Thurrock Council (202204868)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202204868

Thurrock Council

18 July 2023

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 handling of:
   1. Repairs to the bathroom floor.
   2. A sewage leak in the garden.

Background

2. The resident holds a secure tenancy with the landlord.
3. On 6 April 2022, the resident complained to the landlord about unfinished repairs to his bathroom floor and sewage coming up into his garden.
4. The landlord issued a stage one response on 21 April 2022. It said that:
   1. The resident had reported lumps in his bathroom floor in July 2018. Works were carried out to renew the screed and lay a new bathroom floor in August 2018. The resident contacted the landlord to say that he was unhappy about the works which had been carried out. The landlord’s contractors were due to come out and inspect the works on 21 August 2018, but the landlord’s records do not show what the outcome of this inspection was.
   2. A new inspection of the bathroom floor was arranged for 18 February 2022; however, this was cancelled due to traffic problems and rearranged for 21 February 2022. Following the inspection, a works order was raised to renew the sheet flooring in the bathroom, seal holes behind the toilet, take up the carpet in the hallway and apply new latex. These works were scheduled for 4 and 5 May 2022. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for the delay in these works being carried out so far.
   3. It had no records of the resident having made any previous reports about sewage coming up into his garden, prior to his complaint of 21 April 2022. On 14 April 2022, the landlord’s contractors cleared a blockage within the sewerage pipe and said that a new drain cover was needed. The contractors also recommended a CCTV survey to establish if there was any damage to the pipework following the clearance of the blockage. The contractors would contact the resident to let him know when they would carry out the CCTV survey.
5. On 3 May 2022, the resident contacted the landlord to say the contractors were due to attend his property in the next couple of days, but no-one had contacted him.
6. The resident escalated his complaint to stage two of the landlord’s complaint procedure on 16 May 2022. He said that:
   1. He had moved all his furniture into the hallway and pulled up the floor covering in preparation for the new floor to be laid.
   2. The contractor had come but didn’t have the vinyl with him to lay the floor and said that an asbestos check needed to be carried out.
   3. The contractors had not told him of when they would be attending, and he constantly had to chase them up. No-one had informed him of the outcome of the asbestos check and the contractor had not rebooked the appointment to carry out the works. There were some holes in the floor that needed to be refilled.
   4. He did not understand why the landlord could not place a cover over the drain to stop the sewage seeping into his fishpond.
7. The landlord’s internal records of 24 May 2022, show that it had advised the resident that the outstanding works had been rebooked for 10 and 13 June 2022. On 10 June 2022, the resident called the landlord to say that the contractors had not showed up to do the work. He had called the contractor who said that they may attend later that day but couldn’t confirm. They also told him they would need to remove the toilet and the resident was concerned he would be left without a toilet for the weekend. The same day, the contractors attended the property and removed the toilet, so the landlord arranged for a chemical toilet to be delivered to the property for the resident to use. The resident said that the contractors had left the property at one stage to pick up batteries and a charger for their equipment, leading to further delays.
8. The landlord issued its stage two complaint response on 15 June 2022. It said that:
   1. It acknowledged and apologised for the lack of updates from its contractors and the delays in carrying out the works to the bathroom. It said it had reminded its contractors about the importance of providing updates to residents.
   2. There had been a delay in the CCTV survey of the drain being carried out. It apologised for this. The CCTV survey was carried out on 30 May 2022, to inspect for defects which might be causing blockages. The recent blockage had been caused by wet wipes and grease deposits.
   3. The contractors were unable to install a further cover on top of the existing drain cover, as this would cause severe back surge internally.
   4. The landlord offered the resident £50 in compensation for the delays and inconvenience caused.
9. The resident complained to the Ombudsman in September 2022. He said that a drainage specialist had recommended a bolt-down manhole cover to stop the sewage from overflowing again. He said that his garden had been flooded with sewage three times over the years and this had killed the fish in his pond.
10. The resident has told this Service that glue was left on the bath panel, the sink, and the skirting board after the works to the bathroom were completed. He said he reported this to the landlord, however no-one has been sent to remove the glue.

Assessment

Scope of investigation

11. The problems with the resident’s bathroom floor date back to 2018. There is no indication that the resident made a formal complaint about this at that time however (the Ombudsman would usually expect such issues to be brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within 6 months of the matters arising). The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner, so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and whilst the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events which occurred. As the substantive issues become historic it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as the Ombudsman, to conduct an effective review of the actions taken to address those issues. Therefore, although the historic events give context to the more recent issues, this investigation focuses on the landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint about repairs to his bathroom floor that he raised in 2022.

Policies and procedures

12. The terms of the resident’s tenancy agreement state that the landlord is responsible for repairing and maintaining the structure and exterior of the building including floors and drains as well as bathroom fixtures such as basins, sinks, toilets, and baths.
13. The landlord’s website states that it aims to carry out repairs to floors and drains within 20 working days.

Repairs to the resident’s bathroom floor

14. The inspection of the resident’s bathroom floor took place in February 2022, however works were not booked in until May 2022, after the resident complained in April 2022. The repairs were carried out in June 2022. This exceeded the landlord’s repairs policy, set out above, by over two months and will have resulted in avoidable time, trouble, and inconvenience for the resident.
15. It was appropriate that the landlord carried out an asbestos check before proceeding with the works to the bathroom floor to ensure the safety of the resident and its contractors working in the area. However, the inspection of the bathroom took place in February 2022 and the need for an asbestos check did not become apparent until early May 2022, causing a delay of over a month that could have been avoided, had the need for an asbestos check been picked up at the time of the initial inspection.
16. The evidence shows that the landlord’s contractors repeatedly failed to communicate with the resident, did not attend the property when scheduled to do so and on at least one occasion had not brought chargers and batteries with them. The resident repeatedly had to contact both the landlord and its contractors to find out where the contractors were, and when they were likely to arrive. When the contractors did attend the property, they were ill-equipped, not having the vinyl floor covering with them and leaving to pick up chargers and batteries.
17. The resident was not informed that his toilet would be removed until the day the contractors were due to arrive to carry out the works. The landlord acted appropriately by arranging for a chemical toilet to be delivered, however this was done reactively when it became apparent that the resident was at risk of being left without toilet facilities. This points to a lack of planning on the part of the landlord and its contractors.
18. The landlord has acted reasonably in acknowledging and apologising for the delays in repairing the resident’s bathroom. It has offered him £50 in recognition of these delays which the resident has accepted. However, this offer is not proportionate to the failings identified by this investigation and does not fully reflect the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused to the resident.
19. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website) states that where maladministration has been identified which adversely affected the resident £100-£600 compensation should be offered. In the opinion of this Service therefore, an additional £100 compensation should be offered to the resident for the delays in completing the repairs to his bathroom floor.
20. The resident has reported to the landlord that glue was left on surfaces in his bathroom. This has still not been removed over a year after the works were completed. While this will not have interfered with the resident’s use of the bathroom, the landlord has an obligation to make good decoration after carrying out any repairs and the fact that it has not done so, will have caused the resident further time, trouble, and inconvenience. The landlord should arrange to have the glue removed from the resident’s bathroom as soon as possible and in line with its published repairs timescales.

Sewage leak to the garden

21. The landlord acted appropriately by investigating the cause of the sewage into the resident’s garden after he raised this in his stage one complaint in April 2022. It has acted in accordance with its repair obligations by clearing the blockage in the drain within a reasonable timeframe.
22. As the blockage was caused by residents disposing of grease and wet wipes down the drain, it is outside of the landlord’s control whether the leak of sewage into the resident’s garden happens again. However, it should consider writing to its tenants to remind them of the importance of not disposing of anything down sinks or drains, that may result in blockages. If this becomes a recurring issue, it would be helpful for the landlord to carry out regular inspections of the drains to ensure any blockages are removed as soon as possible, before they cause a significant problem.
23. The landlord has acted reasonably by investigating whether it would be possible to fit an additional cover to the drain. It has been advised that this could cause the drain to back-up into other residents’ internal drains. The Ombudsman has seen a copy of the CCTV survey and we are satisfied that the landlord has acted in line with its recommendations.
24. It is understandable that the possibility of sewage leaking into his garden in the future would cause the resident distress and worry. However, were the drain to back-up into internal drains it could be hazardous to the health of other residents, therefore, the landlord has acted appropriately in advising the resident that it cannot fit a bolted-down drain cover.

Determination (decision)

25. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in the way it handled the repairs to the resident’s bathroom floor.
26. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in the way it handled the sewage leak in the resident’s garden.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

27. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £100 in compensation, within four weeks of the date of this report, ensuring that this Service is provided with evidence of compliance by the same date. This amount is in addition to the £50 compensation already offered to the resident through the landlord’s complaints process.
    2. Remove the glue from the surfaces in the resident’s bathroom within four weeks of the date of this report, ensuring that this Service is provided with evidence of compliance by the same date.

Recommendations

28. If it has not done so already, it is recommended that the landlord write to tenants, reminding them of the importance of not disposing of anything down sinks or drains which may cause blockages.