Leeds City Council (202413959)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202413959

Leeds City Council

26 September 2025

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 is about the landlord’s handling of a leak and their request for the resident to remove decking for the investigation.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 3-bed house.
3. The resident reported a leak to the landlord on 20 November 2023. The resident also said she was informed by the water board company there was an on-going leak. The landlord arranged for a plumber to attend on 22 November 2023. The plumber was unable to locate the source of the leak during the initial appointment, and an external contractor was contacted to locate the source of the leak which was believed to be underground. The contractor attended the property on 28 November 2023 and believed the source of the leak to be the pipework under the decking in the back garden. The landlord asked the resident to create an opening in the decking to allow it to access and repair the leak. It was identified by the contractor in February 2024 that the area below the decking was not the source of the leak.
4. The resident made a stage 1 complaint to the landlord on 22 March 2024. She told the landlord she was unhappy that she had removed part of her decking to provide its contractors access to an area that was identified as not being the source of the leak. She said she wanted the landlord to repair the decking and also complete other works to the garden area following the leak. This included repairs to a broken gate, clearing debris left behind by the contractors and concrete pooling by the gate.
5. The landlord provided the resident with a stage 1 complaint response on 8 April 2024. It said in its response that it attended the property on 25 March 2024 to identify and discuss the on-going issues since the leak was resolved. It confirmed it had since resolved the issues with the gate, debris and concrete on 26 March 2024. The landlord said it would not be replacing the decking as it was not responsible for this as the resident had installed this.
6. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s complaint response and requested escalation of her complaint on 20 April 2024. She said she was upset the landlord had asked her to remove parts of the decking to resolve the leak when it was later confirmed there were no pipes underneath the decking, meaning she had removed it for no reason. She said she wanted the landlord to replace the decking.
7. The landlord provided the resident with a stage 2 complaint response on 28 May 2024. It said it had reviewed the resident’s escalation request and the events leading up to the complaint being made. The landlord apologised to the resident for the inconvenience caused and offered the resident £100 compensation for the trouble caused. It did not offer to repair or replace the decking in its response.
8. The resident referred her complaint to us on 5 December 2024. She said the landlord had told her it had offered to fit new decking if the resident bought the materials. The resident said the area was a health and safety risk and the decking is rotten. She said she wanted the landlord to replace the decking and increase the compensation offered. She also said she wanted the landlord to accept responsibility for damaging the decking unnecessarily.

Assessment and findings

9. The landlord’s repair policy states that it will aim to complete general repairs within 20 working days. It also states it will aim to attend priority repairs within 3 to 7 days, depending on the severity. It says the landlord is responsible for resolving leaks. This reflects the landlord’s obligations under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
10. The evidence shows the landlord was first made aware of the leak on 20 November 2023. While the resident has said the issue began in June 2023, the Service has not been provided with evidence to confirm this. The landlord raised a work order and a plumber attended the property on 22 November 2023.
11. The plumber was unable to identify the source of the leak and referred the matter to a specialist contractor. The contractor attended on 28 November 2023 and assessed the internal areas of the property to find the source of the leak. It was unable to identify any visible water leak and advised both the landlord and the resident that the leak was likely coming from pipework beneath the rear decking. This was an appropriate first response from the landlord and it acted quickly in arranging for a plumber to attend the property. It was also positive it referred the matter to a specialist contractor when it could not identify the source.
12. Between the date of the landlord being made aware of the leak and the contractor attending, 4 working days had passed. This was in line with its repair policy for these types of repairs and given the impact a leak could have had on the resident, it was an appropriate response overall from the landlord.
13. Between the appointment on 28 November 2023 and 2 January 2024, the evidence provided shows there was no action or works which took place during this period. However, based on repair notes, on 2 January 2024 the contractor asked the resident to make an opening in the decking to allow it access to assess the pipework beneath. This indicates the leak had not been resolved and a considerable amount of time had passed without action taking place. Between these periods, 22 working days had passed which exceeds the landlords repair policy timescale of 7 working days for urgent repairs. It also exceeded its general repair timeframes of 20 working days. While the leak was not one directly impacting the resident’s property internally, the leak was likely was causing additional distress for the resident.
14. The leak was resolved on 1 March 2024. This was 67 days from when the issue was first reported. This was not appropriate. We understand leaks can be complex issues where the source of the leak is not clear, there were periods of time in which the landlord appears to not have been proactive or taken action which has resulted in unnecessary delays in resolving the issue.
15. At some point between 2 January 2024 and 28 February 2024, the contractor identified the source of the leak was not coming from pipework beneath the decking, but from an area close to the water pump itself. The contractor had incorrectly stated the source of the leak was underneath the decking and this has resulted in the resident feeling understandably frustrated that she had removed and damaged sections of her decking when the issue was not in that area.
16. While frustrating for the resident, the contractor has outlined in its communications between themselves and the landlord that based on previous works in which they have completed in the local area, it was not unreasonable for them to assume there was pipework in the rear garden underneath the decking.. As leaks can be complex issues where the source of them is unclear in certain scenarios, it was not unreasonable for it to request the resident provide it access to the area underneath in order to determine the source.
17. It should also be noted that as per the resident’s tenancy agreement, residents are responsible for the repair and maintenance of any improvements, additions, alterations, appliances or materials at the property. Based on this, while understandably a frustrating experience for the resident, the landlord has acted reasonably by stating it would not replace the entirety of the decking which was requested by the resident in her initial complaint.
18. The landlord offered the resident £100 compensation towards the trouble caused. This was an appropriate compensation offer which fairly took into account the trouble caused to the resident based on what had been reported to it.
19. The resident reported further issues in her stage 1 complaint request on 22 March 2024 regarding the garden gate, debris left behind following works in November 2023 and issues with concrete pooling in the garden. The landlord quickly addressed these issues following the reports and evidence shows that its contractor resolved the issues on 26 March 2024.
20. Following the complaint procedure, the landlord has since reasonably offered the resident options to repair and make safe the damaged decking. It contacted her on 2 July 2024 and stated it would supply and fit a 4sqm area of decking to replace the area which had been cut to allow its contractors access. It also gave an alternative option to the resident whereby it said it would provide labour to install an entirely new decking, should the resident provide it with the materials.
21. These were both fair and reasonable offers by the landlord as while it is not directly responsible for the upkeep or repair of an area which the resident has installed themselves, it did acknowledge the frustration and trouble caused by it and its contractors incorrectly identifying the source in the area. It is unclear why the landlord did not provide these options to the resident during the internal complaints procedure, however, as it is not required to have offered these options based on the tenancy agreement, this was a reasonable approach by the landlord.
22. We recommend the landlord contacts the resident following this report to again offer its goodwill gesture of replacing the 4sqm area, or assist in installing the full 16sqm area, provided the materials are supplied by the resident.

Determination

23. In accordance with Paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the landlord has offered reasonable redress in relation to its handling of a leak and their request for the resident to remove decking for the investigation.

Recommendation

24. We recommend the landlord:
    1. Contacts the resident to further offer support by either repairing and replacing the 4sqm area, or, where materials are provided by the resident, assist in installing the full 16sqm area of decking.