Arawak Walton Housing Association Limited (201702731)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 201702731

Arawak Walton Housing Association Limited

17 April 2023

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:
1. The landlords handling of multiple repair issues reported by the resident including leaks in the living room and kitchen, draughts from the windows and front door; heating in the property, broken floorboards, and electrics.
2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about grounds maintenance and gardening.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy agreement with the landlord that started in 1997. The resident is registered disabled following injuries sustained several years ago.
Under the tenancy agreement, the landlord has an obligation to keep in good repair the structure and exterior of the building including the roof, outside walls and doors, window sills, window frames, internal walls, floors and ceilings, chimney and chimney stacks. There is no reference to a car parking space in the tenancy agreement.
The sole reference to the garden in the tenancy says that the resident should not use the garden for dumping rubbish except in a proper dustbin or other container for this purpose. The landlord’s Estate Management policy says that it will carry out annual inspections and consider key areas including any garden.
The landlord’s repairs policy says that requests for repairs that are held to be its responsibility will be classified by priority status and target completion dates will be one of the following:

Emergency repairs to be carried out within 24 hours.

Urgent repairs to be completed within 7 days.

Routine repairs to be completed within 21 days.

The Decent Homes Standard was introduced by the Government in June 2006 to bring all social and local authority housing up to an agreed decent standard. A decent home has to meet the following four criteria including that it provides a reasonable degree of thermal comfort. The Standard goes on to say that the primary heating system must have a distribution system sufficient to provide heat to two or more rooms of the home and a landlord must be sure that the home is warm enough for the occupant.
At the time of the first complaint response, the landlord tried to resolve complaints informally. If that was not possible, it then had a two stage complaints procedure. The information provided by the landlord did not give timescales for those responses. The landlord introduced a new complaints procedure in February 2021; however, this also did not give timescales for its complaint responses at stages one and two. Its website says that it aims to resolve concerns as quickly as possible and expects to deal with the vast majority within twenty working days.

Summary of events

The repairs log evidences that the landlord took the following action in the property:
1. 21 September 2018 – patch repair to the living room ceiling at the property (reported on 18 September 2018).
2. 6 November 2018 – investigate and repair water leak in kitchen (reported on 2 November).
3. 7 December 2018 –a cubic capacity size calculation of the living room was completed in relation to its heating requirements.
4. 25 January 2019 – a new radiator was fitted. The evidence suggests this was for the living room.
5. 12 March 2019 – refixed two loose floorboards in the rear bedroom (reported 21 January 2019).
6. 7 May 2019 – repaired leak from roof chimney breast above the kitchen (reported on 2 April 2019).
7. 23 May 2019 – repaired slipped roof slates to rear of the property.
8. 13 January 2020 – investigate and repair possible roof leak (reported on 6 January 2020).
On 14 February 2020 the resident told the landlord there was a leak which had been ongoing for four years. The landlord arranged an inspection that afternoon.
On 17 February 2020 the resident told the landlord that the original leak in the kitchen had increased in size and dimension and asked it to look at this issue urgently.
On 18 February 2020 the landlord told the resident that, further to the roofing contractor attending the property the previous week during heavy rain, they had reported/found no water ingress into the kitchen. It said it would organise a decorating voucher which would allow the resident to overcome the small isolated stains/shrinkage crack on the kitchen ceiling.
On the same day the resident said there were other leaks by the bay window of the living room and provided photos.
Following emails from the resident to the landlord on 29 February 2020 with photos, on 2 March 2020 it responded giving a list of work it would undertake at the property which included:
1. A roofing contractor would fix the dislodged roof tiles.
2. Stain blocking and touching up the stain on the existing wall surface on the attic.
3. Tarmacking the rear footpath of the building; it would also consider car parking requirements of residents with a view to marking out car parking spaces in the future.
4. Reinstating the tree that had been affected by the recent storm.
5. Trimming the fruit trees.
The landlord said that it would address the kitchen ceiling stain and hairline crack report under separate correspondence because it was being dealt with under its complaints procedure. This correspondence did not address the issue of the window sill that the resident had raised.
On 5 March 2020 the landlord issued a stage one complaint response to the resident. The main points were:
1. It had investigated the roof both internally and externally on 13 January 2020 and found no leaks and that the loft insulation was “completely dry”.
2. Following contact from the resident about a leak on 14 February 2020, it attended the same day when there was “heavy rain” and found no leak.
3. It acknowledged the resident did not agree with its findings about the roof and said that, if she was to provide them with the name of an independent roofing contractor, it would pay for an independent survey.
4. It offered the resident redecoration vouchers valued at £30 so that she could redecorate the kitchen ceiling where there was a hairline crack and “small stains”.
The landlord explained how the resident could escalate the complaint.
On the same day the resident raised several issues with the landlord including a lack of heating in the hallway; the front door had a gap at the bottom; a warped window sill and electrical issues.
On 9 March 2020 the resident gave the landlord a list of problems at the property including no radiator in the hall; a gap under the front door; the plum tree at the front of the building needed pruning; an uprooted tree needed replanting; and dislodged slates.
On 10 March 2020 the landlord arranged to visit the property on 24 March 2020 to inspect it in relation to the issues she had raised.
On 22 May 2020 the landlord sent a further stage one complaint response to the resident in response to the complaint she had raised through this Service. In relation to this report, the main points were:
1. Cutting down a tree in the back yard without letting residents know – the tree was growing into the car port of the next-door neighbour and was a severe health and safety risk; given that it did not consider that an extensive consultation was required. The local council gave permission to cut back the branches that were growing into the car port. A full explanation about this matter had been given to the late MP in 2016.
2. Floorboard deterioration – it had carried out repairs to isolated damaged areas when they were reported. It said the resident should report any further areas of concern.
3. Electric socket in the bedroom – had been repaired. It asked for an image so that it could assess what further repair was required.
4. Garden maintenance – it undertook estate inspections on an annual basis over the summer months and residents were invited to attend via its website and social media. An inspection took place in 2020 but an invite was not extended to residents and it apologised for that. Residents should report any estate issues to it.
5. It had carried out repair work to the roof in May 2019 when scaffolding had been put up and recently after a storm.
6. It explained that the gardens were maintained under a grounds maintenance contract and the specification had been provided to the resident in November and December 2018. It said anything outside of that specification would be additional works that needed to be planned and budgeted for. It would not therefore automatically plant trees in place of others that had died. It added that the resident had planted trees in the garden and did not believe that additional trees were required.
7. It carried out an annual tree survey to ensure that the trees at its properties were fit and healthy and did not pose a risk to anyone; any further issues reported by tenants, staff or members of the public outside of that survey were investigated and dealt with, as appropriate. The resident had made it aware of two fruit trees that required trimming and it would request that its gardeners do so.
8. It had not received any reports of cars being damaged as a result of the gardens not being maintained.
9. It had not identified a problem with soil erosion on the site.
10. It had ordered a “residents only” car park sign which would be installed on its arrival. It would look into how many residents currently owned vehicles and who were registered for disabled parking, so it could consider parking requirements with a view to future project work.
11. The flat was currently fully central heated and an additional, larger radiator had been installed recently in the living room. Any future heating improvements would need to be at the resident’s own expense.
12. The property had a valid electricity certificate to ensure the installation was compliant and safe.
13. It was willing to pay for an independent survey of the roof if the resident was concerned about leaks.
The landlord explained how the resident could escalate the complaint within 15 working days. The resident did not escalate the complaint at that time.
On 28 May 2020 the resident wrote to the landlord saying she had passed her complaints to a disability charity which would be taking them forward. In that correspondence she raised other issues including draughty windows (she said the living room was so cold in winter that she could not use it in winter even with the heating on); and broken floorboards (she said the floorboards of both the living room and bedroom were “precarious” and she had recently put her heel through a floorboard in the bedroom).
On 9 July 2020 the resident sent a photo of the parking area to the landlord explaining her difficulties in parking and saying that, as a registered disabled person, she would like a space that she could enter and access with ease.
On 23 September 2020 the resident sent a hand-written letter to the landlord outlining her concerns about the repair issues she had raised at the property about the chimney stack, draughty windows, additional heating in the living room, repairs to floorboards, electric sockets and garden maintenance. (The landlord subsequently told this Service that it had no record of receiving that letter).
In November 2020 the landlord received a request for tree pruning from the resident. The resident acknowledged in an email to the landlord of January 2021 that this had taken place.
The repairs log evidences that on 20 January 2021 the landlord fitted a draught excluder to the front door of the property.
On 21 January 2021 the resident told the landlord that the leaks into the kitchen and living rooms had gotten worse and debris was falling. She provided photos and she asked it to take action quickly.
On 29 April 2021 the landlord noted that it had inspected the car park and did not recommend taking action; the tarmac was slightly worn where cars were using a specific area for a turning point but there were no immediate areas of concern.
On 25 June 2021 the landlord told the Ombudsman that it was not aware of the request for an extension made by the resident. It explained that it had also not received emails from this Service because they started to go into its “quarantine” folder and thus were not appearing in our email inboxes. It subsequently agreed to issue a final response to the concerns raised by the resident.
The repairs log evidences that on 30 June 2021 the landlord inspected the windows and front door at the property.
On 23 July 2021 the landlord issued the final complaint response under its formal complaint procedures. The main points were:
1. Chimney stack – there was no leak found in the attic. It would carry out repairs to the plastering in the kitchen; the resident said she would let them know when that was convenient as she did not want this work carried out in the hot weather.
2. Windows – work to the window seals had been carried out.
3. Additional heating requirements – the radiator in the front room had been replaced. It considered the flat was adequately heated and a radiator was not required in the hallway. A repair would be made to the hairline crack above the new radiator.
4. Gap at the bottom of the front door – this had been addressed with a wooden strip added to the bottom of the door. A draught-proof strip had also been added. The resident confirmed that this had resolved the matter.
5. Floorboards – it had carried out floorboard repairs so that the area could be carpeted. It had also replaced plywood in the bedroom with leftover floorboards from the bathroom on 9 July 2021.
6. Electric sockets in the bedroom – it had asked for a photo to assess what further action it could take but the resident had not provided this. It said it assumed this was no longer a problem and to contact it for a repair if the problem remained.
7. New electric switch that the resident had had installed herself – the landlord had carried out an inspection on 14 July 2021 and the switch was found to be satisfactory.
8. Neglect of garden maintenance – the landlord commended the work that the resident had carried out in the back garden which it said “was lovely”. It said there was limited work it could do given the service charges it collects. It said it would remove trees that had died but not replace them and over time grass would probably grow over the area. The landlord also said that:
  1. It had approved the cost of removing black fly from the plum tree.
  2. Other fruit trees would be maintained in line with the garden maintenance contract.
  3. Work had been ordered to replace areas of sunken tarmac.
  4. The garden contractor would remove the weeds at the front of the house beside the house wall.
  5. The contractor dug weeds out of the centre isle on 16 July 2021. It had agreed to remove the soil and replace it with topsoil.
9. In relation to the new issues raised by the resident:
  1. A crack to the hallway ceiling would be repaired on 3 August 2021.
  2. Work to a gas pipe in the front room would take place on 12 August 2021.
  3. A contractor completed work to the front door handle on 16 July 2021.
  4. It would carry out a drone survey of the chimney to see if other work was required apart from removing a tree that was growing out of it as the equipment to undertake this work was quite significant.
  5. It would make a decision later in the year on painting lines in the car park for cars and a disabled space.
The landlord signposted the resident to the Ombudsman.
On 23 August 2021 the landlord gave the resident information an update on the various issues she had raised, including:
1. A different contractor would carry out repairs to the kitchen ceiling that day.
2. It could replace some of the plywood flooring (in the bedroom) with surplus floorboards from the bathroom; however, it would not source more floorboards to finish the area.
3. It had pruned the plum tree on 10 August 2021; a black fly infestation had been treated the same day.
4. It had levelled the tarmac in the car park on 3 August 2021.
5. It had repaired the crack in the hallway ceiling on 5 August 2021.
6. It had completed work to ensure a redundant gas pipe was flush with the floor.
7. A drone survey of the roof had been carried out on 6 August and it was awaiting the outcome.
8. The maintenance team had calculated that there was space in the car park for four car park spaces or three with one disabled space. It said it would make a decision on this proposal later that year.
On the same day the repair log evidences that the landlord had accessed the loft to check for evidence of leaks.
On 20 September 2021 the roofing contractor provided the results of the roof survey. They noted the problems including: the pointing had perished and was missing in areas from the ridge tiles to the whole roof covering; some missing, slipped and cracked slates; vegetation growth recorded to the main roof covering the chimney stack; and general weathering and decay recorded to timber fascia and soffits in various areas across the entire roof covering. They recommended the following action: clear all debris and vegetation growth from valley gutters to front pitch; repoint the ridgeline to whole roof covering including outrigger and associated dormer windows; and replace missing slates.
On 4 May 2022 the landlord’s contractor arranged to visit the property to carry out decorating work to the kitchen on 11 May 2022 followed by a deep-clean the next day.
When the resident approached the Ombudsman, she said that the landlord was installing gas central heating the following week. She said that the windows were still draughty, leaks in the living room had not been addressed and there was a severe cockroach infestation at the property also. The resident acknowledged that there was an electrical certificate for completion of the electrical work but said that the double sockets in the kitchen had been placed on one wall at the back of the fridge area. She said these sockets needed to be moved to where she could reach them more easily as she due to her disability she had difficulty in bending down.

Assessment and findings

The resident initially approached the Ombudsman in late October 2018. This report has focussed, in the main, on the issues contained in final complaint response of July 2021.
The Ombudsman is unable to consider the complaints the resident raised about the installation of the wet room because this matter has not been through the landlord’s formal complaints procedure. It is open to the resident to make a new formal complaint about this issue. For the same reason the Ombudsman is unable to investigate the current infestation of cockroaches in the property. However, a recommendation has been made at the end of this report for the landlord to check if there has been a breach in any area for which it is responsible (for example walls/floors) that has led to the continued infestation.

The landlords handling of multiple repair issues

I have considered the issues in turn.

Leaks in the kitchen and living room

The evidence suggests that the landlord took appropriate action in relation to the reported leaks in the kitchen. It carried out a patch repair to the ceiling in 2018 and repaired a further leak to the chimney block in 2019. The landlord did not identify an ongoing leak in early 2020 but offered to pay for an independent survey to put the resident’s mind at rest. While it was under no obligation to offer this, doing so demonstrated the landlord’s willingness to achieve a resolution in relation to this matter. When no further leak was identified, the landlord stain blocked the area and decorated in March 2020. The landlord’s actions here were in line with the timescales set out in its repairs policy apart from the repair to the leak to the chimney breast which was outside this timescale by ten working days. However, taking its actions in response to these leaks into consideration, this does not amount to a service failure.
Correspondence with the resident has suggested that this matter is resolved. This Service notes that the landlord carried out a drone survey later that year which identified some problems with the roof. A recommendation has been made for the landlord to carry out the work suggested by this roofing contractor.
The landlord acted appropriately to reports of a leak to the living room ceiling by carrying out a patch repair within three working days. There was no evidence provided to suggest this leak had re-occurred but the resident raised this recently with this Service.
It is also not clear that the resident’s reports of a leak around the bay window of the living room have been addressed. It is evident work took place outside the bay window in around July 2021 but this Service understands that this related to a leak into the flat below, rather than the interior leak. This matter has not been looked into by the landlord in its complaint handling therefore a determination has not been reached; however, a recommendation has been made, below, for the landlord to investigate and resolve this matter and to look into the leak to the ceiling also.

Draughts from the windows and front door

The resident raised the issue of draughty windows with the landlord in May 2020 and later that year in September 2020 (in a letter the landlord said it did not receive). The landlord inspected the windows in June 2021 and had carried out work on the window seals by the end of July 2021. The action taken by the landlord was not appropriate because it did not adhere to the routine repair timescales given in its repairs policy of 21 days; rather, it took 14 months to complete action on the window seals.
The resident first raised the issue of the gap under the front door in early March 2020. In January 2021 the landlord took action and added a draught excluder; in the final complaint response of July 2021, the landlord said it had also added a wooden strip to the bottom of the door. Again, the time taken to complete a repair to resolve this matter was outside the routine repair timescales in the repairs policy. In July 2021 the landlord confirmed that the resident was satisfied this matter was resolved.
In relation to the failures identified, the Ombudsman’s role is to provide fair and proportionate remedies where maladministration or service failure has been identified. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies.
These delays meant that the resident lived in a property with draughty windows and a front door over one winter. This evidently caused significant distress and inconvenience to her for which financial compensation of £400 is appropriate. The Ombudsman recognises that some of our complainants’ circumstances mean that they are more affected by a landlords’ actions or inactions than others; this sum therefore has taken into account the resident’s vulnerabilities.
The resident told this Service that the windows were still draughty. An order has been made, below, for the landlord to investigate and resolve this matter.
While the issue of the resident’s reports of a buckled window sill was not considered by the landlord in its complaint handling, the evidence demonstrates that this matter has been raised by her but it is not clear what action the landlord has taken to resolve it. A recommendation has been made, below, for the landlord to investigate and resolve this reported problem.

Heating in the property

The evidence suggests that, following a survey into the heating requirements of the living room in December 2018, the landlord acted appropriately by fitting a new radiator in that room the following month. Soon afterwards, the resident reported that there was inadequate heating in the hallway and this had been confirmed to her by an independent contractor.
The landlord’s view set out in the final response was that the property was adequately heated and the resident would be responsible for any additional heating she required in the hallway. That was a reasonable approach because, under the Decent Homes Standard, there is no obligation for the landlord to provide heating in all rooms. The landlord acted reasonably by ensuring that the living room – an occupied room – was adequately heated.

Broken floorboards

The landlord’s obligation is to keep in good repair the floors of the property. This does not necessarily mean that all areas will be floorboarded. The landlord’s initial response was appropriate by repairing the resident’s report of broken floorboards of 21 January 2019 in early March 2019. In its complaint response of 22 May 2020 the landlord asked the resident to report any further areas of concern. While the resident gave further information at the end of that month, the evidence suggests that they were not resolved until July 2021 – a delay of over thirteen months. That was outside the timescale set out in the repairs policy.
Financial compensation of £200 is appropriate for the impact on the resident of that delay which meant she was living with broken floorboards. The impact o her would have been greater given her disability and that sum reflects that.
It is not clear from the evidence whether this matter has been fully resolved for the resident. Therefore an order has been made, below, for the landlord to inspect the flooring of the property to ensure it is sound throughout.

Electrics

The landlord took appropriate action by repairing a socket in the bedroom and checking the safety of a socket the resident had had installed herself. An electrical safety certificate was also obtained to ensure the safety if the installation.
When this Service spoke to the resident, she suggested that matters were resolved; however, she had trouble with the placement of the double sockets in the kitchen (one of which she said was not working). A recommendation has been made, below, for the landlord to visit the property to arrange these sockets to be moved and repaired as, due to her disability, she has problems reaching them.
In relation to the various repairs, it is evident that there were some delays carrying out repairs which had an impact on the resident. The failings outlined above relating to the broken floorboards, the front door and windows amount to maladministration.

The landlord’s response to concerns about the car park and grounds maintenance

The landlord took appropriate action to repair tarmac in the car parking area. There is no suggestion in the tenancy agreement that the residents have a car parking space. However, the landlord agreed to consider this in 2021 and reach a decision about whether to mark out car parking spaces including, potentially, a disabled space. There is no evidence in the information provide that the landlord has reached a decision about this and a recommendation has been made, below.
While the tenancy agreement does not set out the landlord’s obligation in respect of the garden, the estates management policy sets out that it will inspect it annually to identify any issues. It is evident that the resident has put in a lot of effort and time to maintain the garden at her own expense, even though she is under no obligation to do so. The landlord appears to genuinely appreciate her efforts – describing it as “lovely” in the summer of 2021.
The landlord has acted reasonably by taking appropriate in response to the issues the resident has raised about the garden and setting out what action it would and would not take. No service failure has been identified.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of multiple repair issues.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s concerns about the car park and grounds maintenance.

Reasons

While the landlord has taken action, it is evident there were delays in carrying out repairs to the windows, front door and floorboards of the property which would have had a significant impact on a disabled resident. It is clear that not all matters of concern to the resident have been resolved and orders and recommendations have been made, below, to try to bring a conclusion to these issues.
The landlord has acted reasonably in relation to the car park and garden maintenance issues – setting out its obligations and carrying out reactive work in response to issues the resident raised with it.

Orders

The landlord should take the following action within four weeks of the date of this report and provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with these orders:
1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident the sum of £600 made up of:
  1. £400 for the impact of the delay in resolving the draughts in the property.
  2. £200 for the impact of living with broken floorboards.
3. Carry out a survey of the floor in the property to ensure it is sound throughout and take appropriate action to resolve any issues.
4. Inspect the windows and resolve any issues with them that are still causing draughts in the property.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord takes the following action:
1. Investigate if there has been a breach in any area for which it has responsibility for (for example the walls/floors) that has led to the continuing cockroach infestation.
2. Arrange for the electrical sockets in the kitchen to be moved (and one repaired) to bring them within easy reach of the resident.
3. Investigate and resolve the following issues:
  1. The leak around the bay window in the living room and also to the ceiling.
  2. The buckled window sill.
4. Update its online complaints procedure information (https://arawakwalton.com/complaints-procedure/) to ensure that deadlines are provided for stage two of its complaint handling (15 working days for residents to submit a request and 20 working days for the landlord to respond).

Provide the resident with its latest grounds maintenance contract and confirm exactly what gardening maintenance work they can expect over the next 12 months.

Consider implementing a trees policy and review the recommendations within the Institute of Chartered Foresters’ 2016 report on Tree Management and Social Housing: https://www.charteredforesters.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/TPBEII-Paper-Barton-01.pdf