London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (202220040)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220040

Hammersmith and Fulham Council

26 June 2024

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 the landlord’s handling of:
   1. A leak in the resident’s bathroom.
   2. The associated complaint.

Background

2. The resident lives in a three-bed ground floor flat under a secure tenancy which began on 2 March 2015.
3. The resident herself does not have any vulnerabilities, however the landlord’s records indicate that the resident’s daughter has a disability.
4. The resident reported a leak from under the bath in her flat in September 2021. She said that the leak was causing damage to the skirting boards and creating a damp smell in the property. The resident believed that the leak may have been originated from an upstairs neighbour following major works.
5. The resident raised a complaint on 18 January 2022. She said that despite raising the leak four months earlier, it was not resolved. The resident queried why three contractors had attended but the repairs had not progressed. She was seeking completion of the repairs, improved communication and appointment bookings and compensation for the delays.
6. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 5 April 2022. It apologised for the lack of urgency and delays to the repairs and attributed this to communication issues with its contractor. The landlord said that it had traced the leaks and that works would be booked to rectify this. The landlord offered £250 compensation for the inconvenience.
7. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 24 May 2022. She said that the repair works remained outstanding and that she had experienced further poor appointment communication following an unannounced surveyor visit. The resident also said that the stage 1 response was delayed and was missing several attachments that the landlord had referenced, such as the compensation claim form.
8. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 13 July 2022 and said:
   1. It apologised for the delay, inconvenience and poor customer service that the resident had experienced.
   2. It had raised works to repair the bathroom following the surveys. The landlord said it had not been able to confirm these as it could not reach the resident to book the appointments.
   3. It was offering increased compensation of £550 for the inconvenience and delays.
9. The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated her complaint to the Ombudsman on 21 December 2022 seeking completion of the works and better coordination and communication around upcoming appointments.

Assessment and findings

Leak in the resident’s bathroom

10. The resident said that she first reported a leak in her bathroom, coming from under her bath, in September 2021.
11. Under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, landlords have a statutory duty to maintain the structure and of its properties and are also responsible for the installations for sanitation within the property. Once notified of a defect, landlords must make a lasting and effective repair in a reasonable time.
12. The landlord’s repairs policy outlines 5 priorities of repair:
    1. Priority 1 – Emergency repairs – repair to be completed within 2 hours.
    2. Priority 2 – Emergency repairs – repair to be completed within 24 hours.
    3. Priority 3 – Urgent repairs – repair to be completed within 3 working days.
    4. Priority 4 – Urgent repairs – repair to be completed within 5 working days.
    5. Priority 5 – Routine repairs – repair to be completed within 20 working days.
13. Within the landlord’s repair handbook, a minor leak is defined as a priority 3 repair and should therefore be resolved within 3 working days.
14. It is not disputed that the repairs to resolve the leak were not completed until 7 May 2024. This was a period of over 32 months from the time the resident first reported the issue. This was a significant failing as the repair should have been completed in 3 working days.
15. In the intervening period, the evidence shows that:
    1. At least four surveyors attended the property to assess the damage and cause of the leaks. It is unclear why repeated surveyor attendances were required.
    2. There was at least one occasion when the landlord was not aware previous inspections and surveys had taken place.
    3. The landlord was experiencing ongoing issues with communication with its contractor. The landlord’s staff noted that delays in arranging works following surveyor visits were causing a number of complaints to progress to stage 2.
    4. The scope of works to repair the bathroom were agreed on or around 4 July 2022. It is unclear why the installation and completion of these works were not completed for almost 2 years after this date. Nothing presented in the evidence accounts for this ongoing level of delay.
16. In its complaint responses, the landlord took steps to offer redress to the resident, including:
    1. Apologising for the delays in undertaking works, a “lack of urgency” and poor customer service.
    2. Explaining that the delays had been caused by poor communication with the contractor.
    3. Offering £250 compensation at stage 1 and increasing this to £550 at stage 2. This was to account for the resident’s inconvenience.
    4. Booking further works to address the leak and repairs. 
17. In August 2023, the landlord’s head of dispute resolution met with the resident in person at her home address to discuss the ongoing complaint and repairs. This was followed up by an email on 14 August 2023, in which the landlord said:
    1. It apologised for the ongoing delays and poor service that the resident had received.
    2. It was offering increased compensation of £2425, comprised of £300 for complaint handling delays, £75 per month for delays to the repairs (£1,725 in total) and £400 for the time and trouble caused to the resident.
    3. It was offering to install a new bathroom as part of its overall redress.
18. Following this meeting, the works were completed on 7 May 2024 and were subject to a post-completion survey. The resident has indicated, in correspondence with this Service that she is satisfied with the repairs.
19. Taking this redress together with the completed repairs, the landlord has taken action to address the substantive issue and return the resident to the position she would have been in, but for the landlord’s delays. At the time of this investigation, the resident also considered that the repairs were complete, and that sufficient redress had been offered.
20. Overall, the landlord has resolved the leaks and offered reasonable redress to the resident for the substantive issues, but it has not used this process to identify why the delays and communication issues arose, or taken steps to prevent this reoccurring. This is a service failure and the landlord must now undertake a case review to identify and embed learning across the organisation.

Complaint handling

21. The landlord operates a two-stage complaint process. It commits to issuing complaint responses:
    1. Within 10 working days at stage 1.
    2. Within 20 working days at stage 2.
22. The evidence shows that both of the landlord’s complaint responses were issued in excess of these timescales. Its stage 1 response was issued after 77 working days and its stage 2 response was issued after 50 working days. The Ombudsman expects landlords to manage and progress complaints effectively and resolve them at the earliest opportunity. Delays of this type cause additional distress and inconvenience to residents and also delay them being able to progress their case to this Service for consideration.
23. Throughout the course of this complaint there is evidence that the landlord has taken several steps to offer redress to the resident, including:
    1. Offering an apology in-person from a head of service for the poor service, the delays in completing repairs and for the complaint handling failures. 
    2. Payment of £2,425 compensation. This included £300 for the delays in issuing complaint responses.
    3. Completion of the repairs.
    4. Renewal of the resident’s entire bathroom including a new suite, tiles, skirting and decoration.
24. The resident has expressed that she is content with the redress offered at the time of this investigation.
25. It is important for a complaints process to be used for organisational learning and development. The Ombudsman expects landlords to assess any failings and put steps in place to prevent a reoccurrence. There is no evidence that the root causes of the delays in issuing complaint responses have been assessed or addressed and the Ombudsman considers that this was a service failure.
26. The landlord must now undertake a case review to identify any reasons for the delays and put steps in place to address these to prevent a reoccurrence.

Determination

27. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there has been:
    1. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the leak in the resident’s bathroom.
    2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Order

28. Within 56 days of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to complete a case review which must:
    1. Identify the reasons that the repairs were delayed in this case.
    2. Identify the causes of communication failings in this case.
    3. Identify the reasons why the complaint responses were delayed in this case.
    4. Set out what learning the landlord has taken from this case.
    5. Include an action plan on how the landlord will implement and embed the learning from this case in a period not exceeding 6 weeks.

The completed case review must be shared with the resident and the Ombudsman.

Recommendation

29. The landlord should consider paying additional compensation of £75 per month between August 2023, when its compensation offer increased, to May 2024 when the works in the resident’s property were completed.