Leeds City Council (202419949)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202419949 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
Leeds City Council |
|
Landlord type |
Local Authority / ALMO or TMO |
|
Occupancy |
Secure Tenancy |
|
Date |
6 January 2026 |
Background
- The resident lives in a flat. The resident made a report to the landlord about a leak in the roof which damaged one of her bedroom ceilings. The landlord sent out a contractor in December 2023, but no action was taken following this. The resident formally complained in April 2024, but the work was not completed until October 2024. The landlord apologised and paid compensation, but the resident remained unhappy.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
- Repairs to the bedroom ceiling.
- The complaint.
Our decision (determination)
- There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the repairs to the bedroom ceiling.
- There was reasonable redress in the handling of the resident’s complaint.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
Summary of reasons
Handling of the repairs to the bedroom ceiling.
- The landlord acknowledged a repair was needed in December 2023 but there was a delay in the job commencing. The resident then chased this further, and the repair was completed on 10 October 2024 (10 months in total). The landlord acknowledged the delay and offered compensation, but it was not proportionate.
Complaint Handling
- The Stage 2 escalation was acknowledged 2 days late, and the final response was sent 3 working days late. There was also no follow up as promised from the Stage 1 response. The landlord offered compensation for time and trouble, which is proportionate.
Putting things right
Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.
Orders
Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.
|
Order |
What the landlord must do |
Due date |
|
1 |
Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure:
|
No later than 03 February 2026 |
|
2 |
Compensation Order The landlord must pay the resident a total of £300 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused, and time and trouble caused by the delays in handling of the repairs to the bedroom ceiling. The landlord can deduct £50 as offered in its formal response from the above figure if this has already been paid. If not, the full £300 must be paid directly to the resident. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. |
No later than 03 February 2026 |
Recommendations
Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.
|
Our recommendations |
|
The landlord should review its record keeping processes, to make sure that its contractors record clear and adequate details of the outcome of all repairs appointments and follow up work, and that all records are reviewed and acted upon in a timely manner.
|
|
The landlord should review its staff training on communication with residents to ensure that when a repair job is agreed, the resident is kept informed of the progress and any actions from stage 1 and stage 2 responses are acted upon in a timely manner.
|
|
The landlord must pay the £50 compensation offered in relation to its complaints handling, if it has not done so already. |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
11 December 2023 |
The resident reported a leak from the roof which came into her bedroom and damaged the ceiling in this room. The landlord stated that a job was raised and sent to contractors, but no work was done as they had to serve a Section 20 to leaseholders, which meant there was a delay. Despite this, no work commenced until after the resident raised a complaint. |
|
18 April 2024 |
A stage 1 complaint was raised by the resident, and a further job was raised. Work was meant to be completed by July 2024, but this did not take place. |
|
18 April 2024 |
Stage 1 complaint acknowledged by landlord. |
|
2 May 2024 |
The landlord issued its stage 1 response, which included the following:
|
|
4 September 2024 |
The resident escalated her complaint to Stage 2. She remained unhappy that the repair had still not been completed. There is no evidence of what the escalation request entailed but there is an acknowledgment from the landlord on 13 September 2024, confirming they have received contact from the resident on 4 September 2024 asking to escalate the complaint. The landlord subsequently informed us that the resident raised her concerns when someone from the council visited her property and then this was escalated to stage 2. |
|
13 September 2024 |
Stage 2 Escalation request acknowledged by landlord. |
|
8 October 2024 |
The landlord issued its stage 2 response, which included the following:
|
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident remained unhappy and asked us to investigate as at that time, the repair job was still outstanding. She was unhappy with the delays and wanted the repair to be completed. The repairs reports show the work was completed on 10 October 2024. |
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.
|
Complaint |
Repair to the bedroom ceiling |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
What we did not investigate
- The resident has raised further issues with the landlord regarding a window repair, but this has not been brought to our service to investigate or exhausted the landlord’s complaint process. We have no power to investigate complaints which the landlord has not had the chance to put right first. Therefore, we have not investigated this issue.
What we did investigate
- On 11 December 2023 the resident reported a leak from the roof which had damaged her bedroom ceiling. According to its repairing obligations, the landlord has a duty to keep the structure and exterior of the property in good repair. There is no dispute about the repair being the council’s responsibility.
- The repair history shows that the leak repair was completed but doesn’t say when this was or what was done to repair the leak. It is also not evident the actions taken were communicated to the resident at this time.
- It is not evident that there was any further action taken until 11 March 2024. The repair report from this time stated that the leak maybe coming from the attic. However, it also noted that the job was no longer required as the resident believed the leak was from a radiator. It is not clear if any further action was subsequently discussed.
- On 18 April 2024, the resident raised a complaint as the repair was still outstanding. A stage 1 resolution was issued on 2 May 2024 which confirmed that that there was a delay as the landlord had to serve a Section 20 to leaseholders. While it can be reasonable for this process to cause a delay, the landlord should ensure it keeps any impacted residents informed throughout. It is not evident this occurred.
- The landlord confirmed that approval was given, and work is due to go ahead, and the landlord would let the resident know when the work will commence. The landlord also stated that they will follow up with the resident on 8 May 2024 to confirm if the repair has been completed. While it was appropriate for the landlord to reassure the resident of updates going forward, there is no evidence to suggest any further contact was made by the landlord updating the resident and no further work was completed. It would be expected that the landlord keeps accurate and up to date repair history to ensure clarity and to provide timely updates to the resident and act upon actions it has promised from its resolution. Its failure to do so caused further distress to the resident.
- After reviewing the landlord’s repair history notes, there is a note on 27 August 2024 which states “leak has been repaired twice previously but still continues to be an issue. Now causing damage to one of our bedroom ceilings. The leak must be substantial as it has come through a suspended ceiling, filled with insulation and then caused damage to our bedroom ceiling.” Then a further side note which states “This repair is at stage 2, there is no roof leak, Marchers attended and no work required. Plastering work is outstanding which will be picked up on the stage 2”. This leads to confusion around the root cause of the leak as it was initially stated there was a roof leak but then it was confirmed there was not a leak, and subsequently the job was cancelled from the notes. This is most likely the reason as to why the job was not completed. The landlord should’ve confirmed with the resident if she still had the issue after the contractors made that report then they would’ve known the issue still persisted and needed a repair. This could have avoided continued impact on the resident.
- The resident then escalated her complaint on 4 September 2024, and the landlord went on to confirm it spoke with resident on 19 September 2024. However, there is no evidence on file of this conversation. This represents a failure to keep all contact records with the resident, which may have impacted on its complaint investigation and the ability for this service to assess its actions.
- The landlord acknowledged that there was a delay due to a breakdown in communication and apologised for this. While this showed empathy and understanding of the customer’s concerns, it did not explain how the breakdown had occurred, or how it would improve its service going forward.
- The landlord then went on to confirm that a plasterer did attend in May 2024, but the repair was never carried out. No evidence was provided as to why this was not carried out. We would expect the landlord to provide the resident with a valid reason for works not being completed. Following this, a surveyor attended on 20 September 2024 with a further appointment on 27 September 2024. During this appointment the plasterer stated he would need more time, so a further appointment was made for 10 October 2024.
- As the works were agreed we would expect this work to be completed in a reasonable amount of time and in line with the landlord’s repairs policy of 60 working days. As there were leaseholders in the block of flats, the landlord correctly needed to serve a Section 20 to the relevant leaseholders. The landlord confirmed that approval had been given in its stage 1 response. Therefore the 60 days would commence from this date (2 May 2024). The job from the repair notes shows that the repair was eventually completed on 10 October 2024 which is 5 months after approval was granted and some 10 months after the initial report. This is not in line with the landlord’s own repair policy. This extended period of delay caused the resident ongoing distress and inconvenience.
- The landlord acknowledged in its stage 2 response that there was a breakdown in communication and apologised for this. The landlord offered £50 for the delays in the repair, but this was not proportionate for the length of time the repair took to complete.
- Our remedies guidance states that “the landlord may have made an offer of compensation, but it does not quite reflect the detriment to the resident and/or is not proportionate to the failings identified by our own investigation”. This issue caused the resident continuous distress, inconvenience and time spent chasing the matter.
- The landlord is therefore, ordered to apologise and pay a total of £300 for the delays in this repair being completed, as this should be classed as maladministration to recognise the distress and inconvenience the resident experienced over a prolonged period of time, and the time and trouble she took to pursue the issue and for waiting for further surveyors to visit her property. This is made up of the £50 it previously offered, plus £250 additional compensation. This sum is in line with our remedies guidance where it states a resident has been adversely affected by the landlord’s failure and the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation.
- We also recommend the landlord review its record keeping processes, to make sure that its contractors record clear and adequate details of the outcome of all repair’s appointments and follow up work, and that all records are reviewed and acted upon in a timely manner.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
Reasonable redress |
- The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). The landlord’s complaint policy states that a stage 1 response will be issued within 10 working days and a stage 2 response will be issued within 20 working days.
- The landlord complied with the stage 1 timeframes by acknowledging and responding to the resident’s 18 April 2024 complaint on 18 April 2024 and 2 May 2024 respectively. However, there were delays in acknowledging the escalation and providing the stage 2 response.
- The resident escalated her complaint on 4 September 2024 and there was an acknowledgment sent by the landlord on 13 September 2024, which was 2 days late. The Stage 2 response was sent 23 days after the initial escalation, which meant it was 3 days late. This is most likely because the landlord believes the escalation was received on 11 September 2024, but it is clear from an email from the landlord to the resident on 13 September 2024, that they confirmed contact was made on 4 September 2024 regarding the stage 1 complaint, so there seems to be a discrepancy here. While this is a minor delay, the landlord nevertheless should adhere to its own complaints policy and with the Code and to keep accurate records of the timeline of the complaints process.
- The landlord clearly informed the resident in the Stage 1 response that the works were to be commenced and a follow up would be provided on 8 May 2024, but there is no evidence of this follow up with the resident. This would fall under complaint handling as we would expect the landlord to act upon any actions stated in either stage of the responses to avoid further escalation. This caused the resident even further distress and inconvenience due to the poor service.
- The landlord offered £50 for the time and trouble in pursuing the complaint. This was proportionate because although there were delays in the responses to the resident, these were minor delays and wouldn’t have impacted the outcome significantly. The landlord apologised and acknowledged there was a breakdown of communication which led to delays, and actions from the stage 1 response were not acted upon. This sum is in line with the amount suggested in our remedies guidance which states: “There was a minor failure by the LL in the service it provided, and it did not appropriately acknowledge these and/or fully put them right”. The £50 offered accurately recognises the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s handling of the complaint.
- We recommend that the landlord pays the £50 compensation offered in the FRL for time and trouble caused, if it has not done so already.
- We also recommend that the landlord reviews its staff training on communication with residents to ensure that when a repair job is agreed, the resident is kept informed of the progress and any actions from Stage 1 and Stage 2 responses are acted upon in a timely manner.
Learning
Knowledge information management (record keeping)
- The landlord did not have sufficient clear repair notes clearly explaining the events that took place and the reasons behind this. It is reminded of the need to keep full, accurate, sufficiently detailed, and accessible records and act upon reports from contractors in a timely manner and records should not contradict one another.
Communication
- The landlord’s communication with the resident about the repair was poor. It did not provide timely updates, and the resident had to chase progress and make a complaint before the landlord organised the repair, which went beyond agreed timescales. The landlord is reminded to ensure that they address all concerns raised by the resident and act upon agreed actions from their responses to the resident.