Lambeth Council (201911393)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 201911393

Lambeth Council

10 June 2022

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

This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. the resident’s report that her kitchen window would not open;
2. the resident’s report of a radiator fault.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident was assigned the property under a weekly periodic tenancy from 4 August 2014. The landlord is a local authority and has described the property as a one-bedroom second floor flat.
During the course of this complaint, the landlord was informed of the resident’s health conditions such as anxiety, depression, asthma and respiratory problems.
The landlord has a tenant handbook that shows that it is obliged to maintain the property and the resident is responsible for allowing the landlord’s contractors into the property to do any works needed.
The landlord has a repairs manual that sets out a variety of ways that residents can report repairs and provides timescales that it is required to complete repairs within, including seven days or 28 working days for a routine repair, depending on the priority. It adds that it is responsible for central heating and window repairs and that the resident is obliged to do minor repairs such as bleeding radiators.
The repairs manual shows that the landlord will schedule appointments to complete repairs and will leave a calling card and send a text message if access is not obtained.
The landlord has a complaints procedure that shows that it has an ‘early resolution’ stage (where it will resolve an issue immediately without need for a written response) prior to a formal two-stage process where responses are required within 20 working days (at stage one) and 25 working days (at stage two) respectively.
The landlord has a compensation policy that allows for it to make financial awards where there has been service failure that has had an adverse impact on the complainant.

Scope of investigation

The Ombudsman previously considered a complaint from the resident under case reference 201814246 – this related to works to the resident’s kitchen and included reference to tiling and a kitchen door. The Ombudsman determined on 30 September 2019 that the landlord had offered reasonable redress for delays in the completion of these works.
The resident has advised this Service that her kitchen window concerns date back to the beginning of her tenancy in 2014. However, the Ombudsman will only consider complaints that were brought to the attention of the landlord within six months of the matter occurring and will only investigate matters that exhausted the landlord’s complaints process in May 2020.

Summary of Events

The resident submitted an enquiry to her local councillor on 3 September 2019. She said that she suffered with anxiety and depression and reported that she had been unable to open her kitchen window for five years which she said was a health and safety concern.
The landlord recorded a response to the resident’s councillor on 17 September 2019. It explained that it had attempted to deal with the kitchen window ‘a number of times’ in 2018 but not obtained access so the resident would need to speak to its contact centre to get a new job raised.
The landlord’s internal records indicate that contractors attempted property visits during December 2019 to address kitchen door, electrical and tiling works (relating to the previous Ombudsman case 201814246) but that there were failed appointments as the resident had refused access and then prevented works proceeding. It recorded a further attempted visit on 15 January 2020 but noted there was again no access.
Following contact from the resident, this Service wrote to the landlord on 2 December 2019, 20 March 2020 and 2 April 2020, asking it to progress a complaint. The initial correspondence mentioned outstanding repairs but the March-April 2020 requests specifically referred to the kitchen window issue. The landlord replied to this Service on 6 April 2020, confirming the matter had been escalated to the final stage of its complaints process.
The landlord issued a final complaint response on 14 May 2020. It said it had spoken to the resident on 6 May 2020 to discuss her concerns and it concluded that:
1. it had records of attempts to repair a kitchen window in 2018 but access was not provided so the resident would need to speak to its contact centre to get a new repair order raised once Covid-19 restrictions were lifted;
2. there was a lack of access on 29 June 2018 and 11 February 2019 before the order was closed on 29 May 2019;
3. it had replied to the resident’s councillor in September 2019 regarding the window;
4. its repairs team said a surveyor had attended the property recently and not been made aware of a kitchen window issue;
5. the resident had said she was concerned about paint peeling from the radiators and a lack of TRVs (thermostatic radiator valves) so it had raised a new order on 7 May 2020 for its contractor to check the radiators (it subsequently advised this Service that it had attended and found the radiators were working but has not provided evidence of this)
6. it had previously made unsuccessful attempts in December 2014 to consider a report from the resident of heating issues in the property.
The resident advised this Service in September 2020 that she had reported the kitchen window issue again to the landlord but they had still not attended.
The landlord’s records show that its heating contractor attended the property on 6 November 2020 due to the report of a lack of TRVs but that it noted that this was ‘not covered under the contract’ so no works were done.
The resident advised the landlord in January 2021 that she was no longer living in the property. She updated this Service in March 2021, confirming that she had vacated the property.

Assessment and findings

Kitchen window

The landlord informed the resident through the complaints process that it had been aware of a kitchen window fault during 2018 and unsuccessfully attempted to attend to this on two occasions. This Service has seen no evidence of any report made by the resident in 2018 or of the landlord’s attempted visits so has not been able to conclude that the landlord acted unreasonably during this period.
The resident made a report via her local councillor that she had been unable to open her kitchen window for several years – this was passed to the landlord on 3 September 2019. The landlord replied to the councillor on 17 September 2019 and said that the resident would need to speak to its contact centre. It was appropriate for the landlord to refer to the problems it said it had experienced with access in 2018. However, given the resident had raised a health and safety concern and the landlord was aware of her potential vulnerabilities, it was unreasonable for it to tell the councillor that the resident would need to liaise with the contact centre for it to address the window issue.
The landlord’s repairs manual shows that it can accept repair reports through a variety of methods, including online or via face-to-face contact, so it was unreasonable for it to require the resident to make a further telephone call. This contributed to a delay in the kitchen window being inspected. The landlord repeated this failing when it considered the resident’s complaint in May 2020 albeit this was at a time when only urgent works were being completed due to the impact of Covid-19.
When the landlord reviewed the resident’s complaint in May 2020, it referred to recent inspections it said it had undertaken of the property. However, the landlord has not offered any evidence of a surveyor’s report or demonstrated whether it gave any consideration to the resident’s report that not being able to open the kitchen window was a health and safety risk – this was a record-keeping failure.
In summary, the landlord failed to raise a repair order when the resident submitted a report via her councillor in September 2019 that her kitchen window did not open. It was unreasonable that the landlord did not inspect the kitchen window even after the resident’s complaint and health and safety concerns.

Radiators

There is no evidence of the resident having reported a radiator fault prior to the complaint discussion that she had with the landlord in early May 2020. There was therefore no service failure on the part of the landlord prior to this.
The landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s report that there were no TRVs and peeling paint by raising a repair works order on 7 May 2020 for its contractor to check the radiators. However, despite advising this Service that it did attend to this works order, there is no record that it followed up on this repair until November 2020 when it noted that the repairs were not covered under the contract.
This delay was inappropriate as the landlord’s repairs policy requires it to address routine repairs within 28 working days. In mitigation, the landlord will have been impacted by the Covid-19 related lockdown during this period and some delay was therefore inevitable. However, there is no record that it updated the resident during this period or that it explained why it would not complete any works after its contractor attended in November 2020.
The resident has advised this Service that the lack of radiator maintenance caused a problem to her boiler that the landlord also delayed in remedying. However, no evidence has been seen to demonstrate this, no boiler issue was considered through the landlord’s complaints process and the resident advised in January 2021 that she had vacated the property. The Ombudsman would not therefore be able to conclude that there was service failure on the part of the landlord in this regard.
In summary, although the landlord appropriately raised a repair order in response to the resident’s report in May 2020 that her radiators were peeling and needed TRVs fitted, it was unreasonable that it did not communicate effectively between May-November 2020 and failed to explain how it decided that no repairs were necessary.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of:
1. the resident’s report that her kitchen window would not open;
2. the resident’s report of a radiator fault.

Reasons

The landlord failed to raise a repair order when the resident reported a fault with her kitchen window in September 2019 and did not keep records of the inspection attempts it said it made.
The landlord did not communicate with the resident about progress to inspect her radiators between May-November 2020.

Orders

The landlord to write to the resident to apologise for the service failures identified in this report.
The landlord to pay the resident compensation of £200, made up of:
1. £125 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to her by its service failure in the handling of her report that her kitchen window would not open;
2. £75 in recognition of the time and trouble and inconvenience caused to her by its service failure in the handling of her report of a radiator fault.

The landlord should confirm compliance with these orders to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.