Clarion Housing Association Limited (202234702)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202234702

Clarion Housing Association Limited

11 October 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

  1. The complaint is about:
    1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports regarding works for:
      1. Low water pressure at her property.
      2. The replacement of her property’s bathroom.
      3. Blocked, backed up, and leaking drains and pipework at her property.
      4. Missing manhole and electrical socket covers and a mice infestation in her building’s communal areas.
      5. A lack of ventilation in her bathroom and toilet.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord of a flat with a separate bathroom and toilet on the first floor of a building with multiple floors and communal areas. It has no vulnerabilities recorded for her household. The resident has previously explained to the landlord, however, that she has difficulties carrying out tasks at the property due to her arthritis and her role as her autistic 6-year-old child’s full-time carer.
  2. The resident described reporting outstanding repairs to the landlord since she moved to her property in August 2020. These included for her having hardly any water pressure and therefore washing facilities there, as well as outstanding bathroom repairs, blocked and leaking drains and pipes, missing communal manhole and electrical socket covers, and mice in her building’s communal areas. The resident nevertheless explained numerous reports about these issues had not been responded to, there were only inspections instead of works, it had visited her unannounced and missed appointments, given her incorrect and conflicting information, and there had been a lack of communication by it.
  3. Following the landlord’s unsuccessful attempts to source replacement communal manhole covers from suppliers from August 2020 to August 2021, and it agreeing to replace the resident’s bathroom and surveying this for asbestos from May to October 2021, she contacted it again from October 2021. She reported a blocked and backed up kitchen sink, bath, and drains, her shower and kitchen and bathroom taps still lacking water pressure, and cracked and leaking external downpipes, which it began attending from November 2021. The resident then told the landlord there were leaking sewage pipes at her and her neighbours’ properties in January 2022 that it attended at the time. However, it could not complete these repairs and continued to investigate them.
  4. The resident subsequently continued to report the above issues to the landlord, including mice in communal areas in February 2022, and leaking kitchen sink pipework it repaired on the same day in June 2022, before she made a stage 1 complaint to it in November 2022. She complained about the standard of its service, communication, appointments and staff, and it recorded that this was in relation to her low water pressure and her bathroom not being replaced after this was due in September 2021. The landlord then noted in December 2022 that the resident’s water pressure needed a booster pump and power supply, her bathroom and toilet required extractor fans, there was another leak under her kitchen sink, and repairs were still needed to her drains and bath.
  5. The landlord’s subsequent stage 1 complaint response in January 2023 considered its previous attendances and works scheduled for February 2023 would resolve the resident’s low water pressure. It nevertheless apologised for not replacing or communicating about her bathroom, which might have been due to its asbestos survey that it could not confirm after a June 2022 cyber attack and contractor’s staff changes. The landlord added the bathroom works were now further delayed by a supply chain issue and a lack of operatives in the resident’s area. It therefore upheld her complaint, agreed to contact her as soon as it could reschedule, paid £350 compensation for her inconvenience, chasing and it not following process, and £50 for its late complaint response.
  6. The resident’s January 2023 final stage complaint explained, however, that the landlord had overlooked many other aspects of her complaint. These included the lack of extractor fans or ventilation other than vents and holes in the wall in her bathroom and toilet, its continued missed and rescheduled appointments and unannounced visits, and her outstanding low water pressure, bathroom replacement, and leaking and blocked drains and pipework. The resident added that the communal manhole and electrical socket covers were still missing, mice remained in communal areas, and the landlord’s lack of responses and communication had continued. It then unsuccessfully attended her low water pressure in February and April 2023, when it instead damaged her boiler.
  7. The landlord’s May 2023 final stage complaint response apologised for the resident’s delayed bathroom replacement it arranged in June 2023, and for her low water pressure, which it agreed to follow up May 2023 bypass works for at the time but did not resolve until its March 2024 pump and water tank repairs. It described repairing her kitchen and bathroom sinks in December 2022 and February 2023, but that her building’s drainage was contracted out for major works, which it resolved with a CCTV drain survey and jetting in February and March 2024. The landlord also accepted errors, a lack of approval, and complexity delayed extractor fans in the resident’s bathroom and toilet, fitting one in the bathroom only in May 2023, and that it missed her initial pest reports.
  8. The landlord therefore confirmed that it subsequently arranged communal pest treatment, monitoring, and proofing from March to May 2023, but the resident described subsequently reporting mice in communal areas, including in September 2024. It nevertheless said it could not find her earlier missing communal manhole and electrical socket cover reports, which it then replaced in May 2023. The landlord concluded by apologising for and paying the resident another £1,500 compensation for her water pressure delays, chasing and inconvenience, £150 for its pest control delays, £100 for not confirming the scope of her stage 1 complaint, and £100 for its late final response.
  9. However, the resident then complained to the Ombudsman that the landlord’s above compensation payments did not reflect her stress, constant reports, delays, lack of responses until her and her local councillor complained, and her having to wash her child in the sink. She therefore explained that she sought for it to acknowledge that its complaint responses were either incorrect or not relevant, lacked explanation, and that its communication had been inconsistent and lacking, as well as a higher level of compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. It is very concerning that the resident has described the landlord’s earlier works as previously damaging her boiler for a year, as well as that she began reporting the other outstanding repairs at her property and building to it from when she moved there in August 2020 onwards. Nevertheless, in accordance with the Scheme, this investigation is limited to considering its response to her reports about the works from November 2021 onwards, and we are currently unable to consider a complaint about the boiler.
  2. Paragraph 42a of the Scheme states the Ombudsman may not consider complaints made prior to exhausting the landlord’s complaints procedure. Paragraph 42c of the Scheme states that we may not consider complaints that were not brought to the landlord’s attention as a formally complaint within a reasonable period of normally within 12 months of the matters arising. The Ombudsman is therefore currently unable to consider the damage to the resident’s boiler, as this has not exhausted the complaints procedure yet, which we are helping her to progress in case reference 202343308. We also cannot consider the landlord’s handling of her reports prior to November 2021, as these were not within 12 months of her stage 1 complaint in November 2022.

Agreement and policies

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement obliges the landlord to repair and maintain the resident’s property’s structure, and to keep the water and waste systems there in working order, as well as to repair and maintain her building’s communal areas. Its responsive repairs and maintenance policy requires it to attend emergency repairs within 24 hours, complete non-emergency repairs to individual properties and communal areas within 28 calendar days, and this permits it to carry out complex repairs and major bathroom replacements within unspecified longer periods.
  2. The landlord’s pest and wildlife policy confirms that it is responsible for pest control treatments in its communal areas, and for structural proofing and repairs due to pests in individual properties, as well as in communal areas. Its vulnerable residents policy obliges it to record residents’ vulnerabilities, keep these updated, consider any additional needs due to vulnerability, vary its service delivery accordingly, recognise they may find it more difficult to cope if something goes wrong in their properties, and take this into account.

Water pressure

  1. After the resident described previously reporting low water pressure at her property to the landlord, it recorded attending for her 22 October 2021 further report of this after 21 calendar days on 12 November 2021, in line with its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale. She reported lacking kitchen and bathroom tap and shower pressure, which it found was generally present unless a neighbour used water at the same time and could not repair but only improve with a pump. The landlord therefore asked its mechanical and electrical team to check on this on 18 November 2021, which was also within the policy’s above timescale. However, it did not then record taking any other action for this at the time, which was inappropriate.
  2. The landlord instead took 90 calendar days from the resident’s October 2021 report for its surveyor to explain on 20 January 2022 that water did not always come out of her bathroom taps, the kitchen tap ran slowly, and these needed overhauling and a check for airlocks in the water supply from her boiler. This was far later than its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale, which it only partially explained by noting its plumbers could not resolve her water pressure that its contractor instead attended on 14 February 2022. While the contractor did attend within the above timescale following the surveyor’s report, it was unsuitable that the resident subsequently had to chase the landlord on 23 February 2022 for an update on follow on works for this.
  3. The landlord should have instead given the resident regular updates on the progress of her water pressure until resolution without her chasing it. This is particularly due to this still being outstanding in February 2022, and when she reported her bath taps coming on and off on 5 May 2022, 124 and 195 calendar days after her October 2021 report, respectively. Following the resident’s 15 November 2022 stage 1 complaint about lacking water pressure and so proper washing facilities, the landlord inspected this in its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale on 6 December 2022. It found she had very low water pressure needing a pump under her cold water tank and boiler, so it requested a booster pump and power supply for this.
  4. It was appropriate that the landlord went on to promptly call and leave the resident a voicemail message about installing the booster pump and power supply for her water pressure on 7 December 2022, which was within the above timescale. It is nevertheless of concern that, while it subsequently also scheduled these works within this timescale for 3 January 2023 following its above inspection, it then rearranged this without explanation for 2, 3 and 9 February 2023, which was unsuitable. This is especially due to the fact that the landlord did not take any action for the resident’s low water pressure from February 2022 until after her November 2022 complaint about this, which was very unreasonable.
  5. Therefore, while the landlord’s 6 January 2023 stage 1 complaint response considered that its previous and subsequently scheduled works would resolve the resident’s low water pressure within its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale, this was incorrect. This is because its latest works to do so in February 2023 were scheduled 468 calendar days after her October 2021 report, and these only took place after she chased and complained about its lack of action and communication about this. Moreover, the resident’s 26 January 2023 final stage complaint explained that the low water pressure meant she struggled to run a bath or wash up, and that at times she had to bathe herself and her child with a bucket, which was inappropriate.
  6. The landlord’s latest works additionally failed to resolve the resident’s low water pressure at the time, as she informed it that this was still low on 23 February 2023, which it repaired her new pump for within the above timescale on 9 March 2023. However, she told it the water pressure remained low on 29 March 2023, so it raised a new job for this for 5 April 2023. The resident then reported the plumber attending this on 4 April 2023 did not address her water pressure, but that they left her without hot water it did not attend to resolve on 5 April 2023 after agreeing to do so, which was unsuitable. Therefore, the landlord’s 4 May 2023 final stage complaint response explained it would attend on 5 May 2023 to bypass the underfloor cold water pipework’s restricted supply.
  7. This meant it was reasonable that the landlord’s final response apologised that the resident felt its service for her low water pressure had been poor and acknowledged this had been delayed, she had to repeatedly chase it, and this caused her inconvenience, which it paid her £1,500 compensation for. This was in line with its compensation policy’s and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance’s recommendations for awards in this range for serious failures having a severe long-term impact on residents, so this was proportionate to recognise the impact she reported from October 2021 to May 2023. The landlord nevertheless still did not resolve the water pressure at that time, which the resident confirmed to it on 11 May 2023.
  8. However, the landlord described the resident as declining the works it offered in April and May 2023 to resolve her low water pressure by repairing or bypassing her underfloor pipework, as she did not want the floor pulled up and did not respond to its offer of the latter works. It subsequently did not take further action for this until its contractor attended and identified an issue with the booster pump that they repaired on 6 July 2023. They nevertheless found that the resident’s cold water tank still did not sufficiently fill and emptied too quickly to use the bath, which needed a new mains water feed and pump to resolve. However, the landlord only discussed arranging these works on 27 February 2024, which it arranged to resolve the water pressure from 21 March 2024.
  9. Therefore, the resident experienced another delay of 322 calendar days after the landlord’s May 2023 final response before it organised works that resolved her low water pressure from March 2024. This was an unacceptably lengthy delay that far exceeded its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale, which its above explanation of her not responding to its offer of bypass works in May 2023 only partially addressed. This is because the landlord only discussed taking further action for its contractor’s July 2023 findings about the effect of the resident’s cold water tank on her water pressure after 236 calendar days in February 2024, before it arranged repairs for this after 259 calendar days from March 2024.
  10. The landlord was therefore responsible for a further unremedied failure in the length of time it took to resolve the resident’s low water pressure by delaying this without explanation for most of the above period, as well as for her resulting inconvenience and its lack of communication about this. This was extremely unreasonable and its earlier apology and compensation payment to her was not proportionate to recognise its additional subsequent failure in responding to her reports about her water pressure. As a result, the landlord has been ordered below to follow the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles to put things right and learn from the outcome of this, as outlined in the conclusion at the end of this assessment.

Bathroom replacement

  1. Following the landlord’s earlier agreement to replace the resident’s bathroom and its asbestos survey for this, its contractor’s 7 October 2021 report for the survey found no urgent materials requiring immediate action for asbestos. This instead advised materials in the bathroom floor needed action or management as part of her bathroom’s refurbishment works. The landlord nevertheless took no further action to replace the resident’s bathroom at that time, and it also did not record any reasons for this not going ahead. This was particularly inappropriate because it raised a legitimate expectation on her part that it would replace the bathroom in September 2021, after she signed an agreement for it to do so and it surveyed this and agreed her colour choices at the time.
  2. It would have been understandable if the resident’s bathroom replacement had been postponed for the landlord to carry out works recommended by its contractor’s asbestos survey as being necessary before this could be replaced. However, the survey report instead only recommended action or management for materials in the floor as part of the replacement works, and so this suggested that the replacement should not be overly delayed for this reason. This meant it was extremely unsuitable that it took until after the resident’s 15 November 2022 stage 1 complaint about her outstanding bathroom replacement, and following the landlord’s September 2021 surveys, for it to communicate with her about this in its 6 January 2023 stage 1 response.
  3. The landlord explained it had worked to restore its systems after the cyber attack on it in June 2022, and its planned investment team completed the above stages prior to beginning the resident’s bathroom renewal in September 2021, but they did not explain why they did not start or communicate about this. It suggested this might have been due to the above asbestos survey, or because the works were overlooked and not rescheduled, but it could not investigate this further due to its contractor’s staff changes. The landlord was also unable to currently replace the bathroom due to a supply chain issue, and the planned investment team’s minimal presence in the resident’s area in the next year, so they would contact her as soon as they could reschedule this.
  4. The landlord therefore apologised and upheld the resident’s complaint for having to complain to it about her outstanding bathroom replacement and her experience, which it described raising an internal process for to monitor this to completion. It also paid her £350 compensation for her inconvenience, chasing, and it not following its process in its failure to renew the bathroom. This was in line with the landlord’s compensation policy’s and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance’s recommended ranges of compensation for considerable failures, which adversely affected the resident, but did not do so permanently. Its above payment was therefore proportionate to partially recognise its failure to replace her bathroom in accordance with its policy and our guidance.
  5. The landlord nevertheless continued to delay replacing the resident’s bathroom from January 2023 onwards, with her 26 January 2023 final stage complaint explaining that her bath was very old, rusted, and had mould around the edges. It then apologised to her again in its 4 May 2023 final stage complaint response for its delay in renewing the bathroom, which its contractor and planned investment team were arranging for 2023-24 and would contact her about closer to the time. The landlord added that it had previously inspected the resident’s bath on 6 December 2022 and found no evidence of rust, which it would only replace if this was damaged or unserviceable, but she disputed this as incorrect on 11 May 2023.
  6. The landlord subsequently told the resident on 5 June 2023 it had surveyed her bathroom and would replace this from 12 June 2023, 157 calendar days after its stage 1 response, which she confirmed it completed. It therefore took 613 calendar days from the bathroom’s asbestos survey report in October 2021 to begin works to replace this in June 2023, which was an extremely excessive delay it acknowledged it was unable to explain from October 2021 to January 2023. This was also not justified by the responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s unspecified timescale for such works. It was additionally unreasonable the resident had to complain for the landlord to update her on the bathroom replacement’s progress, and had to escalate this before it began works.
  7. The landlord was therefore responsible for a further delay in replacing the resident’s bathroom that it did not remedy after only partially remedying its initial delay in doing so, which was inappropriate. It is also concerning that the resident reports she was dissatisfied with the standard of the bathroom replacement works and with these not lasting due to the current worsening condition of her bathroom. Therefore, the landlord’s previous apology and compensation payment were not proportionate to fully recognise its further failures in handling the replacement of the resident’s bathroom, so it has been ordered below to put things right and learn from the outcome of this.

Drains and pipework

  1. After the resident’s previous reports of blocked, backed up, and leaking drains and pipework, she described a blocked drain backing water up into her kitchen sink and bath on 21 October 2021 the landlord attended and raised a job for on 11 November 2021. This was in its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale, but she then told it an external downpipe leaked on 18 November 2021 it attended and reported as a plumbing issue in the above timescale again on 22 November 2021. The resident subsequently described multiple internal and external stack pipe water and sewage leaks on 13 and 20 January 2022 the landlord attended and secured but could not find leaks from in the above timescale on 27 January and 1 February 2022.
  2. However, the landlord noted in response to the resident’s next report of her bath and sink backing up on 5 May 2022 that its drainage contractor was needed for this as water kept backing up at her property. It therefore arranged an attendance for this on 16 May 2022 that it rebooked to 30 May 2022 due to illness, which were both within the above timescale, but she told it when its operatives instead attended on the latter date that its contractor was needed for this. It is of concern that the landlord did not follow its own notes by arranging for its drainage contractor instead of its operatives to attend, especially as the resident’s drainage issues kept occurring, which it had previously been unable to resolve.
  3. It is also concerning that the landlord did not take further action for the resident’s drainage at the time, and she then reported pipework leaking under her kitchen sink on 15 June 2022 it repaired on the same day within its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 24-hour emergency timescale. This was suitable as the leak was uncontainable, but it took until 6 December 2022 to inspect her property again for slow drainage and a leak under her kitchen sink, and for slow drainage from her wash basin and bath that needed silicone renewed, which it requested works and a drainage investigation for. The landlord therefore promptly called and left the resident a voicemail message on 7 December 2022 to originally arrange this for 3 January 2023.
  4. Following the landlord’s above unreasonable delay in taking further action for the resident’s drainage from May to December 2022, it initially scheduled this investigation and works in its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale after its December 2022 inspection for January 2023. It nevertheless subsequently rebooked this to 2 February 2023, which was 57 calendar days later than the inspection, contrary to the policy. In the meantime, the landlord appropriately repaired the resident’s 19 December 2022 uncontainable kitchen sink leak on 20 December 2022 in its policy’s 24-hour emergency timescale. However, she told it on 26 January 2023 that she was not informed until the date of the above appointment that this was rebooked.
  5. The resident added that her kitchen sink still leaked on and off and was slow in draining, causing flies and smells, which the landlord only patch repaired instead of resolving, so this continued to occur. She also described her bathroom’s wash basin as being blocked and lacking an overflow, so this was slow in draining too, with water additionally not draining from her bath that was backed up in heavy rain, together with the wash basin. The resident then continued to report to the landlord on 8 and 23 February 2023, after its latest appointment, that she still had problems with drains, water and waste pipe leaks, and flies resulting from these, which it had not resolved. It nevertheless did not take further action for this at that time, which was unsuitable.
  6. The landlord’s subsequent final stage complaint response on 4 May 2023 nevertheless considered it had resolved the resident’s kitchen sink and bathroom wash basin and bath with its above repairs in December 2022 and February 2023. It added that it had received no further reports of rainwater backing up from drains since the latest repair, but that her building’s drainage had been contracted out for major works. The landlord therefore did not recognise that the resident’s property’s drainage issues were still unresolved, it had delayed addressing these, and it had not remedied its failures in respect of this, which was unreasonable. She also told it on 11 May 2023 that it had not repaired her bath in February 2023, as it had described in its final response.
  7. The landlord then booked another job for its contractor to attend the resident’s slow drainage and rainwater backing up in her bath on 6 July 2023, 56 calendar days after her latest report about this in May 2023, contrary to its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale. It subsequently raised further works after attending in July 2023 for the contractor to address a possible stack pipe leak affecting her property and carry out a drainage investigate of this. The landlord nevertheless did not arrange for its contractor to provide a CCTV survey report for the resident’s drains until 6 February 2024, which recommended descaling and jetting to clear these that it did not complete until 37 calendar days later on 14 March 2024, contrary to the policy.
  8. Therefore, the resident confirmed the landlord took 875 calendar days from her October 2021 blocked and backed up drains report to resolve these in March 2024, which was a completely unacceptable delay its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s unspecified complex repairs timescale did not permit. It is particularly of concern it took until February 2024 to arrange a CCTV drain survey report, which she reported was recommended earlier, as it first identified a drainage contractor’s investigation was needed in May 2022, but it did not request the CCTV survey until 22 January 2024. As the landlord did not acknowledge or remedy this very excessive delay, it has been ordered below to put things right and learn from the outcome of this.

Communal manhole and socket covers and mice

  1. Following the resident’s earlier reports of missing communal manhole and electrical socket covers, and mice in her building’s communal areas, she reported that mice were still present there on 22 February 2022, but no action was taken for them at that time, which was inappropriate. The landlord then noted on 24 February 2022 that the 2 manhole covers were still missing. It therefore asked for these to be replaced and agreed to discuss whether the covers belonged to the water company, as it previously unsuccessfully attempted to source these from suppliers twice in 2020 and 4 times in 2021. However, the landlord subsequently closed this job without recording that it took any further action for this on 8 April 2022, which was unsuitable.
  2. It would have been understandable if the landlord had taken longer than its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day non-emergency repair timescale to replace the missing manhole covers at the resident’s building. This is because it had made earlier unsuccessful attempts to do so, and so it was reasonable for it to discuss if the water company could replace the covers when it had been unable to, which would have justified it doing so within the policy’s unspecified timescale for complex repairs. Nevertheless, it was inappropriate for the landlord to close this job without resolving these works, taking any further action for them, or making an action plan for it to do so.
  3. As the landlord continued to leave the resident’s building’s missing manhole covers unaddressed, her 26 January 2023 final stage complaint confirmed these remained missing since she moved in. It is also concerning that she added she had seen a rat going into a manhole and that these were dangerous trip hazards. The resident additionally told the landlord there were mice in the building’s communal areas since she lived there, but that she had never seen any pest control for them, and that it had not resolved the missing communal electrical socket cover outside her front door since she moved in. However, it again unsuitably took no action for the manhole and electrical socket covers at the time, which she re-reported to it on 2, 8, and 23 February 2023.
  4. It took the landlord until 9 March 2023 to instruct its pest control contractor to inspect and treat the resident’s building’s communal areas, which attempted to contact her about this from 15 March 2023 due to an administrative delay, inspecting the building on 27 March 2023. As the contractor found evidence of a mice infestation, they placed bait for this at that time, retuned to monitor this on 19 April 2023, proofed the building’s communal entrance door on 24 May 2023, and were due to proof a cupboard on 31 May 2023. The landlord’s 4 May 2023 final stage complaint response therefore apologised for missing and not raising pest control jobs for the resident’s previous reports of mice, and for its contractor’s delay in contacting her, which it paid her £150 compensation for.
  5. While it was reasonable the landlord acknowledged and apologised for missing and then delaying its response to the resident’s pest reports, its compensation was not proportionate to recognise that it took 463 calendar days from February 2022 to May 2023 to complete pest control treatment and works. This was an extremely lengthy and inappropriate delay, far in excess of its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale, and both its compensation policy and our remedies guidance permit awards of £600 for such failures over a considerable period of time. Moreover, the landlord’s May 2023 final response incorrectly described a lack of earlier missing manhole and electrical socket cover reports, but it agreed to inspect and resolve these.
  6. The landlord subsequently raised works to replace the resident’s building’s missing manhole covers on 5 June 2023, which was 466 calendar days after it noted these were still missing in February 2022. It was therefore responsible for another very unsuitably excessive delay in resolving this issue, which is especially of concern given she explained that the manholes were a health and safety hazard that it ought to have addressed as soon as possible after its above timescale, if it was unable to do so within this. It was also unreasonable that the landlord did not recognise or attempt to remedy this delay.
  7. Nevertheless, there is no evidence the landlord received reports of the missing communal electrical socket cover outside the resident’s front door until January 2023, which it then repaired on 11 May 2023. Its delay in doing so was therefore not as lengthy as for her other communal works, but it still took 105 calendar days to carry out works for this, contrary to its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale, which was inappropriate. It is also concerning that the resident reported that the landlord only completed the above works after both she and her local councillor complained to it about these, and that she required further repairs to her intercom after this was damaged during the electrical socket cover works.
  8. The landlord was therefore responsible for a series of failures over a considerable period of time regarding the resident’s reports of missing communal manhole and electrical socket covers, and mice in her building’s communal areas, which it took far too long to resolve. Moreover, it is of concern that she states that mice have recently been reported in the building’s communal areas again, and that she is unaware of any pest control for this. As a result, the landlord has been ordered below to put things right and learn from the outcome of its handling of the resident’s communal repair and pest reports.

Ventilation

  1. The landlord’s 6 December 2022 inspection of the resident’s property found issues there including a lack of extractor fans to provide ventilation in both her bathroom and toilet. It therefore requested that upgraded envirovent fans be fitted in the bathroom and toilet at that time, and it left her a voicemail message on 7 December 2022 to arrange these works, which it attended her property for on 14 December 2022. However, the resident reported the landlord was unable to install either fan on the latter date, told her the existing holes and vents were sufficient, and was unable to make contact to authorise works for this at the time, leaving without fitting anything. Her 26 January 2023 final stage complaint therefore described this and sewage smells coming from the holes and vents.
  2. The landlord subsequently scheduled another job on 26 April 2023 to install new envirovent fans in the resident’s bathroom and toilet, and its 4 May 2023 final stage complaint response explained it had failed to correctly raise these works in December 2022. This was because it requested replacement instead of new fans, which it had been unable to fit without approval, so the job was not completed at that time, and this was still incomplete due to the complexity of fitting new fans and a power supply. The landlord therefore confirmed it had now arranged to do so on 10 May 2023, and the resident confirmed that a new extractor fan was installed in her bathroom on that date, but not in her toilet, which still currently has only a vent and a hole for ventilation.
  3. The resident therefore also seeks an extractor fan in her toilet to ventilate this and avoid the sewage smell she previously experienced there when the stack pipe leaked, in line with the landlord’s December 2022 inspection’s recommendation. It was suitable that it eventually fitted the extractor fan in her bathroom, as its inspection also recommended, and that its final stage complaint response acknowledged its failure in previously doing so there and in her toilet, as well as the length of time it was taking to carry out these works. It was nevertheless unreasonable that the landlord took 155 calendar days to install an extractor fan in the resident’s bathroom, and that it did not do so at all in her toilet, contrary to its above inspection’s recommendation for it to do so.
  4. The landlord’s responsive repairs and maintenance policy permitted complex repairs to be completed within a longer, unspecified timescale than its 28 calendar days for other non-emergency works. However, this did not justify the inappropriately excessive delay in it fitting a bathroom extractor fan from December 2022 to May 2023, or its failure to install one in the resident’s toilet. It is also concerning that the landlord took no action for this in the meantime, did not communicate with her about these works, only fitted the bathroom extractor fan until she complained about this, and did not give her any reasons for not installing one in her toilet, which was unsuitable. Moreover, it failed to apologise or otherwise remedy this after acknowledging its delay.
  5. Therefore, the landlord was responsible for failures in unreasonably delaying the resident’s bathroom extractor fan, not providing the toilet extractor fan its inspection recommended, not communicating about or justifying this to her, and not remedying these failings. As a result, it has been ordered below to put things right and learn from the outcome of its handling of her reports of a lack of ventilation in her bathroom and toilet.

Conclusion

  1. The landlord’s £2,000 compensation payment to the resident for its failings in relation to her property’s low water pressure and bathroom replacement, and for a mice infestation in her building’s communal areas, was only proportionate to partially recognise its failures in responding to her reports of works. This is because it did not put right its further delays in resolving the above issues, or remedy any of its delays in addressing her drains and pipework, communal manhole and electrical socket covers, and bathroom ventilation, with it not resolving her toilet ventilation at all.
  2. The landlord has therefore been ordered below to write to the resident to apologise for the above further failings identified by this investigation. It has also been ordered to pay her additional compensation totalling £4,050 for the following unremedied delays. These are broken down into: £1,000 for 322 further calendar days of low water pressure; £1,000 for 157 further calendar days to replace the bathroom; £150 for 463 calendar days to complete pest control; £1,000 for 875 calendar days to resolve drains and pipework; £150 for 466 calendar days to replace communal manhole covers; £150 for 105 calendar days to replace an electrical socket cover; and £600 for 155 calendar days to resolve the lack of bathroom ventilation and not doing so in the toilet.
  3. The above amounts are in line with the landlord’s compensation policy’s and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance’s recommendations. These include £1,000 for failures that had a significant impact on the resident over a significant period of time, £600 for considerable delays in resolution, and over £100 for delays in getting matters resolved. The landlord has also been ordered below to contact the resident to arrange for it to attend to resolve the lack of ventilation in her toilet. It has additionally been ordered to learn from the outcome of her case via a senior management review of its handling of her reports of works to identify exactly why its failings in responding to these happened, and to outline exactly how it proposes to prevent them in the future.
  4. Following the cyber attack on the landlord in June 2022, its interim complaints policy permitted it to respond to stage 1 complaints within 20 working days, and to final stage complaints within 40 working days. It nevertheless took 35 working days to respond to her 15 November 2022 stage 1 complaint on 6 January 2023, and 67 working days to respond to her 26 January 2023 final stage complaint on 4 May 2023, which was inappropriate. The landlord also acknowledged that it did not confirm the scope of the stage 1 complaint, and so its stage 1 response only addressed 2 of issues that she was dissatisfied about, which was unsuitable.
  5. It was therefore reasonable and in line with its compensation policy and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance that the landlord apologised to the resident for its complaint handling delays and for not confirming the scope of her stage 1 complaint, which it paid her a total of £250 compensation for. This accorded with the policy’s and guidance’s recommendations of this range of awards for delaying and failing to address all relevant complaint aspects, and so this was proportionate to recognise its poor complaint handling in her case. However, the landlord has been recommended below to review its staff’s training needs in relation to its complaints policy to ensure it issues timely complaint responses and confirms the full scope of residents’ complaints in every case.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in:
    1. Its response to the resident’s reports regarding works for:
      1. Low water pressure at her property.
      2. The replacement of her property’s bathroom.
      3. Blocked, backed up, and leaking drains and pipework at her property.
      4. Missing manhole and electrical socket covers and a mice infestation in her building’s communal areas.
      5. A lack of ventilation in her bathroom and toilet.

Orders and recommendation

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Write to the resident within 4 weeks to apologise for the further failings by it identified by this investigation, accept responsibility for these, and acknowledge their impact on her.
    2. Pay the resident additional compensation totalling £4,050 within 4 weeks in recognition of its unremedied delays to her works, which is broken down into:
      1. £1,000 for 322 further calendar days to resolve low water pressure.
      2. £1,000 for 157 further calendar days to replace the bathroom.
      3. £150 for 463 calendar days to complete pest control.
      4. £1,000 for 875 calendar days to resolve drains and pipework.
      5. £150 for 466 calendar days to replace communal manhole covers.
      6. £150 for 105 calendar days to replace an electrical socket cover.
      7. £600 for 155 calendar days to resolve the lack of bathroom ventilation and not doing so in the toilet.
    3. Contact the resident within 4 weeks to arrange for it to attend to resolve the lack of ventilation in her toilet.
    4. In accordance with paragraph 54g of the Scheme, carry out a senior management review of its handling of the resident’s works within 8 weeks to identify exactly why its failings in handling her reports of outstanding works happened, and to outline exactly how it proposes to prevent these from occurring again in the future. It shall present the review to its senior leadership team and provide her and the Ombudsman with a copy of its review. This review should include:
      1. Its staff’s and contractors’ training needs on its repairs and maintenance, pest and wildlife, and vulnerable residents policies.

This is to ensure it provides prompt and effective responses, investigations, works and updates, addresses all concerns raised, and considers residents’ vulnerabilities and in every works case.

  1. The landlord shall contact the Ombudsman within 4 and 8 weeks to confirm that it has complied with the above orders and whether it will follow the below recommendation.

Recommendation

  1. It is recommended that the landlord review its staff’s training needs in relation to its complaints policy to ensure it issues timely complaint responses and confirms the full scope of residents’ complaints in every case.