requested to arrange for “a written statement” to be sent to the resident, comprised of the actions that it intended to take to “rectify the matter”, including compensation for not repairing the roof, which had led to the majority of the property needing to be replastered and redecorated.
  3. The resident contacted the landlord again on 21 July 2020 to lodge a stage one complaint about it, as she was unhappy with the extent of the works agreed because she felt that more was “needed rather than patching up the damaged plaster.” It wrote to her on 4 August 2020 to advise that work to her walls was scheduled for 20 August 2020, and that it would provide a “decoration pack of sufficient value to redecorate the area or can arrange for the decoration to be done”, in case she could not arrange this herself.
  4. The landlord’s communication records dated 4 September 2020 state that the resident was happy with the repairs carried out to the property’s roof, that there were “lots of” various other works to be completed, and that she was collaborating with the Citizen’s Advice Bureau with regard to resolving these. She contacted this Service on the same date to discuss the outstanding repairs.
  5. Following contact from this Service on the above date, the landlord issued the resident with its stage one complaint response on 15 September 2020, which was comprised of the following:
  1. It acknowledged that she wished for “all of the wallpaper [to be] removed from each room prior to the plaster being repaired.”
  2. It deemed that the “removal of all of the wallpaper from each room [was] excessive and [was] not required as an acceptable standard [could be achieved] with applying lining paper to the affected areas and painting the walls of the rooms”. The landlord explained that this was because its repair and maintenance policy stated that it would make good damage to decorations from its repairs to match original finishes as closely as possible to an acceptable standard via its own works or a decoration pack, for which the resident could alternatively make a claim on her home contents insurance.
  1. On 22 September 2020, this Service wrote to the landlord, on behalf of the resident, to advise that she was unhappy with the stage one complaint response, and requested for this to be escalated by it, as she believed that the roof leak at the property had caused more damage there that it had so far indicated that it was unwilling to repair.
  2. The landlord’s subsequent internal communication, dated 2 October 2020, comprised of the following:
  1. It had inspected the property and had discussed the repair issues there with the resident on 30 September 2020.
  2. It confirmed the areas that were required to be replastered, i.e. the downstairs cloakroom, lounge and hallway, and the small bedroom and a bedroom cupboard, but that it would not remove all of the property’s wallpaper to check if the plaster was in good order, which she was dissatisfied with.
  3. It advised that areas in the bathroom were to be treated for mould, the loft insulation above the middle-sized bedroom was to be checked for damp and replaced if needed, and the chimney was to be checked internally for leaks.
  1. The landlord then issued the resident with its stage two complaint response on 15 October 2020, in which it reiterated the above repair works to be carried out at the property, acknowledged that this may be unsatisfactory to her, and advised that, based on its review of this, it deemed the proposed works to be “proportionate”. It explained that this was because it believed that these would resolve the above issues for her, and that they were reasonable actions to address her concerns in accordance with its service standards, policies and procedures, after it had considered all of the previous discussions and correspondence about this.  
  2. This Service wrote to the landlord on 29 October 2020, on behalf of the resident, to request for her complaint to be escalated to the third and final stage of its complaints procedure. It then acknowledged this to her on 2 November 2020, when it explained that the complaint had been escalated to its final stage board panel review.
  3. The landlord held a board panel review meeting on 10 December 2020 and issued the formal stage three final complaint response to the resident on 18 December 2020. Its third and final stage complaint response stated the following:
  1. It had “reviewed the work required” to her property and the “remedies offered”, and found that “the offer of patch repairs of the plasterwork” was reasonable, and would “rectify the problems” she had experienced.
  2. In the areas where the plaster was patched, it would “re-line the whole of the affected wall with lining paper” to “create a ‘feature’ wall”, offering her a wide choice of colours to match or complement the existing decorations, as this would “leave each room in an attractive state” and be a “reasonable offer”, despite not matching her existing wallpaper, and it would repair further plaster damage identified.
  3. It confirmed that the other repairs that she had reported to it would be undertaken in line with its normal repairs procedures, for which it would visit her to agree a method and timescale for the above works and offered her an occupational therapist’s visit.
  4. It determined that it had appropriately handled the repair issues raised by the resident, that these had been acknowledged and would be undertaken, and it offered her compensation of £200 for the “disturbance which will be caused…by the replastering repairs required”, in addition to the above redecorating works.
  1. The landlord’s records subsequently showed that it agreed to inspect and remedy the property’s chimney, loft insulation, walls, spindle, flooring, kitchen sink, boiler and radiators, together with the above replastering and redecorating works there. However, it considered that the resident’s report that her bathroom door needed to be replaced, due to the lack of a lock on this, was her responsibility as this was an internal door.
  2. The resident nevertheless then complained to this Service that, during a further visit to her by the landlord on 11 February 2021, it had agreed to carry out further repairs to the property but that these would not fix all of the above issues. It subsequently informed us that its occupational therapist had assessed her on 2 March 2021, and that it had raised orders for the above works that it was attempting to arrange with her.

Assessment and findings

The resident’s tenancy agreement

  1. In the tenancy agreement, the landlord commits to keeping “the structure and exterior” of the property “in good repair”, including “the roof…internal walls, floors and ceilings, doors and door frames,  door hinges…but not including internal painting and decorating”. It also commits to keeping “in good repair” the property’s “chimneys, chimney stacks and flues” and “plasterwork”, as well as to “keep in good repair and proper working order any installation provided by [it] for heating or water heating…the basin” and “sinks”, and to “clear up after repairs and restore to a reasonable condition any decoration.”
  2. Additionally, the tenancy agreement states that it is the resident’s responsibility to “look after and maintain” the property and “carry out any minor repairs [she is] responsible for”, including “keeping the property…in good condition” and “internal decorations”.


The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure

  1. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure states that “when required” it would carry out an inspection “to correctly diagnose and specify repair works within [five] days of a repair being reported.” The procedure confirms that damage to internal decorations when carrying out repair works will be minimised as far as possible. The landlord commits that, when such damage is unavoidable, it would make this good to match, as closely as possible, the original finishes, providing a decoration pack of sufficient value to redecorate this if it could not, and arranging and paying for redecoration necessary to return the property to an acceptable standard itself, if vulnerability prevented the resident from doing so.
  2. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure also states that non-emergency repairs to sinks, basins, heating or hot water faults, roof leaks, dampness, flooring, walls and plasterwork were to be carried out by it by appointment with the resident, but that internal door locks were the resident’s responsibility.

The landlord’s compensation procedure

  1. The landlord has discretion under its compensation procedure to offer residents up to £250 compensation for experiencing a high level of inconvenience or distress following a complaint, which should reflect their individual circumstances, including disability.

The extent of repair and redecorating works offered by the landlord following a roof leak

  1. The landlord, following its response to the resident’s report of 1 June 2020 of a roof leak damaging the property and her decorations with its roof repairs on 11 June 2020 and works to the walls on 20 August 2020, carried out a further inspection there on 30 September 2020. During this inspection, it identified that further repairs were needed, in addition to the replastering works, detailed at paragraph 11 above.
  2. This was in line with the landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure, detailed at paragraphs 19 to 20 above, because it carried out the roof leak and wall repairs that it was obliged to, and it then conducted an inspection of the property to determine the further repairs that were required there. Its actions also accorded with the terms set out in the resident’s tenancy agreement, outlined at paragraphs 17 to 18 above, because it did so and committed to carry these further repairs out, as the tenancy agreement obliged it to.
  3. However, the landlord took over a month from its wall repairs of 20 August 2020 to carry out its further inspection of the property’s outstanding repairs on 30 September 2020, which is concerning together with the resident’s concerns around the extent of the replastering works that it proposed for this.
  4. Following the roof leak, the resident reported issues with the plastering and decorations in various areas of her property to the landlord from 1 June 2020 onwards. As a solution, it offered from 4 August 2020 to replaster, apply lining paper to and paint the affected areas. In this instance, the landlord also acted in line with the terms of its repairs and maintenance procedure and the resident’s tenancy agreement, because it agreed to carry out remedial works to keep the internal walls of the property in good repair.
  5. However, the resident disputed this, as she considered the extent of the proposed works to be insufficient, which led to her raising a stage one complaint in respect of this on 2 and 21 July 2020. The landlord then issued complaint responses to her at all three stages of its complains procedure on 15 September, 15 October and 18 December 2020, in which it determined that the extent of replastering works offered was proportionate.
  6. Furthermore, the landlord offered to either provide a decoration pack or to arrange the redecorating works at the property itself, and it offered the resident compensation of £200 on 18 December 2020 for the disruption caused by the works to be carried out. In respect of the above, it is noted that:
  1. It was permitted by its repairs and maintenance procedure to only offer to replaster, line and paint the affected areas, rather than to replace all of the property’s matching wallpaper as requested by the resident, if that was sufficient to return the property’s condition to an acceptable standard, by making this good to match as closely as possible.
  2. The landlord complied with the repairs and maintenance procedure by offering to assist with the property’s redecoration, as the resident’s vulnerability prevented her from doing this herself due to her disability.
  3. The amount of £200, intended as compensation for the inconvenience caused to the resident by the works to be carried out, was reasonable and proportionate to this, and was in line with the amounts recommended for this by this Service’s remedies guidance and the landlord’s compensation procedure above at paragraph 21.
  1. To conclude, based on the information provided, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of the amount of repair and redecorating works offered by it to the resident following the leak from the property’s roof. This is because it acted in line with its repairs and maintenance procedure, the terms of the resident’s tenancy agreement, and this Service’s remedies guidance and its compensation procedure. The landlord did so by offering replastering works, to assist the resident with redecorating the affected areas, and compensation of £200 for the inconvenience that would be caused by this, which was proportionate to the inconvenience caused.
  2. Moreover, the landlord subsequently offered the resident further inspections and repairs to the property’s chimney, loft insulation, walls, spindle, flooring, kitchen sink, boiler and radiators that she had reported to it, which were also in line with her tenancy agreement and its repairs and maintenance procedure. While she was dissatisfied that it declined to install a bathroom door lock at the property, the procedure made this her responsibility and so permitted it to do so, and there is no evidence that it declined her repairs that it was obliged to carry out.
  3. The landlord has therefore been recommended below to contact the resident to arrange to complete the above repairs and redecorating at the property and to pay her the above compensation, if it has not done so already. It has also been recommended below to try and resolve her complaint with her, by contacting her to outline any assistance that it can provide her with her to install a bathroom door lock and any other outstanding works that it is not responsible for at the property, in light of her disability.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of the extent of repair and redecorating works offered by it following a roof leak.

Reasons

  1. The landlord acted in line with its repairs and maintenance procedure and the terms of the resident’s tenancy agreement, by carrying out and offering her further repair and redecorating works at the property, and it acted in accordance with its compensation procedure, by offering her reasonable compensation for the inconvenience that would be caused by the remedial works.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord is recommended to:
  1. Contact the resident to arrange to complete the proposed repair and redecorating works at the property, if it has not done so already.
  2. Pay the resident the £200 compensation that it previously offered her, if she has not yet received this.
  3. Contact the resident to outline any assistance that it can provide her with to install a bathroom door lock and any other outstanding works that it is not responsible for at the property, in light of her disability.
  1. The landlord should contact this Service within four weeks to confirm whether it will follow the above recommendations.
  2. The Ombudsman accepts that, because of the present restrictions due to the corona virus pandemic, the timing of the above actions will depend on what is reasonable in the light of Government guidance regarding the health of the resident and of the landlord’s staff.