Yorkshire Housing Limited (202106011)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202106011

Yorkshire Housing Limited

24 June 2022

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 concerns how the landlord handled repairs following a ceiling in the property collapsing.

Background

2. The resident was an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association, from December 2015 until December 2020. The property is a flat in a communal building.
3. On 31 August 2020, the resident informed the landlord that a ceiling in one of the bedrooms had collapsed due to a water leak. An emergency repair was raised on the landlord’s system and a surveyor attended the property on 2 September 2020. Follow-on work was then raised to undertake an asbestos check and replace the ceiling.
4. On 8 September 2020, the resident contacted the landlord and requested to raise a complaint. She described the elements of the complaint as:
   1. She had informed the landlord of issues with water marks and mould in the property the previous year, but nothing was done.
   2. Her report of the ceiling collapse was not treated as an emergency by the landlord.
   3. She did not feel safe in the property and was concerned for her son’s welfare.
5. The landlord sent a stage one complaint response to the resident on 18 September 2020. It explained that following the report from the resident of the collapsed ceiling, an emergency repair was raised, and the contractor attended the following morning to make safe the ceiling. An asbestos check was also undertaken, and the carpets and ceiling removed.
6. The landlord confirmed that it had raised work orders to repair the ceiling and then paint the bedroom and replace the carpet. It also apologised to the resident for the inconvenience the matter had caused and offered £100 compensation.
7. On 14 December 2020, Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) wrote to the landlord on behalf on the resident and informed it of the resident’s dissatisfaction in how the ceiling repair had been handled and the effect the matter had caused to her family’s health and utility bills. CAB also raised the resident’s concerns that her personal items had been contaminated by asbestos.
8. On receipt of the letter, the landlord escalated the complaint and sent a stage two complaint response to the resident on 29 January 2021. The landlord informed her that:
   1. It was satisfied with how it responded to the report of the roof collapse and to the resident’s complaint.
   2. When it visited the resident on 9 September 2020, it offered a £100 goodwill gesture in recognition of “some small personal items” that had been damaged by the roof collapse. It also offered to replace the carpet and redecorate the bedroom.
   3. Upon being informed by the resident that a laptop had also been damaged by the ceiling collapse, it advised her that she would need to make a claim with its insurer. The landlord provided the resident with the information to make a claim.
   4. It had been informed by the resident that her energy provider had issued a £60 penalty when she left the property. The landlord noted that it was the resident’s decision to terminate the tenancy of the property and it could not be held liable for the penalty.
9. In an email to this Service on 13 December 2021, the resident described the outstanding issues of the complaint as:
   1. She had been accused of lying by the landlord.
   2. She disputed that the landlord was not liable for the ceiling collapse as she had raised concerns about the roof in 2019, which were dismissed by the landlord.
   3. The landlord switched energy providers without her consent, which resulted in a penalty fee being issued by her original energy provider.
10. As a resolution to the complaint the resident requested to receive compensation in recognition of the damage caused to her personal items, the distress and inconvenience the matter had caused, and to reimburse the penalty payment from the energy provider.

Assessment and findings

Relevant policies and procedures

11. The landlord categorises its repairs as follows:
    1. Emergency (attend and make safe within 4 hours, complete repairs within 24 hours). Examples given by the landlord of an emergency repair include “leaking roof if uncontainable”.
    2. Urgent (complete within 7 calendar days). Examples of an urgent repair given by the landlord include “partial loss of electrical power or water supply. Rotten timber flooring or stair tread.”
    3. Routine (complete within 28 calendar days). All other types of repairs are considered routine.
12. The landlord operates a two-stage complaints process. When a complaint is received, the landlord aims to acknowledge the complaint within two working days and provide a response at stage one within ten working days. If the complainant is dissatisfied with the response, they can request an escalation of the complaint to the next stage. The landlord will then undertake a review of the complaint and provide a stage two response within 20 working days. This will be the landlord’s final response to the complaint.
13. The complaints policy also describes the circumstances where the landlord will not open a formal complaint. This, in part, states that the landlord will not open a complaint “where there is a legal solution (e.g., a claim for damages that should be handled as a public liability insurance claim, or matters undergoing court proceedings)”.
14. In regard to compensation, the complaint policy states as follows:
    1. “Compensation is not an automatic outcome from the Complaints and Compliments Policy; however, it may be considered where appropriate and will be applied fairly, honestly, consistently and proportionally. We will consider any quantifiable losses, time, trouble, distress and inconvenience and any payment that will put the customer back in the position that they would have been had the issue not occurred”.

Scope of investigation

15. Paragraph 25(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that the Ombudsman can consider complaints from a person who is or has been in a landlord/tenant relationship with a member landlord. The resident has requested reimbursement of a £60 penalty charge issued by her energy provider when she left the property. In line with paragraph 25(a), this service is unable to consider the actions of the resident’s energy provider as they are not in a landlord/tenant relationship with the resident.
16. In her correspondence with the landlord and this Service, the resident has described the effect the matter has had on her family’s health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments regarding her health and that of her family, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or insurers as a personal injury claim. This is also the same for matters relating to damage to possessions.
17. This is in line with paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, which states that “The Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure”. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident and how the landlord responded.

How the landlord handled repairs following a ceiling in the property collapsing

18. The landlord’s repair logs and system notes state that it was contacted by the resident at 10:21am on 31 August 2020, who informed it that the bedroom ceiling had collapsed. An emergency repair was raised by the landlord. Contractor notes added to the landlord’s system at 13:50pm on 31 August 2020 described what had happened, noted that there was no evidence of a leak, and they had advised the resident to keep the bedroom door closed until the surveyor attended.
19. The notes go on to state that the surveyor arranged for an asbestos check to be undertaken and an emergency repair was raised on 2 September 2020 to remove the collapsed ceiling. On 4 September 2020 routine repairs were raised to replaster, board and skim the ceiling; to renew the insulation and carpet; and to repaint the bedroom walls and ceiling. A routine repair was also raised to inspect the roof once the other work had been completed.
20. The landlord followed its repair policy in responding to the collapsed ceiling. A contractor attended within four hours of the report from the resident and made safe within 24 hours. A further emergency repair was raised to clear the ceiling from the bedroom.
21. The work to repair the ceiling and redecorate the bedroom were raised as routine repairs. This classification was appropriate as once the collapsed ceiling had been cleared and an asbestos check undertaken, there was no evidence that the ceiling posed a risk to the health of the resident or her family, and remedial work could be arranged within the 28-calendar day timeframe for routine repairs.
22. Following discussions with the resident, the landlord offered a £100 goodwill gesture in recognition of some personal items that had been damaged by the ceiling collapse. When the resident requested compensation for further damaged items, notably a laptop, the landlord explained that this would be an insurance matter, providing the resident with the necessary details for its insurer.
23. The resident has disputed the landlord’s denial of liability for the ceiling collapse and stated that she had previously raised concerns in 2019. The landlord’s repairs logs state that a routine repair was raised on 4 December 2019 to inspect the loft for signs of a leak.
24. Contractor notes added on 12 December 2019 state that they were informed by the resident of water marks on the wallpaper, but that they had found no evidence of a leak or dampness. The contractor noted that the next-door neighbour had not reported any issues. Further contractor notes added on 4 February 2020 state that they were unable to gain access to the property, but undertook an external inspection of the property’s roof and did not identify any issues.
25. It is reasonable for the landlord to rely on the advice of appropriately qualified contractors when making a determination on repairs. The landlord explained in its stage two response that as no repairs had been reported relating to a roof leak, it could not be held liable for the damaged items following the collapse of the ceiling.
26. Residents are advised to take out their own contents insurance to cover any damage to their personal possessions due to unforeseen events. This is because the landlord is not responsible for the cost of repairing or replacing residents’ personal possessions in this type of situation.
27. The tenancy agreement makes no mention of home contents in either section 3 (the landlord’s obligations) or section 4 (the tenant’s obligations). However, the landlord’s website does give advice on taking out home contents insurance and, in part, states as follows:
    1. “If you are a tenant who rents, then your landlord may not cover your contents as part of the tenancy agreement. It’s a good idea to consider what a home contents insurance policy would cover you for in order to help you make an informed decision on whether you need one”
28. As there is insufficient evidence to show the landlord was at fault for causing the leak, it was reasonable for it to advise the resident to contact its liability insurer if she considered that it was responsible. Landlords are entitled to have insurance policies to cover the cost of liability claims and the landlord would not be expected to consider a claim for damage to the resident’s possessions outside the insurance process. The Ombudsman cannot investigate the actions of the landlord’s insurer and therefore cannot comment further on the insurance process or the outcome of any insurance claim.
29. The letter sent by CAB on behalf of the resident stated that the resident had experienced an increase in her utility bills as a result of draughts from the bedroom ceiling. This element was not addressed by the landlord in its stage two response.
30. For the landlord to determine if further compensation is warranted in recognition of an increase in energy usage while the ceiling repairs were outstanding, the landlord would first need to be provided with evidence. Therefore, it is recommended that the landlord write to the resident and request evidence that shows an increase in her utility bills during the time period repairs to the ceiling remained outstanding.

Determination

31. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in respect of how the landlord handled repairs following a ceiling in the property collapsing.

Recommendations

32. It is recommended that the landlord write to the resident and request evidence that shows an increase in her utility bills during the time period repairs to the ceiling remained outstanding. Upon receipt of the evidence, it should review its compensation offer and then write back to the resident to inform her of its decision.