Leeds City Council (202325343)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325343

Leeds City Council

22 May 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about:
1. Repairs to the property’s windows.
2. Hazards in the garden of the property.
3. Broken and blocked drains.
4. A broken bathroom sink.
The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord at the property, which is a 4-bedroom house. The landlord has no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident. The resident has told us that she has a medical condition affecting her brain and that she is disabled.
The resident moved into the property via a mutual exchange on 26 April 2021. Between July and September 2021, the landlord identified that works were required to replace the bay window, internal sill, and bay window roof. Some works to the bay window roof and guttering were completed in October 2021.
In May 2022, the landlord inspected the garden at the property because of its concerns about the structural integrity of the surrounding area. The landlord said the resident had removed topsoil and retaining flags from the garden area and it asked her to complete works to return the garden to its former condition. The resident said she had not carried out unauthorised works to the garden. She said the changes had been made by the previous tenant.
The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 7 March 2023. She said that repairs had been outstanding since the mutual exchange 2 years ago. She said repairs were required to multiple windows and frames within the property, to add skirting boards in the living room, and to replace the bathroom sink. The resident also said that the landlord had refused to do works to her garden, which was in a dangerous condition. She later said that an area of the garden had been “dug out” to investigate the drains and had not been filled in. She said her daughter had broken her arm as a result. She later reported that her son had broken his wrists because of the condition of the garden.
On 5 June 2023 the landlord sent a letter to the resident informing her that it may take action for breach of tenancy if she did not restore the garden to its former condition. The landlord said that unauthorised changes to the garden had caused structural damage and that this was affecting a neighbouring property and a public footpath. The landlord said if the resident did not take the action stated in the letter within the specified timeframes, it may arrange for works to be carried out and recharge the cost to her.
The landlord provided a stage 1 response to the resident’s complaint on 19 June 2023. It said:
1. The only repair that had not been completed since the resident’s mutual exchange was for the bay window. These repairs had been delayed due to structural safety. The landlord had arranged an inspection for 20 June 2023 to decide what works were required.
2. The landlord had no record that the bathroom sink had been raised as a repair. The resident should call the repairs line to report it.
3. The landlord had investigated the resident’s garden and found that unauthorised works had been completed. It asked the resident to return the garden to its former condition. The resident was responsible for any required works to the garden and this aspect of the complaint was not upheld.
4. A repair to the drains was raised in 2021 but the landlord could not see any repairs to the drains that would have required digging. This part of the complaint was not upheld.
The resident escalated her complaint on 2 August 2023. She said the bay window repairs had been started but were not complete. She complained about the 2-year delay and the landlord’s communication. The resident said the landlord had completed some works to her garden, but they were not satisfactory. She said as part of the works, operatives had dug up another area of the garden and this was unsafe. The resident also reported that a drain had been blocked for 2 years, preventing her from using her washing machine.
The landlord provided a stage 2 complaint response on 6 September 2023. It said:
1. It had now installed a new bay window and roof. The only outstanding works were to make good an area of plaster. An inspection had been arranged for 11 September 2023. The landlord offered £450 compensation for the unreasonable delay in completing the bay window works.
2. The landlord had responded to a report of blocked drains in April 2022. It had not received any reports of blocked drains since that time. The landlord had raised this as an emergency repair and the resident had agreed to provide access.
3. The landlord had completed works to build a retaining wall in the resident’s garden. The electricity company had relocated a cable before these works took place. The landlord had worked with the electricity company to arrange the works but acknowledged there had been issues, partly due to the presence of a locked gate.
4. The landlord noted there was a separate process ongoing in relation to the hazards in the garden and unauthorised works. The landlord provided advice to the resident about making a claim in relation to her children’s injuries, with reference to its insurer.
The resident referred her complaint to us on 7 February 2024. She told us that the bay window and roof had been replaced but she was still experiencing issues as the landlord had not replaced the seals. The resident confirmed the bathroom sink had not been replaced and that she was still experiencing problems with the drains. The resident wants the landlord to complete any outstanding repairs and to pay compensation to recognise the impact of the length of the delay in resolving the issues and the poor standard of works.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The resident has told us that, at the time of her complaint, there were several repairs outstanding since the date of her mutual exchange. She said she only agreed to take on the property on the condition that works were completed. Where works have not been completed as agreed, the Ombudsman would expect residents to make a complaint to the landlord within a reasonable time, usually being 12 months from when they became aware of the issue. This is so that the landlord has an opportunity to investigate and put things right.
The resident complained to the landlord about its failure to complete outstanding works on 7 March 2023, almost 2 years after she moved into the property. Given the length of time that had passed, our investigation has focussed only on the matters that the landlord has considered and responded to in its complaint responses, and the action it took to put things right.
The resident has also told us that her children were injured on uneven areas of ground in the property’s garden. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim. The resident has the option to seek legal advice if she wishes to pursue these matters.
However, we can consider any general distress and inconvenience the resident may have experienced due to any identified service failures.

Window repairs

Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord is responsible for keeping the structure and exterior of the property in a state of good repair. The resident’s tenancy agreement and the landlord’s Repairs & Maintenance Handbook also confirm the landlord is responsible for repairs to a property’s windowsills, frames, and glazing. The handbook states that where window repairs are classed as improvements, these will be treated as planned works.
Where the landlord does not provide a timeframe for completing a repair, it is reasonable for it to carry out the works within a reasonable time, to keep the resident updated on progress, and to advise of any delays.
The resident’s complaint referred to “all the windows” in the property. She said that the glazing had blown, and the frames needed replacing. The resident had previously reported on 14 April 2022 that the windows in the living room, dining room, and bathroom were leaking. In such instances, it is reasonable for a landlord to carry out an inspection to determine if any repairs are required. However, in this case, there is no evidence that the landlord took appropriate action to inspect the windows at the property at that time to identify any repairs, as required by its repairs policy.
Landlords should also keep accurate records of the dates of any inspections and keep notes of its operatives’ findings. In this case, the landlord ordered “glazing works to renew timber windows” on 26 April 2022. It is not clear which windows the order referred to. The evidence also does not confirm what works, if any, were completed. Without this information, we cannot conclude that the landlord met its repairs obligations.
In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord said there was no record of any repairs raised for all the windows in the property to be replaced. The landlord should have referred the resident’s concerns to its repairs team and asked them to arrange an inspection. The landlord missed an opportunity to identify whether any works were required to other windows in the property, instead focussing only on the outstanding works to the bay window.
It is not clear when the landlord first became aware that major repairs were required to the bay window. Its records show that it requested a quote to renew the bay window roof on 12 July 2021. The landlord raised 2 works orders to replace the bay window and roof on 13 September 2021, and some works were completed to the roof on 7 October 2021. The landlord organised works to address the issue, evidencing that it accepted its repairs obligations and was taking some steps to complete the repairs in line with its repairs policy.
The landlord has not provided us with copies of survey reports and detailed records from the period between 12 July 2021 and 7 October 2021. Without this information, we cannot comment on whether the action it took was reasonable in the circumstances. We expect landlords to keep detailed, accessible records of their actions and decision making. The landlord’s failure to do so has impacted our ability to investigate its response to the resident’s complaint.
The landlord raised an order to replace the UPVC bay window and to complete roofing works on 2 February 2023 but later cancelled it. In response to the resident’s complaint of 7 March 2023, an order was re-raised on 14 June 2023. The landlord has not explained why there was a delay of 3 months between the resident’s complaint and it re-raising an order for the required works. Landlords should take prompt action to put things right when a complaint is received or communicate with the resident to explain any delays, which it failed to do.
In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord accepted that there had been an unreasonable delay in completing the window replacement. At that time, only the works to make good the plaster around the window remained outstanding. The landlord said all works to the bay window were completed on 19 October 2023. This was 25 months after the order was raised on 21 September 2021.
At stage 2, the landlord offered the resident £450 compensation for the inconvenience caused by the delay. This sum was paid to the resident on or around 7 September 2023. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, the landlord’s apology and offer of compensation in the sum of £450 provided reasonable redress for the impact of its failings on the resident. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance and is appropriate in all the circumstances to recognise the impact of the delay and poor communication, and the stress and inconvenience the resident experienced.
Given that the resident referred to “all windows” in her stage 1 complaint, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to inspect all the windows in the property and to provide the resident with the outcome of its inspection in its stage 1 response. In addition, the resident has told us that she is still experiencing damp and draughts through the windows, as the landlord has not replaced the seals. The Ombudsman therefore recommends that the landlord attend the property to inspect all windows and seals and complete any required works.

Hazards in the garden

At the time of the complaint, the resident disputed that she was responsible for works to restore the garden to its former condition. She said it was the previous tenant that had completed unauthorised works. The landlord was clear in its stage 1 complaint response that it believed the resident was responsible for completing the necessary works. The landlord had set out its position in the breach of tenancy letter sent to the resident on 5 June 2023, with reference to the relevant parts of her tenancy agreement. It was appropriate for the landlord to restate its position in its complaint responses, with reference to the breach of tenancy process. This meant that its responses on this issue were clear and consistent.
Between June 2023 and September 2023, the landlord completed some works to rebuild a retaining wall. It noted that works to address hazards in the garden were ongoing.
There was no maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s reports of hazards in the property’s garden. The landlord was already aware of the condition of the garden before the resident made a complaint. As the landlord believed the resident was responsible for completing the required works, it followed its policies and procedures to set out its position and allow the resident an opportunity to respond. When she did not do so, the landlord completed the required works to make the garden safe, confirming at stage 2 that a separate process was ongoing to consider liability. The outcome of that process is outside the scope of our investigation.
The resident referred to the possibility of taking legal action against the landlord about the condition of the garden and injuries to her children. While the liability for injuries is outside of the scope of this investigation, it was nevertheless appropriate that the landlord provided the details of its insurers and referred the resident to the relevant part of its website in its stage 2 complaint response.
It was not always clear from the resident’s correspondence which areas of the exterior of the property she was concerned about. As the complaint referred to the property’s “garden”, and given the conversations that had already taken place, it was reasonable for the landlord to assume that the resident was complaining about the condition of the area of the garden with the missing topsoil. However, elsewhere in the evidence provided by the landlord, there are references to uneven areas of the front driveway of the property. It is therefore recommended that the landlord contact the resident to discuss her concerns and arrange an inspection if necessary.

Broken and blocked drains

The landlord’s Repairs and Maintenance Handbook confirms that it is responsible for repairs to “equipment” installed for delivering water, gas, electricity, and sanitation, which may include the property’s drains. Some areas of the drainage network may be the responsibility of the utility company. If the landlord is responsible for the repair, its policy states that routine repairs will be completed within 20 working days.
According to the records the landlord has provided to us, the first report of a blocked drain at the property was on 14 April 2022. A repairs record from 16 May 2022 confirms that the drains were jetted to remove a blockage. There are no further reports relating to the drains until 5 May 2023, when the resident called to chase her stage 1 response and stated that the landlord had dug up the garden to investigate her drains, leaving the area unsafe.
No records have been provided to us to indicate that the landlord had completed any investigatory works to the property’s drainage. This was confirmed in the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, although it incorrectly stated that there had been no works to the drains since 2021. The landlord should have asked the resident for more information and arranged an inspection to investigate at this time.
In her stage 2 complaint escalation, the resident said that her drains had been blocked for 2 years, preventing her from using her washing machine. She also stated that a drain was open and hazardous. The landlord did not raise a works order to investigate the blocked drains until 4 September 2023. This was outside of the 20-working day timeframe in its repairs policy and there is no evidence that it updated the resident or apologised for the delay.
The landlord’s contractor attended on 5 September 2023 to jet the drains to remove a blockage. The contractor reported that parts of the stack and pipework needed repairing. The landlord attended to complete these works on 9 October 2023, but it was unable to gain access. It is understood that further works were completed after this time.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of broken and blocked drains. At stage 1 of its complaints process, it could have communicated better with the resident and done more to investigate her concerns. When she reported that the drain had been blocked for 2 years, it did arrange for a contractor to attend but this was outside of its published repairs timeframes, and no explanation has been provided for the delay. It took over 5 months for the landlord to attend to complete works to repair the drain.
The landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident and to pay her £150 compensation. This is in recognition of the frustration, stress and inconvenience she experienced because of its failure to investigate and complete repairs in a timely manner.

Broken bathroom sink

Neither party has provided evidence to us that the broken bathroom sink was reported to the landlord before the resident’s complaint of 7 March 2023. In the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, it told the resident to contact its repairs team to report the issue. Although residents are responsible for reporting repairs, it would have been helpful if the landlord had been proactive and referred the matter to its repairs team on the resident’s behalf. This would have shown that it was committed to resolving the issue for the resident. There had been a long delay before the landlord provided its stage 1 response. Asking the resident to follow-up with the repairs team to report the issue likely increased her frustration.
The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response also stated that there were no reports of repairs to the bathroom sink, despite this having been raised in the initial complaint. The landlord said that it would inspect the bathroom sink on 11 September 2023. The landlord has not provided evidence of the outcome of that inspection. The resident has told us that the sink has not been repaired or replaced.
There was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s report of a broken sink, as the landlord did not take sufficient action to put things right for the resident and there is no evidence that it investigated her concerns. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation, in recognition of the time and trouble she has taken to pursue this matter. The landlord is also ordered to inspect the bathroom sink and provide its position on whether works are required, including timeframes for completing any works.

Complaints handling

The landlord did not provide a response to the resident’s complaint of 7 March 2023 and so she called to chase a response on 5 May 2023. There is no evidence that the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint, or her follow-up call in writing. A stage 1 complaint response was provided on 19 June 2023.
We expect a landlord to acknowledge all complaints and to respond within a reasonable time. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code says that complaints and complaint escalations should be logged and acknowledged within 5 working days. This did not happen in the resident’s case. A full response should be provided within 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2.
The landlord did not respond for over 3 months at stage 1 and there was also a delay of approximately a week in responding at stage 2. Its responses did not address or apologise for these delays. The landlord’s failure to respond in a timely manner increased the resident’s frustration and damaged the landlord and tenant relationship.
The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response was inadequate. Where the resident reported new issues, the landlord should have referred these matters to its repairs team to investigate. The stage 1 response assumed the landlord’s records were complete and accurate, and it failed to make further enquiries with the resident to gain additional information to address her concerns.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s complaints handling. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the time and trouble she took to pursue her complaint. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance, which says that such sums are appropriate where there have been unreasonable delays that have impacted the resident for a relatively short duration.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Scheme, the landlord has provided redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint about the delays in completing repairs to the resident’s windows.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of hazards in the property’s garden.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of blocked drains.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a broken bathroom sink.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident £350 compensation, made up of:
  1. £150 in recognition of the stress and inconvenience caused by the delay in investigating and completing repairs to the property’s drains.
  2. £100 in recognition of the stress and inconvenience caused by its failure to address her reports of a broken bathroom sink.
  3. £100 in recognition of the time and trouble she took to pursue her complaint.
3. Carry out an inspection of the drains and bathroom sink at the property, to determine whether any repairs are required. The landlord should inform the resident of its position, providing timescales for completing any required works.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord arrange an inspection of all windows and window seals at the resident’s property to identify any repairs.
It is recommended that the landlord contact the resident to discuss her concerns about hazardous areas of the exterior of the property other than the area that was the subject of its breach of tenancy letter of 5 June 2023.