London Borough of Hillingdon (202102461)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202102461

London Borough of Hillingdon

23 March 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 of repairs needed to communal gutters;
2. the resident’s report that a communal patio area needed to be cleaned;
3. the resident’s report of a faulty communal front entrance door intercom;
4. the resident’s concern about the condition of communal areas within his block.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is a leaseholder and the landlord’s records show that he purchased the lease on 28 August 2020. The property is a flat within a low-level block with shared communal doors, corridors and outdoor spaces. The landlord is a local authority.
The lease agreement obliges the resident to pay rent and a fair proportion of estate expenses and the landlord to keep in ‘good and substantial repair’ the main structure of the estate, including roofs, gutters, floors and security systems.
The lease agreement also includes a requirement for the ‘managed land’ to be kept in a ‘neat and tidy condition’. It includes a plan that shows the managed land and estate includes a communal patio area on the first floor of the block.
The landlord has a repairs policy that shows that it is responsible for repairing the structure and outside of properties and maintaining shared facilities such as communal paths and doors
The landlord has a ‘repairs and maintenance’ factsheet that shows that it will complete repairs within timescales according to a priority given to the repair. It aims to complete repairs within four hours (emergency), one working day (urgent), 20 working days (routine) or 90 working days (larger jobs that require more planning).
The landlord has a ‘leaseholder information booklet’ that sets out that the costs paid by the resident for communal area repairs cover minor repairs to shared areas of the block and that works such as decorations are ‘not covered by this annual service charge and is carried out as part of a separate maintenance programme’ with the costs ‘shared between all flats in the block’.
The landlord has a corporate complaints policy that sets out that it will respond to stage one and stage two complaints within 10 working days, after which the resident can escalate their complaint to this Service.
The landlord has a compensation policy that says that it will consider compensation on a case-by-case basis, including where there has been ‘neglect or unjustified delay’ or a ‘failure to follow… policies, rules or procedures’.

Summary of Events

The resident provided this Service with photographs taken during 8-12 January 2021 that show a section of broken off guttering and water build up on a flat roof, weed growth between paving slabs and a plant growing out of a downpipe.
The landlord’s repairs records show that a repairs order was raised on 14 January 2021 to address the blocked guttering.
The resident raised additional concerns on 23 February 2021 on the grounds that the shared patio was in a poor condition, covered in moss and slippery. He highlighted that he had almost fallen and was paying a service charge but the caretaking team had taken no action.
The landlord raised repairs orders on 23 February 2021 to assess the resident’s reports of unsafe paving slabs outside his property and a report that the front entrance intercom system was not working.
The landlord acknowledged the patio report on 25 February 2021 and said that it had asked the caretaking team to investigate cleaning the patio.
The landlord’s repairs records show that it attended the block on 5 March 2021 to assess for a communal front door intercom upgrade.
The resident reported on 8 March 2021 that there had been no change and there was unsightly gaffer tape applied to the guttering as a temporary leak repair.
The landlord acknowledged the further report from the resident on 9 March 2021. It advised that the caretaking team was shortly to carry out jet washing to the patio and said it would look into the guttering issue.
The landlord recorded the guttering works as complete on 10 March 2021, noting that plants had been removed from the area above the main entrance door but it had been unable to access a flat roof due to railings making it unsafe to do so.
The landlord recorded the patio inspection order as complete on 17 March 2021. It noted that there was no leak into the library in the corresponding area (below the patio) and that paving slabs outside the resident’s property were ‘ok’.
The resident reported on 22 March 2021 that nothing had been done about the patio, the flat roof above a communal door was in a ‘shocking state’ with a plant growing out of it and he queried what he was paying service charges for.
The landlord acknowledged the formal complaint on 24 March 2021; the resident wrote to it again on 13 April 2021, reiterating the previous concerns and chasing up the broken intercom.
The landlord posted the stage one complaint response to the resident on 12 April 2021 (and sent a copy by email on 13 April 2021). It concluded that:
1. colleagues in maintenance services had been made aware of the balcony gaffer tape so they could take appropriate action
2. a roofer attended on 10 March 2021 and noted that plants had been removed from the guttering over the main entrance but could not access the flat roof above the car park entrance due to railings around it
3. it had provided information about what the service charges covered when he purchased the property and this included 2020/21 estimates of £180 for cleaning common areas and £75 for general sundry repairs.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 13 April 2021 – he said that the landlord had ignored the patio moss issue, the plant was still growing out of the roof and communal areas had not been maintained.
The landlord raised a repairs order on 16 April 2021 to address the resident’s report of a tree growing out of the roof above the entrance to a neighbouring flat. It recorded the job as complete on 19 April 2021, noting it had removed a tree that was growing out of the top of a downpipe (it subsequently noted that it also sealed around the leaf grid that had been lifted).
The landlord issued its final complaint response on 19 April 2021, concluding that:
1. two hours per week was spent by its caretaking team washing and hoovering the stairs, clearing waste, washing concrete steps and windows to the communal front door and cleaning carpets every three months
2. it would re-charge leaseholders for any works undertaken to the patio area so while it would remove moss and weed the area, any jet washing would attract a cost that would be re-charged so the resident should let it know if leaseholders wished it to obtain a quote
3. an inspector had attended that week to check the area where the resident had said a plant had been growing and it was found that it had been removed
4. the door entry contractor had attended and found the intercom was beyond repair so a renewal had been agreed and ordered which was likely to take four to six weeks.
The landlord raised a repairs order on 19 April 2021 to inspect the resident’s reports about the condition of communal areas, including the carpets, decorations and patio. It recorded on 21 April 2021 that:
1. the carpets were fine but could be cleaned
2. some markings and hairline cracks to internal decorations and communal walls should be cleaned, filled and painted
3. the patio could do with being jet cleaned and sealed and two slabs needed to be replaced
4. communal lino needed to be cleaned and white ceiling panels required replacement.
The landlord raised a repairs order on 26 April 2021 for a quote to be obtained for the carpet, decoration and patio works.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 27 April 2021 – he advised that excuses for not cleaning the patio were pathetic and he thought four to six weeks for the intercom system was not good enough (when it had already been broken for eight weeks). He added on 28 April 2021 that somebody needed to come to assess the condition of the communal structure and gaffer tape had been left over his balcony.
The resident approached this Service in April 2021, advising that he felt communal spaces outside his property were potentially dangerous and impacting his mental health. He added that he wished for the landlord to clean the patio, fix leaks, paint a shared entrance, fix dangerous shared steps and roof areas above front doors, clean windows and walls, repair a faulty intercom and commit to bi-monthly inspections.
The landlord recorded that it completed the upgrade of the intercom system on 28 May 2021.

Assessment and findings

Gutter repairs

The resident has provided evidence that there was pooling water, faulty guttering and plants growing out of communal pipework in early January 2021. This was reported to the landlord at least as early as 14 January 2021 when the landlord raised a repairs order to address blocked guttering.
There is no record that the landlord took actions to remedy the guttering issue until 10 March 2021 when it noted that it had removed plants from gutters. It is unclear what priority the landlord gave to this repair but even if it was regarded as a ‘routine’ repair, the period of two months to attend to the guttering was inappropriate and meant that the resident felt the need to chase progress.
The resident advised the landlord in mid-March 2021 that there was still vegetation growing from a section of the roof area which the landlord later found was coming out of a downpipe. It was therefore not until 19 April 2021 that the landlord completed the repairs to remove plants growing out of gutters, more than three months after the guttering issue was first reported. This was more than two months outside of the 20-wrking day timescale that the landlord sets for routine repairs.
When the resident chased progress with the guttering repair in early March 2021, he also raised concern that gaffer tape had been attached to gutters as a temporary measure. The landlord acknowledged this report within its complaint response of 12 April 2021 but it is unclear that it took any further steps to investigate and the resident continued to mention the issue of gaffer tape in late April 2021, after the complaint had exhausted the landlord’s complaints process.
In summary, the landlord delayed by more than two months in responding to the resident’s concerns about the condition of the guttering and it is unclear whether it investigated the gaffer tape report. There is no evidence that the delay caused any damage to the resident’s property but it meant that he had to chase progress on a few occasions during March-April 2021.

Patio

The resident initially made reports from 23 February 2021 that the patio area outside his property was slippery due to moss growth. The landlord conducted an inspection on 17 March 2021, concluding that the slabs were in ‘ok’ condition and were not causing water ingress elsewhere to the block. It was reasonable for the landlord to undertake an inspection based on the resident’s reports and its decision not to raise any repair works was in accordance with the inspection findings.
However, there is no evidence that the landlord assessed whether the patio area was slippery and needed to be weeded due to moss growth when it attended in March 2021. This was unreasonable given the resident had reported a potential health and safety concern. It subsequently stated in its final complaint response of 19 April 2021 that it would remove moss and weeds but did not advise when these works would occur and this Service has not been provided evidence of if, or when, this was completed.
Further, the landlord offered conflicting advice during this period as it told the resident in March 2021 that it intended to jet wash the patio area but its final complaint response of 19 April 2021 advised that jet washing would attract an additional charge which leaseholders would need to contribute to. The landlord’s leaseholder information booklet confirms that some more extensive estate works will require leaseholders to contribute to the cost and the landlord’s advice was therefore appropriate but likely caused confusion to the resident given it had already told him that its caretaking team would be conducting jet washing to improve safety.
In summary, the landlord responded within a reasonable timescale to the resident’s report that the patio area outside his property needed to be cleaned. However, it failed to demonstrate that it considered whether the area needed to be treated for health and safety reasons and subsequently offered contradictory information to him about the potential of jet washing the area.

Communal intercom

The landlord initially raised a repair order on 23 February 2021 to investigate reports that the communal front entrance door intercom system was faulty. Its records indicate that it had decided by 5 March 2021 that a replacement system was needed. The landlord acted reasonably by inspecting the fault and promptly deciding that a renewal was needed.
The intercom renewal was completed on 28 May 2021, according to the landlord’s repairs records. Although this was after the resident’s complaint had exhausted the landlord’s complaints process, this was within the 90-working day timescale that the landlord is obliged to complete larger jobs within. Given the extent of works needed to source and replace a communal entrance intercom system, the landlord therefore carried out the works within an appropriate timescale, offering the resident an update accordingly within its final complaint response.
In summary, the landlord acted reasonably by inspecting reports of a faulty communal intercom system, deciding that a renewal was needed and completing the required works within an appropriate timescale.

Communal standards

After the complaint was logged in late March 2021 about the resident’s patio and guttering reports, he began to raise concerns about the quality of communal maintenance and whether he was getting value for money for his service charges.
In response, the landlord took the following actions over the subsequent month:
1. confirmed in the initial complaint response how much the resident’s service charge estimate was and what this was supposed to cover
2. explained to the resident in the final complaint response how many hours its caretaking team were at the block per week and what their duties involved
3. inspected the block to review the condition of communal decorations and floor coverings.

These were reasonable actions on the part of the landlord to explain to the resident what services he paid for and consider his concerns about the condition of communal areas.

It is unclear from the evidence seen by this Service whether the landlord communicated the outcome of its communal inspection to the resident after the complaint exhausted its complaints process and whether it progressed the works it identified as necessary to decorations and carpets – a recommendation is made below in this regard.
In summary, the landlord responded reasonably to the concerns raised by the resident about the condition of communal areas within his block. It provided explanations on what communal maintenance his service charges covered and inspected the block to establish what additional works may be needed.

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 of repairs needed to communal gutters;
2. the resident’s report that a communal patio area needed to be cleaned.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of:
1. the resident’s report of a faulty communal front entrance door intercom;
2. the resident’s concern about the condition of communal areas within his block.

Reasons

The landlord delayed by more than two months in addressing reports that guttering was blocked and vegetation was growing out of it.
The landlord delayed in considering the resident’s health and safety reports about weeds and moss growth to the patio area and gave him conflicting information about whether it would jet wash the area.
The landlord completed the communal intercom renewal works within an appropriate timescale.
The landlord took reasonable steps to investigate the resident’s concern about the condition of communal areas within his block.

Orders

If it has not already done so, the landlord to remove moss growth from the patio area and review whether there are any health and safety concerns.
The landlord to write to the resident to:
1. apologise for the service failures identified in this report;
2. advise if it has inspected the guttering gaffer tape issue and what its findings were (if not, it should advise the resident when it will inspect);
3. confirm the outcome of its health and safety review of the patio area;
4. confirm the process by which leaseholders can ask it to progress a quote for jet washing the patio.
The landlord to pay the resident compensation of £100, made up of:
1. £50 in recognition of the inconvenience and time and trouble caused to him by the service failure in its handling of his report of repairs needed to communal gutters;
2. £50 in recognition of the inconvenience and time and trouble caused to him by the service failure in its handling of his report that a communal patio area needed to be cleaned.

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

Recommendations

If it has not already done so, the landlord to write to the resident to:
1. confirm the outcome of its communal inspection on 21 April 2021 and how it has progressed the works that it identified to be necessary;
2. advise how often it will conduct block inspections in future and whether it is willing to assess his reports that steps and communal entrance decorations require attention.

The landlord should confirm its intentions in regard to this recommendation to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.