Leeds City Council (202324679)

Background

1. The resident has been a secure tenant of a 2-bedroom house since 1999. The resident reported to the landlord that his possessions were damaged while works were carried out by the landlord’s staff in his property.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damaged possessions.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found that:
   1. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damaged possessions.
   2. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Summary of reasons

5. The landlord told the resident to make a claim through its insurers following his report to it that his possessions had been damaged. The landlord subsequently provided the resident with updates on what action was needed to progress the insurance claim in its complaint responses.

Complaint handling

6. The landlord identified it had failed to comply with its policy timescale to reply to the resident’s complaint. It offered £100 compensation which was proportionate to the failings we have identified from our investigation and satisfactorily resolved the complaint.

Putting things right

We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

7. Between 11 April and 13 May 2022, the landlord installed a new kitchen and rewired the resident’s property. During the works some of the resident’s property was put in storage by the landlord’s staff.
8. The resident told the landlord on 26 May 2022 some of his possessions had been damaged while in storage and when the works were carried out at the property. He said he wanted the landlord to pay compensation for the damaged possessions.
9. The landlord’s financial remedies policy states that residents can make public liability claims where the landlord has been negligent and caused damage to their property. The landlord is a local authority and has an insurance team that assesses public liability insurance claims made against it. The policy does not have a timescale for when the landlord should respond to public liability claims.
10. The landlord sent an insurance claim form to the resident on 8 June 2022. The resident completed the form, and the claim was registered with the landlord’s insurance team on 11 August 2022. The resident sent details and photographs of the damaged goods to support his claim. On 11 October 2022 the landlord’s insurance team recorded it had appointed loss adjusters to investigate the resident’s claim. The landlord has not provided any details of what action was taken regarding the insurance claim over the following 8 months.
11. The resident complained to the landlord on 2 June 2023 as he said he there had been no progress on his insurance claim.
12. The loss adjusters emailed the resident on 4 July 2023 and asked when they could visit to assess his insurance claim. The resident replied and said the landlord should address the issue, not loss adjusters. The loss adjusters asked the resident again on 5 July 2023 to arrange an appointment for it to assess his claim. The resident did not arrange the appointment, and the loss adjusters have not visited the resident’s property.
13. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 2 October 2023. It said the insurance claim was referred to loss adjusters as the resident had not provided evidence to support his claim for damaged possessions. The landlord said the loss adjusters had attempted to resolve the matter, but the resident had not let them visit to inspect the items in the claim. The landlord told the resident the claim could not be progressed unless he engaged with the loss adjusters.
14. The resident escalated his complaint on 6 October 2023 and said he had provided photographs of the items that had been damaged.
15. On 17 October 2023 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. The landlord said the resident needed to engage with loss adjustors, or the insurance claim would be dismissed.
16. The landlord has told us the loss adjusters ended their involvement in the claim in August 2024 as the resident had not engaged with their requests. There is no evidence provided to us which shows the decision was communicated with the resident. He has told us he has not had any updates regarding the insurance claim since the landlord’s complaint responses.
17. The evidence shows that the landlord followed its policy process and issued an insurance claim form to the resident shortly after he told it his possessions had been damaged. It was reasonable of the landlord to treat the resident’s request for compensation as a claim against its insurance policy.
18. The landlord’s complaint responses told the resident the claim was at the investigation stage, and it encouraged him to engage with the loss adjusters to enable his claim to progress. The landlord’s complaint responses were appropriate, and they provided the resident with updates on the stage of the claim and what action was required. The evidence shows the landlord acted reasonably in its efforts to signpost and prompt the resident through the requirements needed by its insurance team in order to progress the claim. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damaged possessions.

19. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. Its complaints policy states it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days from when it is raised. It should send its stage 1 complaints response within 10 working days. The landlord should acknowledge escalated complaints within 5 working days and send its stage 2 response within 20 working days.
20. The resident complained to the landlord on 2 June 2023. The landlord did not acknowledge the complaint.
21. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaints response to the resident on 2 October 2023. This was outside of its complaints policy timescale. The landlord apologised and offered £100 compensation for the delayed response.
22. The resident escalated his complaint on 6 October 2023, which was acknowledged by the landlord the same day.
23. On 17 October 2023 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. This was within the timescale permitted by its complaints policy.
24. The evidence shows the landlord failed to acknowledge the resident’s complaint and reply at stage 1 within its policy timescales. The landlord apologised for the delays and the compensation it offered was in line with an amount consistent with our remedies guidance. It fairly reflected the impact caused by the landlord’s failures and was a reasonable offer of redress in the circumstances. As such, this leads to a determination of reasonable redress, in that the landlord attempted to put things right for the resident for its complaint handling failures.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

25. The landlord demonstrated sufficient record keeping in respect of the matters we have investigated in this case.

Communication

26. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaint for several months, and there was no communication regarding the delay. This lack of communication contributed to the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and is reflected in the compensation order above. The landlord should look for opportunities to draw learning from this complaint to inform improved customer service going forward.