Thrive Homes Limited (202003370)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202003370

Thrive Homes Limited

30 November 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 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 concerns:
1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the bathroom ceiling, floor, and shower screen.
2. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the kitchen ceiling.

Background and summary of events

The resident is a secure tenant and the tenancy started in January 2001. The property is two-bedroom terrace house.
The resident does not have any vulnerabilities however the landlord is aware that her two daughters have vulnerabilities.
As a result of the resident’s daughter having Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD), her occupational therapist sent a ‘Disabled Facilities Grant Adaptions Referral’ (The referral) to the landlord in April 2020. This recommended that it make adaptions at the property in the form of an upgrade to the resident’s bathroom on the basis that the issues with the bathroom were having a detrimental impact on her daughter’s mental health. It said the resident’s daughter spent a long time in the shower and considered the current shower curtain unhygienic. It also said the curtain was not retaining the amount of water used in the bath, as a consequence, water was pooling on the floor and the walls were damp. The referral requested for the shower curtain to be replaced with a shower screen and for the shower to be thermostatically controlled. It also requested that flooring was fit for purpose, for example non slip flooring and for damp issues to be addressed.
In a further letter to the landlord from the occupational therapist dated 7 May 2020, they referred to a call from the resident who had advised of the following issues:
1. The extractor fan previously replaced was not working.
2. The bathroom radiator was old and possibly leaking as brown stains had appeared by the base of radiator.
3. Extensive damp and mould even when the bathroom window was opened.
4. The flooring was in a poor condition and the resident believed there may be issues with leaking pipework beneath the flooring which had not been properly explored.
On 6 May 2020, the landlord raised a job order for its repairs team to supply and fit a shower screen and for the shower taps to be thermostatically controlled. The order also referred to the flooring in the bathroom to be reviewed to see if a non-slip covering was required and for damp to be addressed if required.
In its email to the resident dated 12 May 2020, the landlord said that further to the visit by its repairs team that day, it confirmed it would undertake the following works to her bathroom:
1. Install a Shower Screen.
2. Replace flooring.
3. Check fans and replace if required.
4. Make good ceiling.
5. Check all sanitaryware sealant and replace where required.
The landlord’s job repair history shows the works for this job order was completed on 18 May 2020.
On 11 December 2020, the resident complained to the landlord that:
1. The seal on the bathroom screen was broken again – it had already been fixed once.
2. The bathroom ceiling was peeling.
3. She had previously been asked by the landlord to keep her bathroom window open and so she would like a bigger radiator in the bathroom. She said she would also like the radiator next to the bedroom changing.
4. She requested for the lino in the bathroom to be replaced as it had water marks.
The resident sent photos to the landlord on 11 December 2020 of the bathroom and the kitchen ceiling that she said needed repairing.
The landlord arranged for its surveyor to inspect the property on 18 December 2020. The surveyor attended on this date and on 22 December 2020, provided the landlord with its inspection notes.
On 7 January 2021, the landlord provided the resident with a stage one response. It advised that as part of its investigation it had the inspection notes and photographs provided by the surveyor who visited on 18 December 2020 along with previous notes and photographs on file which it had reviewed. It advised:
1. Bathroom ceiling -it was observed that there was surface mould and some flaking paint work. At the time of inspection there was a high level of humidity in the bathroom. This would cause condensation and if not managed would lead to mould growth, and as previously advised this was the resident’s responsibility to manage. It attached its Guide on Dealing with condensation and mould (The guide).
2. Bathroom flooring – the floor covering was newly installed and was the correct (non-slip) specification for the room, and was generally in good condition. The water marks that the resident had referred to could be cleaned off and was the resident’s responsibility.
3. Bathroom radiator – the radiator was observed and was in good condition and appropriate for the room, therefore it did not need replacing at this time.
4. Bath screen – this was inspected and was found to be in working order. It noted that its repair team had recently attended to this. The landlord’s repair log confirms this was repaired on 17 December 2020.
5. Bathroom light – it was tested on inspection and the light switch only worked intermittently, therefore a repair would be raised for this.
6. The bathroom had an opening window and a humidistat extractor fan, both of these features should be used, with the bathroom door closed to help ventilate the room and help manage the condensation she was experiencing.
7. Kitchen – a crack in the textured ceiling finish was observed by the surveyor and it had raised a planned repair with a target date of 1 April (2021). Once the repair had been completed, it would review and consider if the kitchen ceiling needed to be decorated. It was noted that a kitchen sink unit door was damaged however it would not replace this as this was the resident’s responsibility.
The landlord advised it was not upholding the resident’s complaint however if she was dissatisfied with this outcome, she could ask for a senior manger to review this in accordance with its complaint process.
On 10 January 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to advising:
1. The fan previously installed did not “do the job” and the light was left flickering.
2. She referred to the occupational therapist’s previous communications in relation to the bathroom ceiling, flooring, shower screen and radiator.
On 12 January 2021, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate her complaint to stage two.
On 18 January 2021, the landlord’s repair contractor visited the property to repair the kitchen ceiling. The resident refused access as she believed that the landlord was attending to repair the bathroom ceiling – she explained she had not cleared the kitchen and so refused the landlord access on this occasion.
On 21 January 2021, the landlord provided a stage two response when it reiterated the response provided at stage one in relation to: the mould in the bathroom; the bathroom flooring; the radiator; and the bath screen. It also advised:
1. The resident had refused access for works to the kitchen ceiling when its repair team attended on 18 January 2021 as she wanted works completed to the bathroom ceiling.
2. The humidistat extractor fan in the bathroom was found to be fit for purpose. Coupled with the openable window these features could help with reducing the condensation issues.
3. An operative repaired the bathroom light on the 8 January 2021.
4. It would like to complete the outstanding works to the kitchen ceiling and requested that the resident booked an appointment for these and provided contact details.
The landlord said having reviewed her complaint, it was satisfied that the required works had either been completed or arranged and that her complaint had been dealt with in accordance with its procedures. It provided details of how to escalate her complaint to the Ombudsman if she was dissatisfied with its response.
In her communication to the Ombudsman on 21 January 2021, the resident advised that whilst her bathroom ceiling had been “done” a few times, it kept peeling. She believed the landlord had agreed to repair this on 18 January 2021 but it was only willing to repair the kitchen ceiling when it attended and she had not cleared this room.
The landlord advised the Ombudsman in September 2021 that the resident had now raised a disrepair claim regarding the issues raised in her complaint. In November 2021, it advised the resident’s disrepair claim was proceeding under the pre-action protocol for housing condition. As the claim was in the pre-action protocol stage and there is no evidence to suggest that a claim has been issued in court, the Ombudsman’s can investigate the resident’s complaint raised during the landlord’s complaints process.
In a further communication to the Ombudsman dated 19 November 2021, the resident advised that the front gate that had fallen off because the post had rotted. She also said that water did not drain away from the cementing in the back yard. The Ombudsman will consider these matters in this investigation as the repairs were not raised as part of the resident’s complaint which exhausted the landlord’s complaints process on 21 January 2021.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to the bathroom ceiling, floor, and shower screen

The resident’s tenancy agreement makes clear that the resident is responsible for the internal decoration at the property. It notes that the resident must not apply artex, vitreous tiling, floor tiling or wooden flooring or any similar materials to the walls, ceilings or floors unless the landlord gives prior written permission and states that this will not be unreasonably withheld.
The tenancy agreement also states that the landlord is responsible for internal walls, floors and ceilings, doors and door frames, door hinges and skirting boards but states this does not include internal painting and decoration.
The landlord’s guide sets out the resident’s and landlord’s respective responsibilities relating to condensation and mould including. This states the resident is obliged to:
1. Adequately ventilate the home.
2. Adequately heat the home.
3. To open windows after baths or showers to clear steam. Use any extractor fan if fitted. Keep the door closed whilst bathing/ showering.
4. Clean mould off walls and ceilings promptly when it appears.
The guide states that the landlord had obligations to:
1. Ensure residents are able to ventilate their homes.
2. Ensure residents have a heating system which, if properly used, will reduce condensation.
3. Carry out a full investigation when condensation is first reported and complete a survey report and confirm its findings and action with residents.
4. Resolve any problems if condensation is due to shortcomings in either the fabric of the building or the materials or work supplied by it.
5. Give residents advice about how to reduce condensation which occurs as a result of lifestyle.
6. If it finds penetrating or rising damp, it will tell residents how it intends to resolve the problem and estimate how long the works will take.
In response to OT’s recommendations made in the referral in April 2020 and additional issues raised in the letter dated 7 May 2020, the landlord made adaptions at the property in the form of an upgrade to the resident’s bathroom on the basis that the condition of the bathroom at that time was having a detrimental impact on the resident’s daughter’s mental health. These works included:
1. The supply and fitting of a shower screen and shower taps which could be thermostatically controlled.
2. Replacement of the flooring with non-slip floor covering.
3. Making good of the bathroom ceiling which was pealing.
The completion of works by the landlord on 18 May 2020 was appropriate as it demonstrates it promptly carried out the recommendations made in the referral. The landlord’s job order dated 6 May 2020 order also shows the landlord checked the bathroom for damp and if the extractor fan was working at the time although the outcome of the inspection is unclear from the available evidence.
When the resident raised a formal complaint on 11 December 2020 regarding the condition of the bathroom ceiling and flooring and issues with the bathroom screen and radiator, the landlord arranged an inspection by its surveyor. The landlord’s repair history shows the shower screen was repaired on 17 December 2020 and a surveyor attended on 18 December 2020. This demonstrates the landlord promptly acted upon the information provided in the resident’s complaint regarding the potential need for repairs which was reasonable.
The outcome from the surveyor’s inspection was that the bathroom ceiling had some ‘surface mould’ and flaking paintwork however this was the resident’s responsibility to address. This along with all of the surveyor’s findings were communicated to the resident in the stage one and two complaint responses. As the surveyor also noted that the humidistat extractor fan in the bathroom was ‘fit for purpose’, that the window in the bathroom was able to open and that the bathroom radiator was functional, this indicates the bathroom was reasonably equipped to allow it to be adequately ventilated in order to reduce humidity caused by showering. This in turn would reduce condensation and surface mould.
Bearing in mind also that the landlord had previously ‘made good’ the bathroom ceiling in May 2020, the conclusion reached by the landlord was reasonable in the circumstances. It was also in accordance with the resident’s responsibilities set out in the tenancy agreement and guide to carry out internal decoration including paintwork and for cleaning surface mould off walls and ceilings when it appears. The landlord provided the resident with a copy of the guide with its stage one response which was reasonable.
The resident’s communication with the Ombudsman on 21 January 2020 indicate that she was expecting a repair to the bathroom ceiling when the landlord attended on 18 January 2020 to repair the kitchen ceiling. The resident said the repair for the bathroom ceiling was booked on 8 January 2020. The landlord’s repair history does not reflect this but rather that a repair to the bathroom light was booked on this date and also that a repair to the kitchen ceiling was booked on 7 January 2021. There is no other evidence to indicate the landlord agreed to repair the bathroom ceiling or raised a repair for this. As such this appears to be a misunderstanding between the parties. However, even if the resident was expecting a different repair, under the tenancy agreement she was obliged to allow the landlord access to effect the repair.
In regards to the bathroom flooring, during the inspection of 18 December 2020, the surveyor found that the non-slip flooring installed in May 2020 was in good condition except for “water marks” that could be cleaned off. Given the age of the flooring, it would seem unlikely to need replacing so quickly and as such the surveyor’s finding was consistent with this. Therefore, the landlord has demonstrated that it responded promptly to this issue and no repair or replacement was required as it was in a reasonable condition. Its response was therefore appropriate.
Therefore, the landlord acted in accordance with its responsibilities under the tenancy agreement when dealing with repairs to the bathroom ceiling, floor, and shower screen. It has also demonstrated that it took steps to ensure the resident’s bathroom contained features to allow it to be adequately ventilated for potential condensation and surface mould to be managed, which was reasonable.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the kitchen ceiling.

The landlord responded to the resident’s report of an issue with the kitchen ceiling promptly and appropriately by arranging and inspection of this which took place seven days after the resident had provided photos of this which showed small cracks. It was identified during the inspection that a small section of the textured ceiling finish had started to crack and flake and needed repairing. The landlord’s repair history shows it booked this repair on 7 January 2021 for 18 January 2021. In its stage one response of the same date, the landlord confirmed that a repair was required to the kitchen ceiling and said it had booked this repair however it did not provide details of the appointment date in its response. However, it is clear that the landlord did subsequently notify the resident of this appointment by text message.
When the landlord attended on 18 January 2021 to out carry the repair, the resident denied it access as she said she had not cleared the kitchen, rather she had cleared the bathroom. Under the tenancy agreement the resident is required to allow the landlord access to carry out repairs, however, as the resident said she had not cleared the kitchen it was reasonable of the landlord to come back another time to give her the opportunity to do so.
In its stage two response, the landlord advised that it would like to complete the outstanding works to the kitchen ceiling and requested that the resident booked an appointment for these and provided contact details. This was a reasonable approach to take. However, there is no evidence to show the repair to the kitchen ceiling was subsequently carried out. As the landlord is responsible for this repair, a recommendation has been made for it to contact the resident again to arrange for this repair to be undertaken, if not already done so.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord regarding handling of repairs to the bathroom ceiling, floor, and shower screen.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord regarding its handling of repairs to the kitchen ceiling.

Reasons

The landlord made adaptions in the form of a bathroom upgrade in accordance with recommendations in a referral it received from the resident’s daughter’s occupational therapist, which was reasonable. It then inspected the bathroom to assess amongst other things the bathroom ceiling, floor, and shower screen in response to the resident’s subsequent formal complaint about the condition of these. This resulted in a repair carried out to the shower screen however, as the issues it found with the bathroom ceiling and flooring related to decoration of the bathroom ceiling and cleaning, no repairs were required. The landlord therefore acted appropriately.
The landlord inspected the resident’s kitchen ceiling when she raised an issue with this and promptly raised a repair for work to the kitchen ceiling to be carried out which was appropriate. When the resident did not allow the landlord access to the property in order for the repair to be completed, the landlord asked her to book the repair in providing contact details to do this. This was reasonable.

Recommendations

The landlord recommends that the landlord:
1. Contact the resident again to arrange the repair to the kitchen ceiling if it has not already completed these repairs.