Broxtowe Borough Council (202111303)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202111303

Broxtowe Borough Council

5 August 2022


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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a roof leak.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is a leaseholder in a block of flats with a flat roof.
  2. The resident says that he first reported a problem with water leaking from the roof on 10 May 2018 after waking up to find up a high level of water on his spare room floor. The resident contacted the emergency repairs service and repair records indicate that work was carried out by the landlord on 25 May 2018 following an inspection. An insurance claim was made by the resident at the time for damage to his belongings.  
  3. In March 2019, the resident reported the same issue recurring following a period of heavy rain. The resident says that although he reported the problem and the landlord took action to repair the roof, he was not informed of exactly what repair had been carried out and had concerns about this particularly since as a leaseholder he would be expected to contribute to repair costs in the future.
  4. On 6 April 2019, the resident asked his landlord to update him on exactly what repair work had been done to the roof as he had become concerned with “damage to his ceiling, walls and windows from a regularly leaking roof.”
  5. On 4 December 2020, after experiencing a further leak in his home, the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord regarding its response to the leaks. The resident said that he wanted compensation for the distress and inconvenience of the leaks which had been a problem since 2018. The resident said he had been required to make alternative living arrangements due to damp and mould problems making his home unsafe. No further details have been provided about this, but the resident has said that his spare room became unusable for a time and that black mould appeared in his home. The resident says that he spent time and money redecorating his property in the summer of 2020 and he did not want to continue to suffer from the leaks which had damaged the walls and windows.
  6. The landlord carried out a visit on 8 December 2020 and made a temporary repair. On the 29 December 2020, the resident contacted the landlord again to express his concern about the roof damage which he said had got worse and damage was spreading to the communal areas. The resident said he was disappointed that the landlord had not kept him informed of any progress or plan for repairing the roof. The resident said that he had been emptying buckets of water regularly to try and prevent damage to other flats below him in the block.
  7. Work began on the roof on 11 January 2021. The resident had been told the work would start earlier in January but the landlord said there had been delays due to staff sickness and bad weather. The roof was to be primed and then resealed to prevent water ingress to flats below.
  8. By Friday 28 January 2021, the flat area of the roof that was defective had been “sealed with a new surface.” The landlord said that further less urgent work was still needed to a second roof for the block. At this time, the landlord contacted all residents to discuss any interior needs and the drying out process. The landlord commented that the resident’s flat remained damp and needed more time to dry out than other flats in the block.
  9. The landlord says that a maintenance officer was on site every day from 13 January 2021 until 22 January 2021 and that residents were updated weekly during January 2021 when it was confirmed there had been no further leaks.
  10. On 12 March 2021, the resident contacted his local MP regarding the problems with the roof leak. The resident explained that during the period the roof was defective, he had no access to the spare room. The resident said he wanted the landlord to provide assurances about future costs he might have as a leaseholder for further repairs. The resident also had concerns about the dehumidifiers he was supplied with being faulty and expensive to run.  
  11. On 29 March 2021, the landlord sent an acknowledgement of the resident’s complaint after being sent correspondence by the MP. The resident said that his original complaint had been made back in December 2020 and wanted to check the timescale for response as this was the first acknowledgment he had received. 
  12. On 10 April 2021 the landlord sent a stage one response. The landlord said there had been ‘regular visits and conversations over 3 years’ about the roof leak but their insurance department was dealing the matter. The landlord acknowledged that stress had been caused and so the complaint was considered by the landlord to be partially upheld.
  13. On 16 April 2021, the resident escalated his complaint to stage two. The resident said that
    1. No ongoing maintenance inspections had been carried out since the initial leak in 2018.
    2. The landlord had failed to follow up on suggestions for improvement or solutions leading to disappointment and false hope.
    3. The dehumidifier supplied had been faulty and the resident had concerns about the cost of these units.
    4. That the landlord had ‘failed to provide an appropriate level of service (negligence) that has given me a high level of stress, anxiety and many hours of lost work.’
    5. He wanted to be given an apology and explanation of why things went wrong
    6. He wanted to be given an update on the learning from the complaint and whether other residents in the block had been affected or awarded compensation.
    7. Mediation might be helpful in providing a sense of closure and rebuilding trust.
  14. On 10 June 2021, the landlord responded at stage two, the final stage of the landlord’s complaints process. The landlord said that
    1. The resident had first reported the leak on 9 May 2018 and the landlord had responded by attending on 25 May 2018 and ‘marking the job as complete.’
    2. The resident reported that the leak had returned on 6 March 2019 and an inspection took place on 12 March 2019.
    3. On 26 April 2019 the resident chased works to the roof and on 29 April the landlord attended again and agreed that further works to the roof were required.
    4. The resident chased works again on 4 December 2019 and following a visit on the 7 December and a further chase from the resident, it was established that a new roof was required for the building.
    5. On the 7 January 2021 it had supplied the resident with a dehumidifier.
    6. That the roof had been fixed and the landlord apologised for the delay and the lack of communication about when the repairs would take place.
    7. The landlord was willing to waive a £250 emergency repair fee and offer the resident £250 due to these service failures in addition to the resident’s insurance claim for damages.
  15. On 27 October 2021 the resident contacted the repairs manager to say he was concerned that the roof repair was not done effectively and was worried about the weather this winter. The resident has suggested the roof may need to be completely rebuilt. The resident has said he has not been compensated properly for the damage and distress caused by the roof leaks.

Assessment and findings

  1. The focus of this investigation is on the landlord’s response to the roof leak following the resident’s complaint on 4 December 2020. It is noted that the resident has made an insurance claim for damage to his belongings and this is being handled separately. The Housing Ombudsman provides an alternate means of dispute resolution which does not provide compensation for damages in the same way a court or an insurance claim might provide. Rather, it seeks to support landlords to learn from complaints by identifying service failure and helps try and put things right for residents when things have gone wrong.
  2. The landlord’s repair obligations are set out in the lease. The lease states that the landlord will “keep in repair the structure and exterior of the building (including windows exterior doors drains gutters and external pipes but not the floorboards or the interior faces of such parts of the external walls or internal walls and ceilings of the building as bound the property or rooms therein) and make good any defect affecting that structure.”
  3. This clearly indicates a repair obligation to make good a roof defect. The landlord’s leaseholder guide also confirms the landlord’s repairs obligations include “the roof (including verge repairs, broken tiles/ slates, leaks, guttering, chimneys).”
  4. The landlord’s repairs policy has not been provided to this service and no information is given online regarding expected timescales for repairs. However, the landlord does not dispute that there was delay in carrying out the roof repair. This was from 4 December 2020 until 28 January 2021 when the flat roof was resealed. It is also noted that the landlord accepted responsibility for damage to the resident’s goods in the resident’s initial insurance claim in 2018.  
  5. Similarly, the landlord does not dispute that there were failures in communication around the timings of repair work taking place. The resident has said that these communication failures were not only present in the period after his complaint of December 2020, but extended back to 2018 when he had first reported the roof leak. There is no evidence that the landlord responded comprehensively to the resident’s repeated requests in 2018 and 2019 for further information about its plans for the roof.
  6. Although there is no formal obligation for the landlord to provide this information to the resident, the resident had a legitimate expectation that this information would be provided as part of a general service to leaseholders. This is described in the landlord’s leasehold management policy document as an aim to provide ‘a good quality service to leaseholders’ and a commitment to ‘work with leaseholders to ensure high levels of satisfaction.’  
  7. These communication failures were not only to do with long term plans or not informing the resident of when works would be taking place, but also in the complaints process itself. The resident made a complaint in December 2020 that was effectively unacknowledged until March 2021. The landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s complaint and respond within 15 working days as stated in its complaints policy. The landlord could have acknowledged the complaint earlier, even if the first stage response was to be sent after the roof repairs had taken place in January 2021.
  8. As a result of the landlord’s failure to communicate effectively on repairs, the resident has been inconvenienced by taking time off work and multiple visits to his home. The overall communication failure over the two years of leaks have also affected the resident’s ability to plan matters such as redecorating his home. The landlord’s delay on roof repair has caused the resident considerable inconvenience which includes making one of his rooms unusable and causing him to leave his home for a time due to damp and mould issues.
  9. The landlord has apologised for these failures and tried to put things right by offering the resident compensation of £250 as well as an exemption from  additional charges of £250 for the emergency roof repair. The amount of compensation offered by the landlord is reasonable for the distress and inconvenience caused and is in line with ombudsman guidance on remedies.
  10. Ombudsman remedies guidance states that compensation of between £50 and £250 is appropriate where there have been instances of service failure resulting in some impact on the complainant. A payment at the top of this scale is reasonable due to the timeframe involved and the impact on the resident. It is also appropriate for the landlord to exempt the resident from repairs charges as part of the redress package. 
  11. Whilst the landlord has offered redress for the failings identified in the complaint, it has not demonstrated any learning from this complaint or shared this with the resident as requested by the resident in his escalation letter. It is therefore recommended that in addition to the £250 compensation payment, the landlord provide the resident with a letter detailing what steps it has taken to improve communication with leaseholders, repair response times and complaints handling since the resident made his complaint in December 2020. The landlord should also discuss with the resident any assistance it may be able to provide with redecoration.  

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55b of the Housing Ombudsman scheme, the landlord has provided reasonable redress for acknowledged service failures in its response to the resident’s report of a roof leak.

Reasons

  1. The landlord has apologised and accepted there was delay in carrying out repairs and failures in communication in responding to the roof leak. The landlord has offered the resident £250 and a waiver to a £250 charge for repairs.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord write to the resident within four weeks detailing any steps it has taken to improve communication with leaseholders, repair response times and complaints handling since the resident made his complaint in December 2020. The landlord should also discuss with the resident any assistance it may be able to provide with redecoration.