Peabody Trust (202405119)

Decision
Case ID	202405119
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Peabody Trust
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Shared Ownership
Date	27 January 2026

Background

1. The resident lives in the property with her daughter, who is disabled and vulnerable. The resident said that in March 2023 the property was flooded with dirty water. She said a private plumber advised it was due to the condition of a communal pipe. At this time, the property was owned and managed by a different landlord.
2. The resident reported flooding in the property to the current landlord on 7 January 2024. The current landlord was not responsible for repairs in 2023. There is no evidence it knew about issues with the communal pipe until the flooding in January 2024. This investigation therefore assesses the landlord’s actions and decisions from that point.

What the complaint is about

3. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Reports about communal pipe repairs.
   2. Associated formal complaint.

Our decision (determination)

4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the communal pipe repairs. We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
5. The landlord offered reasonable redress for its complaint handling.

Summary of reasons

6. The landlord completed repairs appropriately but failed in its communication with the resident.
7. There were failures in the landlord’s complaint handling but it offered proportionate compensation.

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	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident directly £450 compensation (less the £250 offered if already paid). This is for the distress and inconvenience caused by its communication failures relating to communal pipe repairs.	No later than 24 February 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
The landlord should pay the resident directly the £275 compensation offered for its complaint handling failures.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
23 January 2024	The resident complained about delays in repairs to a communal pipe that had caused flooding in the property.
1 March 2024	The landlord gave its stage 1 response. It apologised for the time taken for repairs. It offered £275 compensation (£150 for distress and inconvenience, £100 for time and trouble and £25 for delay in complaint handling).
3 July 2024	The resident escalated her complaint. She said she was not receiving any response from the landlord when she asked about the repairs.
14 November 2024	The landlord gave its stage 2 response. It gave details of the repairs completed but apologised for poor communication. It offered a further £250 compensation for its delayed complaint handling.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response.

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 landlord’s handling of communal pipe repairs
Finding	Maladministration

8. On 7 January 2024 the resident reported to the landlord that wastewater was coming through the drains in her bathroom. According to the landlord’s responsive repair policy, this should have been attended as an emergency within 4 hours. A contractor did attend the same day but we are not aware of the exact timings. The resident said it took 4 hours to get through on the phone to report it. If that was the case, the issue was not resolved in a timely manner.
9. On attendance, the contractor cleared the drains in the property. The same issue occurred again on 1 and 2 February 2024, with wastewater entering the bathroom. The contractor attended again as an emergency on both days and cleared the blockage, which was positive. However the resident was understandably frustrated as she had previously been informed it was the condition of the communal pipe causing the issue.
10. Records show the landlord arranged necessary repairs to the communal pipe within its target timescales. According to its policy, programmed repairs should be completed within 60 days. Following the flooding on 7 January 2024, the landlord was informed about the communal pipe. A contractor removed limescale from the pipe on 7 February 2024. A drainage specialist attended on 22 February 2024 and removed debris from the pipe and advised the landlord a CCTV survey was required. This was completed on 7 March 2024.
11. The landlord received the CCTV survey report on 14 March 2024. It noted the communal pipe was defective and a section needed to be replaced to prevent future blockages. It was replaced on 19 March 2024. The landlord was reliant on specialists inspecting the pipe and advising what action needed to be taken. It responded to this appropriately and took repair action within the required timescales.
12. However, the landlord failed to update the resident about the progress of the repairs, which caused her anxiety and frustration. There is evidence of the resident contacting the landlord numerous times without response, so there was a lack of meaningful communication. The resident wanted to be updated at each stage of the repair given the effect it had on the property. Even once the works were complete, the landlord did not inform the resident.
13. In the stage 1 response of March 2024, the landlord offered £250 compensation for distress and inconvenience and time and trouble. At that time, it was proportionate to the failings in communication and the impact on the resident. However, the failure to update and communicate continued past this point. The resident contacted us in May 2024 as the landlord continued to fail to respond to emails. This was unreasonable and unfair.
14. The landlord provided the resident with repair reports in July 2024. It said the delay in communication was due to staff shortages. Had the landlord kept the resident updated and given these reports earlier, it would have eased some worry and uncertainty. It would also have saved the resident additional time and trouble in chasing the landlord and contacting us.
15. The continued failure in communication amounts to maladministration in how the landlord handled the communal pipe repairs. The resident was adversely affected by this as the communal issue directly impacted the property. The prospect of wastewater reappearing in her bathroom was worrying, increased by the potential impact on her disabled daughter.
16. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £450 compensation (less the £250 offered at stage 1 if already paid). This is in line with our remedies guidance for the level of maladministration identified in this case.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

17. The resident made the stage 1 complaint on 16 January 2024 but this went to the previous landlord. The current landlord received the complaint on 23 January 2024, so calculated timescales are from that date.
18. The landlord responded 28 working days after receiving the complaint, outside its 10-day target timescale. Its complaint policy says it can extend the response time if necessary. It informed the resident it needed to do this on 7 February 2024. The policy says the extension should not be more than another 10 days. The response was given a further 17 days later.
19. The £25 compensation offered at this point was reasonable as the delay was minimal. It was in line with our remedies guidance for a minor failure that did not cause permanent impact.
20. The resident escalated the complaint on 1 May 2024. The landlord failed to acknowledge or reply to this. It did not provide its stage 2 response until prompted by us, which was a failure. The resident felt ignored and frustrated. The landlord ultimately gave its stage 2 response on 14 November 2024, 6 months after escalation. This was not in line with its policy which says a response should be given within 20 working days. The delay was unfair on the resident and added to her worry about the substantive issue.
21. The landlord accepted its failure and offered a further £250 compensation for the delay. The total of £275 compensation offered for complaint handling is in line with our remedies guidance for this level of failure. It is proportionate to the adverse effect on the resident. The landlord therefore offered reasonable redress for its complaint handling. It is recommended that the landlord pay this sum, if it has not already done so. The finding of reasonable redress is dependent on this as there were genuine failings identified.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

22. There were sufficient records to allow for this investigation.

Communication

23. There were failures in the landlord’s communication with the resident. It should remember the importance of updating residents about issues that adversely affect them and their property.