Birmingham City Council (202222264)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202222264

Birmingham City Council

30 November 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 the landlord’s handling of roof leaks and resultant damage, including ceiling collapse.
This service has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling approaches.

The outstanding issues

The resident has explained that the outstanding issues are that the repairs the landlord referred to in its final complaint response remain outstanding. The landlord informed him that the timber within the roof would be replaced due to it being rotten. The landlord has since advised this is no longer happening due to roof repairs being complete.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord and has lived at the property since May 2015. The property is a one-bedroom, first-floor flat within a two-storey block and the landlord’s records show that it has a flat roof construction comprised of a ceramic covering and that the roof was last renewed in December 1990. The landlord is a local authority and its records show that the resident lives alone and has no known vulnerabilities.
The landlord instructed a contractor for roof repairs and it is noted that it changed contractor on 1 April 2022.
The resident has stated to this Service that he raised concerns about the length of time leaks from the roof have been ongoing. He states that this has been a problem for over 7 years.
The resident has also advised this Service that the communication has been poor. He states he has not been told what work has been completed and what needs to be done. He further advised that he has had to repeatedly chase the landlord about the progress of repairs.
He explained the situation has caused a great deal of stress and anxiety due to the length of time the matter has been ongoing and the deterioration of his living conditions. He further added that he was injured during a ceiling collapse.

Scope of investigation

The landlord’s records show that roof leaks at the property were first reported in 2010, before the resident’s tenancy, however, the resident has made numerous reports of roof leaks since January 2019.
Although it is noted that there is a long history of concerns around the landlord’s handling of repairs reported by the resident, this investigation has primarily focussed on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports from October 2021. We have not investigated events before this. This is because residents are expected to raise complaints with their landlords promptly so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and while the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events that occurred.

Summary of events

The landlord’s records show that:
1. on 11 October 2021, the resident reported that the roof was leaking water into the bedroom. This repair was logged as a 7-day repair and was marked as completed on 20 October 2021.
2. on 9 December 2021, the resident reported that the roof was leaking water into the property. The landlord’s records show that this repair was logged as a 7-day repair and was marked as completed on 20 December 2021.
3. on 24 January 2022, the resident reported that the plaster on the bedroom ceiling was loose and bulging. An emergency repair was logged with its contractors. It records show that this repair was marked as completed on 16 March 2022.
4. on 4 February 2022, the resident reported that the roof was leaking water onto the bathroom ceiling. The landlord’s records show that this repair was logged as a 7-day repair with its contractor and was marked as completed on 9 February 2022.
5. on 14 February 2022 following an audit the landlord had recalled its contractors to the roof because the work was not completed to a satisfactory standard and that water was still leaking from the roof onto the bathroom ceiling.
On 16 February 2022 the resident reported that water had leaked onto the electrics in the bedroom. This was logged as an emergency repair with its contractors and marked as completed the same day. Follow on works were logged the next day for the contractor to make an appointment with the resident as this was “a bad roof leak”.
The landlord’s records show that on 23 March 2022 following an audit, it recalled the contractor due to the work not being completed to a satisfactory standard. It noted that the roof was still leaking and the repair had not been completed.
On 30 March 2022 the landlord logged a repair with a new roofing contractor due to a further leak from the roof of the property. This was logged with a 7-day response time and was marked as completed on 8 April 2022.
On 30 March 2022 the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord in which he stated:
1. For over 3 years the roof had been leaking. The leaks had caused major damage to the ceiling.
2. Every time it rains the property would be flooded following heavy water leaks.
3. He advised that the leaks were worst in the bathroom, but water had leaked into the bedroom and the living room also.
4. He stated that its contractors had attended many times however, they only took pictures and claimed the leak was resolved when it was not.
5. He stated that any time he chased up the repairs he would be told by the landlord that the works were completed. He was advised to make a new repair request. He reported having over a dozen references for the same repair stretching back to 2019.
6. The resident had concerns that the ceilings would collapse due to the water leaks and referred to the bathroom ceiling collapsing recently.
7. He outlined his unhappiness with the incompetence and complacency of its repair contractors and described the anxiety, stress, and depression this had caused. He explained that he could not invite friends and family to the property due to its condition.
8. He requested that it repaired the leaking roof, and the damaged ceilings in the bedroom, bathroom and living room.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint via letter on 11 April 2022. It stated that it would provide its stage 1 complaint response within 15 working days.
On 11 April 2022 the landlord sent an information request to its previous roofing contractor about the roofing repairs it had carried out at the property. It requested a response by 12 April 2022.
On 10 May 2022 the landlord logged a repair with its roofing contractor due to the resident reporting a further leak from the roof of the property. The resident had reported that a large area of the bedroom ceiling had collapsed due to the leak. This was logged as a 3-day repair and follow-up works regarding the ceiling were also booked.
On 18 May 2022 the landlord logged a further repair with its repair roofing contractor due to a further leak from the roof of the property which had affected the bathroom ceiling. This was logged with a 7-day response time and was marked as completed on 20 May 2022.
On 24 May 2022 and 30 May 2022, the landlord logged on its systems that scaffolding was required around the building and that either liquid or felt would be required to repair the roof.
The landlord provided the resident with its stage 1 complaint response on 28 June 2022 in which it stated:
1. It apologised for its delays in responding.
2. It stated that it was not able to provide him with a response to his complaint as its previous roofing contractor was no longer carrying out repairs on its behalf.
3. It further stated that its previous contractors had not provided it with any information in response to his complaint.
4. It advised that any repair requests made after 1 April 2022 had been assigned to its new contractor.
5. It outlined how he could escalate his complaint if he remained dissatisfied with its response.
On 7 December 2022 the landlord attended the property to inspect the plaster on the ceilings which was loose due to damage from previous roof leaks. It was determined that the roof leaks would need to be addressed first before the ceilings could be re-plastered.
On 19 December 2022 the resident contacted the landlord to report that there was a serious leak from the roof and that water was coming into the bedroom and bathroom which had affected the electrics. He stated that he could no longer sleep in the bedroom due to the damage. He also chased the landlord for a response following its visit on 7 December 2022. The landlord contacted its contractors who informed it that they could not attend the property any earlier than 3 January 2023 due to limited availability.
The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 22 December 2022 and highlighted his dissatisfaction with the landlord’s handling of the repairs at the property. We wrote to the landlord that same day and requested it address the required repairs at the property and provide details of its complaint responses.
The landlord’s repairs records show that on 3 January 2023, its contractors inspected the property and determined that scaffolding was required to carry out repairs to the roof. The inspection of the roof did therefore not take place.
On 6 January 2023 the landlord wrote to us and advised that it had raised a stage 2 complaint. It stated that it would respond by 24 January 2023.
On the same date (6 January 2023) the landlord sought to clarify if the contractor had requested scaffolding at the property. It stated that these works were carried over from its previous contractors and that the landlord was likely to incur “heavy criticism” from the Ombudsman.
On 10 January 2023 the landlord’s contractor advised that they believed the roof leak could be due to the ceramic covering on the roof. It stated that it had applied a new felt to the roof but that the leaks were continuing. It stated that it would make attempts for an operative to attend the property whilst it was raining to inspect the roof. The landlord logged a new roof repair job on its systems that same day.
On 18 and 19 January 2023 the landlord chased its contractor for an update. The contractor replied on 19 January 2023 and stated that scaffolding was being installed on 21 January 2023 and it would then be able to determine how to carry out a long-term solution to the leaks. It later noted that the roof was inspected on 23 January 2023 and the necessary repairs were scheduled for 31 January 2023.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 24 January 2023 in which it stated:
1. It confirmed its position as outlined in its stage 1 response that it was unable to provide any information from its previous contractor.
2. It confirmed that an inspection of the roof had taken place on 23 January 2023 and its contractor had confirmed the required repairs needed were:
  1. Strip the back end of the roof and renew the timber and felt.
  2. Repair the box guttering.
3. It confirmed that the above repairs had been scheduled for 31 January 2023.
4. It would arrange with the resident a follow-up visit to inspect the internal damage in the property caused by the water leaks from the roof.
5. It apologised for its lengthy delays in resolving the resident’s concerns.
6. It acknowledged that following its stage 1 response, it should have been more proactive in its approaches to resolve the situation sooner. It also stated that it should have known that scaffolding was required for an inspection of the roof to take place, which caused further delays.
7. It stated that it was working with its contractor to improve service delivery and prevent further unnecessary delays in the future.
8. It asked the resident to make contact if the scheduled repairs on 31 January 2023 did not take place.

Post complaints process

On 9 February 2023 the landlord’s records show that an entry was logged which outlined that the roof had been repaired but there were still rotten joists and the timber inside the roof needed to be replaced. On 24 February 2023, following an audit, the landlord rebooked this repair as it was not completed by the contractor.
On 30 March 2023, in a telephone call to us, the resident advised:
1. The repairs outlined in the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response had not yet been completed.
2. He stated that the scaffolding had been removed from the building and he had been informed by the landlord that the roof had been repaired and it would now make good the plastering on the ceilings.
3. He reported that following a further spell of bad weather the roof had leaked again onto the ceiling.
4. He further reported that the landlord had advised him that because the roof had been repaired it would not be replacing the rotten timbers in the roof.
5. He highlighted that when reporting repairs to the landlord there was difficulty in getting any information from it. He said the landlord either states that the work has been marked as complete or cannot locate the information on its systems. He advised that this had been ongoing for 7 years.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s obligations

The landlord’s repairs policy confirms that it is responsible for the structure of its properties including roofing, electrics, and internal finishes such as plastering. It outlines the following categories of repairs:

Emergency repairs – where there is a danger of injury or damage to the property. The repair service provides a 24-hour a-day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year emergency repair service for repairs where a response is required within 2 hours of the instruction being issued to the repairs partner. The repairs partner shall be responsible for any follow-up action that is required.
Urgent repairs – repairs that are concerned with protecting the health and safety of the tenant and their family or the security of the property. The completion period for these repairs shall be one, three or seven working days based on the requirements of the Secure Tenants of Local Housing Authorities (Right to Repair) Regulations 1994.
Routine repairs are targeted to be completed within 30 days of them being reported. Some larger repairs may need special materials and arrangements to be completed. In these cases, the tenant should be advised what timescale to expect.

The landlord’s complaints policy outlines a two-stage complaint process. Complaint responses are sent to residents within 15 working days at stage 1 and within 20 working days at stage 2 of its complaints process respectively.

The landlord’s handling of roof leaks and the resultant damage, including ceiling collapse.

The landlord’s repair records confirm that the landlord was aware for a significant period before the resident’s complaint that roof repairs were required. It did not plan for this under its routine repair schedules. This caused the resident to experience further roof leaks which should have been resolved much sooner – this caused distress and inconvenience to the resident over a long time.
There is little evidence to show that the landlord communicated with the resident effectively and provided him with timescales in which it would complete repairs. It is clear that the resident had to chase the landlord for updates whilst continuing to live in a property with a frequently leaking roof. This was, and remains, unreasonable. The resident fulfilled his tenancy obligations by reporting repairs to the landlord promptly yet it did not fulfil its obligations by addressing the root causes of the leaks.
The landlord’s approach seemed to be to repair rather than replace the roof, despite its records showing that it had been carrying out ineffective repairs for numerous years which did not resolve the problem. The resident has stated to this Service that despite the landlord’s current and previous contractors carrying out repairs to the leaking roof, it has not remedied the root cause of the problem as he reports that the roof is still leaking. There is no evidence to show that the landlord made the resident aware of its obligations under the Right to Repair scheme which gives provision for residents of local authority housing providers to choose another contractor to complete repairs.
The landlord took reasonable steps in auditing and reviewing the standard of repairs by its previous contractors. It also acted reasonably by instructing a new contractor in March 2022. Despite this, the roof leaks still persisted and the resident continued to receive a poor repair service meaning that he faced another winter period with a leaking roof. Its contractor did not carry out the listed repairs which the landlord outlined in its stage 2 complaint response. This demonstrates further that it chose, again, to carry out ineffective repairs and not replace the roof, including rotten timbers within. The Ombudsman finds that it is therefore likely that the roof will leak again in the future and cause further damage inside the property to the ceilings and electrics, both of which could put the resident at risk of serious injury.
Despite reporting a serious leak to the landlord on 19 December 2022, its contractor could not attend until 3 January 2023, some 5 days later. It therefore did not meet its policy position by providing an emergency repairs service.
As the resident has a signed tenancy agreement with the landlord, it is ultimately responsible for the quality and timeliness of repairs carried out on its behalf by contractors. The consistently poor repairs and lack of a customer-centred approach taken by the landlord and its contractors were unreasonable and caused severe detriment to the resident.

Complaint handling

The landlord took 60 working days to provide the resident with its stage 1 complaint response. This is significantly outside of its 15 working day response time which is outlined in its complaints policy. There is no evidence to show that it contacted the resident to explain the reasons for its delays, nor did it advise that a further extension of time was required due to awaiting information from its previous contractor.
The landlord’s stage 1 response confirmed that it held no information from its previous repairs contractor’s repairs on its systems. This meant that the landlord could not provide any detail at stage 1 of its complaints process, meaning that the resident did not receive a satisfactory response. Landlords should ensure that they hold accurate and up-to-date records for repairs at their properties. This will ensure that residents receive the best possible service and also that they know the current status of their housing stock.
Having issued its stage 2 complaint response to the resident in January 2023 the landlord did not ensure that its contractors carried out the full schedule of works listed within the response. This meant that the roof was not fully repaired and leaked again as confirmed by the resident.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of roof leaks and the resultant damage, including ceiling collapse.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling approaches.

Reasons

The landlord’s attempts to repair rather than replace the leaking roof did not fully resolve the leaks into the property. The resident has lived in a substandard property for a number of years and due to the leaks has at times not been able to sleep in his bedroom. This was due to the damage caused by the leaks including collapsed ceilings and saturated electrics, which left the property in an unsafe condition.
Whilst the landlord did apologise for not being able to provide the resident with any information from its contractors in its stage 1 complaint response, this demonstrates poor record-keeping on its behalf. It did not keep copies on its systems of vital information relating to repairs carried out by its contractor. This impacted on the resident who did not receive a customer-focussed service throughout this case and in his associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Within four weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failings outlined within this report.
2. Arrange for an independent surveyor to survey the roof. The surveyor should be asked to set out a schedule of works – together with potential costs and likely timeframes to complete. The landlord must then use all its best endeavours to ensure the works are carried out within 8 weeks or later time specified in the surveyor’s report. The landlord must provide a copy of its inspection report to this service and the resident within 5 working days of receiving it.
3. Pay the resident directly a total of £2,450 comprised of:
  1. £2,200 compensation to recognise the impact on his enjoyment of his home and the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures as set out in this report in respect of the roof leaks.
  2. £250 compensation for the time and trouble caused by the landlord’s complaint handling.
The landlord is to consider the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management (KIM-report-v2-100523.pdf (housing-ombudsman.org.uk). The landlord is to share the findings with relevant staff, including training where appropriate and to provide the Ombudsman with a report on its findings.
Provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to this Service.