Wakefield And District Housing Limited (202126183)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202126183

Wakefield And District Housing Limited

15 March 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 reports of banging pipe noises and electrical issues within the property.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord at the property, a 2 bed terraced house.
3. The resident reported a banging noise in the property, which she attributed to her neighbours. The landlord inspected the property and stated, in May 2021, that this was a banging pipe noise caused by plumbing issues and not due to activities by her neighbours. It commenced action to try and resolve the problem, informing her in July 2021 that the issue could be emanating from a stop tap on the street. The resident continued to report the noise as vibrations and, from October 2021, she also described it as “surging electric”. The resident continued to be unhappy about the issue and raised a formal complaint with the landlord through contacting this Service in March 2022.
4. In its decision, of 13 April 2022, the landlord explained that the electrical safety check recently carried out showed no issues, so they were unable to uphold this part of the complaint. With respect to the “banging pipes” the landlord noted that this had been an ongoing concern and said that a new job has been logged for a plumber to attend to carry out a further investigation.
5. On 28 April 2022 the complaint was escalated to stage two. The landlord then wrote to the resident on 4 May 2022 saying it would not be progressing the complaint because they could not provide the resolution requested of “resolving the issues with the surging electrics and banging pipes” and it had “done all that can be done re banging pipes and electrical surge”. It also referred to an ongoing process in respect of initiating its unacceptable behaviour protocol. The resident referred the matter to this Service as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s actions.

Assessment and findings

6. The banging pipe noise was raised by the resident in January 2021. Her view was that the neighbours were banging on the pipes, but she requested, at the time, that the landlord take no action. She stated, during the inspection by the landlord in May 2021 that she thought that it was coming from the neighbour running industrial machinery next door. The landlord’s initial attempt to return with a plumber was unsuccessful because the resident would not give access, but when it returned later in the month with an engineer for the annual gas safety check it persuaded the resident to agree to a visit with a plumber. The plumber could not hear the pipe noise but said he would contact the water company which could inspect the stop tap in the street and consider replacing the property’s stop tap. The resident still opined that the noise was caused by people trying to “get at her” but agreed to the work as an attempt to resolve the banging pipes issue.
7. From the foregoing, the landlord demonstrated that it took the resident’s reports seriously and was proactive in and timely in conducting visits, assessing the situation and ensuring that the appropriate operatives attended. Although the initial report was in January 2021, it is reasonable that the landlord took no action at the time in adherence to the resident’s request. Its visit in May 2021 and subsequent efforts to properly diagnose and resolve the issue were timely in the circumstances.
8. In July 2021 the landlord visited the property again in response to constant communications from the resident and confirmed that the water company was being chased to inspect the stop tap. The resident insisted that this was not the source of the problem and that “the vibrations that shake the whole house” mainly emanated from the properties next door. As she stated that this occurred at all times and she was not sure how long it went on for, the landlord suggested that she could keep diary records for a week. The resident refused to do this and also declined its offer of using a noise recording equipment.
9. Although the landlord’s expert operatives had assessed the banging noise as being caused by plumbing issues the evidence indicates that it was willing to investigate the noise. Its suggestions to the resident and the offer to install noise recording equipment were appropriate in this case as these are measures often employed by landlords in cases where residents repeatedly report incidents of disruptive levels of noise.
10. From August 2021 to March 2022 there were several reports from the resident about the banging pipes and vibrations and from October 2021 she also started talking about “surging electric”. During this period the water company changed the stop tap in the street.
11. In its stage one decision on the resident’s formal complaint, the landlord explained that the electrical safety check, only recently carried out, had shown no issues with the electrics. It also explained that it had consulted the electricity supplier to see if there were any possible issues that could cause “surging electrics”. This was in addition to getting them to undertake tidying up work to cables crossing the adjoining property, which the resident had been concerned about. With respect to the “banging pipes” the landlord noted that this had been an ongoing concern and said that a new job has been logged for a plumber to attend to carry out a further investigation.
12. In light of the nature and frequency of the resident’s report, it was appropriate that the landlord made efforts to investigate the possibility that there were electrical faults in the building. Its determination to resolve it is, again, evident in the action it took with respect to tidying up the cables. It utilised the opportunity of the decision on the formal complaint to explain the steps it had taken and to reassure the resident that it intended to take further action to deal with the noisy pipes.
13. The resident immediately responded with a series of abusive texts, some of which were sent late at night to the service manager who had signed off the stage one response. On 28 April 2022, the landlord emailed the resident saying that the service manager understood that the resident wanted the complaint escalated to stage two. This triggered another series of abusive emails from the resident.
14. The landlord wrote to the resident on 4 May 2022 saying it would not be progressing the complaint to stage two because it could not provide the resolution requested of “resolving the issues with the surging electrics and banging pipes” and it had “done all that can be done re banging pipes and electrical surge”. It referred to her continual phone calls, emails, social media posts and text messages which she sent to a number of its employees, containing offensive language and inflammatory statements. It described the impact her numerous contacts and refusal to accept its explanations was having on its resources, which had resulted in it issuing her with a breach of tenancy letter due to her “unacceptable behaviour.” It warned that it was likely to consider action under its Unacceptable Behaviour Protocol.
15. This Service finds that the landlord made every reasonable effort to try to resolve the issue of the banging pipes. It contacted the resident’s neighbours to establish that the other terraced properties did not have the same issue and consulted the water company. The stop valve in the road was changed by the water company and the landlord then changed the internal stop valve and the sure-stop in the property. It must be noted that these actions were taken on the basis of the noise being heard on only one occasion by the landlord’s staff members (in May 2021). The resident’s decision not to keep a diary or use noise recording equipment meant that the landlord was unable to further ascertain the nature and level of the noise.
16. There is no evidence of the “electrical surging” the resident referred to. The landlord has a comprehensive Electrical Safety Policy and Management Framework which includes five yearly Electrical Installation Condition Reports and testing in line with Institute of Engineering and Technology recommendation and sector norms. Both the 2017 and 2022 test results were satisfactory with no recommendations. There were several visits by the landlord and its expert operatives to discuss the issue with the resident, all in a bid to proffer a solution.
17. The resident self identifies as vulnerable and had asked that all males attending the property are accompanied by a female member of staff. The landlord complied with this request. It had a considerable number of interactions with the resident over the years, but she remained generally dissatisfied with the landlord’s service. Overall, this Service concludes that the landlord’s actions were proportionate and considerate in the circumstances.
18. The resident has also expressed her dissatisfaction with the landlord’s customer service but offered no specifics. Thus, this report has made no comment on this aspect of her case. On the other hand, as detailed in preceding paragraphs, there is evidence of abusive communication and behaviour by the resident which led to the landlord issuing her with a formal unacceptable behaviour letter in July 2022. This was in accordance with its Unacceptable Behaviour Protocol and in line with section D of the resident’s tenancy agreement.

Determination

19. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of banging pipe noises and electrical issues within the property.