Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust (202308330)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202308330

Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust

23 November 2024

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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
1. Draughts fromthe windows and garden door.
2. Condensation and damp in the property.

Background

The resident is a leaseholder of the landlord. The property is a mid-terraced one-bedroom bungalow, and the lease agreement commenced on 18 March 2019.
During March 2022 the resident made a report about her lounge being cold and draughty near the garden door and windows. The landlord arranged for an operative to attend that month to assess the issue. The resident states that the operative agreed the windows were cold and draughty, however did not think anything could be done to improve this. The operative was unable to assist with issues with the door as he was a joiner, and the door was made of metal. The resident was informed that a follow up request would be made.
The resident stated she had to chase the landlord, however she was informed at the time a follow up request had not been made. The landlord arranged for a technical pre inspection on 17 May 2022. The operative found the seals under the door needed to be replaced and put forward this request.
In July 2022, the resident further chased an update to the replacement of the seals and found this had not been raised. Subsequently the landlord raised a job order for the seal on the patio door to be replaced.
The landlord arranged for an operative to attend on 23 August 2022 to do a survey. The operative was unable to source a replacement seal locally and informed the resident this job would be followed up.
On 6 and 9 September 2022 the landlord and building services attended the resident’s property to look at the seals. The resident was informed replacement seals were no longer available on the market. The landlord recommended an alternative seal to be used.
The resident chased on four occasions between September and November 2022 for an update as to when the work could be completed. On 4 Novemberthe landlord assured her the work had been booked in and was due to be completed.
The resident further chased in December 2022 and an operative attended the resident’s property to fit draught excluders to the door.
On 21 December 2022 the resident informed the landlord that there was a leak under the eaves and water in the loft. At the time she informed it she was experiencing condensation and damp within the property. Subsequently the landlord arranged for an operative to attend for a pre-inspection on 4 January 2023. The resident states she was informed by the operative this would be followed up, however she did not hear from the landlord.
On 17 January 2023 the landlord visited the resident’s property. She states at the time she was told the door and windows would not be replaced for at least another 7 years. The landlord was aware of the issues with condensation however she says she was advised she would have to live with the problem.
On 21 January 2023 the landlord arranged for a contractor to visit the property to see what improvements could be made to the windows and doors. Subsequently in February 2023 an operative attended to seal the windows and install draught excluders on the garden door.
The resident raised a complaint on 14 March 2023, about the cold which she experiencing within the property. She also expressed that she had felt dismissed by the landlord. As a resolution she was seeking to be able to use her lounge, feel warm, and open the garden door. She also informed the landlord she was still waiting for a follow up regarding the damp patches in the attic.
The landlord issued its stage one response on 18 April 2023. It acknowledged operatives attended the property in March 2022, however it explained that, due to insufficient information being provided by the surveyor, this resulted in unclear instructions to address the draughts. This resulted in no further works being conducted. The landlord apologised that work had not yet been completed. It agreed to have the loft insulation re-installed. With regards to the windows and door, it stated it found the silicone was not sealed correctly and said it would look at having this replaced. It further explained that it was in the process of finding a suitable door and window representative to assess and source a replacement.
On 1 May 2023 the resident’s complaint was escalated to stage two and the landlord arranged for a visit to investigate her concerns. Subsequently it issued its stage two response on 4 July 2023 and upheld the resident’s complaint. It acknowledged service failures with not following up on commitments and having inappropriate work carried out. The landlord acknowledged that there were times when commitments made to carry out work did not materialise, were ill-judged, or inappropriate work was carried out. It explained that when it visited the resident’s property it tested the seals around the lounge windows and garden door and stated whilst the majority of these were correctly fitted, it found isolated areas were not satisfactory. Following this it had arranged for some alternative seals to be sourced and committed to contacting the resident later to arrange the fitting. The landlord agreed that it had taken longer than expected to resolve the matter and apologised to the resident.
The landlord raised works for the existing seals to be removed and replaced with bubble seal on 10 July 2023. This was completed on 6 September 2023.
The resident has confirmed she is still experiencing cold within her lounge, and has told us the damp patches and condensation have also worsened now that it is winter. She has also told us that, due to the landlord failing to carry out work in the attic, her items kept in there as storage keep getting wet. The landlord has not carried out any further inspections or work since September 2023.

Assessment and findings

The resident’s reports of draughts from the windows and garden door

The landlord’s asset management strategy acknowledges that, despite its properties being purchased on a leasehold basis, the responsibility for repair and replacement both internally and externally in most part is the landlord’s. It further states the landlord as the lessor will ensure:
1. Residents’ homes will meet their needs in respect of lifestyle, mobility etc.
2. Residents’ homes will be well maintained.
3. Residents’ homes will be safe, warm and secure.
4. Homes will be attractive to prospective and existing residents.
5. Asset management and maintenance services will be efficient, effective and offer value for money.
6. Asset management and maintenance services will deliver high levels of resident satisfaction.
7. Costs associated with asset management related services will be affordable within the context of the landlord’s financial plan and budget.
In this instance the resident has had ongoing concerns about the warmth within her lounge since 2022. She states that during the winter months it is draughty, and she is unable to use the lounge comfortably as it is too cold. The evidence shows that she has brought these concerns to the landlord on multiple occasions. She has also expressed dissatisfaction with the level of service which she has received from the landlord and its attempts to fix the issue.
The repairs history shows that in response to the resident’s reports of issues on 3 March 2022, the landlord arranged for an operative to attend the property for a pre inspection on 22 March 2022. In accordance with the landlord’s policy, where it is unable to diagnose the cause of a repair remotely, it will carry out a pre-inspection prior to ordering the work, therefore it was appropriate for the landlord to conduct this inspection.
The operative’s comments stated that the resident wished to have someone who had more knowledge about the type of windows and door to inspect them. The following day the operative requested that a surveyor attend to discuss the issues and also enquired if the windows were due for a replacement. The evidence suggests that, despite this being noted in March, there was a delay in raising the job order and this was not done until two months later in May after the resident chased the landlord. This service has seen no evidence to explain why it took this length of time for the landlord to raise the job order. In the Ombudsman’s view the resident’s request to have a surveyor attend was reasonable and we acknowledge that the landlord also agreed to this. It is not clear why there was such a delay, however we expect landlords to take prompt actions ensuring work orders are made without unnecessary delay. This will help to prevent unnecessary delays and further distress to its residents.
The repairs history shows that during May 2022 the surveyor noted new seals were required for the back door. There is no mention of the windows and what was required to resolve the issues with draughts coming from them. The evidence shows that, throughout the rest of 2022, the landlord arranged visits on seven occasions to inspect the issue and see what could be done to resolve it. These visits were conducted on the following dates:
1. 23 August 2022.
2. 6 September 2022.
3. 9 September 2022.
4. 20 December 2022. (The landlord’s records do not reflect this, however the resident stated an operative attended to fix the garden door and screwed into place ‘off the shelf’ draught excluders).
5. 4 January 2023 – twice.
6. 17 January 2023.
The evidence shows that draught excluders were fitted to the back door and the windows were sealed on 3 February 2023. However, the resident said that this did not resolve the cold issue.
When the resident raised further concerns that her property was still cold during her complaint in March 2023, the landlord proceeded to conduct further inspections which took place throughout 2023. We can see the landlord raised a job on 10 July 2023 to replace the bubble seal and remove existing seal, and this was completed two months later.
We recognise the landlord was making attempts to resolve the matter. We also understand how numerous visits and the matter going unresolved would have frustrated the resident, particularly as she had to chase the landlord for a follow up on some occasions.
In the landlord’s records it stated that it had agreed for a new door to be fitted, however this did not materialise. Subsequently the resident was informed this would not be done and it proceeded to replace the seals instead. Whilst we recognise this would have been frustrating for the resident, it is important to recognise landlord resources are limited and, in such circumstances, landlords are responsible for managing resources appropriately, in this case it was reasonable for the landlord to decide not to replace the door, and to replace the seals as an alternative.
The landlord’s repairs policy states it will use sustainable solutions wherever practical and affordable. However, this service is not satisfied that the landlord’s attempts to resolve the issue by replacing the seals twice was sufficient. Whilst we recognise the landlord had surveys conducted to investigate the matter, the landlord did not do enough to investigate the resident’s concerns and it could have included consideration of a thermal imaging survey. This would have enabled it to clearly understand the cause of the cold and possibly where heat was escaping from. It is advised that the landlord investigates an alternative method to resolve the issues.
Landlords may have to carry out improvements if repairs do not fix an underlying problem. In this instance the landlord has stated that it undertook a stock survey on all its properties on 21 March 2024 and the suggested replacement of windows and doors would be in 2033. This is in line with the landlord’s 35 years standard replacement lifecycle for windows and doors. Whilst we acknowledge this, the landlord’s actions in replacing the seals have not resolved the issue, as the resident has reported that the problem persists. Therefore the landlord should consider exploring alternative solutions.
In the stage one response, the landlord stated that the loft insulation would be re-laid in a satisfactory way. It is understood this was recommended to help with the warmth within the property. There is no further mention of this in its stage two response. This service has reviewed the repairs history and there is no record to show this work had been completed. The resident also informed this service that this had not been done.
We understand that the landlord recognised in its stage two response that there were service failures where it committed to conduct work which did not materialise. A significant amount of time has passed since this response; however, it has failed again to meet its commitments set out in its stage one.
Overall, there were failings in how the landlord handled the resident’s reports. The evidence shows there have been several delays, resulting in the resident having to chase the landlord. The landlord has also failed to follow through on its commitments. Considering the length of time this issue has been ongoing we understand how this caused further distress to the resident.
We can see that the landlord has upheld the complaint and apologised to the resident but it has not offered financial compensation to reflect the impact its service failure had on her.
In the Ombudsman’s opinion, given the delays and inconvenience caused to the resident, the landlord should have considered making an offer of compensation. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it may consider making discretionary compensation payments in instances where:
1. There is poor complaint handling.
2. Failure to complete a service in line with agreed timescales.
3. Financial loss or distress as a result of service failure/ inadequate service.
4. Temporary loss of amenities/facilities in the house, or loss of use of part of the property.
5. Failure to follow policy and procedures.
6. A resident has to spend excessive time and trouble achieving a resolution.
7. Worry, distress or other inconvenience has been caused by the events.
Section 6 of the landlord’s compensation policy provides guidance for the level of compensation awards. This is to compensate for the inconvenience caused by absent or inadequate service. It states in situation where there was absent or inadequate service which took longer than would have been reasonably expected, it awards between £25 and £50. In situations where it did little or nothing to address the situation it awards between £25 and £100.
Considering the length of time it took for the landlord to address the matter and the resulting impact on the resident, the Ombudsman has found maladministration and made an order for compensation.

The resident’s reports of condensation and damp

During a recent conversation with the resident, she told us that she had also been experiencing ongoing issues with damp patches and condensation within her property. She stated that this was in her initial complaint to the landlord however it was not addressed within the formal response. This service has reviewed the resident’s initial complaint dated 14 March 2023. It shows the resident did raise concerns about the large levels of condensation and damp patches within the attic.
We have reviewed the records and can see that the resident raised this report with the landlord on 21 December 2022 and a pre inspection took place on 4 January 2023. The resident states she was informed this would be followed up, however this was not until she chased for an update. There is no record of this being followed up and no record to show the findings of the operative’s visit.
The landlord should keep robust records to provide an audit trail and enable it to understand what steps have been taken and what steps need to happen. In this instance, there was a failure on its part in the form of poor record keeping. As the landlord did not have comprehensive records, the resident had to chase for an update.
During a visit on 30 May 2023, the landlord stated the issue with condensation was caused by the resident’s lifestyle. The resident stated at the time the landlord did not make any enquiries about her lifestyle before determining this was the cause. She disputed that the damp patches and condensation were a result of her lifestyle and explained she would dry clothes outside, when possible, ensured windows were slightly ajar to allow airflow, and would use a dehumidifier. The resident states at the time the landlord said she should be keeping the heating at 23 degrees. This service has not seen any evidence to support the conversation which took place between the resident and the landlord. However, in circumstances where a resident has raised concerns about damp, landlords are expected to investigate the matter to determine the cause of damp. We have not seen that a survey was completed to assess the damp issues within the property and determining the cause as lifestyle without full investigation and considering if a specialist report was needed is not sufficient.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould actively discourages inference or blame on residents for causing damp within their home. In this case, the resident states she made it clear to the landlord that she had made reasonable efforts to control the damp within her home. This service has not seen any evidence to suggest the landlord demonstrated it thoroughly investigated the cause of the damp. Furthermore, the length of time it took for the landlord to follow up on the matter is unreasonable. We understand how this would have caused further distress to the resident.
Most recently the resident has informed this service that the issue remains, and she has continued to experience condensation, damp patches and puddles near the eaves. As this service has found that there was service failings in the landlord’s overall handling of the resident’s reports, we will make an order for the landlord to conduct a thorough survey on the issue, ensuring the cause is determined.
In addition, and in accordance with the landlord’s compensation policy, this service will be ordering the landlord to award the resident a further £100 compensation.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of draughts from the windows and garden door.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of condensation and damp.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

In accordance with its stage one response, the landlord to ensure the loft insulation is re-laid by 31 January 2025.
The landlord to arrange for a full inspection of the property, including temperature checks, checking for draughts, assessment of the condensation and damp. This should be completed by 31 January 2025. On completion it should follow up with the resident and explain its plan of action detailing what steps It will take to resolve the issue.
The landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation in regard to its handling of her reports of draughts from the window and garden door.
The landlord to compensate the resident a further £100 in regard to its handling of her reports of condensation and damp.

Recommendation

To ensure its repairs history records reflect the works carried out within its properties, the landlord should review its approach to record keeping, using the recommendations set out in the Ombudsman’s recent spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (published May 2023).