Dacorum Borough Council (202206306)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202206306

Dacorum Borough Council

16 February 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. The renewal works to the kitchen, bathroom, and downstairs toilet.
2. The resident’s associated complaint.

Background

The resident has a flexible tenancy with a local authority which began on 9 November 2019. The resident lives in the property with her 2 children, 1 of whom has vulnerabilities.
On 28 March 2020 the Government issued guidance for landlords, tenants and local authorities concerning the COVID-19 pandemic. The guidance recommended that “access to a property is only proposed for serious and urgent repairs.”
On 18 May 2020 the housing minister sent a letter to all social housing residents saying that “as we start to ease lockdown measures, landlords should be able to carry out routine as well as essential repairs for most households. There will be a backlog of repairs that they will need to address, so it may take longer than normal to carry out more non-essential work.”
On 1 June 2020 the Government issued updated guidance for landlords, tenants and local authorities concerning the COVID-19 pandemic. The guidance said that landlords “can now take steps to address wider issues of repairs and safety inspections, provided these are undertaken in line with public health advice” and that “where workforce is available and resources allow, landlords or contractors are now able to visit most properties to carry out both routine and essential inspections and repairs, as well as any planned internal works.”
On 12 January 2021 the resident contacted her MP about the delay in the renewal works to her kitchen. She told the MP:
1. When she was offered the property, the landlord told her the kitchen would be replaced. It told her to move in so she could choose the kitchen design.
2. The works were put on hold due to COVID19. She contacted the landlord in June/July 2020 when restrictions were lifted and was told it was only carrying out emergency repairs.
3. Her kitchen was in disrepair, and she could not live with it anymore. She said it was a huge inconvenience, unsafe and unhealthy and it was damaging her and her children’s mental health.
The landlord wrote to the MP on 11 February 2021. It said two surveyors visited the resident in February 2021 and discussed that its kitchen and bathroom renewals were on hold. It said once it recommenced renewal works the resident’s property would be one of the first to have the works completed.
On 8 November 2021 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord. She said the kitchen, bathroom and downstairs toilet should have been upgraded in 2019 but she was still waiting for this to happen. She said her kitchen was unsafe.
On 29 November 2021 the landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response. It stated that it developed a 12-week programme for new tenants to have the choice on the kitchen design and colour choices. The kitchen would then be fitted within a 12-week period. It apologised that this was not communicated to her. It said when it made the decision to add this property onto the 12-week programme it was not aware of the pending impact of COVID-19. Due to COVID-19 these programmes have been delayed and it could not provide a date on when they would commence. It said it was working with its contractor to recommence works, however, due to the impact of COVID-19 it was having to source new contractors and it was struggling to get materials. The landlord provided details of its surveyor, so the resident had a point of contact.
On 28 June 2022 the resident raised a complaint. She said she had attempted to call the landlord several times, left voicemails and sent text messages but she had not received a response. She raised the following issues:
1. She was still waiting for the paperwork from its visit on 18 May 2022.
2. The kitchen plan had incorrect information on it.
3. Despite contacting her MP in 2021 she still does not have a start date or timescale for the renewal works to her kitchen, bathroom, and downstairs toilet.
4. The water company had charged her £300 for the toilet leak she reported, which she cannot afford to pay.
The resident chased a response from the landlord several times from June to August 2022.
On 17 August 2022 the landlord apologised for the delay in responding to her complaint.
This Service contacted the landlord on 22 September 2022 and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint by 6 October 2022.
On 29 September 2022 the landlord contacted the resident about the toilet leak and asked her to provide water bills so it could investigate her complaint.
On 5 October 2022 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It:
1. Apologised for the delay in its complaint response and said it was taking significant steps to improve wait times.
2. Apologised for its poor communication and stated it would raise this with its repairs contractor and would develop an improvement plan. It gave the resident the contact details for a named person from its organisation and its contractor, so she knew who to contact going forward.
3. Said there had been an oversight with the toilet leak and asked the resident to provide her water bills so it could investigate a refund for her water bill.
4. Stated there were no outstanding repairs.
5. Stated that the planned works team visited her to design the kitchen. The kitchen and bathroom were on the priority list for renewal, and it was aiming to complete them by January 2023.
6. Reviewed the asbestos survey and all asbestos found in the property was low or very low risk. When the kitchen is renewed the asbestos floor tiles would likely be replaced.
The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 6 October 2022. She said she has been given multiple people to contact and no one was responding to her. She said her kitchen was in disrepair, she had waited over 3 years for a functioning kitchen which was having an impact on her children. She said she has had 3 different companies completing kitchen plans and the works keep getting delayed. The resident said she wanted the works completed by the end of November 2022.
The landlord acknowledged the resident had escalated her complaint on 6 October 2022 and said it would respond within 20 working days.
On 17 October 2022 the resident’s local MP contacted the landlord stating the resident had contacted them last year about the renewal works to her kitchen, bathroom, and downstairs toilet. The MP said they understood the works were still outstanding and asked the landlord to investigate this case as a matter of urgency. They said they felt the landlord should reimburse the resident for the water bill.
On 27 October 2022 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It stated it provided as much information as it could regarding the renewal works in its stage 1 complaints response and said it would contact her when it had a confirmed date for the works to take place. It apologised for the on-going delays and said it was working through a backlog of repairs and had problems getting hold of materials and labour. It said it was working hard to resolve this.
The resident contacted the Ombudsman as she was dissatisfied the landlord did not give her date for the works to be carried out and wanted compensation for the delay.

Events following completion of the landlord’s internal complaints process

The renewal works to the kitchen were completed on 16 December 2022.
On 8 February 2023 the resident contacted the landlord and stated there was outstanding issues with the renewal works. She stated:
1. The kitchen worktop and corner unit were not fitted correctly.
2. The contractor damaged the oven, a kitchen drawer, and her carpets.
3. The works on the bathroom had been ongoing for a month.
The renewal works to the bathroom and downstairs toilet were completed on 20 February 2023.
On 17 October 2023 the landlord contacted the resident and apologised that she had to approach the Ombudsman to get the outstanding issues to be acknowledged and actioned. It stated the head of assets management would visit her to discuss the issues she had raised. This included:
1. Its contractors damaged her carpets and the landlord said they would get them professionally cleaned.
2. The front door and hallway wallpaper had also been damaged.
3. Issues with poor workmanship in the installation of the new kitchen.
4. The landlord told the resident the kitchen and bathroom ceiling would be skimmed when the asbestos checks were carried out and this was not done.
5. The tiling in the downstairs toilet was poor.
6. The walls were painted magnolia when the resident had requested, they were painted white.
7. The resident raised concerns that a contractor staff member was under the influence of alcohol when tiling her bathroom. The bathroom was retiled.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The resident told the Ombudsman that during the renewal works there was poor workmanship and internal decorations were damaged. As these issues occurred after the completion of the landlord’s internal complaints process the Ombudsman cannot consider them within this investigation. If the resident wishes to pursue these issues, she will need to contact the landlord and raise a separate complaint. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to the involvement of the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman has included a recommendation within this report for the landlord to consider these issues.
Whilst this Service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on the resident’s health or wellbeing. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the resident’s claims that the landlord’s handling of the renewal works had a negative impact on her and her household’s health and wellbeing. These matters are better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident and her household.

The landlord’s obligations

The landlord has a statutory duty under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to keep in repair and proper working order the structure and exterior of the property, as well as the installations for the supply of power, heating, and water.
The Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 requires landlords to ensure their properties are fit for human habitation at the beginning of, and throughout, the tenancy. The courts have held that a property is not reasonably fit for habitation if the state of repair means an occupier might be injured or experience injury to health because of ordinary use of the property.
The landlord has not provided any policies or procedures which set out the frequency of its home renewal or refurbishment programs. Nonetheless, the Decent Home Standard sets out the required standards of a property for it to be considered decent for living. One of the criteria for a property to be considered a decent home is that the kitchen should be “reasonably modern” which is taken to be “20 years or less”.
The landlord’s repairs handbook states that its target response time is 24 hours for emergency repairs and 20 working days for all other repairs.
The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints procedure. It states it will acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days, and it aims to respond to stage 1 complaints within 15 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
The landlord did not have a compensation policy in place at the time of this complaint. It told this Service any compensation offered was calculated using the Housing Ombudsman’s website.

The landlord’s handling of the renewal works to the kitchen, bathroom and downstairs toilet

The resident was offered this property in November 2019 and was told the kitchen, bathroom, and downstairs toilet would be renewed. She was told to move into the property before the works were carried out so she could be involved with the design. The renewal works to the kitchen were completed on 16 December 2022, and the bathroom and downstairs toilet were completed on 20 February 2023.
It is recognised that delays between March 2020 and June 2020 would have been due to the Government restrictions that had been imposed on the landlord during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic would have impacted the landlord’s services, and it would have needed time for its operations to recover. This Service would not have expected to see non-urgent repairs or renewal works to be completed after the restrictions were lifted in May 2020, but it would have expected to see the landlord contact the resident to update her with estimated timescales for the renewal works. No evidence was provided to this Service that the landlord did this. The landlord acted inappropriately by not keeping the resident updated. This was not customer focused or proactive and caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
It is understandable that the resident was distressed when she was told that the renewal works to her kitchen, bathroom and downstairs toilet would be delayed. In February 2021 the landlord told the local MP that the resident’s property would be one of the first properties to have the renewal works completed. Although it was reasonable for the landlord to pause any planned works due to COVID-19, telling the resident this would have raised her expectations. The renewal works were not started until 1 year and 10 months later. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to manage the resident’s expectations.
Between November 2021 and November 2022, the resident reported several times that her kitchen was unsafe and not functional. This included broken cupboard drawers, sink drainage board, and floor tiles. The evidence shows that a surveyor attended the property in February 2021 to discuss the delays with the kitchen and bathroom renewals with the resident. However, no evidence was provided to this Service that the landlord investigated whether the reported issues needed to be treated as repairs in line with its repairs policy. This Service would have expected the landlord to investigate whether it had any repairing obligations, if the property was fit for human habitation and that there were no health and safety issues. It should have communicated its findings to the resident. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to consider any repairing obligations with the existing kitchen structure before the renewal programme took place. This left the resident feeling frustrated and that the landlord was not taking her situation seriously.
The landlord was aware of the resident’s son’s vulnerabilities. It should have communicated with the resident about any potential risks and carried out a risk assessment. No evidence was provided to this Service to show the landlord carried out a risk assessment or considered the household’s vulnerabilities throughout the life of this case. This was a significant failing.
When the landlord became aware there was going to be a delay with the renewal works it should have considered what impact this was going to have on the resident and her household. A landlord must consider loss of amenity and what interim measures could be considered and put in place. This could include temporary solutions, support from local services, or a decant. Interim measures may not always be possible, but a landlord must show they have explored all options and explain to the resident why such measures may not be put in place. There is no evidence the landlord investigated or communicated with the resident about whether interim measures could have been put in place. It was unreasonable the landlord left the resident and her household living with a kitchen that was not fully functional for over 3 years with no consideration of any interim measures.
A landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records of repairs, responses, inspections, investigations, and communications. Good record keeping is vital to evidence the action a landlord has taken and failure to keep adequate records indicates that the landlord’s processes are not operating effectively. The landlord’s staff should be aware of a landlord’s record management policy and procedures and adhere to these. Throughout this investigation the Ombudsman’s work has been impacted by the landlord’s poor-quality records. The Ombudsman asked the landlord to provide evidence of its communication with the resident and the actions it took in relation to the renewal works, but it failed to provide this. This was a failure by the landlord which contributed to the other failures identified in this report.
When there are failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
In this case the landlord failed to investigate the resident’s reports of repairs to the kitchen. It failed to carry out a risk assessment and it did not consider the vulnerabilities in the household. It did not consider any interim measures or offer support to the household. There was evidence of poor record keeping and poor communication. The landlord acknowledged the delays and its poor communication and put things right by completing the renewal works. However, it failed to offer any compensation to the resident for its failings and it did not demonstrate that it understood the detriment this caused the resident and her household.
Based on the above, the Ombudsman finds maladministration for the multiple failures identified in the landlord’s handling of the renewal works to the kitchen, bathroom, and downstairs toilet.

The landlord’s handing of the resident’s related complaint

The resident raised a complaint on 8 November 2021. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 29 November 2021. This was within its target response time of 15 working days. It is unclear from the landlord’s records if the resident requested an escalation of this complaint. The resident told the landlord in June 2022 that she had attempted to call the landlord several times, left voicemails and sent text messages but she had not received a response. The lack of communication from the landlord led her to make a second complaint about the same issue. This was a failing on the part of the landlord which caused the resident distress, time and trouble in pursuing the complaint.
The resident submitted a complaint on 28 June 2022. The landlord failed to acknowledge the resident’s complaint within its 5 working day timescale. The lack of communication from the landlord led the resident to chase a response to her complaint several times in July and August 2022. She also contacted the Ombudsman for assistance with her complaint. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to manage the resident’s expectations and its poor communication caused her distress and inconvenience.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 5 October 2022. This was 70 working days later, which was outside its target timescale of 15 working days. It is noted the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response after the Ombudsman intervened. This was an inappropriate delay.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 27 October 2022. This was 15 working days after the resident escalated her complaint, which was within its 20-working day target response time.
In its stage 2 response the landlord acknowledged and apologised it was taking a long time to upgrade the kitchen. It said it was working through a backlog of repairs and had issues getting materials and labour. It said it would contact the resident when it had a confirmed date for the works. The landlord failed to respond to the resident’s concerns about the kitchen being in an unusable condition and that the kitchen floor tiles were cracked, and bits were breaking off. The landlord acted inappropriately as it failed to meaningfully engage with the resident’s complaint, it did not provide detailed responses to the issues raised and it failed to fully consider the impact on the resident.
In the landlord’s stage 1 and 2 complaint responses it told the resident she could escalate her complaint to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, when it should have referred her to the Housing Ombudsman. As the resident was in touch with this Service throughout the complaint procedure it is unlikely this caused her any detriment. However, the landlord must make sure it updates it complaints policy and refers its residents to the correct Ombudsman.
In summary, landlords must have an effective complaint process to provide a good service to their residents. An effective complaint process means landlords can fix problems quickly, learn from their mistakes and build good relationships with residents. In this case the landlord failed to accept the resident’s initial complaint and failed to provide a stage 1 complaint response without intervention from the Ombudsman. The landlord failed to keep the resident updated, it did not meaningfully engage with the resident’s complaint, and it did not provide detailed responses to the issues raised. The landlord acknowledged its complaint handling failures and apologised to the resident. However, it failed to demonstrate that it understood the detriment caused to the resident and did not offer any redress.
Based on the above, the Ombudsman finds maladministration for the failures identified in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

The Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the renewal works to the kitchen, bathroom, and downstairs toilet.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident, this must be done by a member of the senior leadership team.
2. Pay the resident £1050 compensation. This is broken down as:
  1. £800 for the distress and inconvenience and time and trouble caused to the resident because of its handling of the renewal works to the kitchen, bathroom, and downstairs toilet.
  2. £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its complaint handling failures.
3. Consider whether, based on the findings of this report, further compensation is due for further delays, distress and inconvenience and time and trouble from October 2022 to the date of this report. The landlord’s decision is to be signed off by a senior member of staff. The landlord is to then to write to the resident and this Service to confirm its position with an explanation.
Within 8 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to complete a case review on the issues identified in this report and its overall failures. It must provide a copy of the case review to this Service.

Recommendations

It is recommended the landlord considers the issues raised by the resident in regard to the poor workmanship and damage caused to her internal decoration and fixtures and fittings when the renewal works were carried out. The landlord should consider whether:
1. It has affected a lasting resolution to these issues and communicate this with the resident specifying what that resolution was and when it was affected or set out how and when it will diagnose the issues and affect a solution.
2. The resident could make a claim through its insurance and if so advise the resident how to do this.
If the landlord has not already done so it should complete a self-assessment against the Ombudsman’s knowledge and information management spotlight report.