Haringey London Borough Council (202338198)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202338198

Haringey London Borough Council

23 May 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. Roof repairs.
    2. Complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 3-bedroom house.
  2. The resident reported a leak in the roof in October 2022. On 6 October 2022, a roofer visited the property and concluded that scaffolding was required to complete the inspection. The roofer also queried whether the property was covered by a new build warranty. However, after this initial inspection, no repair work was completed and the leak deteriorated. Additionally, no temporary measures were implemented to protect the property from further leaks.
  3. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 2 April 2023 as he had not received a response. He also reported that he considered the ceiling was about to collapse.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 26 June 2023. It accepted that there was a delay in repairs due to ineffective communication between its repairs team and new build team. The property was incorrectly highlighted as a new build and there was general poor management of the case. It explained that a further update would be provided by 10 July 2023. The landlord also explained that it was reviewing its processes to better manage this issue.
  5. The resident did not receive an update on 10 July 2023 or a timescale for repairs. He therefore requested the escalation of his complaint on 21 September 2023. He explained that the roof repair was still outstanding since the leak was reported in October 2022.
  6. The resident reported on 27 October 2023 that the situation was getting critical and heavy rain had caused significant damage to the ceiling and interiors. The resident emphasised that his concerns were not being responded to, and the leak posed a risk to his safety and wellbeing.
  7. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 2 November 2023. It acknowledged that the stage 1 response highlighted significant delays in arranging scaffolding and completing repairs. It reiterated its finding this was due to poor internal communication. It offered £100 compensation for the errors and delays.
  8. Works were completed on 6 December 2023; however, on 31 December 2023, the resident reported that the roof was leaking again. He has advised that the repairs for the latest leak were delayed, and that the landlord had not responded to his emails and chasers. He therefore referred the complaint to the Ombudsman on 28 January 2024. He explained that the leak was still an issue, and he has been chasing the landlord for a response.

Assessment and findings

Roof repairs

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 requires the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property.
  2. The Housing Act 2004 also requires landlords to provide a safe and healthy environment in its properties by keeping these free from unnecessary and avoidable hazards, and by providing adequate protection from these, including falling elements, structural collapse, and damp and mould growth.
  3. The tenancy agreement states that tenants have a right to have repairs done within a reasonable period of time. If the repairs are not done on time, then residents can receive compensation. It also states the landlord must keep the structure and outside of the property (including drains, gutters and outside pipes) in good repair.
  4. The landlord’s repairs handbook states that repairs should be completed within a reasonable timeframe. 
  5. The leak was reported in October 2022. After the first inspection on 6 October 2022, the landlord queried if the property was covered by a new build warranty. While it was reasonable that it sought to establish this, it has acknowledged that this led to it failing to progress the works. The landlord should have sufficiently robust repair systems in place to monitor any works, and its failures led to unreasonable delays.
  6. As no repair work was completed, the leak deteriorated. The repair should have been completed in within a reasonable period of time according to the tenancy agreement and repairs handbook. The policy does not specify what is a ‘reasonable period of time’; however, for routine repairs, it is reasonable to expect action to be taken in a timeframe of 28 days. Given that 15 months elapsed before any repairs were undertaken, this was a significant departure from what was reasonable.
  7. Where there are delays, a landlord should be proactive in communicating with the resident and explaining any delays, as well as providing updated indicative timeframe. In this case, the resident had to chase the landlord on various occasions during these 15 months, without any meaningful updates. This was unreasonable and caused him distress and inconvenience.
  8. Where repairs may take an extended period of time, it is reasonable for a landlord to consider any interim works to mitigate damage. However, after its first inspection, it is not evident that any temporary measures were considered. Additionally, during the 15-month period of the complaint, the resident repeatedly reported that the leak had deteriorated and became a significant problem when there was heavy rain. He reported having to use buckets to contain the rainwater. These were further missed opportunities for the landlord to consider temporary repairs which resulted in damage to the property and distress to the resident.
  9. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 2 April 2023. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 26 June 2023. It acknowledged that there was delay in repairs due to ineffective communication between the repairs team and the new build team. It explained that the property was incorrectly highlighted as a new build and there was general poor management of the case. It also committed to improving its processes in order to better manage the issue going forward. While it was appropriate that it acknowledged the cause of the delays and that it demonstrated learning, it failed to provide any form of redress for its acknowledged failings. This was a missed opportunity to fully recognise the impact caused to the resident and repair the landlord/tenant relationship.
  10. Additionally, it failed to set out a clear action plan to resolve the issue. While it committed to providing an update by 10 July 2023, it did not explain what this update would include, or why it would take that long to provide. This would have added to the resident’s frustration.
  11. The resident did not receive the promised update or timescales for repairs and subsequently he requested the escalation of his complaint on 21 September 2023. This demonstrated that the landlord had failed to implement the learning identified in its stage 1 response and caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident.
  12. The roof repair was still outstanding on 27 October 2023 and the resident reported that the situation was getting critical. He explained that heavy rain caused significant damage to the ceiling and interiors. He emphasised that his concerns were not being responded to, and the leak posed a risk to his safety and wellbeing. While it may be reasonable to address a routine repair within 29 days, an emergency repair requires a more urgent response. It is not evident, however, that the landlord provided any position on the resident’s reports of safety concerns or sought to expedite its response. This was unreasonable.
  13. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 2 November 2023. As per its stage 1, it acknowledged that there had been significant delays to the roof and scaffolding works and that its communication had been poor. While it was appropriate that it offered some compensation, the £100 was not proportionate to the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and his family over a prolonged period, which could have reasonably been avoided.
  14. Additionally, while works were completed on 6 December 2023, the issue returned again on 31 December 2023. Once again, it is not evident that the landlord has responded to the resident or sought to raise further works in a timely manner. It has not been able to demonstrate the works completed on 6 December 2023 were effective, therefore, the continued delays have been considered as part of this investigation. Its ongoing failure to raise works or communicate further demonstrates its failure to learn from the outcomes of its complaint investigation and has led to ongoing distress and inconvenience for the resident.
  15. In summary, the landlord failed to raise the works within a reasonable timeframe. Once it had identified its failing, it continued to fail to raise works or provide updates, despite its commitment to do so. It also repeatedly failed to consider interim works or reassess its response given the deterioration of the property, despite the resident’s safety concerns. Given the above failings, and in consideration that the issue has still not been resolved, a finding of maladministration has been made.
  16. An order for £1,550 has been ordered to reflect the impact caused to the resident. This replaces the landlord’s previous offer of £100. This has been calculated at £50 per month since the delay October 2022. An order has also been made for the landlord to arrange a further inspection within 4 weeks and to commit to any works identified following its inspection.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that the landlord operates a 2-stage process. At stage 1 it will respond within 10 working days and at stage 2 within 20. At any stage, if it needs further time, it will agree it with the resident.
  2. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code states that “landlords must address all points raised in a complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law and good practice where appropriate.”
  3. The landlord failed to respond within the timeframes set out in its complaint policy at both stage 1 and 2. It also failed to keep the resident informed about the delay. Two days after the stage 1 responses was due, the landlord sent an update apologising and advising that a response would be provided by 25 April 2023. However, the landlord missed this deadline too and did not provide any further update. The stage 1 response was eventually sent on 26 June 2023, in 57 working days and this was not appropriate.
  4. The stage 2 response was also delayed. 8 days after the response was due, the landlord informed the resident that it needed more time. The stage 2 response was subsequently sent on 1 November 2023, after 31 working days.
  5. The landlord should have sent its responses within 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2. If it could not meet these deadlines, it should have kept the resident properly informed, maintained good communication and responded within a reasonable timeframe. The landlord only sent updates after missing previously agreed deadlines. It should have provided these updates promptly. The landlord failed to acknowledge these failures in its responses and this was not appropriate.
  6. Given these delays and poor communication, a finding of maladministration has been made. An order for £100 has been made to reflect the impact caused to the resident, being £50 for the delays at each stage.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the roof repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

 

 

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay £1,550 compensation to the resident in recognition of the impact, time and trouble caused by the landlord’s handling of the leaking roof repairs.
    3. Pay £100 compensation to the resident in recognition of the time and trouble caused by the landlord’s complaint handling failure.
    4. Arrange a further inspection of the roof and commit to any works identified following its inspection.