Southern Housing (202333548)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202333548

Southern Housing

20 December 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s response to her concerns about the condition of her property at the start of her tenancy.

Background

The landlord is a housing association. The property is a 1-bedroom upper floor flat. The resident is an assured tenant.
Prior to the resident’s tenancy, the landlord carried out a void inspection on 8 February 2023.
The resident viewed the property on 10 July 2023. During the viewing, the landlord noted that some windows had blown panes. It ordered replacement for 11 glass units and 2 handles for the windows on its systems.
The resident signed the tenancy agreement on 14 July 2023 and the tenancy officially started, however, the resident could not immediately gain access to the property as the key code was wrong. On 17 July 2023 she was able to enter the flat and inspected it again. She raised the following issues with the landlord:
1. The windows had missing handles.
2. The tiling in the bath was incomplete despite there being a shower tap.
3. The kitchen cupboards did not have enough storage to support her needs.
She stated a contractor came to inspect the property in response to her call about the window handles and he then called the landlord to find out ‘why the property was not completed to a liveable standard’.
The landlord’s contractor tried to access the property on 24 July 2023 for the window repairs but could not gain access.
On 26 July 2023, the resident raised a complaint about these issues, stating that she was unhappy the landlord had rented the property to her despite it being in an ‘unliveable’ condition. She emphasised that she felt not having enough kitchen cupboard storage would cause food safety issues and the lack of sufficient tiling would cause water ingress. She explained that the events had caused her very significant distress. She considered that she should not be held liable for rent from 14 July 2023 onwards and asked the landlord to either complete the property to a satisfactory standard in good time or put her back on the bidding list for a different property.
The landlord inspected the property again on 1 August 2023 and confirmed that it would conduct repairs on the following:
1. Repair the windows with blown double-glazed units.
2. Fill in the tiling below the bathroom window and around the end of bath, adding 3 rows of tiling to the tap end of the bath and supplying a shower hose and spray.
3. It proposed to replace the kitchen wall unit.
On 14 August 2023 the landlord installed some additional tiling and completed window repairs to the handles and the double-glazed units.
The resident raised further on 29 August 2023 that she felt the windows had not been repaired to a satisfactory standard.
The landlord’s operative further met with the resident on 11 September 2023 to confirm it would install more splashback tiling on 29 September 2023. The landlord also confirmed with the resident that it could potentially replace the 300mm kitchen wall unit with a 400mm one, although this was subject to electric cable testing to ensure there was no electricity running down the area to the side of the current wall unit. It also said it would replace the 600mm base unit with one that is the same size but with a drawer.
The landlord installed new windows on 16 September 2023.
The resident moved into the property on 18 September 2023.
The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 20 September 2023, summarised as below:
1. The landlord was sorry that the resident experienced distress and poor mental health.
2. It had a duty to ensure the properties under its management were inhabitable and safe.
3. It had done repairs to the handles and the double-glazed units on 14 August 2023. It had installed new windows on 16 September 2023. It explained it had not done a void check since 8 February 2023 prior to the start of the tenancy. It had previously offered a windows upgrade to all the other flats in the block and the other residents had their windows replaced, however, the previous tenant in the property did not allow access which was why the windows in the resident’s flat had not had the replacement. The landlord apologised for not communicating this sooner.
4. At the time of the letting, the bathroom lacked full splashback tiles to support a shower. It explained it had installed tiling on 14 August 2023 and would further install splashback tiles to the foot of the bath on 29 September 2023.
5. It had always maximised wall space to accommodate kitchen units if safe to do so. Its operatives had previously reported that adding more units would be a health and safety concern, however, it would look to replace the current 300mm wall unit and replace the 600mm base unit with a unit that had a drawer, and it would do so on 29 September 2023.
6. It offered £155 to the resident in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by not providing correct information about fitting a shower, failing to pass on information regarding window upgrades (previously offered to the rest of the properties in the block), and her time and trouble in pursuing the complaint.
7. It also offered to adjust the resident’s rent from 17 July till 16 September 2023 by £99.11 for each of the affected rooms (4 in total) due to the window issues. This totalled £396.44.
The resident remained dissatisfied with this and raised a further issue on 21 September 2023 about the front door, which she felt was not safe or secure. She asked for the front door to be replaced and stated she had changed the locks. She repeated that the windows were ‘rotten’ and ‘mouldy’ when she moved in and she developed a sinus infection during the viewing. She also stated that she did not feel the compensation offer was enough and would like the landlord to clear her rent account and refund the rent in full from 14 July until 16 September 2023. Alternatively, she would accept the tenancy dates to be amended to reflect that she started the tenancy on 18 September 2023 (when she moved in). She said she would pursue legal action against the landlord.
The landlord replied on the same day to say it had forwarded the front door issues to its surveyor to check if a replacement was needed. It also discussed with her whether moving back the tenancy date on the agreement was in the resident’s interests, as this would mean the compensation offer would be less.
The landlord’s operative attended on 29 September 2023 to install more splashback tiles to the foot of the bath, including sealing. However, they found they could not replace the 300mm wall unit with a larger one, as there were electric cables within the wall that would prevent them doing so safely. They carried on with replacing the 600mm base unit with one that had a drawer. The maintenance surveyor confirmed that the front door rattled in its frame but was safe and secure.
The landlord wrote to the resident on the same day to provide this update. It also offered:
1. A bridging unit over the fridge freezer to create more cupboard space.
2. Easing and adjusting the locks and installing a brush strip to the frame to ease the rattling on the front door.
3. It repeated its compensation offer and asked the resident to send in her acceptance form if she wished to accept.
The resident repeated in her reply that she felt she should not be liable for the rent from 14 July until 16 September 2023 as the windows were mouldy when she moved in, rendering the property unliveable. She also chased for dates of the repairs. There is no record the resident accepted the landlord’s offers for kitchen storage adjustments or the front door adjustments at the time.
The resident further asked for escalation of her complaint in a series of emails from 30 September to 12 October 2023 emphasising that she felt the landlord had acted illegally in letting the property to her in its original condition. She also stated she had to call weekly for updates instead of the landlord taking the initiative and re-emphasised the mental health impact this had on her as a vulnerable person including increased therapy costs.
Around 19 October 2023, after a series of email exchanges and phone call contact, the landlord agreed to refund £1,185.39 to the resident’s rent account for the 9 weeks from 17 July until 17 September 2023 when window repairs were completed. The landlord later confirmed this over email on 25 October 2023 and stated it was processing the payment.
The landlord issued a stage 2 complaint response on 1 December 2023, summarised as below:
1. In response to the resident’s request for information on what laws it abided with, it stated its void standards comply with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) and Decent Home Standards.
2. All kitchen adjustments had been completed.
3. It confirmed the existing front door was deemed safe and secure by a surveyor. However, in order to resolve the matter satisfactorily for the resident, it would replace the front door with a new one on 15 December 2023.
4. It confirmed that rent adjustments had been made: £56.45 for the period of 14 July to 17 July 2023, and £1,185.39 for the period of 17 July to 17 September 2023.
5. It increased its compensation offer to £380 in recognition of the resident’s inconvenience, time and trouble.
6. It could not offer to pay for the resident’s private therapy costs but the resident could submit a claim to its liability insurer if she wished, and it attached the claim form.
7. It could not amend the tenancy start date as the property met void standards and, despite some outstanding repairs issues, it was deemed inhabitable.
The resident remained dissatisfied and referred this matter to this Service.
As of December 2024, the resident is seeking an increased offer of compensation as she felt the offers made by the landlord did not adequately reflect the very significant mental health impact these events have had on her. In particular, she would like the landlord to not charge her any rent for the period from 14 July till 17 September 2023 (her move in date was 18 September 2023). She stated the window sills were still loose, and a kitchen cupboard had loose hinges which was a hazard. She also said she had accrued council tax debt from the local council due to the landlord renting an uninhabitable property to her, despite her being exempt from council tax.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The Ombudsman has noted the resident has said the condition of the property has caused her a sinus infection and her mental health to deteriorate, as a result of which she has had to seek further private therapy. The resident has asked the landlord to refund her private therapy costs. While the Ombudsman acknowledges this must have been distressful and concerning for the resident, the Ombudsman is not able to determine the cause of her mental health condition. This type of personal injury claim is better suited to the courts, where the judge would benefit from an independent medical expert confirming the diagnosis, cause and prognosis of the injury or illness. It is usually only the courts that can say if legal liability arises. The Ombudsman can, however, consider if the resident was likely to have been caused distress and inconvenience by the landlord’s actions or omissions.
The resident has explained to this Service that there are several issues in the flat that are in need of repair, including window sills that have become loose, and a kitchen cupboard hinge that has also come loose. The records do not show the resident has previously raised these specific issues with the landlord during the internal complaints process.
In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is focused on the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to the involvement of this Service. Any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord and progressed as a new formal complaint if required.
The resident has stated to this Service that she was in council tax debt, despite being exempt from council tax, as the local council had not made the current property exempt from council tax at the beginning of the tenancy. The resident suggests this was because the landlord rented to her a property that was not liveable and therefore should not have been taxable. This is not an issue that has been raised previously during the resident’s formal complaint with the landlord. Administration of council tax is a local authority function and does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Housing Ombudsman. If the resident is concerned about how her liability for council tax has been calculated or the overall administration of her council tax account, she should contact the relevant local council..

Relevant policies and guidance

The Decent Home Standard states that a home is considered decent if it satisfies the following criteria:
1. It is free of HHSRS category 1 hazards.
2. It is in a reasonable state of repair (a property will satisfy this criterion unless one or more key building components, or two or more building components, are old and because of their condition need replacing or major repair. Building components are structural parts of a property like a wall or the roof).
3. It has reasonably modern facilities and services. A property would not fail this criterion if it is impossible to make the required improvements for physical or planning reasons.
4. It provides a reasonable degree of thermal comfort.
The landlord’s lettable standards state that a lettable property should have, among other requirements:
1. Sound and secure external doors.
2. The external door should open and close freely without rubbing on the frame.
3. The windows should open and close freely and the handles should work correctly.
4. Any defective, cracked or broken glass should be replaced.
5. Any blown double-glazing units should be replaced, and if the manufacturer lead time exceeds the estimated length of void works, the replacement can take place while the tenant is in occupation.
6. The tiling in shower areas should be of adequate height to prevent water damage.
7. The splashback tiled areas in the bathroom should have 3 rows of standard 150mm x 150mm tiles.
8. Kitchen base units should have securely fitted plinths.
The landlord’s empty homes standards state that it would provide the following:
1. In the kitchen, a minimum of a double base and a double wall unit, including a worktop and a stainless steel sink.
2. In the bathroom, it would replace any missing and cracked tiles to match the existing ones as closely as possible, and will ensure the splashback to the bath will be greater where a shower or hair rinse facility has been installed.
3. In the bathroom, it would provide a minimum of a 300mm two course high splashback to baths, wash hand basins and worktops.
4. It would trace and stop all sources of water penetration and rising damp.
5. Once the resident has signed or accepted the property, it would visit shortly after the move-in to see how the resident was settling in and to ask if there was anything else it could help with. It would arrange any further work it needed to do to meet the empty homes standards.
Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord has a duty to keep the structure and outside of the property in a reasonable state of repair and proper working order, including: the outside doors, window sills, window catches, window frames and sash cords; and the installations in the property for the supply of water (including basins, sinks, baths, and sanitary conveniences, but not other fixtures). The tenancy agreement further confirms this.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the condition of her property at the start of the tenancy

The evidence suggests that at the start of the resident’s tenancy, the property did not fully meet the landlord’s own lettable standards as set out within its own policies in some aspects. These include at least: the windows (blown double-glazing units and handles that did not operate correctly) and the bathroom tiling which was not sufficient to support a shower facility.
The lettable standards set out that the windows should be in good working order and the tiling coverage should be sufficient to support the showering facilities.
The window handles and blown double-glazing units repairs were originally raised when the resident viewed the property. The landlord had begun to process this work before the resident moved in. Once the resident further inspected the property on 17 July 2023, in response to her raising these issues, the landlord progressed the repairs for the window units and handles within a month (by 14 August 2023). The Ombudsman notes that the landlord’s lettable standards stated that, in order to prevent delays for moving in, repairs to blown double-glazing units could be completed after the move-in date while the resident was in occupation. In that respect, the landlord had acted in line with its policy and whilst it is clear that this work would cause some inconvenience to the resident, this did not render the property uninhabitable.
Regarding the rotten window frames, records show the resident first mentioned on 21 September 2023 that when she moved in, the window frames being ‘rotten’ and ‘mouldy’. She complained that the window conditions were such that the property was uninhabitable. The landlord had replaced all of the windows several days ago before she raised this (on 16 September 2023) and has further apologised for not communicating earlier to the resident that it had offered other residents a windows upgrade previously. There is no objective window inspection record to show what condition the window frames were in, however the Ombudsman’s view is that the landlord responded in a timely manner to install new windows, which resolved the immediate issues of the windows being not fully functional and the health and safety concerns.
With respect to the bathroom tiling, once the resident raised this issue on 17 July 2023, the landlord installed tiling to support the shower facilities by 14 August 2023 and added more on 29 September 2023. It is unclear why this needed to be installed in two stages, however, the Ombudsman considers the landlord was responsive about the tiling issue and communicated clearly with the resident what its plans were and the timescales for resolving the issue.
With regards to the kitchen cupboards, at the start of the tenancy, there was a 300mm wall unit and a 600mm base unit. This appears in line with the landlord’s empty homes standards and lettable standards. Since the resident requested more storage space on 17 July 2023, the landlord has organised meetings with the resident or emailed her to discuss what it could do to increase storage space in a safe manner. As of 1 August 2023 it raised the option of replacing the wall unit. On 11 September 2023, after further discussions, it offered to install a 400mm wall unit for her, subject to electric cable testing. The operatives conducted this test on 29 September 2023 and found that it was impossible to install a 400mm wall unit as this would create a hazard with the electric cables. The landlord came back to the resident on the same day to offer one more alternative solution – to install a bridging unit to create more storage space. It is unclear whether the resident has accepted this offer.
With regards to the front door, once the resident raised the issue about the front door potentially jamming on 21 September 2023, the landlord’s surveyor attended on 29 September 2023. The landlord was able to communicate its findings to the resident on the same day to reassure her that the door was safe and secure, while also offering a solution for the rattling through adjusting the locks and installing a brush strip. After the resident expressed further concerns, the landlord installed a new door on 15 December 2023.
While there is no conclusive evidence to show that the property contained any HHSRS category 1 hazard or otherwise did not fit the criteria of a decent home under the Decent Homes Standards, it is not in dispute that the property was below the landlord’s own lettable standards in some respects (most significantly the windows and tiling) at the start of the tenancy. However, the Ombudsman considers that overall the records show the landlord had been communicative and responsive to the resident’s concerns. Throughout the period of 17 July to the date the resident moved in, it had kept the resident updated on how and when it planned to resolve these issues, including arranging a contact person to meet with the resident to explain its plan for a way forward on 11 September 2023. The Ombudsman considers the solutions it provided (including the alternative kitchen storage options, installing tiles, replacing the windows and doors) were effective in addressing the resident’s immediate concerns.
It is clear that the property being below lettable standards at the start had caused the resident distress and inconvenience, and she had been put to time and trouble in pursuing repairs and the subsequent complaint. The resident has stated she considers the landlord’s compensation offer inadequate and she should not be held liable for any rent from 14 July to 17 September 2023.
The landlord has apologised for the resident’s experience of distress and worry. It has also offered rent adjustments amounting to £56.45 for the period of 14 July to 17 July 2023, and £1,185.39 for the period of 17 July to 17 September 2023. This was roughly equivalent to the full amount of rent for 9 weeks (as the resident’s weekly rent was £131.71 including service charges). In effect, this means the landlord has not charged the resident rent for the period of 14 July to 17 September 2023. On top of this, the landlord has offered £380 in recognition of the resident’s distress and inconvenience.
During this investigation, the resident has raised with this Service that she did not think the landlord had cleared her of the rent liability in full for this period, or offered her any compensation on top of the rent adjustment. In the interests of providing some reassurance to the resident and restoring some trust between the parties, a recommendation has been made below for the landlord to provide evidence of payment and the rent account statements to the resident, so she could check this against her own records.
The Ombudsman’s view is that the landlord has made reasonable offers of redress to put things right for the resident in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance. This is because it has carried out the works needed, and done some additional work it was not obliged to do in terms of replacing the front door. It has also refunded the resident’s rent payments and offered compensation of £380 which the Ombudsman considers to be proportionate to the level and extent of failings identified and resulting inconvenience caused. Taken altogether the Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord has taken sufficient action to resolve the resident’s complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman finds that the landlord has offered reasonable redress for failings in responding to the resident’s concerns about her property’s condition at the start of her tenancy.

Recommendations

The landlord should contact the resident in writing to provide evidence of previous payment to the resident for the £1,185.39 in October 2023. It should also check its records to see if the £56.45 rent adjustment (for 14 to 17 July 2023) and the £380 compensation has been paid to the resident before. It should provide rent account statements and evidence of payment to the resident so she could check this against her own records. If the resident has not previously accepted the offer of £380, it should re-open this offer and re-send her the compensation form so she could accept this and the payment can be processed.