Red Kite Community Housing Limited (202424529)

Background

1. The resident lives in a 3-bedroom property. She has medical issues and her family use the spare bedrooms to provide additional support when needed. The resident first reported a leak from the roof on 3 January 2023 and explained this was causing damage to the property. She later raised a complaint due to the length of time it had taken the landlord to resolve the leaks and the fact the damage caused had still not been made good.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Roof leaks and repairs to damage caused by them.
   2. The resident’s complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of roof leaks and repairs to damage caused by them.
4. There was a service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

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

Reasons

Handling of roof leaks and repairs to damage caused by them

5. The resident reported wet walls in the property due to a leak from the roof on 3 January 2023. The landlord attended the same day and carried out repairs to a broken tile and sealed a hole in the flashing. Over the next 12 months the resident reported further issues as detailed below.
   1. On 13 January 2023 the resident reported a further leak. The landlord attended on the 20 January 2023, 16 March 2023 and 6 April 2023 to inspect the roof and carry out further repairs.
   2. On the 17 April 2023 the resident reported the roof was still leaking, however an electrician attended in error. Following this the resident contacted the landlord 3 times in May and June 2023 requesting further updates about the repair. The landlord attended on 23 June 2023 to carry out an inspection and identified it needed a tower scaffold. The repairs were then carried out on 24 August 2023.
   3. On 5 December 2023 the resident contacted the landlord again to report the roof was still leaking. The landlord inspected this on 14 December 2023 and carried out repairs on 11 January 2024, which appeared to resolve the issue.
6. The landlord’s repair policy says, “the contractor will respond within 20 working days” and “We aim to complete repairs on the first visit …. additional works may be required but our aim is to ensure completion within the priority time allocated”. The landlord appears to have attended following each report of a leak, however it either misdiagnosed the cause and/or failed to identify another issue. We understand roof leaks can be difficult to trace and diagnose as the leak is not always visible unless there is rainfall. However, we also recognise the impact multiple appointments and recurrences of the issue could have on the resident.
7. On 26 January 2024, the landlord inspected the damage inside the property. It was reasonable for the landlord to wait until the repair was permanent before taking this action. The Technical Officer confirmed repairs and redecoration were needed to a bedroom, the bathroom and kitchen so added the details to the records. However, the landlord did not take this work forward. This resulted in the resident chasing this work in March 2024. The landlord then carried out work to the bathroom in March and May 2024.
8. On 14 May 2024 the contractor informed the landlord that the bedroom radiator needed to be removed. The landlord did not appear to arrange any follow-on work until the resident again chased this up in June and July 2024. The decorating contractor attended in early July 2024 but was still unable to complete the work as the radiator had not been removed as requested. The landlord arranged for a contractor to remove the radiator on 11 July 2024, nearly 2 months after the request was initially raised.
9. The landlord appears to have completed the decoration work to the bedroom on 22 October 2024 with final decoration work to the kitchen completed in January 2025. The landlord did not provide any explanations for these further delays and the time taken to complete the redecoration was excessive.
10. On the 29 July 2024, in its stage 1 response, the landlord apologised for the time taken to resolve the leaks and acknowledged there had been a lack of ownership. It confirmed the radiator had been removed so the contractor could then complete the redecoration work. The landlord identified its service failures and offered £100 compensation for the inconvenience caused by the delays.
11. The resident escalated her complaint as she felt the landlord had taken an extraordinary length of time to complete the work. She said she did not feel the compensation offered was appropriate as there were no resolution to her complaint and the appointment to redecorate the bedroom was at the end of the summer holidays. The resident had previously explained to the landlord that her family use the bedrooms most during the summer to provide additional care, support and companionship. She told the landlord she wanted the bedroom completed urgently and an increased compensation offer.
12. In its stage 2 response dated 6 September 2024, the landlord provided a history of the issues and apologised for the delays. It identified service failures and confirmed there was an unreasonable delay to arrange the removal of a radiator, which then delayed the redecoration works. The landlord offered £200 compensation for the delays and poor communication relating to the roof repair. In addition, it offered £200 for the unreasonable delay and avoidable inconvenience to complete the redecoration. It also confirmed further work to complete the decoration to the bedroom had been arranged.
13. The resident told us the loss of the bedrooms had a severe impact, as her family used them when they provided her with support. While the landlord confirmed that repairs and decoration were needed to the bedroom, it had not stated it was unsafe or unusable during the period.
14. The evidence provided shows the resident made herself available for multiple appointments over a 2-year period, needed to repeatedly request updates about the repairs and on several occasions reminded the landlord that work was still outstanding. The landlord was not proactive and its poor communication with its contractors caused avoidable delays. The resident’s emails and calls to the landlord demonstrated the delays to complete the work caused her a great deal of frustration and inconvenience.
15. When investigating complaints, we look at all the evidence to decide if the landlord followed our dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes. It is positive that the landlord identified its service failings, apologised for these and offered redress, however it did not fully put things right. Its communication with both the resident and its contractors was reactive and needs improvement.
16. The landlord’s compensation procedure allowed it to offer a higher level of compensation, of up to £250. Our remedies guidance recommends compensation of up to £600 when residents have been adversely affected. In this case the landlord failed to fully address the impact the delays and inconvenience had on the resident. The compensation offered was not proportionate to the service failings identified in this report. Therefore, we have found maladministration. We have made orders for the landlord to provide an additional £200 in compensation for the resident’s loss of enjoyment in her home for a prolonged time.

Complaint handling

17. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process which is in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). The landlord acknowledges complaints and escalations within 2 working days, rather than 5 working days as recommended in the code. It follows the Code requirements to provide a stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days and a stage 2 response within 20 working days.
18. The resident called the landlord on 1 July 2024 as she was unhappy with the repairs to the property and the length of time they were taking. The landlord initially dealt with this through its quick resolution case route. The landlord’s complaint policy states a quick resolution case is “An alternative resolution route to our formal complaints where a tenant doesn’t wish to use the formal complaints process”. In an email on 3 July 2024, the resident was clear that she wished to raise a formal complaint. She then sent a further email a week later reenforcing this. While the Code encourages landlords to try to complete early local resolution of complaints, it was inappropriate to continue to do so once the resident made it clear she wished to access its formal complaints process. This was a failing.
19. The resident’s raised her formal complaint on 3 July 2024, therefore the landlord’s acknowledgement on 11 July 2024 was 4 working days outside of the timescale in its feedback policy. The landlord provided a stage 1 response on 29 July 2024 which was again outside the timescales set out in its policy and the Code.
20. The resident escalated her complaint on 1 August 2024, and the landlord acknowledged this the following day. It provided a stage 2 response on 6 September 2024. This was 5 working days outside the timescale set out in its’s feedback policy and the Code. While the delay was unlikely to have caused the resident any detriment, as above, the landlord needs to ensure it provides responses within the timescales set out, or it advises the resident of the need to extend its response date, as the Code requires. We have therefore found service failure and order the landlord to pay £50 in compensation for the failures detailed above.

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.