Nottingham Community Housing Association Limited (202310444)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202310444
Nottingham Community Housing Association Limited
21 October 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
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
- Reports of a roof leak.
- Associated formal complaint.
Background
- The resident is the leaseholder of the property, the landlord owns the freehold. The property is a 2-bed, second-floor flat.
- The resident reported a roof leak to the landlord on 7 November 2022. She stated that it was leaking into a bedroom. It set a target date for works on 5 December 2022 and completed them on 9 August 2023.
- On 27 March 2023, the resident complained to the landlord that it had not completed works and its contractor had cancelled appointments. It acknowledged her complaint on 4 April 2023.
- The landlord provided the resident with its stage 1 complaint response on 19 April 2023. It acknowledged that its service standards had fallen short, explaining that there had been issues with access and contractor staffing, along with a miscommunication about scaffolding. It provided a date for its contractor to attend and assess scaffolding requirements of 21 April 2023, with works to follow once they completed this.
- The resident requested escalation of her complaint on 4 May 2023. She felt that its response was not good enough as the leak had caused damage to the ceiling in her flat and she had taken multiple days off work to facilitate missed or unnecessary appointments.
- In its stage 2 complaint response of 16 May 2023, the landlord stated that its contractor needed to inspect the resident’s bathroom to determine where the leak was to ensure that they erected scaffolding in the correct place. It had booked an appointment for this on 18 May 2023. It stated that once it completed the roof repairs, it would complete a post-works inspection of her property and consider compensation.
- The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s actions following its stage 2 response and brought her complaint to this Service for investigation.
Assessment and findings
Scope of investigation
- Throughout the period of the complaint the resident has reported the effect that the issues have had on her health. The Ombudsman is not able to make a determination about any links between the issues and the resident’s health concerns. Under paragraph 42.f the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion concern matters where this Service considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, other tribunal or procedure.
- However, the Ombudsman will consider the overall distress and inconvenience that the issues in this case have caused. A determination relating to damages caused to their health is more appropriate for the courts and she may wish to seek appropriate advice if she wishes to consider that option.
Repairs to a roof leak
- 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 policy, and its covenants under the lease agreement, in which it states that it is obligated to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the flat and of the block. Its repairs policy places roofing works under its 60-day repairs timescale.
- The resident reported a leak from the roof, going into her bedroom, to the landlord on 7 November 2022. It has not provided records of its attendance following this, however, in its stage 1 complaint response it detailed a no access appointment on 12 December 2022. It then stated that it attended again on 16 January 2023 and accessed the communal area only. This demonstrates that, while unsuccessful, it had attempted to visit her property to assess and locate the internal leak within its published timescales. However, it appears to have made no effort to investigate the roof for any repair issues within this time.
- The landlord rescheduled the works for the morning of 27 March 2023. Its contractor failed to attend, citing a resource issue for this and they rescheduled the works for 26 July 2023. The resident raised her complaint on the same day due to the length of time it was taking to repair the roof. While it had experienced access issues to her property initially, it rescheduled external roof works for 121 days after her complaint which far exceeded its 60-day published timescale for roof repairs.
- In its stage 1 complaint response of 19 April 2023, the landlord apologised for its service standards falling short. It confirmed that a second contractor would be attending to assess the scaffolding requirements on 21 April 2023. However, the evidence provided shows that it, or its contractor, rescheduled twice more, with a final date of 25 July 2023. This was the day before repairs were due to commence. While it would have been reasonable of the landlord or its contractors to arrange scaffolding erection a date closer to the works, by not fulfilling appointments on 2 previous dates, it failed to effectively manage her expectations which undoubtedly added to her frustrations.
- Following the resident’s stage 2 escalation request, the landlord responded on 16 May 2023. It advised that its contractor would be attending her property on 18 May 2023, to inspect her bathroom and locate the area of the leak. It said that it would arrange to inspect her property again once it had completed works and would then consider offering compensation. Its response was poor and placed focus on being unable to contact her to confirm the 18 May 2023 appointment. It did not offer an apology for the delays and failed to consider redress outside of a future uncalculated compensation offer.
- The landlord started works on 26 July 2023 as arranged. However, this was 261 days after the resident’s initial report of the leak. While this Service acknowledges that roofing repairs can be complex and take longer than 60 days to complete, this was not an acceptable length of time as evidenced by the completion date of 9 August 2023, 15 days after commencement. It undoubtedly faced challenges in accessing the resident’s property, but it could have arranged for more prompt installation of scaffolding and investigative works as it did not require access to her property to reach the roof.
- As offered in its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord did complete a post-works inspection of the resident’s property, and it subsequently raised works to stain block and redecorate the affected part of her ceiling. This demonstrated good practice. However, there is no evidence that it considered an offer of compensation as it had previously stated.
- Overall, there were clear failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak. There were avoidable delays and a failure to responsibly manage her expectations throughout. It made little effort to investigate the severity of the leak and left her to chase it for updates throughout the complaint period and prior to the completion of works.
Complaint handling
- The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), current at the time of this complaint, states that landlords must acknowledge where things have gone wrong and set out the actions it has already taken, or intends to take, to put things right. This can include providing an explanation, apologising, providing a financial remedy or taking action where there has been a delay.
- While it did provide an appropriate and reasonable stage 1 response, the landlord’s stage 2 response lacked explanation and it did not appropriately apologise for the continued delays, instead apologising that the resident had cause to complain. It stated that it had upheld the complaint but did not explain why or offer any reasonable remedy for this.
- The Code also states that a landlord’s final complaint response must confirm details of how to escalate the complaint to the Ombudsman, which it did not do.
- As such, a finding of service failure is appropriate in the circumstances of this case and this Service will make orders for financial redress below.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak.
- 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 associated formal complaint.
Orders
- The landlord is ordered to:
- Pay the resident compensation totalling £350, broken down as follows:
- £300 for the failures identified in its handling of repairs.
- £50 for the failures identified in its complaint handling.
- Provide an apology to the resident, explaining the delays in completing repairs that were within its control.
- Pay the resident compensation totalling £350, broken down as follows:
- The landlord must provide evidence that it has complied with the above orders to this Service within 4 weeks of this decision.