Leeds City Council (202016026)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202016026

Leeds City Council

14 July 2021

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 refers to:
1. The landlord’s handling of repairs following a leaking roof at the resident’s property.
2. The resident’s legal disrepair claim.

Jurisdiction

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 will not be investigated.
After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the following aspect of the complaint is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

The resident’s disrepair claim.

Paragraph 39 (i) of the Scheme states:
1. The Ombudsman will not consider complaints which concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure.
In its communication, the landlord has acknowledged that the resident raised a disrepair claim on 21 April 2021. The Ombudsman would not consider any circumstances related to the repairs after the date the claim was put in. This is because there is a separate legal process for disrepair claims, which would be better suited to court to decide. If the disrepair claim has since been abandoned or suspended then the resident may be able to raise a separate complaint about any delays after the disrepair claim was abandoned or suspended, but we cannot consider this as part of the current complaint. We will, however, consider the repairs needed to the resident’s roof and the inside of the property up to 21 April 2021.

Background and summary of events

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord which is a local authority. The property is a house.
The landlord’s records show that the resident first reported a serious leak from the roof of her property on 12 June 2020. The landlord arranged for contractors to attend that day to carry out a temporary repair and make safe the ceiling as water was reported to be coming through the electrics.
The landlord’s records show that the resident called the landlord on 15 June 2020 about her roof repairs. She had been told that the gas would need to be turned off before the repairs could go ahead and asked for this to be done on the same day as the repair as she could not be without heating and hot water for an extended period due to the health of her child. The landlord requested that this was investigated internally that day. The records show that the resident called the following day for an update.
A further repair was arranged on 18 June 2020 as the ceiling in the resident’s boiler cupboard had collapsed following the leak. A temporary board was placed to make this room safe.
The landlord’s records show that a further telephone call took place on 12 October 2020 as the resident had been waiting for the repairs to her roof to take place for months. She said that she had been assured that the required work would be carried out as an emergency. She explained that the roof leaked when it rained and the internal ceilings were saturated. This was a health risk to her child, who had been hospitalised with double pneumonia The landlord confirmed that a repair had been raised but no date had been set. It noted that the repair had been set as a general priority rather than an emergency. She had also been advised that no scaffolding was needed. The landlord raised for this to be investigated internally.
The landlord’s records show that the resident called to raise a complaint on 6 November 2020 for the following reasons:
1. She explained that operatives had attended her property that week to complete the work on the roof and found that a larger amount of work was needed compared with the jobs raised. They found that scaffolding would be needed to complete the work to the roof so they were unable to complete it that day. This had been raised as an emergency repair by the roofers due to the resident’s child’s ill health.
2. She had been told by the roofer that the temporary fix which had previously been completed was not an effective fix and the flow of water had been re-routed to somewhere else. They could not confirm where this water was now flowing but advised that this could be to another area of the roof of loft space, potentially causing more damage. They also advised that it would be impossible to do a temporary fix considering the roof repair needed.
3. She added that there had been water damage to her bedroom ceiling and onto the wall, damaging the paint and wallpaper. The ceiling to her boiler cupboard had also come through, letting the heat escape into the roof space. She advised that no one had attended to complete any repairs to this area. A temporary board was fitted in June 2020 and her heating bill had cost more due to the heat leaving the property through the roof.
4. She had been told that this work was due to be completed by 4 November 2020 and the operatives had attended on 2-3 November 2020. This did not give the operatives a chance to fix the roof. She explained that this was causing undue stress and worry as she did not know whether water would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
5. She explained that the operatives would have had the opportunity to go onto the roof that week as the weather had been good, but they had not. She expressed concern that the weather would get worse, meaning that the repair could not be completed.
6. She also explained that the landlord had not communicated with her effectively and that she had needed to follow-up on multiple occasions. She was expecting a call back regarding the scaffolding but had not received any contact.
The landlord’s records show that a repair order was raised on 10 November 2020 for the chimney stack to be taken down to below the roof level and for the roof to be felted and tiled.
The landlord issued its stage one response to the resident on 11 November 2020 and explained the following:
1. It confirmed that with roofing repairs, the contractor must first attend to specify what work was required. As the result of a large backlog of works because of Covid-19, many of its repairs had not been completed on time due to a shortage of resources. It apologised for the delays the resident had experienced.
2. It confirmed that it had visited the property on 5 November 2020 and had raised a repair order to remove the chimney and re-felt and tile the roof. It explained that this work would require a scaffold which had been placed on a 60-day order. This had an expected target date of 5 February 2021. It confirmed that it had tried to contact the resident but the call did not connect. It advised her to contact its technical support team for further information.
3. It explained that it could not make any promises regarding the timescale of this work as its service was still recovering from the restrictions imposed due to Covid-19. It noted that the repair may be completed before the expected target date if possible. It apologised for any inconvenience and assured her that any internal damage would be rectified. It confirmed that the resident could escalate her complaint if she remained dissatisfied.
The resident asked for her complaint to be escalated on 26 November 2020. She expressed dissatisfaction that she had been told different things about what work needed to be done. She said that none of her questions had been answered and asked how this would be fixed. She also asked whether the loft insulation would be replaced as it was soaked form the leak, and when the ceiling would be replaced. She expressed concern that her child had medical issues which were exacerbated by the coldness and the damp in the property. she had needed to keep the heating on due to this which had come at an extra cost. She explained that the repairs had been raised as urgent but she had heard nothing which was causing significant stress and anxiety.
A repair order was raised on 10 December 2020 to remove any wet loft insulation after the leak. This was reported as completed on 16 December 2020,
The landlord issued its stage two complaint response to the resident on 16 December 2020 and explained the following:
1. It apologised that the issues with the resident’s roof had not yet been resolved. It confirmed that temporary works were carried out following the resident’s initial report on 12 June 2020 and that these seemed to have worked, as the resident had not reported any further leaks despite the poor weather.
2. It explained that it had now arranged to take down the redundant chimney to below the roof line which would remove the areas where it was believed that the water was entering the property. it had provisionally arranged the scaffolding to be placed on 5 January 2021 and the repairs would follow shortly after.
3. It explained that some delay was to be expected because of Covid-19, which caused a shortage of scaffolding for some months, however this did not fully explain the delays the resident had experienced. It acknowledged that it had not kept the resident up to date with developments. It apologised that this was the case and that she had been given contradicting information about what repairs were needed.
4. It confirmed that it would keep in contact with the resident over the Christmas break to see how things were. Once the roof repairs had taken place it would inspect the property and make the arrangements to complete any necessary internal repairs. As part of this it said it would assess the decorations within the property and replace any loft insulation is required. It also confirmed that it would keep in regular contact with the resident until the repairs had been completed.
5. It apologised for the time and trouble the resident had spent pursuing these matters and offered £100 compensation in recognition of this. it confirmed that the resident had now exhausted its complaints procedure.
The landlord’s records show that the work to remove the chimney was completed on 19 January 2021. On 21 January 2021, the resident contacted her local councillor for support. She explained that there had been a long delay in completing the work to her roof and the contractors had now left rubble on the roof and broken the gutters. She had been told by the workmen completing work to the insulation that the chimney was not sturdy and moved. She explained that she was not sleeping in the living room with her child as she was concerned about the safety of the upstairs.
This information was sent to the landlord and it responded on 22 January 2021. It confirmed that it had arranged for a full inspection of the property to identify any damage or new repairs. it confirmed that it had already booked works for the plaster and internal decorations following the leak and would continue to communicate with the resident about this.
The resident’s councillor asked the landlord to provide a further update on 8 February 2021 and 17 March 2021 following contact from the resident, who reported that there was still an extreme lack of communication from the landlord. The landlord responded on 18 March 2021 and said that most of the external work had been completed but that a small patch of pointing was needed. It confirmed that this work had been ordered and it had asked its contractors to complete this as soon as possible. It stated that much of the internal plastering had been completed, including the child’s bedroom. It confirmed that it had spoken to the resident that day and apologised that she had not been provided dates for the rest of the work. After discussing the internal decorations, she had requested a decoration pack which would allow her to choose new wallpaper and would include all materials needed to redecorate.
The councillor asked the landlord to provide a further update on 15 April 2021 as the resident had not heard anything about the pointing work since the last communication. The landlord responded and confirmed that it had visited the resident two weeks’ prior and explained the timescales. It had since become apparent that its contractors would not be able to complete the works within set timescales and had issued the job to a sub-contractor.
On 2 June 2021, the landlord confirmed to this Service that the repair to the pointing of the roof remained outstanding but was due to be completed that week. It confirmed that once the external works were completed it would carry out a further inspection of the inside of the property to make good any damage. It confirmed that it had also provided the resident with a decoration pack as a gesture of goodwill.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident has said she considers that the issues affecting her property have impacted her family’s health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments. However, it is beyond the expertise of this Service to make a determination on whether there was a direct link between the roof leak and the resident’s family’s medical conditions. The resident therefore may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if she considers that her family’s health has been affected by any action or lack thereof by the landlord. Whilst we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident and her family experienced because of any errors by the landlord. We have also considered the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports that the state of the property was affecting her family’s health and whether this response was reasonable in view of all the circumstances as detailed further below.

The landlord’s handling of repairs following a roof leak at the resident’s property.

The resident’s tenancy agreement states that the landlord would be responsible for repairing and maintaining the structure of the property, including drains, gutters, external pipes and external decorations. The landlord’s repairs handbook confirms that this would also include the roof and chimney stack. The repairs handbook states that the resident would usually be responsible for the decoration inside the property. If, as a result of a repair issue such as a leak, the decoration is damaged, the landlord would not be responsible for restoring this. In some cases, the landlord may provide a decoration grant to assist with the cost of redecoration. It details the following categories and timescales for repairs:
1. Emergency repairs, where urgent action is needed to prevent major damage to the property structure, should be completed within 24 hours. This may include a temporary fix and follow-on works.
2. Priority repairs should be completed within seven working days and include issues such as roof leaks.
3. General repairs should be completed within 20 working days and include small internal repairs such as fixing cupboards and general heating repairs.
4. The landlord should carry out non-urgent repairs within 60 working days. A repair would be considered under this timeframe where an inspection and ordering further materials is needed and includes repairs needed to gutters, fences and major repairs to plaster and concrete floors.
The landlord initially acted appropriately by carrying out a temporary fix to the resident’s property within 24 hours of the issue being reported on 12 June 2020. This was in line with its emergency repairs timescales. Following the second report that a ceiling had fallen through on 18 June 2020, it also acted in line with its emergency time scales to complete a temporary fix.
The landlord was only recently able to complete non-urgent repairs in June 2020 and had a backlog of repairs as a result of the restrictions in place because of Covid-19. It was, therefore, reasonable for the landlord to take longer than normal to carry out the follow-on works required to the roof once this was made safe, as the restrictions were outside of the landlord’s control. The landlord would, however, have been expected to keep the resident updated on the progress of the repairs and to explain the reasons for any delays. In this case, it does not appear to have done so. The evidence provided to this service shows that the resident had needed to follow-up with the landlord on multiple occasions and was not provided with an expected timeframe for the works to be completed.
In November 2020 it was established that the work orders raised did not consider all of the repairs needed to the roof, and that scaffolding was required. There was a further delay to the repairs as the scaffolding needed to be placed on a 60 working day order and there had been shortages from the supplier because of Covid-19 and the backlog of repairs caused by this. The resident seems to have been under the impression that scaffolding was not needed in August 2020 but it is not clear what this decision was based on or why this changed later.
The landlord has said that it had not received any further reports of leaks from the resident following the temporary fix, we can therefore assume that nothing had changed to the repairs needed and, on balance, the landlord should have been able to determine that there would be a need for scaffolding and get this ordered sooner, following the initial inspection in June 2020 (subject to any delays with the scaffolding provider due to Covid-19). This may have reduced the further delay in completing the repairs.
In her communication with this Service, the resident has expressed dissatisfaction that she would need to redecorate the property herself and wanted the landlord to assist with redecorating. In line with the landlord’s repairs handbook, it would not usually be responsible for the decoration inside of the property if this were damaged as the result of a leak. The landlord would not be obliged to complete the redecoration work for the resident as ultimately, the leak was not its fault. It was, however, reasonable for the landlord to offer the resident a decoration pack as a goodwill gesture in view of the overall time taken to complete repairs and any distress caused.
It was reasonable for the landlord not to address the internal repairs in the property until it had confirmation that the roof leak had been resolved in case of any further damage. The landlord has not provided sufficient evidence to show the extent of the internal repairs needed following the roof leak or confirmed when this work was completed. This amounts to poor record keeping by the landlord. We cannot confirm the landlord’s actions were reasonable following its final response as it has not provided sufficient evidence to confirm that it had adequately follow its policies and procedures. The landlord should have clear records of repairs needed following an inspection and records of when these repairs were due to be carried out and subsequently completed. The landlord has not satisfactorily explained the further delays in completing the internal repairs to the property and based on the lack of evidence we can only assume that the delays were unreasonable.
Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In this case, the landlord has acknowledged that the delay due to Covid-19, which caused a shortage of scaffolding for several months, did not fully explain the delays. It admitted that it had not kept the resident up to date with developments and apologised that it had given contradicting information about what repairs were needed. It has also offered £100 compensation for the time and trouble she had spent pursuing this matter.
In this case, there has been service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs following a roof leak at the resident’s property. The landlord’s offer of £100 for the time and trouble the resident had spent pursuing this matter was disproportionately low considering the inconvenience caused by its lack of regular communication and the overall time taken for the repairs to be completed following the leak (June 2020 – June 2021). In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website), compensation in this range may be used for instances of service failure which had a minor impact on the resident and was not fair or reasonable in this case.
Similarly, whilst it was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge that it had not kept the resident up to date, the landlord has not demonstrated that it has learnt from the complaint. The resident had needed to follow-up on multiple occasions (through her local councillor) regarding the further repairs needed into 2021. The landlord has also not fully addressed the impact the repair issues had on the resident or considered her concern that her heating bills had been higher during this period. There is insufficient evidence to show that the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns about her and her child’s health because of the leak and the damage it caused. The landlord should have addressed these concerns and explained whether it would be able to prioritise repairs in view of this.
In view of these failings, the landlord should offer the resident a higher award of compensation in recognition of the inconvenience caused by its lack of clear communication and delays in completing the repair works needed. It should also consider her request for compensation for her increased energy bills during this time upon receiving evidence of this increase. It is recommended that the landlord inspects the property to identify any outstanding repairs and agree on timescales for these, unless the resident confirms to the landlord that she is satisfied that all repairs have now been completed.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs following a roof leak at the resident’s property.

Reasons

It was reasonable for these to be some delay in completing the repair works to the resident’s property due to the impact of Covid-19, however the landlord did not keep the resident regularly informed and its offer of compensation for her time and trouble was disproportionate to the inconvenience caused by its failings. The landlord has also not demonstrated that it has learnt from the complaint and the evidence suggests that it failed to communicate effectively following its stage two complaint response.

Orders

The Ombudsman orders that the following actions are taken within four weeks:
1. The landlord is to pay the resident £250 in recognition of the inconvenience caused by its lack of communication and delays in completing the repairs.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord inspects the property to identify any outstanding repairs and agree timescales for these, unless the resident confirms to the landlord that she is satisfied that all repairs have now been completed.
The landlord should consider the resident’s request for compensation in view of her increased heating bills during this period. The resident should supply the landlord with her energy statements for the period when the repairs were ongoing and for the same period the year before for comparison so the landlord can consider this request.
It is recommended that the landlord take steps to establish a system of record keeping that ensures that all repairs, including the dates these were raised and completed are recorded and retained so that it can be provided to This Service upon request, in response to a complaint.