A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202333410)

Background

1. The resident lives in a second-floor flat. She reported that water had come through her bathroom ceiling due to a leak from the above flat. She complained to the landlord that it was the second time a leak had occurred from the above flat. She said her new flooring was damaged and needed to be replaced.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reported leak.
3. We have also assessed the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found:
   1. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reported leak.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

5. The landlord provided appropriate and proportionate compensation for its lack of communication and delays that it had identified. However, it failed to demonstrate that it took reasonable steps to investigate and resolve the leak when the resident first reported the issue.
6. The landlord failed to demonstrate that it fully reviewed its handling of the resident’s initial report of the leak within its stage 1 complaint response. It also failed to address all aspects of her complaint.

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.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

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.

7. The landlord’s repair logs show that on 11 September 2023, the resident reported that she “has had water [come] through her bathroom light fitting.” The evidence suggests that an electrician attended the same day. However, we have not been provided with the outcome of the visit. On 13 September 2023 the landlord raised an order to provide the resident with some dehumidifiers. The above steps show that the landlord took some steps in line with its responsive repair policy to mitigate any further distress and inconvenience caused by the leak. However, the evidence provided does not demonstrate that it investigated the cause of the leak at the time.
8. We would expect to see evidence that the landlord had taken steps to taken steps to ensure the leak was appropriately investigated under its repair obligations in a timely manner. It was not until the resident made a complaint that it attended 4 days later and resolved it. Therefore, while the reason that it did not take reasonable steps to investigate the cause of the leak sooner is unclear, that it did not is a failing.
9. The landlord disconnected the bathroom light due to safety reasons. While the evidence suggests that it had noted that the light needed to be reinstated on its 19 September 2023 inspection, there is no evidence to show that it took any further action. It was not until the resident chased the matter that it did so on 6 October 2023. That she had to chase the landlord caused her time and trouble. During that those several weeks she went without a light in her bathroom, which would have caused her distress and inconvenience.
10. Following the same inspection following the leak, the landlord also recorded that the resident’s laminate hallway floor needed to be removed and the underlying flooring needed to be repaired as they both had water damage. It noted that it needed to consider whether it or the resident would be responsible for removing, disposing of and replacing the laminate flooring.
11. However, the landlord did not progress the matter until it was prompted by the resident’s November 2023 escalated complaint. It carried out another inspection on 28 November 2023 and noted that she needed to be decanted to carry out the floor works. This meant that it took approximately 2 months to progress the issue. During that time there is no evidence that it kept the resident updated as it said that it would in its stage 1 response. Its poor handling of the repairs resulted in a lack of communication and progress over a prolonged period of time, which would have caused her distress and inconvenience.
12. The landlord’s November 2023 inspection also noted that a mould treatment was required in some areas of the property. It is acknowledged that around this time it was working with the resident to move her into temporary accommodation so it could carry out the remedial works. However, there is no evidence that it considered carrying out the mould treatment between the November 2023 inspection and its 12 December 2023 complaint response.
13. The landlord’s repair policy states that it would carry out any relevant damp and mould works within 5 working days after an inspection. That there is no evidence that it did so has meant that it missed an opportunity to ensure that while the resident remained in her home, the damp and mould was treated. This would have demonstrated that it was taking proactive steps in line with its policy to deal with the issues in a timely manner – particularly given her concerns about the impact the property conditions were having on her family’s health.
14. The landlord offered the resident £200 compensation for the delayed works and its poor communication. While this was reasonable, because we have identified further failings, we have made an order for it to pay her an additional £100 compensation. This is in line with our remedies guidance.
15. At the time of the final response the landlord explained that it would move the resident into temporary accommodation so it could complete the remedial works. It is noted that at the time of this investigation, the resident has been moved into temporary accommodation. If she has any concerns about how the landlord has handled her case since its December 2023 stage 2 response, she has the option of raising a new complaint. She may then refer this to us if she is dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response.

16. The landlord issued its stage 1 response within its 10-working-day policy timescale. That was positive. However, it said that it had not found any service failure because its housing team was unaware of the leak until the resident’s complaint on 15 September 2023. While a specific team may not have known about the leak until that date, the resident notified the landlord about the leak on 11 September 2023.
17. Therefore, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have investigated its handling of the issue from when it first was notified of the leak on 11 September 2023. That it did not was a missed opportunity to satisfy the resident, itself and us that it fully investigated the matter against its responsive repair policy obligations and timescale commitments.
18. The landlord appropriately issued its stage 2 response within its 20-working-day policy timescale.
19. The resident explained in her complaints that the landlord had not handled a previous leak appropriately. However, it did not address this within its responses. This was not in line with our Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) which states landlords must respond to all aspects of a resident’s complaint. Therefore, the landlord missed an opportunity to fully address her complaint.
20. The landlord offered the resident £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by “having to go through this process”. This offer was reasonable. However, its reference to “having to go through this process” was vague and meant the landlord did not acknowledge or take responsibility for specific complaint handling failures. Taking into consideration the additional failings we have identified, we have made an order for it to pay the resident a further £50 compensation. This is in line with our remedies guidance.

Learning

Knowledge and information management (record keeping)

21. Our assessment of the landlord’s complaint handling highlighted that it missed an opportunity to either use or analyse the information that was available to ensure that it carried out an effective investigation in the resident’s complaint. Therefore, it may wish to complete our eLearning on knowledge and information management, which it can find on the Centre for Learning section of our website.

Communication

22. The landlord failed to keep the resident updated following its September 2023 inspection. While it acknowledged this and offered her reasonable compensation, it may wish to complete our eLearning on communication, which it can find on the Centre for Learning section of our website.