Derwent Housing Association Limited (202211282)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202211282

Derwent Housing Association Limited

28 March 2023

 

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman, and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the level of compensation awarded for acknowledged service failures in the landlord’s response to reports of problems with drainage at the property.

Background

  1. The resident occupies the property, a two-bedroom house, under an assured shorthold tenancy. The resident lives in the property with her partner and three young children.
  2. On 2 October 2019 the resident reported to the landlord that the down pipe at the back of the property was damaged, causing water to gather at the back door when there was heavy rain. An operative attended on 10 October 2019 and cleared the drain, but the situation was not resolved. Further work was carried out to extend the drains on 4 February 2020 but, again, this did not resolve the issue with flooding of the drains at the property causing water to flood through the back door into the living room.
  3. On 13 March 2020 there was a joint inspection between the landlord and Environmental Health, and a recommendation was made to redirect the rainwater from the ACO drains to a manhole on the property. These works were not carried out, and following a pause in repairs during the first Covid 19 lockdown, some minor works were carried out to rod the drains and replace the storm guard on the door in June 2020.
  4. These further repairs did not permanently resolve the flooding issues and, on 28 January 2021, the resident reported ongoing issues to Environmental Health at the local authority, who contacted the landlord on her behalf. The landlord acknowledges that no further action was taken at this time, nor following a further email from the local authority on 17 February 2021. The resident contacted the landlord again on 28 July 2021 and 29 September 2021 but, in spite of further works to the door and guttering, the issue with the drains and flooding remained unresolved.
  5. On 16 November 2021 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord and requested compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay, and reimbursement for the damage to her property.
  6. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint on 3 December 2021, apologising for delays in resolving the flooding issues at the property and offering compensation of £100 as an apology and £96 (£4 per day) for use of a dehumidifier. The resident rejected the offer of compensation as inadequate and noted that it was premature, as the issues with the drainage and flooding had still not been resolved. The landlord responded to the resident in their stage 2 complaint response dated 25 January 2022, by offering a further £300 (a total of £496).
  7. The resident escalated her complaint by email to the Ombudsman on 30 August 2022. The resident has confirmed that she is dissatisfied with the level of compensation, which she believes should be higher. The Ombudsman understands that the repair was matter was resolved in 2022.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. At both stage one and stage two of the landlord’s complaints process, the landlord has acknowledged service failures in their response to reports of problems with drainage at the property. This investigation will therefore focus on the timing and impact of the acknowledged service failures, in order to determine whether the level of compensation awarded by the landlord was appropriate.
  2. Whilst this service is an alternative to the courts, it is unsuitable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental effect on a resident’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the aspects of the resident’s complaint concerning the impact on the health of the resident and her family. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim.

Level of compensation awarded for acknowledged service failures in the landlord’s response to reports of problems with drainage at the property.

  1. The landlord confirmed, in its stage one response to the resident’s complaint, that the usual standard for routine repairs is 28 days, but it allowed an additional 28 days if resources or materials are needed. In this investigation, these timescales will therefore be taken as a baseline against which to consider the landlord’s action in this case.
  2. On 2 October 2019 the resident reported issues with the down pipe at the back of the property being damaged and reported that, when it rained, water was gathering at the back door. In response to this report, on 10 October 2019 the landlord attended the property and cleared a blocked ACO drain.
  3. On 4 November 2019, the resident reported that slugs were entering the property via the back door. On 11 November 2019 she reported that the garden was flooding again, and that water was entering through the back door. The landlord attended the same day but no action was taken until the following day when it adjusted the door to prevent slugs gaining access.
  4. The landlord cancelled appointments on 29 November 2019 and 11 December 2019 before attending on 4 February 2020, to extend the external drains. In its stage one complaint response, the landlord acknowledged that this timeline meant that it had exceeded its extended deadline to complete a non-urgent repair.
  5. After the works to extend the drains, the resident reported on 11 February 2020 that the property was still flooding; the landlord undertook a further joint inspection with an environmental health officer from the local authority on 13 March 2020.
  6. Whilst it took several visits between October 2019 and March 2020 for the landlord to conclude that significant drainage works were required, it can occasionally take several visits to ascertain what the most appropriate solution might be for a repair issue. The Ombudsman agrees with the position put forward by the landlord in its stage one complaint response, that the route of diagnosis and works during this period was fair, because on each occasion, works were carried out under the belief and intention that they would resolve the matter at the time.
  7. However the later inspection with environmental health in March 2020 took the view that, to resolve the issue, the landlord needed to install a channel from the ACO drains to a manhole on the property. This was because the ACO drains were being overwhelmed with rainwater, which was causing the flooding. It is not possible to determine from the records at what point the landlord established that the existing manhole in the garden could not be used in this way. However, in the stage two complaint response, it was noted that the landlord was not permitted to run a channel into the manhole identified, because it was not permitted to connect a rainwater channel to a foul drain.
  8. It is significant that the first national lockdown due to the pandemic began on 23 March 2020, shortly after this joint inspection. From the records, it appears that appointments for the landlord to attend the property were cancelled on 5 May 2020 and 15 May 2020, during the initial lockdown. The landlord correctly acknowledged in their stage one response to the resident’s complaint, that delays beyond their control occurred during this period.
  9. The landlord subsequently attended the property on 2 June 2020and some further work was completed. This included overhauling the back door, installing a new stormguard, repointing the paving flag, rodding the drain, and screeding. However, no mention was made, within the records provided for that time, of the suggested works to channel rainwater from the ACO drains to the main drain. From the records available, it appears either that the recommendations were not followed up, or that no alternative action was identified when it became clear that the main drain was not to be used.
  10. This failure to follow up on the agreed action, or identify an effective alternative when it became clear that the foul drain could not be used, was identified within the complaints investigation carried out by the landlord in December 2021.
  11. Following the works in June 2020, there is a record of an attendance by the landlord on 17 July 2020, but no record of any further works taking place at that time. On 29 October 2020 the tenant reported damaged skirting boards to the landlord as a result of flooding, and these were renewed by the landlord on 21 December 2021.
  12. The local authority contacted the landlord by email on 28 January 2021 to report that the resident had contacted them because the property was still flooding and they asked the landlord to intervene. This was followed by a reminder on 17 February 2021. No response to these emails was located within the records provided to the Ombudsman. There was also no record of an attendance by the landlord at the resident’s property to investigate the ongoing flooding reported. The landlord correctly identified in their stage one complaint response, that this represented a failure to adequately respond to the reports of continued flooding issues at the property.
  13. Further reports of flooding were made by the resident on 28 July 2021, following which the backdoor was resealed by the landlord, but again, no action was taken to resolve the drainage issue. The resident reported flooding again on 29 September 2021, and the landlord noted, when it attended on 16 November 2021, that further works to improve the gutters and drainpipe were needed.
  14. In fact, an effective alternative to the solution suggested in March 2020 was not identified until 25 March 2022, when an external drainage company was commissioned by the landlord to inspect the property. The company recommended to the landlord that an entirely new storm drain line was installed from the rear of the property to the nearest storm connection, 14 metres away.
  15. The Ombudsman considers that the acknowledged failure to follow up on the actions recommended in March 2020, caused an avoidable delay in rectifying the drainage issues between 2 June 2020 and the repairs recommended in March 2022. In addition, there were subsequent reports made by the resident, of flooding and issues with the drains, representing further missed opportunities to rectify the problem.
  16. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord has put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances.
  17. In their stage one complaint response to the resident, dated 3 December 2021, the landlord acknowledged some delay and communication issues, but incorrectly stated that works recommended in March 2020 had been carried out. The resident responded and noted that this was incorrect, and suggested that it was premature to determine compensation, as the issue was still not resolved.
  18. The landlord proceeded to stage two of the complaints procedure, and in its stage two response dated 25 January 2022, it appropriately acknowledged service failures in their response to the drainage problems. It also appropriately acknowledged the error made in its stage one response, which stated that the works to install a rainwater channel from the ACO drains to the main drain had been carried out in 2020, when they had not.
  19. The Ombudsman considers that the landlord acted fairly in acknowledging the delays and poor communication and apologising to the resident. In their stage two response, the landlord also appropriately acknowledged the error made in their first complaint response and attempted to put things right by offering to increase the compensation award to £400 for inconvenience and distress caused by its delay in remedying the repair plus £96 for the running of the dehumidifier.
  20. In relation to the failures identified, the Ombudsman’s role is to 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 takes into account 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 as well as our own guidance on remedies.
  21. The Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies specifies that compensation in the range of £600 to £1000 is proportionate in recognition of maladministration where there is a significant impact on the resident. Examples of maladministration include a situation where there are service failures accumulating over a period of time, such as in the lengthy delay and missed opportunities to repair, as in this case.
  22. Given the extent of the detriment to the resident (which includes her reports that the living room was flooded regularly making it unusable for the resident and her three very young children and that there was mould and damp), it is appropriate that a substantial award is ordered. Also of relevance to the level of compensation awarded, is the fact that these issues persisted over an excessive period, and that the resident reports a significant emotional impact. In light of the significant impact and the time taken to resolve matters, the Ombudsman considers that a total award of £800 for distress and inconvenience would be appropriate in this case (this replaces the sum of £400 previously offered by the landlord).
  23. In addition to compensation for distress and inconvenience, it is noted that the landlord has offered £96 as reimbursement for the cost of running a dehumidifier in November 2020. This is appropriate in respect of the dehumidifier use, based on the daily rate of £4 per day.
  24. However, the resident has also reported that she sustained damage to her property, including carpet, underlay, and items in her shed. The resident also reported that she needed to use the heating more throughout this period, to try to combat the damp and mould.
  25. The landlord advised the resident in July 2020 to claim for financial losses on her contents insurance; the Ombudsman considers that this advice was inappropriate and it would have been reasonable for it to have signposted her to its insurer in respect of her damaged belongings. The insurer will be able to assess the damage and reach a decision on whether it was a result of any negligence by the landlord.
  26. In addition, the Ombudsman considers that it is reasonable to reimburse the resident for additional heating costs incurred during the period, upon the resident providing copies of energy bills demonstrating increased use and an order to that effect has been made, below.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of the level of compensation awarded for acknowledged service failures in its response to reports of problems with drainage at the property.

Orders

  1. The landlord should, within four weeks of the date of this report:
    1. Pay to the resident direct £400 in recognition of any distress and inconvenience. This sum is to be paid in addition to the total of £496 previously paid to the resident at stage one and stage two of the complaints process.
    2. Give the resident details of its insurer so that she can make a claim in respect of damage to her belongings.
    3. Request evidence from the resident of her increased heating costs from June 2020 (when the delay in completing the effective repair began) until the date of the drain repair in 2022. The resident will need to provide evidence to the landlord of her increased energy use, alongside energy statements from the previous year for comparison.
    4. Any payment to the resident in respect of additional heating costs should be made within six weeks and correspondence should include a calculation of how any compensation has been calculated.