Islington Council (202217372)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202217372

Islington Council

14 November 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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to a faulty centrifugal fan.
    2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord and lives in a top floor flat in a purpose built block of flats. The resident’s flat is underneath a tank storage facility.
  2. The resident made the landlord aware of an issue with a centrifugal fan in the tank storage facility on 10 July 2022. She said the fan was faulty and emitting a loud noise 24 hours a day, which she found very unpleasant and it also disturbed her enjoyment of her home.
  3. The landlord’s contractor attended the repair on 1 August 2022 and identified a fault with the centrifugal fan as the source of the noise. The landlord advised the repair would be addressed under planned monthly maintenance works.
  4. The resident made a formal complaint on 1 October 2022. She complained about the failure to resolve the issue with the fan causing noise, the landlord’s failure to respond to her in good time and an issue she experienced with the landlord’s online complaint reporting system.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 17 October 2022. It acknowledged that it failed to progress the repair in good time, and the repairs remained outstanding. The landlord explained its contractor was awaiting approval for a quote for the repairs, and this was the reason for the delay. It also acknowledged a poor level of communication with the resident, and advised she would be contacted with an update that week.
  6. Unhappy with this response, the resident requested to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 21 October 2022. She remained dissatisfied that:
    1. the fan was not fixed and was still emitting a constant loud noise;
    2. the communication about the repair remained poor;
    3. the stage 1 complaint response contained errors and omissions.
  7. The landlord declined to escalate the resident’s complaint. It explained that as per its complaints policy, it would not escalate a complaint if repair works were still outstanding. It referred the matter to its customer services team to chase the repair works and provide the resident with an update.
  8. The resident brought her complaint to this Service on 5 November 2022. She said she was experiencing noise nuisance from the fan 24 hours a day, which impacted her sleep, caused her to have headaches and made her feel stressed. She advised that the landlord had refused to escalate her complaint to stage 2, because the repair works were still outstanding. She explained that this was the reason she wanted to escalate her complaint, in order for the repair works to be completed and resolve the situation.
  9. This Service wrote to the landlord on 28 November 2022, requesting it provide the resident with a stage 2 response by 5 December 2022.
  10. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 9 December 2022. It apologised for the delay in providing this response and offered £75 compensation. The landlord said its contractors had been delayed in providing a quotation for the repair works, and acknowledged the inconvenience this caused to the resident. It explained that a survey for the repair works was carried out on 6 December 2022, and it expected a quotation to follow. The landlord explained this meant the repair works would likely be carried out in early 2023. The landlord offered an additional £251 for the delay in repair, and £100 for the resident’s time and trouble.
  11. On 17 December 2022, the resident advised this Service she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response to her complaint. She explained that the noise from the fan ‘measured 60 decibels, audible throughout her flat 24 hours a day’. The resident said the landlord had failed to repair the fan within a reasonable timeframe, failed to consider any alternative measures to address the noise and failed to communicate with her. The outcome sought by the resident was for the fan to be repaired so the noise would stop and more timely communication from the landlord about the repair.
  12. The landlord advised this Service that repairs were completed on 5 May 2023. The resident has disputed this, and advised that she believes the fan has been switched off and not repaired.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of repairs to a faulty centrifugal fan

  1. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only 3 principles driving effective dispute resolution:
    1. Be fair- treat people fairly and follow fair processes;
    2. Put things right, and;
    3. Learn from outcomes.
  2. The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.
  3. The landlord’s repairs policy states that routine repairs will be attended within 20 working days, extending to 60 working days for planned repairs.
  4. The resident first made the landlord aware of an issue on 10 July 2022. The landlord attended on 1 August 2022, 15 working days later. The landlord attended the repair within a reasonable time frame, and identified repair works needed to the centrifugal fan causing the noise disturbance to the resident.
  5. Between 20 August 2022 and 17 September 2022, the resident chased the landlord for an update on the repair 4 times. The landlord responded to the resident twice, advising it would chase the repair. However, the landlord failed to respond to the resident on 29 August 2022 and 17 September 2022. This is failing on the part of the landlord, and reflective of poor communication practice throughout the complaint.
  6. In the stage 1 response, the landlord informed the resident there was an issue with gaining approval for the quotation for the repair, and this was the reason for the delay. The landlord advised the resident it would contact her with an update in the week following the stage 1 response, though there is no evidence to suggest it did and the resident had advised this Service that she was not updated. This was a failing on the part of the landlord.
  7. Furthermore, in the stage 2 response the landlord again explained the reason for the delay was the same issue, though advised the resident the necessary survey had been completed. This demonstrates a failure to ‘learn from outcomes’ on the part of the landlord, as the reason for the delay remained the same and had not been addressed prior to providing the stage 2 response. The landlord said the works would ‘likely be completed in early 2023’ but did not provide a timeframe for the completion of the repair.
  8. The landlord offered the resident £251 for the 6 month repair delay on 9 December 2021. It has since advised this Service that repairs were completed on 5 May 2023, which is an additional 5 months later. However, there is no record of the repair being completed in the repair log provided to this Service as evidence. Therefore, it is unclear if this repair took place and it is noted that the resident has disputed that it has, advising that she believes the fan has been switched off. The lack of record of the repair is a concern to the Ombudsman, an indicates a wider issue with accurate record keeping.
  9. Overall, the time from the resident first reporting the issue to the noise abating was 208 working days, and 149 days from when the resident raised a complaint. This is well outside the landlord’s policy aims of 60 working days for planned works and constitutes an unreasonable delay. This is a failing on the part of the landlord. The failings in both the repair and communication were frustrating for the resident, and led to time and trouble taken to pursue the matter. The failings also meant that the noise issue was ongoing for a protracted period of time, impacting on her enjoyment of her home.
  10. It was reasonable for the landlord to recognise failings, apologise and try to ‘put things right’ with an offer of compensation. However the total of £351 for the time and trouble and delay with the repair did not take into account the impact the noise had on the use of the resident’s home. Neither does it reflect the fact that it was another five months until the noise was stopped. Further, while the landlord recognised failings in its handling of the matter, there is no indication that it took action to learn from these.
  11. In conclusion, a finding of maladministration is made in regards to the landlord’s handling of repairs to the faulty centrifugal fan. Compensation is ordered below, to reflect the length of time taken to repair and the ongoing distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, in circumstances where there was a failure which adversely affected the resident, the landlord has acknowledged failings and made some attempt to put things right but failed to address the detriment to the resident.
  12. In October 2023, the Ombudsman published a special report on the landlord, which highlighted issues with the landlord’s handling of repairs, including delays and poor communication. The report made a number of recommendations to address this, which the landlord has accepted, and which should address the failings highlighted above. As such, no orders are made in terms of ‘learning from outcomes’ in this case.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The resident first complained on 1 October 2022, and the stage 1 response was provided on 17 October 2022, 10 working days later. The response was provided within a reasonable timeframe, in line with the expectations set out in the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
  2. The resident requested to escalate her complaint on 21 October 2022. She said the landlord failed to address all the issues raised and she was dissatisfied the repair to the fan was still outstanding. The landlord acknowledged the resident on 31 October 2022, but refused to escalate the complaint, saying as per its complaints policy it can do so when, “any issue still remains outstanding..[the complaint] will be referred back to the department to have all the issues addressed within the agreed timeframe.”
  3. This was not appropriate. The Ombudsman’s complaint handling code states that: ‘a landlord must not unreasonably refuse to escalate a complaint through all stages of the complaints procedure. Reasons for declining to escalate a complaint must be clearly set out in a landlord’s complaints policy and must be the same as the reasons for not accepting a complaint’. As the landlord’s reason for refusing to escalate the complaint was not the same as its reasons for not accepting a complaint, the refusal to escalate was unreasonable. This was a failing on the part of the landlord.
  4. Furthermore, this Service wrote to the landlord on 28 November 2022 and requested it escalate the resident’s complaint and provide her with a stage 2 response by 5 December 2022. The landlord confirmed it had done so on 9 December 2022. Whilst it is acknowledged that the landlord did progress the resident’s complaint, the Ombudsman expects landlords to do without its involvement. This was a failing on the part of the landlord.
  5. It is also the case that despite the landlord acknowledging on 1 November 2022 that the resident wanted to escalate her complaint to stage 2, the landlord did not provide its Chief Executive’s response until 9 December 2022, which was 28 working days later. The landlord recognised there was a delay and offered the resident £75 compensation for this. However, taking into consideration all the circumstances, this award fails to reflect the full impact on the resident and a further £100 has been ordered, below, to reflect the full inconvenience and frustration to her. Overall, there were significant failures in the landlords complaint handling, and a finding of maladministration is made.
  6. The Ombudsman’s special report as noted above highlighted issues with the landlord’s complaint handling, and made a number of recommendations to address this, which the landlord has accepted, and which should address the failings highlighted above. As such, no orders are made in terms of ‘learning from outcomes’ in this case.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the repairs to the faulty centrifugal fan.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Pay the resident the £426 compensation already offered if it has not done so;
    2. Pay the resident an additional £600 compensation (made up of £500 for the impact on the enjoyment of the property and the impact of the additional five months of delay and £100 for complaint handling failings)
    3. Investigate the resident’s claim that the fan has been switched off, carrying out any repairs that may be required. The landlord should write to the Ombudsman with the outcome of the investigation and any repairs undertaken.