London Borough of Hillingdon (202313798)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202313798

London Borough of Hillingdon

23 July 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 the resident’s reports of a leak into the property and the associated repairs.

Background

  1. The resident is the leaseholder of the property, an apartment in a building owned by the landlord. He sublets the property to his tenant. Although he does not live at the property, for clarity he will be referred to as “the resident” throughout this report and his tenant will be referred to as “the tenant.”
  2. The resident reported to the landlord that water was entering his property from above on 15 May 2023. The landlord raised works to clear the building guttering on the same day.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 13 June 2023, stating that he had chased repairs on the same day due to water continuing to enter the property close to electrical sockets during rainfall. He stated it had told him to speak directly to its roofing contractor to find out when it would be completing the repair, which he found unacceptable. He was disappointed that it was not pursuing the issue with the urgency of an emergency repair, as he said that it was placing the health and safety of his tenant at risk. He noted that he had raised similar requests on 3 separate occasions in the prior 5 years and that there was a general lack of routine maintenance to the guttering and external fascias at the property.
  4. The landlord responded to the resident at stage 1 of its complaint process on 27 June 2023. It explained that it had requested a quote for works from its roofing contractor. It had, in the meantime, arranged for its own team to attend on 14 July 2023 to check the guttering. It apologised for the delays in completing repairs.
  5. The resident requested escalation of his complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s procedure on 10 August 2023, as it had not repaired the roof to stop the leak despite assurances from it during calls with him. Rainwater was continuing to enter the property and was causing damage to the interior of the apartment and its contents. He stated that this was causing a significant risk to the health and safety of his tenant.
  6. The landlord responded to the resident at stage 2 on 23 August 2023. It confirmed that it had completed works to the guttering as promised on 14 July 2023. During this visit, it booked works to clear the gullies for 31 August 2023. Its roofing contractor had since made it aware that the lead covering the parapet wall on the roof was compromised which was likely to be the cause of the leak. It had requested that the contractor addressed this as a matter of urgency. It apologised for taking longer than expected to resolve the issue and said it understood his frustrations. As a gesture of goodwill, it offered to repaint the inside of his property once it completed works to the roof and gullies. It had arranged delivery of a dehumidifier on 25 August 2023 and said it would keep contact with him to ensure completion of all works in a timely manner.
  7. The resident brought his complaint to this Service as works remained outstanding to the roof and the landlord had not redecorated the inside of his property as offered.

Assessment and findings

Policies, procedures, legislation, and the lease agreement.

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places an obligation on landlords to conduct repairs to the structure and exterior of their properties. The landlord reflects this in its repairs guide, and the third schedule of the lease agreement, in which it states it is obligated to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the flat and of the block, including all drains, gutters, and external pipes.
  2. The landlord’s published fact file for leaseholders and repairs factsheet both contain information on response timescales for repairs. It aims to respond to all emergency repair reports within 24 hours, with a 4-hour timescale to make safe all dangerous situations. It aims to attend to urgent works within 1 working day, routine works within 20 working days and minor works (larger jobs that require more planning) have a 90-working day response timescale. It does not offer specific examples for any of these categories. However, it is good practice for a landlord to deal with leaks as either an emergency or routine repair depending on the information available to the landlord at the time of the report.
  3. The complaint policy also sets out alternative types of redress to compensation that the landlord could offer, including:
    1. An apology.
    2. Providing the service that should have been received at first.
    3. Taking action or making a decision that should have been done before.
    4. Reconsidering an incorrect decision.
    5. Improving procedures so that similar problems do not reoccur.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak, and associated repairs.

  1. The resident reported water entering the property to the landlord on 15 and 24 May 2023. Following the first report on 15 May 2023, it raised works to clear guttering at the property. However, neither party has provided evidence demonstrating that it communicated this to him or that it took any action to identify the cause of the leak following either of the reports. While the landlord may not have categorised the reports as requiring an emergency response based on the information it had, it would have been good practice to communicate this to the resident to manage his expectations.
  2. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 13 June 2023 after chasing repairs on 12 June 2023. He stated that his report on the 24 May 2023 was an emergency due to rainwater entering the property adjacent to electrical sockets. When he spoke to it on 12 June 2023, it advised him to contact the roofing contractor directly for more information on when it would complete repairs. This was now 21 working days since the first report and had exceeded the emergency, urgent and routine repair timescales set out in its repairs policy. While the leak only occurred during rainfall, which may have been intermittent due to the time of year, the landlord should have treated the reports with more urgency when advised of the risk from the nearby electrical points.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 27 June 2023. It stated that it appreciated that he wanted works completed as quickly as possible, but that it had to follow due process by receiving quotes from its roofing contractor first. It said that had arranged for its own team to attend the property on 14 July 2023, but it did not tell him that this was to deal with the guttering. It apologised for the delays in getting the repairs completed. It was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge the delays, but it offered little information to ease the resident’s concerns.
  4. The landlord completed guttering works on 14 July 2023 and identified further required works to the gullies. It booked these for 31 August 2023. However, the resident escalated his complaint on 10 August 2023 as the leak continued during rainfall, causing damage to the property, and risking the health and safety of his tenant. Following this, it attended an arranged appointment at the property on 14 August 2023 and confirmed water entry. This is the first evidence of it attending the property to inspect the leak, 65 working days after the first report on 15 May 2023. While its response to the report on 10 August 2023 was prompt, although not in line with emergency or urgent timescales, the overall delay was not acceptable in the circumstances with a potential electrical safety issue.
  5. During the visit on 14 August 2023, the landlord raised works to make safe the ceiling in the resident’s property. It marked this as completed on 20 August 2023, within the appropriate timescales set out in the repairs policy. It arranged delivery of a dehumidifier for 25 August 2023 to aid the drying process inside the property which was a positive step forward in supporting the resident and his tenant.
  6. On 23 August 2023, the roofing contractor advised the landlord that lead was missing from the roof and it raised urgent works to fix this. Following this, on the same day, it provided the resident with a stage 2 complaint response. It advised him of the planned works for 31 August 2023 and that it had identified missing lead on the roof as the cause of water ingress. It apologised for taking longer than expected to resolve the repairs and as a gesture of goodwill, offered to repaint the inside of his property once it had completed all works. Its response at this time was fair, and the offer of redress was appropriate. However, the landlord’s handling of further events following this offer adversely affected the positive resolution which it could have achieved. 
  7. The landlord’s roofing contractor completed the temporary lead repairs on 1 September 2023, this was within 6 working days of identifying the issue, which was reasonable when considering the nature of these works. 3 months later, on 7 December 2023, the resident made a further report of water entering the property to the landlord. Due to this, it stated that it would not arrange redecoration of his property until it was certain there was no water ingress. It attempted to visit the property on 8 and 11 December 2023 but could not gain access. It left a message for the tenant to call and arrange a survey appointment with it on 12 December 2023. No evidence has been provided to this Service relating to any matters after this date and the evidence it has provided does not indicate that it contacted the resident to arrange the redecoration.
  8. In conclusion, there were avoidable delays in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak. It did not adhere to the timescales set in its own repairs policy and did not treat emergency reports with the urgency required. There were clear and obvious failings by it in this case which could have been resolved by the redress it offered as part of its stage 2 response. It, however, has not completed the redecoration works almost 10 months later nor did it offer compensation to the resident as an alternative resolution. As such, a finding of service failure is appropriate.
  9. In a conversation with this Service on 16 July 2024, he stated that there have been no further leaks and although all works appear to have been completed, the redecoration offered at stage 2 remains outstanding. Thus, this report includes orders for the landlord to undertake the redecoration which it offered to do.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak into the property and the associated repairs.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £200 compensation for the distress and inconvenience experienced in this case.
    2. Provide the resident with a written apology, detailing the reason for the delays in this case and how it intends to improve services going forward.
    3. Contact the resident and his tenant to arrange the previously offered redecorations in the property.
  2. The landlord must provide evidence that it has complied with the above orders to this Service within 4 weeks of this decision.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should consider updating its repairs policy to include examples of what it considers an emergency repair, urgent repair, or routine repair to enable it to manage the expectations of its residents more appropriately.