Read our new Spotlight report on repairs and maintenance – repairing trust.

Lambeth Council (202405395)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202405395

Lambeth Council

30 January 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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of Japanese Knotweed impacting her use of the garden.
    2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for information about restrictions in using the garden, including whether she could place a shed in the garden.

Background

  1. The resident has a secure tenancy which started on 10 December 2013. The property in question is a 3-bedroom maisonette on the second floor of a 4-storey block. Although the resident’s property is not on the ground floor, the resident has a garden which forms part of her tenancy.
  2. The landlord says that it had no vulnerabilities recorded for anyone living at the property. The resident has recently provided this Service with evidence of some vulnerabilities.
  3. This Service previously investigated the landlord’s handling of reports of Japanese Knotweed and other matters and issued an investigation report on 17 October 2023. One of the orders in the report was for the landlord to arrange an inspection for Japanese Knotweed at the property and if present, arrange for a treatment plan to begin within 28 days of the date of the report.
  4. The landlord arranged for a specialist company to re-survey the property for Japanese Knotweed and the survey took place on 20 December 2023. As a result, the landlord agreed a new 5-year treatment plan for Japanese Knotweed from 17 January 2024.
  5. The resident wrote to the landlord on 8, 18 and 29 January 2024. The resident stated that the specialist contractor had cut the shrubbery in December 2023 but had left the cuttings in the garden. She also stated that she was previously advised that the Knotweed would only be eradicated by excavation of the garden. She requested a copy of the specialist contractor’s survey report.
  6. The landlord registered a stage one complaint and sent its response on 18 March 2024 in which it confirmed that it considered the 5-year treatment programme it had put in place to be an acceptable and effective way of removing and treating the Knotweed.
  7. Following further expressions of dissatisfaction with the landlord’s response, the landlord registered a stage 2 complaint and sent its stage 2 reply on 9 May 2024. The landlord reiterated that it considered the 5-year treatment to be an effective way to deal with the Knotweed. The landlord also confirmed that the resident was not being charged for the garden as part of her rent.
  8. The resident contacted this Service on 9 May 2024 and stated that she had been unable to use her garden since her tenancy began n 2013 because of the presence of Japanese Knotweed. She said she had requested information from the landlord about what she could and could not do in relation to the garden. She said she was seeking compensation for not being able to use the garden since the start of her tenancy.
  9. The landlord wrote to the resident on 9 January 2025 and advised her that she could place a shed in the garden providing it was situated on a concrete base.

Assessment and findings

Jurisdiction

  1. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint, or part of a complaint, will not be investigated.
  2. The resident advised this Service on 21 January 2025 that her previous complaint was mainly about the toilet in the property and therefore the Japanese Knotweed and the garden issues were not investigated by the Ombudsman to any great extent.
  3. The Ombudsman has reviewed the previous investigation report under case reference 202217945 and has concluded that the landlord’s handling of reports of Japanese Knotweed were fully investigated by this Service. Therefore, after carefully considering all the evidence, the resident’s complaint concerning the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of Japanese Knotweed impacting her use of the garden falls outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
  4. Paragraph 42.l. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion “seek to raise again matters which the Housing Ombudsman, or any other Ombudsman has already decided upon”.

Scope of the investigation

  1. The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 9 May 2024. A key part of the Ombudsman’s role is to assess the landlord’s response to a complaint and therefore it is important that the landlord has had an opportunity to consider all the information being investigated by the Ombudsman as part of its complaint response. It is therefore considered fair and reasonable not to investigate matters that occurred after the date of the final response. Information following the landlord’s final complaint response has, however, been included in this report for context.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for information about restrictions in using the garden, including whether she could place a shed in the garden

  1. The resident wrote to the landlord on 8 January 2024 to ask for an update on whether she would be able to place a shed in the garden. She said if this was not possible, she would require the use of a garage for storage purposes. The landlord replied on 16 January 2024 and included a hyperlink which the resident could use to apply for a garage.
  2. The resident wrote to the landlord again on 29 February 2024 and raised further questions, including which parts of the garden, if any, she could used. The resident chased the landlord for a response to this question on 19 March and 26 March 2024. It was unreasonable that the landlord had not responded to the resident’s questions about which parts of the garden, if any, she could use and whether she could place a shed in the garden.
  3. The landlord’s lack of response to the resident’s emails prompted her to write to the landlord on 11 April 2024 and ask for this to be added to the complaint she had previously submitted. She reiterated that she was seeking information on what she could and could not do in relation to the garden.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 9 May 2024, however, the reply did not address the resident’s request for information on whether she could place a shed in the garden and details of any restrictions that applied in terms of her using the garden. This was a missed opportunity for the landlord to provide information that would help the resident understand fully what she could and could not do in relation to the garden. The resident had previously advised the landlord that she needed additional storage for some of her belongings and therefore wanted to know whether she could place a shed in the garden. It was therefore unreasonable that the landlord had not provided this information or explained the reason it could not provide the information.
  5. As part of her stage 2 complaint, the resident had also asked specifically why a member of the landlord’s staff had not responded to her emails. The landlord stated in its stage 2 reply that it was unable to provide an explanation as to why the staff member had not responded to the resident’s emails. The landlord advised the resident to contact her Neighbourhood Housing Officer with any concerns about her property. This was an inappropriate response as the landlord should have investigated the resident’s concerns about not receiving a response to her emails and provided an explanation. The Ombudsman’s complaint handling code states: “Landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law and good practice where appropriate”.
  6. The lack of information given to the resident by the landlord meant she was unaware of whether it was safe for her to use the garden. It also meant that she experienced further time and trouble chasing the landlord for a response.
  7. The Ombudsman has found there was a service failure because the landlord did not directly respond to the resident’s questions about whether there were any restrictions in terms of her use of the garden and whether she could place a shed in the garden. The Ombudsman has ordered the landlord to pay compensation of £100 to reflect the additional frustration experienced by the resident and the inconvenience caused. The level of compensation is within the range of financial redress identified in the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for service failures that have resulted in distress, inconvenience, time and trouble for the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 42.l. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of Japanese Knotweed impacting her use of the garden is outside the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its response to the resident’s request for information about restrictions in using the garden, including whether she could place a shed in the garden.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered within 4 weeks of this report to:
    1. Write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident a total of £100 compensation.
    3. Write to the resident to provide advice and information regarding any restrictions that apply in terms of using the garden.