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

Torus62 Limited (202220330)

Back to Top

 

A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220330

Torus62 Limited

11 September 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 bathroom repairs, along with the quality of those repairs.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord.
  2. After the resident had a leak in her main bathroom, (which is unrelated to this complaint), the landlord undertook tiling repairs on 15 June 2022. The resident reported that the works were not of good quality, but accepted the works on 21 June 2022. On 28 September 2022, the landlord fitted a new disabled toilet in the resident’s small bathroom, which was separate to the main bathroom. She reported the same day that aspects of the work had not been completed, such as the pipe casing around the toilet.
  3. On 3 October 2022, the resident complained that she constantly had to follow up with the landlord on the quality of its works. She explained that the casing had still not been completed, the toilet seat fitted was not the correct one and did not fit properly, and the original toilet had been left in her garden. Additionally, the resident complained that the recent tiling job from June 2022 was done very badly and left in a poor state.
  4. The landlord attended on 5 October 2022 to inspect the quality of the repairs and identify any necessary remedial work. The landlord sent its stage one response on 17 October 2022. It stated that following this appointment, the landlord would arrange for the toilet seat and boxing to be renewed, as well as the cistern to be levelled and to lift and relay the tiles to the floor. It had also arranged to remove the abandoned toilet from the resident’s garden. The landlord stated that it would use this opportunity to reinstall its customer service standards in its employees.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint on 19 October 2022, as an operative had attended the property, but had not been able to complete the full spectrum of the works. The landlord has explained that some extra materials had needed to be ordered. The resident was unhappy that the works would now be delayed until 17 November 2022. The landlord completed some of the works on 17 November 2022, including replacing the toilet seat and cistern. It did not complete the tiling, as it needed to source matching tiles for the resident’s flooring.
  6. The landlord sent its final response on 17 November 2022. It acknowledged that it had taken several attempts to rectify the resident’s repairs. In recognition of its failing to complete the works in a timely manner, the landlord offered the resident £250 compensation, and apologised for the inconvenience caused.
  7. In her complaint to this Service, the resident explained that despite her repeated complaints, the second toilet seat fitted had again been the incorrect size. She also explained that the tiling had still not been completed. The landlord has explained that it replaced the toilet seat for a third time on 15 June 2023, and replaced the resident’s tiled floor on 28 June 2023.

Assessment

  1. According to the resident’s tenancy agreement, the landlord is responsible for keeping in good repair and proper working order any installations that it has provided for the supply of water and sanitation. This includes basins, sinks, baths, toilets and flushing systems. Additionally, the landlord is responsible for the structure of the property, including floors and skirting boards. According to the landlord’s repair policy, the resident is responsible for toilet seats, chains, pulls and handles, as well floor coverings. The repair policy also states that routine repairs will be carried out within 20 days.
  2. The resident reported that her tiles were fitted to a poor quality on 21 June 2022, but stated that she did not want a post inspection and that they ‘would do’. The resident reported that her the works to her toilet renewal had not been completed on 28 September 2022 and asked for an update. Once the landlord received a report from the resident that some of its planned works had not been completed, in-line with general customer service standards, the landlord would be expected to respond proactively with an update. Despite this, there is no evidence to suggest that the landlord took action after the resident’s report. The resident was then required to submit a complaint on 3 October 2022, which also included a complaint about the quality of the tiling works. It is not appropriate that the resident was required to complain about the works to receive an update on the repairs.
  3. Once the resident complained on 3 October 2022, the landlord acted appropriately by investigating her reports. It attended on 5 October 2022, to inspect the works. It identified that the old toilet had been left on site, the boxing in around the pipes had not been completed, and the cistern and tiles did not appear to be straight. It also found numerous issues with the tiling on both the floor and around the doorframe in the bathroom.
  4. The landlord inspected the toilet seat, and explained to the resident that it had fitted a standard size. The resident also complained about splashback from her basin taps while the landlord was onsite. The landlord found that the taps were working as standard. The landlord found that there had been gaps left around the base of the toilet, but stated that this was due to a differing shaped toilet and that the flooring was the resident’s own. The landlord explained that the resident was responsible for her own floor coverings.
  5. The landlord concluded that it would rectify the toilet seat, the cistern, the tiling and complete the boxing in for the pipes. It explained that the other aspects raised, such as the taps, had been fitted in-line with service standards. It also explained that its repair policy stated that the resident was responsible for her own floor coverings. This is in line with policies laid out above, and was appropriate, as the landlord had sent a qualified operative to inspect the issues, who had assessed them against the landlord’s policies and procedures.
  6. The landlord acted appropriately by attending on 19 October 2022, which was within the 20 day repair timescale stated above. The landlord needed a further part which was non-standard and so rebooked to attend on 17 November 2022. The landlord has explained that this was its earliest appointment available, as the works required a skilled multi-trade operative for the various jobs.
  7. A delay is not always a failing if the landlord has a legitimate reason for the time taken. In-line with general customer service standards, the landlord would still be expected to communicate with the resident, and to continue to manage her repairs. In this case, the landlord has explained that it was minimising visits by using a multi-skilled operative to complete all of the jobs. It needed to work around operative availability, and had also ordered an additional part. The landlord was proactive in rebooking the repair and did communicate with the resident. Therefore, this additional delay is reasonable in the circumstances.
  8. The landlord acted appropriately in its first complaint responses by identifying that it had failed to initially complete the bathroom and toilet works to a good standard. It acknowledged the inconvenience this would have caused to the resident, and apologised for its errors. The landlord also explained which works would be undertaken. It stated that it would address the errors with the relevant teams, and ensure that there was not a repeat of the same issues. In its final response, the landlord offered the resident £250 compensation.
  9. It was appropriate of the landlord to have offered the resident compensation, to acknowledge the inconvenience that the poor quality of works would have caused. However, on its visit on 17 November 2022, the landlord did not complete the works to the resident’s bathroom, leaving the tiling incomplete and fitting an incorrect toilet seat once again. The landlord has explained that the resident’s tiles had been discontinued, and so it was struggling to find matching replacements for the tiling work. It has also stipulated that toilet seats are the resident’s responsibility.
  10. Although the landlord’s repair policy does state that toilet seats are the resident’s responsibility, the landlord had agreed to fit the correct size seat in its complaint response. Additionally, the landlord had also assured the resident that it would rip out the tiles and relay them. In line with this Service’s complaint handling code, the landlord is expected to follow through with any remedy offered in its response to completion.
  11. The toilet seat was finally replaced with the correct size on 23 June 2023, with the tiling work completed on 28 June 2023. This was nine months after the resident’s original complaint. Despite the landlord’s explanation regarding the tiling, this is not a reasonable length of time for the works to have been outstanding. There is no evidence to suggest that the landlord was continuing to manage the resident’s repairs, or that it was continuing to communicate with her. This is a further failing in the circumstances.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of bathroom repairs, along with the quality of those repairs.

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £300 compensation, in recognition of its continued failure to rectify her repairs. This is in addition to the £250 compensation offered in its complaint response.
  2. Evidence of compliance with the above order must be sent to this Service within the same four week period.