Read our damp and mould report focusing on Awaab's Law

Crawley Borough Council (202329723)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202329723

Crawley Borough Council

13 March 2025

 

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 handling of:
    1. Repairs to an uneven communal pavement and drain.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The resident has a disability which the landlord is aware of.
  2. In June 2022, the resident contacted the landlord and reported an issue with uneven pavement slabs on the communal pathway serving her property.
  3. In July 2022, the landlord’s operative inspected the uneven pavement slabs.
  4. On 31 May 2023, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord. She explained she previously reported an issue about the uneven pavement, but the landlord had not carried out any works. The resident stated the pathway, and the drain were uneven and dangerous. She also stated she had a disability which affected her feet, which meant she could trip easily.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 14 July 2023. It apologised for the delay in updating her about the works to the pathway and drain. The landlord explained it had submitted quotes for the pavement works to its area surveyor for approval. It also stated as there were leaseholders living within the building, it would need to issue a section 20 notice to the leaseholders because of the value of the works. The landlord explained the consultation period was 30 days. It also confirmed it could arrange the works if no objections were raised during the consultation period.
  6. On 1 September 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of its complaints process. She explained contractors had attended twice to inspect the pavement and provide a quote for the works. However, she stated the landlord had still not issued the section 20 notice to leaseholders and the repairs to the pavement were still outstanding.
  7. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 29 September 2023. It acknowledged that there had been a delay in its surveyors approving the quotes for the works to the pathway. The landlord also apologised for the delay. It confirmed it had now issued the section 20 notice to leaseholders, and the closing date was 3 November 2023. The landlord stated it would provide the resident with a further update after the consultation period had ended.
  8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated her desired outcome was for the landlord to repair the pavement and drain.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to an uneven communal pavement and drain.

  1. The landlord has told the Ombudsman that it did not have a repairs policy in place at the time of the complaint. In May 2024, it confirmed it was drafting a repairs policy.
  2. As the landlord did not have a repairs policy in place at the time, we have looked at repair timescales which would be considered good practice. Generally, emergency repairs should be attended to and made safe within 24 hours. Whereas non-emergency repairs should be attended to within 28 days. However, it is recognised that some repairs may take longer than 28 days due to the need to order parts or the need for a specialist contractor.
  3. In addition, as the resident was a secure tenant, the landlord would be responsible for repairs to the communal pavement and drain.
  4. In June 2022, the resident contacted the landlord and reported an issue with uneven pavement slabs on the communal pathway. Shortly after, the landlord’s operative carried out an inspection of the pathway. The operative identified that some of the pavement slabs were uneven and stated it was a potential trip hazard. It stated the pavement slabs would need to be re-laid. The landlord acted appropriately by arranging for the communal pavement to be inspected.
  5. Following the inspection of the pavement, there was a considerable delay in the landlord taking any further action. The landlord’s records from December 2022 explain that there was a leaseholder living within the building. Therefore, a section 20 notice would need to be issued due to the expected value of the works. The landlord stated it would require 2 quotes from contractors for the pavement works. The landlord correctly identified its required next steps to proceed with the works. However, it failed to complete the necessary action to obtain the quotes for the works and issue the section 20 notice to the leaseholders. The delay by the landlord was unreasonable.
  6. Due to the pavement and drain works remaining outstanding, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord on 31 May 2023. She explained the communal pathway and drain were uneven and dangerous. The resident also explained she had a disability which affected her feet, which meant she could trip easily.
  7. On 16 June 2023 and 5 July 2023, two external contractors provided the landlord with quotes for the pavement and drain works.
  8. The landlord provided it stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 14 July 2023. It apologised for the delay in updating her about the works. It was a positive step that the landlord recognised the delays and apologised. However, considering the length of the delay, it would also have been reasonable for the landlord to offer compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused.
  9. After the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response, there was a further delay in it issuing the section 20 notice to the leaseholders within the building. Due to this, the resident contacted the landlord on 1 September 2023 and requested her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint process.
  10. Following the resident’s escalation request, the landlord’s surveyor visited to inspect the communal pavement and drain. The surveyor’s report stated the paved area in front of the property was in a poor and unsafe condition. They also stated that the drain was pushing out from the surrounding paving slabs. The surveyor recommended the existing pavement slabs to be removed and renewed.
  11. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 29 September 2023. It apologised for the delay in its surveyors approving the quotes for the pavement works. The landlord confirmed it had issued the section 20 notice to leaseholders, and the closing date was 3 November 2023. The landlord stated it would provide the resident with a further update after the consultation period had ended. It is recognised that the landlord was required to issue the section 20 notice to the leaseholders within the building. However, the delay in the landlord issuing the section 20 notice was unreasonable and would have delayed the completion of the pavement and drain works.
  12. On 18 November 2023, the resident contacted the landlord asking for an update because it had failed to update her after the section 20 consultation period had ended. The landlord agreed in its stage 2 complaint response that it would update the resident after the consultation period. Therefore, it had failed to carry out the agreed action, which was unreasonable.
  13. On 1 December 2023, the landlord responded to the resident’s update request. It apologised for the delay in responding and explained that no observations were raised during the section 20 consultation period. Therefore, it confirmed it had booked the pavement and drain work for 18 December 2023. However, it explained this was subject to weather and ground conditions. The landlord’s contractor completed the works to the pavement and drain during December 2023, as agreed.
  14. After the landlord’s contractor completed the pavement and drain works. The resident emailed the landlord on 2 January 2024 and stated she was unhappy with the quality of the works. She explained the contractors only replaced some of the pavement slabs and stated that some slabs broke and were replaced with cement. The resident also stated that the contractors used the wrong type of cement, and they filled the drain stopcock with cement, which had made it inaccessible. Shortly after, the landlord responded to the resident’s email and stated it would arrange for its surveyor to carry out a post inspection of the works. The landlord responded reasonably by confirming it would arrange an inspection of the completed works. The surveyor inspection took place on 17 April 2024. However, the delay in the inspection being carried out was unreasonable and was approximately 3 months after the resident had raised the issue about the quality of the works.
  15. The landlord’s internal records from 15 January 2024 and 29 January 2024 state that the stopcock located outside the front door of the property had been filled with cement, which had hardened. It explained due to this, the stopcock was inaccessible and required fixing. The records also state that some of the pointing work to the front area had already cracked and fallen away. The landlord requested the contractor to reattend to resolve the issue with the stopcock and repair the pointing issue. The landlord took the appropriate steps by asking its contractor to reattend to resolve the outstanding repair issues from the completed pavement works.
  16. Shortly after the landlord’s contractor reattended in February 2024 to resolve the issue with the stopcock, which had been filled with cement and the pointing issue. The landlord acted reasonably by completing the required follow-up repair works.
  17. On 15 May 2024, the landlord emailed the resident to update her on the findings from the post inspection of the pavement works. It referenced the surveyor’s notes, and it also confirmed it had discussed the findings with its maintenance manager. The landlord concluded that the pavement works were carried out to a good standard and the cement would tone down overtime. It explained it would not be carrying out any further work on the pavement and stated it would await to hear feedback from the Ombudsman about the quality of the works.
  18. The surveyor and the landlord’s maintenance manager did not recommend any further work to the pavement. Therefore, the landlord provided a reasonable response, as it was entitled to rely on the expertise of its own qualified surveyor, and we have not seen evidence to confirm the surveyor’s assessment was incorrect. The Ombudsman recognises that some of the pavement slabs look different. However, as the surveyor stated the paving was flat and did not require further works. We agree the landlord is not required to complete any further works to the pavement and drain.
  19. Its positive that the landlord eventually completed the required repairs to the pavement and drain. However, it took the landlord around 18 months from when the resident reported the issue to complete all the repairs, which was unreasonable. The landlord acknowledged there were delays in completing the repairs in its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses. However, it only apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused by the repair delays. Therefore, there has been maladministration by the landlord in its handling of repairs to an uneven communal pavement and drain.
  20. It would be appropriate for the landlord to offer the resident £250 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its poor communication and delays in completing the pavement and drain repairs. The compensation awarded is in line with the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation, which is set out in our remedies guidance (published on our website). The remedies guidance suggests awards of £100 to £600 where there has been a failure by the landlord, which adversely affected the resident, but there may be no permanent impact. In this case, there was no permanent impact as the repairs to resolve the uneven pavement and drain were eventually completed. Although there was distress and inconvenience for the resident before the repairs were completed.

The associated complaint

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states that a stage 1 response should be provided within 10 working days of the complaint. It also explains that a stage 2 response should be provided within 20 working days from the request to escalate the complaint. The landlord’s complaints policy includes the same timescales as referenced in the Code.
  2. There was a delay in the landlord providing its stage 1 complaint response to the resident. On 31 May 2023, the resident submitted her complaint to the landlord. However, the landlord did not provide its stage 1 complaint response to the resident until 14 July 2023. The response was approximately 22 working days late and not compliant with the Code or the landlord’s own complaints policy.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on time and within 20 working days timescale referenced in the Code and the landlord’s own complaints policy. The resident requested her complaint to be escalated on 1 September 2023 and the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 29 September 2023.
  4. The landlord failed to acknowledge the delay in providing its stage 1 complaint response to the resident. Although there was only a small delay, it would still have caused inconvenience to the resident and was not compliant with the Code or the landlord’s complaints policy. Therefore, there has been a service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. In this instance, it would be reasonable and proportionate for the landlord to provide a written apology to the resident for the delay. The apology is in line with the remedies referenced in the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance referenced above.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to an uneven pavement and drain.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was a service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident for its complaint handling delay.
    2. Pay the resident £250 compensation for its handling of repairs to an uneven pavement and drain.
  2. The landlord must comply with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this determination.