Birmingham City Council (202329385)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202329385

Birmingham City Council

30 September 2025

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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. Her reports of a roof leak and damaged plaster on ceilings and walls.
2. Her request for an asbestos check.
3. Her reports of damaged cooker points.
4. Her reports of a damaged intercom system inside her flat.

Background

The landlord is a local authority. The property is a 1-bedroom flat on the top floor of a block. The resident has been a secure tenant of the landlord since July 2015. She has reported a number of disabilities to us, including dyslexia and a history of poor mental health. A support worker initially raised this complaint on her behalf. It is unclear from the records if the resident has reported any vulnerabilities to the landlord.

Plaster damage to walls and ceilings and roof leak

On 25 October 2022 the resident reported that the wall and ceiling plaster in the living room and lounge was damaged. The landlord’s contractor attended for repairs in early November 2022 but could not gain access. It left a calling card. There was then no further communication from either party on this matter for about 10 months.
On 11 August 2023 the resident reported there was a roof leak causing ‘the kitchen ceiling to collapse’ which damaged the wall and ceiling plaster. Photos from the resident from that time showed the plaster on the ceiling bulging in places and coming off.
From 11 August to 19 December 2023 the landlord’s records showed it made about 4 to 5 repair appointments, but on each occasion it either could not gain access to the flat or the resident cancelled the appointment ahead of time. The resident stated that on one occasion she waited but no one called or attended.
As of 11 December 2023, the issues with the roof leak and damaged plaster remained outstanding. The resident contacted us on 11 December 2023 for assistance. The landlord conducted repairs on 20 December 2023 to the roof including draining the accumulated water and re-sealing it with waterproof agents. The work was marked complete at the time, however the resident remained dissatisfied and requested further repairs almost immediately. She repeated requests in January 2024.
The resident made a formal complaint on 16 January 2024. The landlord arranged a roof inspection and repair for 18 January 2024 but its records showed the resident cancelled this the day before.
The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response on 2 February 2024. It stated that:
1. Although it had arranged repairs on each occasion when the resident reported an issue, the appointments had been cancelled by the resident herself or it had not been able to gain access to the property.
2. It would re-inspect the property on 5 February 2024 to assess what repairs were needed and then re-book the repairs. It would also assess whether it would be necessary to move the resident to temporary accommodation while the works take place.
3. As a special one-off action it would also try to arrange for the resident to leave her keys with a ‘disclaimer’ in place, so the contractor could proceed with the work without her being present.
The resident asked for an escalation of the complaint stating that the landlord did not call her or leave her voicemails.
The landlord’s records showed it tried to attend again on 16 and 21 February 2024 but could not access the flat due to no keys being left. It was able to re-attend on 4 March 2024 and 4 April 2024, completing repairs to the plaster in the kitchen, bathroom and lounge. It noted the ceilings in other rooms were ‘fine’. It set up a further appointment for 11 April 2024 for investigation of the roof leak which it postponed.
The landlord issued a stage 2 complaint response on 26 April 2024 summarised as follows:
1. It set out the timeline of repairs and confirmed the plaster work had been completed.
2. It had tried to contact the resident on each occasion but had not been successful in reaching her.
3. Its planner would get in touch with her to make an appointment for investigating the roof leak.
The landlord carried out further repairs to the roof in mid-May 2024. Records do not specify what work had been done. The resident has confirmed with us in September 2025 that the roof leak had not recurred since summer 2024, although she considered the plaster in the living room was still damaged.

Asbestos check

The resident reported in mid-October 2023 that she was concerned about the health risks posed by asbestos coming through cracks in the ceilings and floor tiles. The landlord’s records show it tried to access the flat on 20 November 2023 but could not reach the resident by phone call. It was not able to leave a voicemail. The matter was closed on its system without rebooking.
The landlord explained in its stage 1 complaint response that it had not been able to contact the resident nor gain access for the check. At stage 2 it gave the same explanation, and provided a contact number asking the resident to call it and re-book an appointment for asbestos check.

Cooker points

The resident first reported that her cooker points were not working as part of her formal complaint on 16 January 2024. She stated she believed this was due to water damage from the roof leak.
The landlord scheduled a repair appointment for 29 January 2024 which was cancelled by the resident and rearranged for 30 January 2024. On that day the landlord’s contractor reported they could not gain access to the flat. The contractor later attended on 8 February 2024 and completed repairs. The landlord confirmed this at stage 2.
The resident stated to us that as of September 2025, although the cooker points were working, they were rusting and stained in places which she believed to be caused by water damage from the roof leak.

Intercom system

The resident reported to the landlord on 9 and 22 November 2023 that the intercom system to her flat was not working, and she could not let visitors in. She asked the landlord’s contractors to call her on her mobile when they came to her flat. There is no record to show the landlord followed up with repairs to the intercom at the time.
The landlord’s account is that in January 2024 its contractors reported the communal intercom had broken down and calls were not going through. It stated it raised a communal repair at the time.
The resident again reported to the landlord on 6 February 2024 that the intercom system inside her flat was not working and she had not been able to receive calls or release the communal door. The landlord’s records showed that it completed repairs to the intercom system on 15 February 2024.
The landlord referred to this issue briefly in its stage 1 complaint response of 2 February 2024 and said it would carry out repairs in due course. It did not refer to this matter in its stage 2 letter.
As of September 2025 the resident has explained to us the intercom system within her flat remained broken and she was not able to use it.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

This investigation will consider events starting from August 2023. We can see the resident asked for similar repairs to her wall plaster in October 2022. However her initial complaint was made only in January 2024 and did not refer to the events in 2022 which happened more than 12 months ago. We would normally expect residents to raise a complaint with the landlord within 12 months of a matter arising as it would become more difficult to collect evidence and investigate a matter fairly as time passes.
This investigation will consider events up to May 2024 as the landlord carried out further repairs in May 2024 which were part of its commitments in its stage 2 response. These events were directly linked to the resident’s complaint.

Relevant policies and procedures

The landlord’s repairs policy define ‘urgent’ repairs as repairs concerned with protecting the health and safety of the tenant and their family or the security of the property. This policy sets out that the completion period of these repairs should be within 7 working days. It also sets out that it would aim to complete routine repairs within 30 days of these repairs being reported.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak and damaged plaster on ceilings and walls.

It is clear that the parties have experienced considerable difficulty in communicating and coordinating with each other on repair appointments. Records show that each time the resident reported an issue with the plaster or the roof leak, the landlord raised repairs on its system in a timely fashion within its routine repair timeframes. For the roof leak, the landlord initially responded within its urgent repairs timeframe, which was appropriate. However the repairs could not progress due to the resident requesting cancellation or the contractor not being able to gain access.
Although there are delays in resolving the roof leak and also in repairing the wall and ceiling plaster, the landlord’s efforts to make repair appointments and attend to repairs were reasonable. We understand the resident disagreed that contractors had not been able to gain access and believed they might not have called her or attended on the day of the appointment, however there is no evidence to support this view.
This situation happened on multiple occasions, prompting the landlord to eventually seek a solution by asking the resident to leave her keys behind with a ‘disclaimer’ so the contractors could gain access. This showed a flexible and customer-focused approach to problem resolution and was positive to see.
Overall we have not seen evidence to suggest failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of roof leak and damaged plaster. We have therefore made a finding of no maladministration.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for an asbestos check.

The resident requested an asbestos check in October 2023 to which the landlord responded by making an appointment in a timely manner, however the check did not go ahead as planned as the landlord could not gain access. The landlord took no further action on this matter until the resident made a complaint that escalated to stage 2. The landlord then provided a contact number to say the resident should re-book an appointment.
Given the difficulties the parties had experienced up to that point in reaching a mutually agreeable time for the landlord’s contractors to attend, it was reasonable that the landlord asked the resident to call the repairs hotline to book an appointment. We have therefore made a finding of no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for an asbestos check.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damaged cooker points.

The cooker points were repaired within a month of the resident’s report of their damage. The landlord had responded with an appointment within 2 weeks of the resident’s report, however it was not able to gain access at the time. It then rebooked the appointment within 10 days and completed repairs. The overall time it took for the landlord to resolve this matter was within the timeframe of its routine repairs and was reasonable.
We therefore have not found any failings in this aspect of the complaint.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a damaged intercom system.

The resident had drawn the intercom to the landlord’s attention as of early November 2023, on two separate occasions. There is no evidence the landlord took action on this issue. It missed an opportunity to deal with this matter at the time.
After feedback from its contractors, the landlord diagnosed a ‘communal intercom’ issue. It is not clear from the communication records that the resident had mentioned specifically to the landlord that it was the intercom inside her flat that was not working. In any event, the resident was left without a functional intercom system from November 2023 till now. It has limited her ability to monitor who was visiting her and to let in visitors and has caused her distress and inconvenience.
It would have been better practice for the landlord to explain clearly what steps it intended to take and when the resident could expect the repairs to take place in its complaint responses. The landlord did not do so, only stating at stage 1 that its own staff had reported it as a communal issue and it would do repairs in due course. It provided no timescale for resolution, nor did it acknowledge the previous two reports from the resident herself. There is also no evidence to show that, after its contractor carried out repairs in mid-February 2024, it provided any update to the resident.
Although the resident raised the issue again after stage 1 when she requested an escalation, the landlord did not further respond to this issue at stage 2. There is another missed opportunity to discuss the matter with the resident, understand what had gone wrong and take the appropriate steps to resolve the problem. The lack of action from November 2023 till now on this issue has caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
There is no record to show the resident actively pursued answers and chased for repairs after stage 2. However, it was the landlord’s responsibility to resolve the issue once the resident had made the landlord aware of it, which it has failed to reasonably fulfil.
Due to the lack of consideration and follow-up to this issue over an extended period of time (November 2023 till April 2024), we have made a finding of maladministration in how the landlord responded to the resident’s reports of a broken intercom system.
The resident has explained to us the intercom system inside her flat is currently still not working. We have therefore made an order below for the landlord to contact her on this issue and raise repairs as necessary.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there is:
1. No maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak and damaged plaster on ceilings and walls.
2. No maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for an asbestos check.
3. No maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damaged cooker points.
4. Maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a damaged intercom system.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report and acknowledge the impact its handling of the resident’s reports of a damaged intercom system has had on her. It must provide a copy of this letter to this Service.
Within 4 weeks from the date of this report, the landlord is to pay to the resident a sum of £200 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by failing in handling the resident’s reports of a damaged intercom system. This payment must be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears. The landlord must provide evidence of payment to this Service.
Within 4 weeks from the date of this report, the landlord is to contact the resident regarding the intercom system and conduct an inspection of the intercom inside her flat, following which it must complete any necessary repairs. It must write to the resident to provide an update with copy to this Service.

Recommendations

The landlord should update the resident’s records to reflect that she has reported dyslexia and poor mental health, and further contact the resident to confirm any other vulnerabilities she may wish to record.