Wandle Housing Association Limited (202230626)

A blue and grey text

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202230626

Wandle Housing Association Limited

29 February 2024

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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s property including damp and mould, repairs to the windows and doors, and replacement of the bathroom extractor fan.

Background

The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord. The resident shares the flat with another family member and her two young children, one of whom is registered disabled. The landlord is aware that one of the resident’s children is disabled.
New windows were installed in the resident’s property on 7 January 2020.
On 20 January 2023, the resident complained to the landlord. She said:
1. There was an ongoing issue with damp and mould in her front room, both bedrooms, and the bathroom. She said that the landlord had sent its operative to wipe down the mould on several occasions only for the mould to return within days.
2. She had been told that “mould is to be expected and wiping it down was the only action possible”. The damp and mould had led to rotting windowsills, damaged skirting boards and peeling wallpaper. It had also damaged furniture, clothes, and shoes.
3. The new windows in the property had broken within a couple of months of being installed, making it very difficult for her to ventilate her home. She said the broken windows were a fire and security risk.
4. She had also reported that doors in the property were not opening properly.
5. She asked the landlord to consider a tenancy transfer. She said her family were suffering from breathing problems and depression due to the repair issues and she had started legal action.
The landlord issued it stage 1 complaint response on 26 January 2023. It said that it had not been able to find any jobs raised in relation to damp and mould. It said it had called the resident to arrange an appointment to inspect the property, but she said she wanted to speak to her solicitor first. It had therefore cancelled the job. It had raised the issue of the broken windows with its major works department which would look into this issue further.
On 9 February 2023, the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure. She said the landlord had booked an appointment for 6 February 2023, to address the mould and repair the windows, however no-one had attended.
The landlord called the resident on 13 March 2023, to discuss her complaint. During this phone call, the resident told the landlord she was worried her property was overcrowded. It issued its stage 2 complaint response the same day. It said its repairs team would contact the resident by 17 March 2023 to carry out an inspection of the property. It said that it had procedures in place to deal with overcrowding and asked the resident to contact its neighbourhood team for advice and guidance.
On 18 March 2023, the resident contacted the landlord’s neighbourhood team to reiterate her concerns about overcrowding and the repairs needed to her home. She told the landlord she was pregnant.
On 24 April 2023, the resident contacted the landlord again. She said that on 14 March 2023 a surveyor had attended the property, but she had heard nothing further, and no repairs had taken place. She had called the landlord twice and had also emailed to find out when the repairs would be carried out. On 6 May 2023, she contacted the landlord again as she had still not had contact from it about the repairs.
On 10 May 2023, the landlord raised a works order to replace the extractor fan in the bathroom, remove tiles round the bath, wash off mould, regrout and replace sealant, replace all missing or broken window handles, and install a trickle vent in the bedroom window. It wrote to the resident to book these repairs for 2 June 2023. However, its records dated 4 August 2023, show that these repairs remained outstanding. Its records also noted a broken radiator in the children’s bedroom which may have been contributing to the damp and mould in the property.
The landlord’s contractors’ repair log of 4 December 2023, states that the bathroom door was replaced a couple of months previously, but that the lock was not fitted correctly, and this had resulted in the door being damaged. The landlord raised works to ease and adjust the door.
On 12 February 2024, the resident told the Service that the landlord had not carried out any treatment of the damp and mould in her property. It had not repaired the radiator in her children’s bedroom, it had not replaced the bathroom extractor fan and had not installed trickle vents in her windows. She said it had replaced the window handles; however, these are still stiff and each time she tries to open the windows to ventilate the property, the opening mechanisms feel as if they are at risk of breaking.
The landlord told the Service on 16 February 2024, that although its records showed the repairs as being complete, the work had not in fact been carried out. It said it had booked a damp and mould survey but that the damp and mould contractor had not gained access when it attended the resident’s property. The landlord said that it arranged for the windows manufacturer to check the trickle vents and window handles on 19 February 2024.

Assessment

Scope of investigation:

The resident has reported multiple repairs to the landlord since the start of her tenancy including the condition of the floor, repairs to a kitchen cabinet, repairs to a heating thermostat, the replacement of the bath, a broken fence in the back garden, a leak from her toilet, and a repair to a communal door. As these repairs were not progressed through the landlord’s complaint procedure, these issues have not been considered in this assessment.
This is because the Ombudsman is not able to consider complaints that are made prior to having exhausted a landlord’s complaint procedure. This is so that landlords have the opportunity to respond to complaints and resolve issues before the Ombudsman becomes formally involved. If the resident wishes to pursue the repairs listed above further, she can complain to the landlord. She may be able to refer her complaint to the Ombudsman once it has exhausted the landlord’s complaints process.
The resident has mentioned in her complaint that her health and her family’s health was affected by the landlord’s handling of the repairs. The Service does not doubt the resident’s comments about her family’s health (and it is accepted that damp and mould can have a negative impact on health). However, it is beyond the Ombudsman’s remit to consider whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions or inaction and her family’s health. The Service can consider any distress and inconvenience caused by any errors by the landlord as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her family’s health.

Policies and procedures

Under the terms of the resident’s tenancy agreement, the landlord has a responsibility to maintain the structure and outside of the resident’s property.
The landlord’s repairs policy states that its repair obligations include windows and doors as well as extractor fans in bathrooms. The policy states that the timescale for completing routine repairs is 28 working days. The policy also states that where the landlord is aware of disabilities, it will consider prioritising the repairs.
The Ombudsman’s complaint handling code (the Code), published on our website, sets out our expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law, and good practice where appropriate.

The landlord’s handling of the repairs

In her stage 1 complaint, the resident asked the landlord to consider a housing transfer due to the repairs she had reported to it. The landlord did not respond to this complaint point in its stage 1 response. Landlords have no obligation to move residents who have reported repairs except in cases where a property has been deemed to be uninhabitable by a surveyor or a local authority environmental health officer. However, the Ombudsman’s complaint handling code, states that the landlord must address all points raised in a complaint. The landlord should have responded to this aspect of the resident’s complaint. The fact that it did not do so was a failing which would have been frustrating for the resident as she was left without an answer to this part of her complaint.
In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord said it had not been able to find any jobs raised in relation to damp and mould. The resident has told the Service that she had reported damp and mould to the landlord multiple times since moving into the property. The Service does not doubt the resident’s word; however, it has not seen evidence that she reported damp and mould to the landlord in the 12 months prior to her stage 1 complaint of January 2023. It was reasonable therefore for the landlord to advise the resident that it could not raise works to repair issues that had not been reported to it.
It was appropriate that in response to the resident’s stage 1 complaint, the landlord said it would arrange an inspection of her property to look at what repairs were needed to address the issues she had raised. It said that the resident wanted to speak to her solicitor before allowing it to inspect the property. The landlord acted reasonably in putting the inspection on hold temporarily as the resident had asked it to. However, once the resident had agreed that it could carry out the repairs, the landlord should have attended to the repairs in the resident’s property as a priority, in line with its repairs policy, as it was aware that one of her children was disabled. The fact that it did not do so will have caused the resident considerable distress and inconvenience.
The resident raised concerns about the doors in the property in her stage 1 complaint and this issue was not addressed by the landlord in either its stage 1 or stage 2 complaint responses. As noted above, the landlord’s contractor repaired the bathroom door in December 2023. However, the Service has not seen evidence that the landlord inspected any of the other doors in the property and if it did, whether it identified any repairs. The landlord is ordered to inspect all the internal and external doors to the property, to ensure that these are all working as they should and to remedy any identified issues.
In her stage 1 complaint, the resident told the landlord that the reoccurring damp and mould in the property, was causing damage to her furniture as well as clothes and shoes. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to refer the resident to its liability insurer (if it has one), to establish whether it had any liability for damage in this case. The resident also complained that the damp in her property was affecting her health. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to look at whether it could take any steps to support the resident and/or refer her to other agencies who may be able to provide support. It would also have been appropriate for the landlord to advise her that she could pursue a personal injury claim with its liability insurer should she wish to do so for damage to her health. The landlord should pass on its insurer’s details to the resident now so she can make a claim for damage to her belongings and for the effect on her health if she wants to. It is outside the Ombudsman’s remit to comment on the outcome or handling of insurance claims and therefore we could not comment on the actions of the landlord’s liability insurer if a claim is made to it.
In a phone call with the landlord on 13 March 2023, the resident told the landlord she was worried her home was overcrowded. It was appropriate that in its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord advised her to contact its neighbourhood team, as this team would be able to offer her advice as to whether she met the criteria for a move based on overcrowding. The resident contacted the landlord’s neighbourhood team as advised on 18 March 2023. The Service has not been provided with a copy of the landlord’s response. The landlord should provide the resident with a response to her query about overcrowding if it has not already done so.
The landlord’s records show that the landlord and its contractors were not able to gain access to the resident’s property for some pre-booked appointments. The landlord followed good practice in writing to the resident in advance of each appointment, setting out the date and time it would attend. Its records show that it acted appropriately in leaving cards each time it had not been able to access the resident’s home. Whilst there may sometimes be legitimate reasons why residents are not able to grant access, the landlord would not be responsible for any delays to repairs caused by a lack of access.
As noted above, the landlord has told the Service that several repairs were recorded as completed, when in fact these had not been carried out. This was a serious error as it meant the resident was left with outstanding repairs to her home for over a year. The landlord is ordered to review its record keeping procedures in relation to repairs and should set out what action it will take to prevent a re-occurrence of repairs being mistakenly recorded as completed.
The repairs are still outstanding over a year after the resident’s initial complaint of January 2023. The landlord’s delays in completing the repairs are unacceptable particularly given that one of the resident’s children is disabled. The landlord is ordered to undertake a damp and mould survey of the property and should carry out any recommendations made, to remedy any identified causes of the damp and mould. It is ordered to make good any damage caused by the mould to the windowsills, the skirting boards, and to the wallpaper. It is also ordered to repair the radiator in the children’s bedroom and to repair the bathroom extractor fan.
The resident has told the Service that the landlord has not installed trickle vents to the resident’s windows. It has replaced some of the window handles, however the resident has said these are not working properly as the handles are stiff and difficult to use and that the opening mechanism on the windows is at risk of breaking. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s concern that the windows not opening easily represented a fire and security risk. It acted unreasonably in not doing so, as it had an obligation to ensure that the windows open as they should, both to satisfy itself that the windows are compliant with health and safety regulations and to allow the resident to ventilate the property. As noted above, the landlord said that it had arranged for the windows manufacturer to check the trickle vents and window handles on 19 February 2024. The landlord is ordered to provide the Ombudsman with the outcome of this inspection. It is ordered to install trickle vents in the windows where necessary, and to ensure that all the windows open as they should.
The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, published on our website, sets out our approach to compensation. The guidance states that where maladministration has been identified which adversely affected the resident, £100-£600 compensation should be considered. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £600 for its failures in its handling of the repairs.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the repairs to the resident’s property.

Orders and recommendations

Orders:

The landlord is ordered to do the following within 4 weeks of the date of this report, ensuring that the Service is provided with evidence of compliance by the same date:
1. Inspect all internal and external doors in the property and undertake repairs to remedy any identified issues.
2. Undertake a damp and mould survey of the property and carry out any recommendations made in the survey to remedy any identified damp and mould.
3. Make good any damage caused by the mould to the windowsills, the skirting boards and to the wallpaper.
4. Provide the Ombudsman with the outcome of the inspection of the windows, install trickle vents in the windows where necessary, and ensure that all the windows open as they should.
5. Replace the extractor fan in the bathroom.
6. Repair the radiator in the children’s bedroom.
7. Review its record keeping procedures in relation to repairs and set out what action it will take to prevent a re-occurrence of repairs being mistakenly recorded as completed and provide the Service with details of the outcome.
8. Pay the resident £600 compensation for its failings in its handling of the repairs to her property.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the landlord provides the resident with:
1. Details of how to contact its liability insurer (if it has one) so she can make a claim for damage to her belongings and her family’s health if she wishes to do so.
2. A response to her query about overcrowding if it has not already done so.