Haringey London Borough Council (202429943)

Decision
Case ID	202429943
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Haringey London Borough Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Leaseholder
Date	30 April 2026

Background

The resident has experienced drainage blockage and overflow of wastewater in his building, which led to this complaint.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s:
1. Response to the resident’s reports of persistent drainage issues.
2. Complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

We have found that:
1. There was service failure in the landlord’s response to reports of persistent drainage issues.
2. There was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s response to reports of persistent drainage issues

The landlord did not fully or directly address the resident’s complaint about defects in the drainage system causing stagnant water to puddle.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord did not send an acknowledgement to the resident’s complaint or his escalation request. It also delayed in issuing a response at stage 1.

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 specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 28 May 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £125 made up as follows: £75 in recognition of the inconvenience, time and trouble related to its response to the reports of persistent drainage issues. £50 in recognition of the inconvenience, time and trouble related to its delays and lack of acknowledgment in complaint handling. 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 28 May 2026
3	Inspection order The landlord must arrange an inspection of the structure of the drain. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by a qualified surveyor with no prior involvement in the case, and the 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. The landlord must provide the resident and us with a copy of the inspection or survey reports. What the inspection must achieve: The landlord must ensure that the surveyor inspects the structure of the drain to verify if it was working effectively and if it was defective or damaged in any way. The survey report must set out: The most likely causes of the drainage overflow issues. 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.	No later than 11 June 2026
4	Starting the works The landlord must take all steps to ensure any works identified from the inspections (as ordered above) 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.	No later than 25 June 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
3 May 2024	The resident raised a complaint to say: He had reported to the landlord repeatedly over the past 3 to 4 years that the drain behind his and his neighbours’ flats kept being blocked and overflowing with dirty water. Even when the drain was not blocked, there were defects with the drainage system (gaps on the bottom, no drainage cover, loose pipe connection) that caused stagnant puddles around the drain. He asked the landlord to replace the drain and change its design.
28 May 2024	The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response. It explained: It attended to the blockage and found that the drain was blocked by a mix of items like rice, oil, and wipes, which was a misuse of the drainage system. It would distribute a communal letter to all residents in the building to stop this behaviour. It had no plans to alter the design of the drain and believed it would not resolve the problem.
7 June 2024	The resident asked for an escalation of his complaint. He repeated that the drain did not have a cover and there were gaps in the drain that enabled dirty water to keep leaking out, causing a bad smell and attracting flies.
9 July 2024	The landlord issued a stage 2 complaint response. It said: It had found that the issue was caused by misuse of the drainage system. It did not believe altering the drains would resolve the issue. It had issued a communal letter to warn residents against blocking the drain by flushing items like baby wipes. It might carry out major works on the building between 2025 and 2028 but there was no guarantee this would happen. The resident should keep reporting any blockages and it would treat this as a responsive repair.
21 October 2024	The resident referred the matter to our service. He stated the drainage issues have persisted and would like the landlord to change the drainage design.

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 response to reports of persistent drainage issues
Finding	Service failure

The landlord had taken positive steps to address blockages. It sent communal letters to residents once it identified that there were inappropriate items being flushed that caused the drain to block. Records showed that it attended in good time (usually within 3 days) to clear the blockage every time it was reported. Starting from February 2026, it informed us that it was attending regularly every 3 months to clear out any blockage.
However, the landlord has not acknowledged or directly responded to the resident’s complaint about the drain leaking wastewater in the absence of blockages. The resident described that there were gaps around the drain, pipes being loose and a lack of drainage hole cover. He explained there were stagnant puddles which smelled bad and attracted flies. The landlord did not respond to this.
It would have been appropriate for the landlord to investigate this directly and ask a plumber or surveyor to verify whether the drain structure was defective. It did not do so. It remained uncertain whether the drainage structure was intact, and whether this was contributing to the problem of wastewater accumulating.
The landlord has not demonstrated that it thoroughly considered the resident’s reports of drainage defects or taken sufficient action to eliminate the problem. This has caused inconvenience, time and trouble to the resident. Due to this reason, there is service failure in its response to the resident’s reports of persistent and recurring drain overflow
The resident explained to us that as of April 2026, the problem of persistent wastewater on the ground was still occurring. We can also see from the landlord’s evidence that it was regularly attending every 3 months to clear the drains, but the issue has not been resolved. This suggested the landlord might wish to escalate or review its approach to resolve the issue more effectively.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The landlord’s complaints policy provides for a two-stage complaints procedure. At stage 1, it should acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days and then respond to the complaint within 10 working days; at stage 2 (the final stage) it should acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days and then respond within 20 working days. If the landlord requires more time at stage 2 it should contact the resident to explain why and the extension should not exceed 20 working days. These timeframes mirror those set out in the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which member landlords are expected to adhere to.
There was no record of the landlord acknowledging the resident’s complaint at stage 1 or his escalation request at the beginning of stage 2.
The resident raised his complaint on 3 May 2024, and the landlord issued a stage 1 response on 28 May 2024. While it is unclear when the landlord acknowledged his complaint (due to the lack of records), the stage 1 response appears to be delayed. The landlord’s complaint policy states that the landlord should issue a complaint response within 10 working days after the acknowledgment. It did not seem to have done so. There was also no record of the landlord seeking an extension at stage 1.
At stage 2 the landlord appeared to have responded within the timeframe, however as there was no record of it acknowledging his escalation request, this remained uncertain.
While the complaint responses set out clearly what actions the landlord has taken (issuing communal letters and clearing blockages), they did not fully or directly address the resident’s complaint about potential defects in the drainage system.
These delays, lack of acknowledgment and lack of a thorough response to the complaint have caused the resident inconvenience, time and trouble, which the landlord had not acknowledged. We therefore find service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Learning

The reason for finding failing in the landlord’s response to reports of drainage issues was because the landlord did not fully understand his complaint and did not respond to some aspects of it about lack of a cover and persistent puddles. If it could have taken the time to understand the complaint more thoroughly, this could have informed its decision making on what steps to take (for example get a plumber to verify the issues raised) which might have avoided the complaint.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

There was no record of the landlord acknowledging the resident’s complaint or his escalation request. If it had done so, it could have demonstrated compliance with our Complaint Handling Code.