Bromford Flagship LiveWest Limited (202435302)

Decision
Case ID	202435302
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Bromford Flagship Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	12 January 2026

Background

The resident lives in a 3-bedroom mid-terraced house. The resident has complained that the landlord has delayed or failed to complete promised repairs to the property. Some of which she said had been ongoing for over 20 years.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Report of a foul smell from the bathroom drains.
2. Reports of pests in the property and the associated repairs.
3. Roof replacement.
4. Associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

There was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s:
1. Report of a foul smell from the bathroom drains.
2. Reports of pests in the property and associated repairs.
There was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the roof replacement.
There was reasonable redress by the landlord in its handling of the complaint.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

In summary, the Ombudsman found that the landlord:

Foul smell from the bathroom drains

Missed repair timescales and cancelled repairs too soon. It failed to keep accurate records which led to delays. It failed to keep the resident updated which meant she spent considerable time chasing it for updates. It raised the resident’s expectations by promising to complete works but then failed to do so.

Pests in the property and associated repairs

Failed to refer the issue to its contractor in 2021. It delayed in referring the issue to its contractor in September 2023. Its contractor completed 3 treatment visits. The landlord failed to complete the recommended proofing works.

Roof replacement

Failed to provide the resident with an estimated timeframe of when it would complete the works. It failed to keep the resident updated throughout.

Complaint handling

Recognised the failures, apologised, and made an offer of compensation which put things right.

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: The apology is provided by a manager. The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 09 February 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,450 made up as follows: £850 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the handling of the report of a foul smell from the bathroom drains. £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the handling of reports of pests in the property and the associated repairs £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the handling of roof replacement. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 09 February 2026
3	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by an externally appointed independent surveyor with expertise to complete the type of inspection required. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: Inspects the wastewater drainage of the property and produces a written report with photographs. The survey report must set out: Whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards. The most likely cause of the foul smell from the bathroom basin. Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue together with reasons where it is not responsible. A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible). The likely timescales to commence and complete the work. Whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works.	No later than 09 February 2026
4	Starting the works The landlord must take all steps to ensure the any repairs identified as part of its inspection are started no later than the due date. If the landlord cannot start the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date: Why it cannot start the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will start and finish the works; or The steps it has taken to start the works and provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to ensure the works were started by the due date. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot. Whether suitable alternative accommodation is necessary and will be made available to the resident.	No later than 23 February 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We found reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling on the basis it pays the resident the £125 compensation it offered at stage 2. We recommend the landlord pay this in addition to the compensation set out above.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
24 October 2023	The resident complained that the roofer could not complete the work to seal the holes in the roof on 19 October 2023. The pest control contractor had not turned up to the previous visit. The landlord had not replaced the bathroom wastepipes on 23 October 2023.
24 October 2023	The landlord acknowledged the complaint. It said it would contact the resident by 29 October 2023 to discuss the complaint.
9 November 2023	The landlord sent its stage 1 response. It had been unsuccessful in its attempts to discuss the complaint with the resident. It could not provide a full response without speaking to the resident. It would close the case if the resident did not contact it within 5 working days.
3 April 2024	The resident escalated her complaint. She was unhappy with the time it was taking the landlord to complete the repairs. She was unhappy with the complaint process.
2 May 2024	The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response. It accepted there had been a lack of ownership regarding the drains and the pests. It said it would add the proofing works to the upcoming guttering repair. It would inspect the drains again and decide on next steps. It would add the resident’s roof replacement to its planned programme. It apologised and offered £525 compensation for failure to resolve repairs, poor communication, and poor complaint handling.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained dissatisfied and asked us to investigate. As an outcome she wanted the landlord to resolve the issue with the drains. She also wanted the landlord to increase the compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused and for the time spent chasing the landlord for updates.

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	The handling of the report of a foul smell from the bathroom drains.
Finding	Maladministration

The resident has told us she has been affected by the foul smell in her bathroom for over 20 years. As issues become historic, evidence becomes difficult to obtain and authenticate. This investigation will focus on events from 2021 onwards, which the landlord considered during its complaint responses.
On 4 June 2021 the landlord raised a repair to check the drain near the resident’s property. The drainage contractor attended on 12 July 2021 and carried out descaling works. This was within its 90-day target for specialist works. It then completed a CCTV survey to locate the cause of the smell.
We have not seen the CCTV survey or the recommendations made. However, the landlord raised follow-on works on 23 August 2021. The drainage contractor completed the works on 27 August 2021. This was within its 90-day target for specialist works.
The resident raised the issue again on 24 October 2022. The landlord logged a repair with a 90-day target. The landlord should have responded by 22 January 2023. It took no action and cancelled the repair.
The resident contacted the landlord on 21 February 2023 to say she was waiting for it to attend. The landlord raised another repair. There was no requirement for the resident to report the issue again. The landlord’s failure to attend to the October 2022 report delayed matters.
In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord said it attended on 14 March 2023 but it did not record any notes or actions. Landlords should keep a record of all attended appointments. It should record when it attended, what work it completed, and what further action it needed to take, if any. This did not happen.
On 19 September 2023 and 27 September 2023 the resident contacted the landlord for an update on the drains. She said the previous engineer had told her it would replace the pipework from the bathroom sink to outside. As the landlord had not made a record of the 14 March 2023 visit it needed to complete another inspection. It attended on 18 October 2023, which was within its 90-day target. The notes from the job state the resident would not allow the operative access.
The resident was unhappy because she was expecting the landlord to complete works, not inspect again. She felt another inspection meant she was starting the process again which caused further distress and inconvenience for her. The resident was frustrated however it is a condition of her tenancy agreement that she allowed access to the landlord.
A failed or missed appointment is no reason for the landlord not to complete the works. The landlord’s repair policy says it will only close a repair after it has tried to contact the resident on 3 separate occasions. This did not happen in this case.
In February 2024 the landlord arranged to assess the bathroom wastepipes again, which it arranged for 11 February 2024. We have not seen the inspection report for this visit. However, in its stage 2 complaint response the landlord said it changed the wastepipe on the basin and made some further recommendations. The landlord did not take any further action after this date.
The resident has told us the foul smell from the drains is still there.
The landlord acknowledged it had not taken ownership of the issue. It attempted to put things right by apologising and offering compensation of £300. This was for its failure to resolve the issues between June 2023 and June 2024. It also said it would send its most experienced staff to assess the issue again and decide on next steps. This does not recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
In this case, the issues were outstanding from at least November 2022 until at least May 2024. The landlord missed repair timescales and cancelled repairs too soon. It failed to keep accurate records which led to delays. It failed to keep the resident updated which meant she spent considerable time chasing it for updates. It raised the resident’s expectations by promising to complete works but then failed to do so. This leads to a finding of maladministration.
Due to this, we have ordered the landlord to increase the compensation to £850. This follows our guidance for situations where problems went on for a long time and made it hard for the resident to feel comfortable in their home.
We have also ordered the landlord must instruct an independent surveyor to inspect the drains to achieve a lasting and effective resolution.

Complaint	The handling of the report of pests in the property and associated repairs.
Finding	Maladministration

We have not seen the landlord’s pest control policy prior to June 2024 or know if there was one. When a landlord receives a report of a pest infestation, we expect it to inspect promptly and to follow a methodical approach to address the problem. Landlords should seek expert advice and attempt to prevent future infestations as well as treating the existing problem. This should include measures to prevent mice from getting into a building or home.
In March 2021 the resident reported hearing rats in the loft space. She reported the rats were getting in via broken roof tiles, gaps in the soffits, and the guttering. The landlord said it attended on 30 March 2021 to fill the holes. This was within its 90-day repair target. Whilst it was reasonable that the landlord attempted to complete proofing works, there is no evidence that it referred the report to its pest control contractor for investigation or treatment.
In June 2021 it made a major works referral for renewal of the front and rear gutters, soffit boards, and facias due to poor overall condition. We have not seen any evidence to show the landlord approved this work at this time.
On 6 September 2023 the resident reported hearing rats in the loft again. The landlord referred this to its pest control contractor. The contractor attended on 26 September 2023, 10 October 2023, and 24 October 2023. It was right that the landlord referred the issue to its contractor. However, we would not consider 20 days (6 September 2023 to 26 September 2023) to be a reasonable timeframe for reports of this nature.
The contractor placed bait boxes and tracking powder. It did not find any evidence of pests at any of the visits. It recommended the landlord survey the roof and repair any holes.
The landlord raised a job to inspect the roof. It arranged the appointment for 22 November 2023. The landlord cancelled the job. It said it would not complete the job because pest control had not completed 3 visits. This was incorrect because the visits had taken place. This delayed matters.
In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord said it would reschedule the proofing works. It noted the resident had an upcoming repair to replace the guttering. It said it would complete the proofing works at the same time as the guttering repairs to avoid further inconvenience for the resident. The landlord arranged an appointment for the guttering repair for 2 May 2024. This did not go ahead due to the resident being in hospital. The landlord asked the resident to let it know when she was well and it would rearrange.
The landlord replaced the roof around February 2025. The resident has not had any issues with pests in the loft space since.
The landlord attempted to put things right by apologising, agreeing to complete proofing works, and offering compensation of £100. This does not recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
In this case, we cannot be satisfied the landlord referred the issue to its pest control contractor in 2021. It then delayed referring the issue to its contractor in September 2023. Although the contractor completed 3 visits to treat the problem, the landlord failed to complete the recommended proofing works. We have noted the resident did not report any issues with pests after September 2023. The proofing works remained outstanding until the landlord replaced the roof in February 2025. These failures lead to a finding of maladministration.
We have ordered the landlord to increase its compensation to £500. This is in line with our remedies guidance and fairly reflects the distress and inconvenience caused.

Complaint	The handling of the roof replacement.
Finding	Service failure

The resident told us the landlord agreed to replace the roof in late 2023 but this did not happen.
Due to the lack of adequate records we cannot say when the landlord agreed to replace the roof. We also do not know when it said it would start the works and complete the works. However, we know it had agreed to do this work because in its stage 2 complaint response dated 2 May 2024 it said it completed a pre-survey for the roof replacement and considered access issues in November 2023. It said there had been delays in it starting the works due to having to wait for a neighbour to sign forms to allow it to access their garden. When the contractor had attempted to contact the neighbour to arrange access, it was unsuccessful.
The resident disputes this. She has provided an email from the neighbour which states they did not hear from the landlord after the initial conversation with the contractors. We have not seen any evidence from the landlord that it attempted to contact the neighbour again. We also do not have access to the neighbour’s phone or email records. Therefore we are unable to say whether the landlord attempted to contact the neighbour or not. We also do not know what the neighbour’s response was.
The landlord said it surveyed the resident’s roof as the roof contractor was in the area. It decided to replace the roof. The replacement was not based on the age or need to replace the roof. The replacement did not happen when it had the opportunity to do so. Given the roof contractor had left the area the landlord said it had put the work on hold and would add to its planned works programme.
The landlord replaced the roof in February 2025.
We understand that timescales for major works, such as this, can change based on several factors including such things as contractor availability and scope of work required. Therefore, it would be reasonable that a landlord provide an estimated timeframe of when it would complete the works. It should also provide regular updates on progress to residents to ensure it kept residents updated.
In this case, the landlord failed to provide an estimated timeframe to the resident. It then failed to keep her updated throughout. This meant she had to repeatedly chase it for updates. This leads to a finding of service failure.
We have made an order that the landlord pay the resident £100. This is to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its poor communication and failure to keep the resident updated.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case is the 2022 edition (April 2022) for stage 1 and the 2024 edition (April 2024) for stage 2. Our findings are:
1. The landlord has a published complaints policy which complies with the terms of the Code in respect of the definition of a complaint and timescales.
2. The landlord should have acknowledged the resident’s complaint by 31 October 2023. It should have sent its stage 1 response by 14 November 2023. It acknowledged the complaint by 24 October 2023, which was inline with the Code.
3. It sent a stage 1 response on 9 November 2023. It said it could not provide a full response because it had not spoken to the resident. It is positive complaint handling to speak to the resident to discuss the complaint. However, if this is not possible, it should not prevent the landlord from responding within the timescales set out in the Code.
4. If the landlord required additional time to complete its investigation it should have agreed an extension with the resident. This did not happen in this case.
5. The landlord wrote to the resident on 17 November 2023. The landlord said this may have been a formal stage 1 response. It was unable to obtain a copy of this letter as the staff member who sent it was out of the business. The staff member had not saved the letter to a central location. This meant the landlord did not know what it had said in its stage 1 response or what it had agreed to do to put things right.
6. At stage 2 the landlord should have acknowledged the complaint by 11 April 2024 and send its response by 10 May 2024. It acknowledged the complaint over the phone but did not send a written acknowledgement. This was not in line with the Code.
7. It sent its stage 2 complaint response on 2 May 2024, which was on time.
The landlord attempted to put things right by offering £125 compensation for not taking ownership at stage 1, not providing a stage 1 response, and poor communication. Given the failings, the apology made, and the compensation offered, this would lead to a finding of reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord has not provided evidence of all inspection reports or completed works. Some of its repairs records are unclear and do not detail the nature or outcome of the works completed. At times, this has affected our ability to assess its actions.
The landlord’s systems should enable them to keep accurate and accessible records of complaints and responses. This means keeping everything in one central place, not saved on individual computers. The landlord was unable to access its letter to the resident from 17 November 2023 due to a staff member being away from the business. This meant it did not know how it had responded to the resident’s complaint. This indicates a record keeping failing.

Communication

The resident had to repeatedly chase the landlord for updates in relation to the repairs and her complaint. Whilst the landlord responded to some contacts, its communication and updates could have been better. The landlord should ensure it has a strategy in place for keeping residents informed.