Hyde Housing Association Limited (202120154)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202120154

Hyde Housing Association Limited

28 April 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s:
1. Response to reports of a pigeon infestation.
2. Handling of the related complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident has an assured short-hold tenancy agreement which began on 6 May 2019. The property is a one bedroom second floor flat.
The landlord has the following vulnerabilities listed for the resident: mental health difficulties, Asperger’s Syndrome and depression.
The landlord provided a copy of its pest control policy which stated that a public health pest was a pest, which if uncontrolled, would impact upon the health and wellbeing of its residents and may cause significant structural damage to its properties. The policy stated that the landlord would conduct a pre-inspection, pest treatment and a post treatment monitoring and review process.
The landlord has provided a copy of its complaints policy which says that it would respond to stage one complaints within ten working days. The policy says that if any extra time is needed, then it would let the resident know and respond within a further ten days. At stage two, the landlord would respond within 20 working days. In exceptional circumstances, it may take a further ten working days to conclude its review.

Summary of Events

The landlord has provided the repair notes for the resident’s flat and these showed a problem with a pigeon infestation in 2016 and 2017, which was before the resident moved into the property in May 2019. This is mentioned for context only to show that the issue existed prior to the resident living at the property.
The repair notes showed that the first mention of a possible new pigeon issue was in June 2021. Therefore, it is from this point that the Ombudsman will begin its investigation, approximately six months before the resident complained.
In July 2021, there was a report at the resident’s property that mice might be eating electrical cables as the repair notes showed an electrical problem. On 19 October 2021, a contractor reported rodents chewing through electrical wires in the loft. There were further notes on the repair log to say that the roof needed major repairs and the loft needed to be cleared and cleaned by a professional company.
On 1 November 2021, the resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord and received an acknowledgement. The resident said that the issue with pigeons had been ongoing since she moved in three years previous and that a pest control company had sent a report weeks prior to the complaint. On 1 December 2021, the resident contacted the Ombudsman Service and a first chaser was sent as the resident had not received a stage one response.
On 17 January 2022, this Service wrote to the landlord and asked it to investigate and respond to the complaint. On 8 February 2022, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint and said that it would provide a stage one response by 21 February 2022. On 9 March 2022, the landlord sent the resident an update to say that it needed an extension until 23 March 2022.
On 9 March 2022, a pest control company visited the property and inspected the roof. The report said that birds had been gaining access for some time and this had resulted in heavy accumulations of fouling and pigeon related debris. The report recommended the following action: all fouling and pigeon debris to be treated with a specialist biocide with the contaminated area then cleared by brush, scrapers and hoovers and removed in suitable waste bags. The cleared area was then to be re-treated with disinfectant and possibly an insecticide.
The landlord’s inspection report from 9 March 2022 said the roof areas were noted to be in poor condition with tiles missing. Internally, light was seen coming through the roof which indicated open sections which allowed bird ingress. The report also said that a roofer would be required to remove the tiles in a section and cut back the felt and baton for access. They would need to cover the holes with a temporary sheet to prevent weather damage and further bird ingress, then roof repairs would be required to prevent pests gaining access again.
On 22 March 2022, the landlord sent a delay response and said that it needed more time to send the stage one response. On 1 April 2022, the landlord provided its stage one response and upheld the complaint. The response said the following:
1. That the work could have been completed much quicker and it apologised for letting the resident down. It also said that the situation with pigeons had been going on for a considerable amount of time.
2. It offered £50 compensation in recognition of time and trouble, as well as £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused and £100 for the delays which occurred. The landlord also offered £50 for the delay in the complaint being acknowledged. In total, the landlord offered £350 compensation.
3. It said it would repair the loft to ensure the pigeons could not get in and ensure that the infestation was eradicated. All insulation which had been contaminated with pigeon fouling was to be removed from the loft space and all areas cleaned and disinfected with new insulation to be added.
4. It said that it anticipated that the works would be completed by the end of May 2022 and the resident would be notified of any appointments or any times where she would need to be away from the property to complete the repairs.
On 26 May 2022, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate the complaint to stage two as it had not completed the repairs and said that it would reply in full by 22 June 2022.
On 14 June 2022, the landlord issued its stage two response and upheld the complaint. The response said the following:
1. The roof repairs failed to commence in May 2022, as the landlord had issues accessing the area that needed to be repaired. The landlord wanted to use its contractor’s scaffolding to reach the roof and said that it would then make the necessary repairs and carry out pest treatment works.
2. It apologised for not keeping the resident updated regarding the scheduled works. The bird team at pest control confirmed that the works would begin on 13 June 2022. The landlord could not say how long the scaffolding needed to be up for.
3. It acknowledged the allegation that operatives had turned up unannounced and that the resident had previously asked to be notified of appointments to plan her time. The landlord apologised for the experience the resident had had from its staff, as she felt disrespected. It asked that the resident take the member of staff’s name in future for this to be looked into.
4. It apologised for the delay and poor communication and said that it should have explained that the height of the area for repair was causing some issues. The landlord said it had fed back about the poor communication to its staff, including the customer service manager.
5. It increased its compensation award to £450, made up of £50 for time and trouble, £200 for distress and inconvenience caused by the pest issue and poor service, £150 for delays and £50 for a delay in acknowledging the complaint.
On 25 July 2022, the pest control company visited the resident’s property again as there was a recall to clean the resident’s loft hatch and remove any birds. The report said that the operative hoovered around the hatch and disinfected the area. There was an opening that birds were apparently entering from and all the fascias needed replacing and the area closed up to stop any bird ingress.
On 28 July 2022, the contracts manager inspected the site to see what was outstanding.
On 7 August 2022, email correspondence showed that the landlord was trying to arrange for fascia and soffit replacements. The email said that this was urgent as pigeons could still access the loft until this was completed. The landlord said it had tried to make it clear to the resident that window, soffit and fascias were being carried out by a different company to the roof repair.
On 22 August 2022, the resident responded to say that there was still work outstanding including insulation, cleaning the soffits and repairing a hole in the resident’s bathroom ceiling.
On 3 November 2022, the resident emailed the Ombudsman to say that not all the work had been completed as the soffits had been painted over, but because they were not cleaned properly, they were still attracting insects. The resident said that she had been informed that the insulation for the loft had been put on hold. Furthermore, she said that the contractors had called and said that they could repair her bathroom ceiling on the coming weekend.
The landlord has said that on 27 February 2023, it visited the property and found that all areas of the loft had been cleaned up and disinfected, all holes to the roof coverings had been repaired and that repairs to the resident’s ceilings and replacement of fascias had also been carried out. The landlord said it was trying to arrange to replace the loft insulation, but had been struggling to gain access through the resident’s neighbour’s property.
On 3 April 2023, the resident said that the soffits had not been cleaned, the gutters were still not connected properly and the insulation had not been replaced. The Ombudsman has noted that the gutters were not mentioned throughout the complaint and they were not something the landlord confirmed it would be repairing.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to reports of a pigeon infestation

The resident has said that the issue with pigeons had been ongoing since she moved in a few years ago, but the repair notes do not show any issues reported with pests until June 2021. Here it was mentioned that this was a possible reason for an electrical problem, as they could be disturbing wires in the loft. Prior to this, the repair log does not show any other issues the resident raised regarding a pigeon infestation. On 19 October 2021, a contractor reported seeing mice chewing electrical wires and the notes show that it was reported that the roof needed major repairs and the loft needed professional cleaning.
The resident raised a formal complaint on 1 November 2021 and the landlord replied to acknowledge the complaint. The resident mentioned in her complaint that a pest control company had completed a report weeks before her complaint. The repair log only showed a report made on 14 July 2021 regarding possible mice and then a contractor visiting some months later in October 2021. Therefore, it is difficult to say how long it was prior to the complaint that the landlord was aware of the pigeon infestation, but given that the landlord knew there was a pest issue at least as early as 14 July 2021, it was not reasonable that it waited until October 2021 to inspect the loft to confirm an infestation. This was particularly the case given it knew that the property had a history of pigeon and mice infestations.
On 9 March 2022, the landlord arranged for a pest control company to visit the property and complete a pre-inspection which is in line with its pest control policy. The report said that birds had been gaining access for some time and this had resulted in heavy accumulations of fouling and pigeon related debris. The report recommended that cleaning of contaminated areas and proofing works to the roof. The pest control inspection was reasonable for the landlord to carry out as it is part of its procedure; however, this was around nine months after it was noted there was a mice infestation in the loft and therefore this delay was unreasonable.
In the landlord’s March 2022 stage one response, it said that it would complete repairs to ensure that the pigeons could not get in and ensure that the infestation was eradicated. All insulation which was contaminated with pigeon fouling was to be removed from the loft, areas cleaned and disinfected and new insulation installed. The landlord said that it anticipated that the works would be completed by the end of May 2022. However, the work had not even started by the end of May 2022, and the landlord had not updated the resident. This was unreasonable as the landlord did not keep to the timescales it had proposed and failed to communicate appropriately with the resident.
Pest control visited the resident’s property again in July 2022 as there was a recall to clean the resident’s loft hatch and remove any birds. The report said that the operative hoovered around the hatch and disinfected the area, but there was an opening that birds were entering from. All the fascias needed replacing and the area closed up to stop any bird ingress. This showed that the pest access problem still remained at the end of July 2022. This was a year after the landlord’s repair log noted a possible infestation and there were still areas that pigeons could get into the roof from. This would have caused the resident undoubted distress and inconvenience as the infestation had not been resolved.
It is not clear when the roof repairs were completed, but it appears to have been after August 2022, as the pigeons could still gain access to the loft at this point. Further, email correspondence from 7 August 2022 showed that the landlord was aware the matter was urgent as pigeons could still access the loft until the fascias and soffits were replaced. The landlord has said that the fascias and soffits were being replaced by a different company to the one carrying out the roof repair, and that there had been an issue with the height of the area and that it wanted to use its contractor’s scaffolding; however, the issues with the infestation still remained a year after the landlord was initially aware of it. This was unreasonable, as pigeons could apparently still access the loft, and indicated that the landlord had not treated the issue with sufficient priority.
The resident did not mention the roof repairs were outstanding in her email of 3 November 2022 and the fascias had also been replaced at this point. The landlord’s repair notes do not provide dates or specific details regarding when the work was completed. This would indicate that there was a failing with the landlord’s record keeping; however, it is not disputed that there were also significant delays which were unreasonable.
In November 2022, the resident said that although some of the work had been completed, the landlord only painted over the soffits and did not clean them and they were attracting insects. The insulation which the resident had been told would be renewed had also not been replaced. There had been some damage to her bathroom ceiling which the contractor was arranging to repair. This indicated that the landlord had completed most of the work but there were still outstanding repairs in November 2022 and the resident was also concerned at the level of cleaning.
On 27 February 2023, the landlord inspected the resident’s loft and said that all the holes had been repaired, fascias replaced, the area had been cleaned up and disinfected and all repairs completed. The landlord said that only insulation needed to be replaced and that it needed to gain access through the neighbour’s property. The landlord had previously said that all the repairs would be completed by May 2022, but the resident emailed on 3 April 2023 to say that the insulation has still not been replaced. The delay was unreasonable and will have caused the resident a significant amount of distress and inconvenience. The resident is still unhappy with some elements of the clean up as she said the soffits were not cleaned but instead painted over.
Through the complaints process, the landlord did apologise and award compensation of £400 in June 2022. However, the proofing and pest treatment works continued well after this despite the assurance that the landlord gave the resident. The continued delays meant that the landlord did not put things right or learn from outcomes in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles. The level of compensation was also insufficient given the pest issue continued for around 18 months and the inconvenience to the resident will have been significant. Overall, there were multiple failings in the landlord’s handling of the pest control reports and it did not provide sufficient redress given the circumstances of the case.

The landlord’s communication regarding the repairs and the complaint.

The resident complained on 1 November 2021 and, although the landlord responded to acknowledge the complaint on the same date, it did not provide a stage one response within ten working days as its complaints policy said it would. On 1 December 2021, the resident contacted the Ombudsman Service and this Service wrote to the landlord asking it to reply to the complaint at stage one within ten working days. The landlord did not comply with its complaints policy as it did not provide the response within this timescale.
The Ombudsman Service chased the landlord further in February 2022 and the landlord said it would respond later that month. However, it was not until April 2022 that the complaint response was issued. Although there were a couple of update emails in that time, these delays meant that the landlord did not act in accordance with its complaints policy. This delay of around five months was inappropriate and will have caused the resident a significant amount of time and trouble in chasing the complaint and uncertainty as to how the landlord was intended to resolve her concerns.
The landlord accepted that there was a delay in acknowledging the complaint and offered £50 compensation for the delay. However, given the extended period of the delay, this level of compensation did not fully recognise the inconvenience and time and trouble that will have been caused.
The landlord did complete a stage two complaint investigation within an appropriate period after acknowledging the resident’s escalated complaint. However, it did not offer sufficient redress for its earlier complaint handling delay.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman Service finds maladministration in regards to the landlord’s handling of reports of a pigeon infestation.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman Service finds maladministration in regards to the landlord’s handling of the related complaint.

Reasons

The landlord has failed to demonstrate that it acted appropriately, and in accordance with its pest control policy, when dealing with the pigeon infestation. The landlord was aware of an infestation from July 2021 and knew the property had a previous history of infestations, yet it was slow to react. There were also multiple delays with the work that was needed to rectify the issue which would have caused a significant amount of distress and inconvenience to the resident, particularly as the landlord was aware of her mental health difficulties.
The landlord said that all the work would be completed by the end of May 2022, but pigeons could still enter the loft in August 2022. The landlord confirmed on 27 February 2023 that all the roof repairs had finally been completed, but this was ten months after the resident was assured the repairs would be done and the insulation was still not refitted by the start of April 2023.
The landlord’s compensation award of £400 did not offer sufficient redress given the circumstances of the case.
The landlord also failed to acknowledge the resident’s complaint for three months and, once it did so, it still took an extended period of time for it to provide the stage one complaint response. Its compensation award of £50 for complaint handling failures did not offer sufficient redress given the circumstances of the case.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord should write to the resident within four weeks of the date of this report to apologise for the service failures identified in this report.
The landlord should pay the resident a total of £1,000 compensation within four weeks of the date of this report – this amount includes the £450 offered in the stage two response, and is made up of:
1. £800 for the distress and inconvenience caused to her by the failure in its handling of her reports of a pigeon infestation.
2. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused to her by the failure in its complaint handling.
The landlord is ordered to carry out an inspection of the resident’s property within four weeks of the date of this report to ensure that the infestation and the roof repairs have been fully dealt with, including ensuring that the area has been fully disinfected and that there are not any issues with the soffits.
The landlord is ordered to write to the resident within four weeks of the date of this report with a date for it to complete the insulation replacement, if it has not already done so.
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with the above orders within the timescales set out above.