Thurrock Council (202218825)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202218825

Thurrock Council

11 August 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 the resident’s concerns regarding subsidence and the request for a full structural survey to be completed.

Background

2. The resident holds a secure tenancy and has lived in a 2-bedroom semi-detached house since 2014.
3. The landlord conducted a structural survey in 2018 in relation to a right to buy application; this did not identify any subsidence concerns. During the visit, the resident advised she wished to undertake her own survey which was completed some years later in 2021. This service has seen the resident’s report which also did not identify any subsidence concerns.
4. On 31 August 2022, the resident contacted the landlord to report possible property subsidence and her concerns that this was not assessed in or following the landlord’s recent Transforming Homes survey. As part of the stage 1 resolution the landlord organised for a structural survey to be conducted. The survey did not identify any subsidence concerns; therefore, the landlord did not uphold the complaint in its stage 2 response. As the resident remains dissatisfied, she brought the complaint to this service.
5. As a resolution the resident wishes the landlord to conduct a full structural survey to identify any defects in the float structure underneath the property.

Assessment and findings

6. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only three principles driving effective dispute resolution:

a.         Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes;

b.         put things right, and;

c.         learn from outcomes.

7. The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.
8. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in good repair. Once the landlord is informed of the resident’s concerns, a suitably qualified person should inspect the property and raise any necessary repair work in a timely manner in line with its obligations under the tenancy agreement.
9. During the complaint process, the resident informed the landlord of the following issues: windows, front door and bedroom door not fitting in their frames, a blocked drain, upstairs floor creaking, hollow kitchen floor, and the general unevenness of the downstairs floor. The resident believed this indicated the property was subsiding. The landlord carried out the survey on 28 September 2022 and did not find any subsidence concerns.
10. During this survey, the landlord assessed the repairs, it found the front door and bedroom door, creaking upstairs flooring and unevenness of the living room floor to be acceptable so would not address these. The landlord had already resolved the windows and the drain. The landlord advised the resident it would repair cracks in the living room and hall ceiling and the second bedroom wall / ceiling and would screw down a staircase tread. The landlord also agreed to level a section of the kitchen floor. The resident wanted the whole kitchen floor to be levelled, but the landlord deemed a sectional repair to be appropriate.
11. It is clear from the landlord’s timely actions and its complaint responses, that it acknowledged the resident’s report and undertook proportionate actions to investigate. In circumstances such as these, the role of the Ombudsman is to assess the landlord’s actions and determine if they were reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances, and whether they were in line with its own policies and best practice.
12. Given the property surveys including the resident’s own, concluded there were no subsidence concerns, it was reasonable for the landlord to rely on these expert inspections and conclude that the property was not suffering from subsidence. Unless the situation changes it is reasonable for the landlord not to commit further resources to investigating the matter further.
13. It is acknowledged the resident has concerns about possible subsidence and she should continue to monitor this, reporting any changes to the landlord.

Determination

14. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s concern of subsidence and the request for a full structural survey to be completed.

Recommendation

15. This service recognises the impact of the resident’s concern about possible subsidence. This service suggests the landlord try to allay these concerns by offering a meeting with its surveyor to explain why subsidence is not considered a factor in the repairs she raised.