Incommunities Limited (202306598)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202306598

Incommunities Limited

13 August 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 the resident reports of overgrown trees in the garden.

Background

The resident is the leaseholder of the property, a 2-bedroom first floor flat in a low-rise block. She has held the lease since January 2009 and lives alone. The landlord has told this Service it is not aware the resident has any vulnerabilities.
On 11 January 2023, the resident contacted the landlord to report she had concerns with 2 trees that were growing in the gardens of the property. She stated one tree was growing into the side of the property and needed to be removed, while another was beginning to block her view.
On 17 January 2023, the resident made further contact with the landlord to follow up her requests. She stated that she had seen 4 landlord vehicles at the property throughout the week and would have expected the work to be completed. The landlord contacted the resident by email on 26 January 2023 and informed her that work was being completed to the inside of the property below and any works to the garden would usually get done when the internal work had been completed.
The resident submitted her formal complaint to the landlord on 17 March 2023, via her local MP. She stated she had contacted the landlord on numerous occasions to report work that was needed to the garden, which had not been completed. The resident stated the gardening work she had complained about was not her responsibility, and she was concerned about a tree that had taken root directly in front of the building. The resident also made other complaints that are not relevant to this report.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 18 April 2023. It stated that the garden was communal, and the tenants were responsible for the maintenance. It explained the previous tenant who shared her garden was part of a “Garden Assistance Scheme”, which is why the landlord had carried out previous garden work at the property. However, that tenant had since left the property, and the garden was no longer part of the scheme.
The resident escalated her complaint the following day and stated she was assured by a member of the landlord’s staff that the works to the garden to remove the trees would be completed before the new tenant of the neighbouring property moved in.
In its stage 2 complaint response dated 16 May 2023, the landlord repeated that the garden was no longer maintained under its “Garden Assistance Scheme”. It stated that while an email did confirm work would be carried out prior to the new tenant moving in, this work did not include the removal of trees as these were not considered essential works. The landlord apologised if it had raised the resident’s expectations and stated it would request a second opinion from its Ground Maintenance team, which would be communicated to her.
The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and referred her complaint to this Service.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

In her correspondence with this Service, the resident has raised other garden related matters that have not yet been through the landlord’s complaint process. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to matters which completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 16 May 2023. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions before the involvement of this Service.

Reports of overgrown trees in the garden

The resident’s property is a flat within a 2-story building. The resident is the leaseholder of the first floor flat, while the ground floor flat is a rented property belonging to the same landlord. The estate of the property contains gardens at the front and rear. The resident’s lease identifies which parts of the gardens form part of her lease for which she is responsible. The remaining areas are associated with the ground floor flat. The 2 trees in question were growing in the garden areas belonging to the ground floor flat.
On 11 January 2023, the resident called the landlord to expresses concern regarding the 2 trees. She said a tree at the front of the property needed to be removed because it was growing directly against the property, and she was concerned that the roots had the potential to cause damage to the building. She also said a second tree, in the rear garden, was beginning to block her view and she wanted that removed also. The resident provided the landlord with pictures of the trees she was referring to by email.
The summary of buildings insurance cover for the resident states, “Structural damage to buildings caused by trees and shrubs is on the increase…ensure that they are pruned regularly.” The landlord provided the document to this Service; therefore, it should have recognised that the resident’s concern was valid and should have been taken seriously.
Landlord internal emails, dated 16 January 2023, show that an inspection of the vacant property was requested. The email said that while the tree at the front did not look like it posed an issue, it should be checked just in case. It also suggested that the rear tree may pose an issue as it was located near steps.
A further landlord internal email of the same date confirmed that as the property was currently unoccupied, the voids team would manage the garden. It said the tree at the front of the property was too small to cause damage and “if voids want us to look at it when they get round to clearing it then we will.” The emails also confirmed that the garden would be “cut and cleared” before the new tenant of the ground floor property moved in. This information was not communicated back to the resident and was a missed opportunity to manage the resident’s expectations.
On 17 January 2023, the resident emailed the landlord to ask if her previous email had been reviewed. She stated she had seen 4 landlord vans at the property in the past week and would have expected the work to be carried out. The landlord replied to the resident by email on 26 January 2023 and said, “the garden work will be carried out whilst the property is empty, they usually do the garden last when all the repairs have been done inside.” Because the landlord was not clear on what the work would consist of, the email gave the resident the impression that the trees would be dealt with.
While the landlord did cut the grass and clear the shed base, it took no action regarding the resident’s request to have the trees removed. It also failed to provide the resident with an update as to why the work would not be carried out. In February 2023, a new tenant occupied the ground floor flat.
The landlord has a ground maintenance policy, which states that customers who have a designated garden space are responsible for the maintenance of that space to an acceptable standard as specified in their tenancy or leasehold agreement. It further states that an exception to this is if a resident qualifies for the “Garden Assistance Scheme”. Ordinarily, the trees in question would be the responsibility of the tenant living below, as set out in their tenancy agreement. However, at the time of reporting the trees, the property was unoccupied.
The policy also refers to tree work and states that in the first instance, all tree requests should be referred to the Area Housing Office who will arrange the initial inspection to validate the request. It further states if the request is validated, it will be sent through to the Grounds Maintenance Section for inspection and work arrangements. In this instance, instead of contacting the Area Housing Office, the landlord relied on a vacant property inspection from the Estate’s team before taking any further action. This was a deviation from its policy position.
The landlord also has its own “Tree Guidelines”, that set out the reasons why work may or may not be carried out on a tree. The guidelines state that that loss of view or sunlight is not considered a good reason for carrying out work. However, the guidelines also state that root pruning work will be carried out where roots are damaging footpaths and buildings. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to inform that resident that requests to remove the tree that was obstructing light or her view, would not be considered a good reason to remove the tree. However, it failed to do this and further failed to consider its own guidance on root pruning.
On 17 March 2023, the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord, through her local MP. She said she had reported work that needed to be done to the garden, the areas she was not responsible for, and the work had not been done. The resident again expressed her concerns about the tree that had taken up root at the front of the building. She stated the previous tenant was supported by an assisted gardening scheme, which cut the grass once a fortnight. However, she stated that this meant the trees, bushes, weeds, and plants, were left to grow wild and had made the gardens look a mess.
On 21 March 2023, landlord internal emails show that the complaint was passed to the Grounds Maintenance team to review and establish what action was needed. The Grounds Maintenance team replied stating that the gardens were the tenants’ responsibility and were not maintained by the team.
In its stage 1 complaint response dated 18 April 2023, the landlord stated that the gardens of the property were the tenant’s responsibility and would not be maintained by its Ground Maintenance Team. It further explained that the previous tenant did receive gardening assistance, but that stopped when the tenant moved in out in December 2022.
The complaint response failed to acknowledge the lack of communication with the tenant prior to her making the complaint and also failed to address the concerns she had raised regarding the tree roots and the general untidiness of the garden. It also failed to inform the resident that no tree work would be undertaken to improve her view or light and missed an opportunity for the landlord to clarify its key policy position on tree maintenance.
On 19 April 2023, the resident escalated her complaint, and stated that she had been assured by the landlord in an email dated January 2023, that the works to the garden would be completed before the new tenant moved in.
An internal landlord email dated 15 May 2023 read, “I never said the trees would be removed just that the garden would be done whilst void at [property below]. I did make enquiries about the tree’s and ask for them to be inspected but they didn’t think they posed an issue. They advised if it’s an issue voids would notify them, as they haven’t then it couldn’t have been an issue.”
The email suggests that while an inspection of sorts may have been requested, an outcome was never followed up. This Service has seen no evidence of any inspection being conducted on the tree at the front of the property, in line with the landlord’s policy.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response the following day. It stated that while garden works were carried out prior to the new tenant moving in in February 2023, the budget only allowed for necessary works to be undertaken and small trees were not considered as essential. The landlord apologised for raising the resident’s expectations and stated it would request a second opinion from the Grounds Maintenance team and communicate that decision to the resident. To date, the resident has not received an update on this review.
Again, the landlord’s response failed to acknowledge the resident’s concerns regarding the tree roots and arrange for it to be inspected by the appropriate team as defined by its policy, which was the Area Housing Office.
The resident has informed this service that she remains concerned about the tree, which has grown since her original complaint. She has further concerns about saplings that are taking root and fears that without careful inspection and maintenance, her property will be at risk of damage from tree roots. This has caused the resident time and trouble to pursue the matter and has also left her feeling distressed.
The landlord’s failure to follow its ground maintenance policy and have the tree inspected by the correct department has caused the resident stress and inconvenience as she believes that the tree may cause damage to her property, a point that is highlighted to her in the insurance cover she pays through the landlord.
There was a service failure in the landlord’s handling of reports of overgrown tress at the property, in that it failed to follow its own policy and guidelines to carry out an assessment of whether the tree was likely to cause damage to the property. An order has been made that the landlord pay £150 compensation to the resident for the time, trouble, and distress this failing caused, in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of reports of overgrown trees in the garden.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Provide the resident with a written apology for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay directly to the resident £150 compensation for the time, trouble and distress caused by its failures in handling reports of overgrown trees.
3. Arrange for an assessment to be carried out, by a suitably qualified person, of the tree at the front of the property, to determine the likelihood of any future damage being caused to the property and take appropriate action. The landlord is to provide a copy of the assessment report to the resident.
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with the orders, within the timescales specified above.