City of Lincoln Council (202229509)

Back to Top

 

 

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202229509

Lincoln City Council

30 August 2024

 

 

Investigation report amended at review.


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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports about outstanding repairs in her property. 
    2. Reports about damp and mould in her property.
    3. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident holds a secure tenancy. The resident applied for the right to buy (RTB) the property on 2 November 2021.
  2. The resident reported an issue with damp and mould in the bedroom of her property on 9 December 2022. She said this was an issue that had been ongoing for a number of years and asked the landlord to come and inspect the guttering as she felt this may be causing a leak. The landlord raised a job for this on 12 December 2022 with an operative scheduled to inspect the property on 15 December 2022. The operative did not arrive on 15 December 2022, but attended the following day whilst the resident was not in. The resident’s son was in the property at the time allowing an inspection to happen. Upon returning to the property, the resident requested the operative come back to perform an inspection whilst she was present. This occurred on 17 December 2022.
  3. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 19 December 2022. She was unhappy that the landlord’s operative had not turned up on the correct date, and with the advice given by the operative who had initially said the damp and mould was caused by condensation. After returning, the operative had agreed with the resident that there were issues with damp and mould in the property. The resident raised further concerns on 3 January 2023 about not receiving a callback following this visit. She also raised new repair issues including with her loft insulation, windows, radiators, boiler, and her garden. On 19 January 2023 the resident reported a new damp and mould issue, stating that her radiators were not working correctly.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 1 March 2023. It apologised for the issues relating to the appointment to view the damp and mould. It scheduled a visit from an independent surveyor to look at the property on 7 March 2023. It also informed the resident that due to her active RTB application, it would not perform any repairs except for emergency repairs.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process on 6 March 2023. She was unhappy that the landlord had decided not to undertake the repairs. She confirmed that she wanted the repairs to be completed and wanted compensation for the stress, worry and loss of earnings. The resident was unable to provide access to the independent surveyor on 7 March 2023 due to the short notice given to her.
  6. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 4 May 2023. It apologised for the short notice for the damp and mould inspection, arranging a new inspection for 12 May 2023. It also reiterated that whilst the RTB was still ongoing, it would only carry out certain priority repairs.
  7. The resident confirmed to the Ombudsman on 11 May 2023 that she wished for us to consider her complaint. She said that the initial missed appointment had caused her to lose a day of pay. She also said that she wanted the landlord to resolve all of the outstanding repair issues and provide her with compensation for the stress and subsequent health related issues this has caused her. The resident has now withdrawn her RTB application.

Assessment and findings

The scope of this investigation

  1. The resident has said that the damp and mould has had a negative effect on her health. It is beyond the remit of the Ombudsman to decide on whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions and the resident’s ill-health. The resident may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if she considers that her health has been affected by any action or failure by the landlord. While the Ombudsman cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any service failure by the landlord.
  2. The resident mentioned that the repairs had been outstanding for several years. The Ombudsman expects that a complaint is raised within a reasonable timeframe of the event occurring, usually six months. This means that the Ombudsman has not investigated any historical repairs to the property that the resident may have requested. These have been noted for context, however.

The landlord’s handling of reports about outstanding repairs in the property 

  1. On the landlord’s website, it has a ‘Right to Buy Your Home Guide’ issued by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. In this guide, it says that ‘once a Right to Buy application has been submitted there may be certain repairs and maintenance work that a landlord does not need to carry out anymore, as the value is based on the condition of the property on the date of the application’. The landlord’s repairs policy provides a list of the issues which it would consider a priority or emergency repair. These include blocked lavatories; blocked or leaking drains; serious storm, accident, or flood damage to rooms; dangerous structures; and serious electrical faults.
  2. The issues which the resident reported included problems in her garden, ill-fitting windows, a lack of loft insulation, discolouration of the pipes, and the radiators not getting hot enough. In her correspondence with the landlord, she said she would like for the boiler and her windows to be replaced, a neighbour’s tree affecting her garden to be cut down, and the loft properly insulated.
  3. The landlord’s policy, and the standard practice whilst a RTB application is ongoing, would not require the landlord to complete the repairs which the resident had asked it to. The landlord’s decision, and the position it set out in its complaint responses about this, were therefore fair.
  4. The landlord has provided a letter issued to the resident following the Right to Buy application. The letter dated 23 November 2021 clearly sets out that ‘Now you have submitted an application under the Right to Buy, and until your Right to Buy is denied, withdrawn or completed, the Council will only carry out repairs necessary to keep your home wind and watertight and to maintain essential services as required under the Tenants’ Statutory Right to Repair scheme. Your home will not be included in any planned improvement works, such as new kitchens or bathrooms’.
  5. Having considered the evidence, it is clear the landlord set out its new obligations to the resident prior to her raising the outstanding repair issues in January 2023; therefore, the landlord’s decision not to complete repairs was reasonable as the repairs listed by the resident were not considered to be priority or emergency in accordance with its policy.
  6. With everything being considered above, as the landlord had already set out its position in November 2021, this Service considers that there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the issues raised.

The landlord’s handling of reports about damp and mould in the property. 

  1. The landlord’s repair policy splits repairs into three types. Firstly, priority repairs which it says it will complete within 24 hours. Secondly, urgent repairs, which it says it will complete within 3 days. And finally, all other repair requests which it says it will complete within 100 days. It goes on to say that if the repair request is a priority or urgent repair, it ‘will arrange an appointment with the customer at the earliest possible date available, which is suitable for the customer’.
  2. The resident reported damp and mould in her property which she believed to be caused by a leak. The landlord appears to have treated this as an urgent repair, arranging an appointment 3 days after the repair job had been raised. There was a minor delay in the landlord raising the job, caused by internal discussions over the landlord’s obligations due to the ongoing RTB application.
  3. The landlord’s operative was unable to attend the appointment on the day, arriving the following evening. The landlord provided no update to the resident about this. The resident has stated that she had to take a day off for this appointment, resulting in a loss of earnings. The missed appointment by the landlord will inevitably have caused inconvenience.
  4. Following the visit from the operative, the resident was promised a callback the following week about the situation, which the landlord failed to evidence that it performed. It provided no reason for this failure.
  5. The resident raised new issues pertaining to damp and mould on 19 January 2023 when she informed the landlord that her radiators were not working correctly, resulting in the property not getting warm. The landlord arranged a visit on 23 January 2023 but was unable to access the property as the resident was not at home. This job was then cancelled on 24 January 2023. The landlord has not provided any evidence that it contacted the resident to arrange access. Nor did it try to follow up after this appointment. If the landlord decided that it was unwilling to perform this repair due to the ongoing RTB application, the Ombudsman would expect it to clearly communicate this to the resident. There is no evidence it did so.
  6. Following the stage 1 complaint response, the landlord arranged an appointment in March 2023 for an independent surveyor to assess the property to look at the problem. Due to the short notice, the resident was unable to provide access, leading to the visit to be rearranged for 14 March 2023. This appointment does not appear to have been fulfilled.
  7. The landlord arranged another appointment for 12 May 2023 following the stage 2 complaint. It is unclear if this appointment took place on the day it was supposed to. The landlord has provided a surveyor’s report to the Ombudsman dated 6 December 2023.
  8. The landlord’s handling of the reports of damp and mould represented maladministration. It missed several appointments, often failing to communicate with the resident about when these appointments were. This led to uncertainty from the resident about the actions the landlord would be taking and when. This also left the resident in the property with damp and mould. It took the landlord 8 months from the issue first being reported to having a survey completed. This is significantly outside of the 3-day timescale its repair policy states.
  9. For this failing, the landlord should pay the resident £650 compensation. This is for the distress and inconvenience its combined failures have caused the resident. This amount is in line with this Service’s remedies guidance which recommends figures in this range where there was a failure by the landlord which had a significant impact on the resident.
  10. The resident has informed the Ombudsman that the damp and mould issues remain unresolved. The landlord should also contact the resident to perform a survey of the damp and mould throughout the property. The landlord should then, within the timescales set out in its repair policy, outline the exact actions it is going to take in order to combat the damp and mould in the property in line with the survey’s recommendations.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy states that it will provide a response to complaints in 10 working days at stage 1, and in 20 working days at stage 2 of the complaints process. It says that if it is unable to keep to these deadlines it will contact the resident to explain why it needs more time.
  2. In this instance, the landlord failed to keep to these timescales at both stage 1 and stage 2 of the complaints process. It did not provide the resident with any updates or reasons for the delay at stage 1. At stage 2, it provided an update on the delay, however 20 working days had already elapsed by this time.
  3. When acknowledging the complaint at stage 1, the landlord told the resident she would be contacted shortly by a team leader to discuss the complaint. There is no evidence that the landlord followed up on this commitment.
  4. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint represented maladministration. It failed to keep to the timescales specified in its complaints policy at both stage 1 and stage 2 of the complaints process. It also failed to properly keep the resident informed about these delays. For these failings, the landlord should pay the resident £100 compensation. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about outstanding repairs in her property. 
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about damp and mould in her property.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this letter, the landlord should:
    1. Pay the resident £750 compensation consisting of:
      1. £650 for failures in handling the resident’s reports of damp and mould;
      2. £100 for its failures in handling the resident’s complaint.
    2. Perform a survey of the resident’s property and provide the resident with a list of the works it is due to undertake to combat any damp and mould identified in this survey. It should provide timescales for completing this work.
    3. Apologise in writing to the resident for its failings.
    4. Provide evidence to the Ombudsman that it has complied with these orders.