Onward Homes Limited (202017410)

A picture containing logo

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202017410

Onward Homes Limited

21 December 2021

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 refers to:
1. The landlord’s handling of damp repairs to the resident’s property.
2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is a house.
The landlord’s records show that the resident had reported issues of damp and mould in her property in November 2020. Following this an inspection was carried out on 2 December 2020 and the following repair issues were identified:
1. A mould wash of the walls and ceilings in the resident’s bedrooms.
2. Renew the kitchen window and frame, as well as the external kitchen windowsills.
3. Repair the roof leak into the resident’s rear bedroom and renew the internal windowsill.
4. Reseal around the bedroom windows.
5. Clear the guttering at the rear of the property.
6. Re-plaster and paint the kitchen wall and around the door area.
7. Repoint the brickwork on the external wall underneath the kitchen window.
8. Varnish the rear door
9. Clean and service the bathroom extractor fan and renew a double plug socket in the resident’s lounge.
The landlord’s records show that a contractor attended on 30 March 2021 to replace the vent at the back of the property and clean the bathroom fan. They identified that there was no damage to the lounge socket and that the kitchen fan was working correctly.
The resident called the Ombudsman on 31 March 2021 and explained the following:
1. She wished to raise a complaint to her landlord, although it is unclear from the evidence provided as to whether she had previously raised this with the landlord directly.
2. There was damp and mould in the property, a leak into her bedroom through the roof, the kitchen window and windowsills were mouldy and leaking water into the property, the plaster in her kitchen was breaking away and her back door did not shut properly and was unsafe.
3. She expressed dissatisfaction with the landlord’s communication regarding the repairs and felt it had shown a lack of interest or concern for the property. There had been several missed appointments and contractors had been sent when the work could not be done, due to other jobs needing to be completed first. Appointments had also been changed without prior warning.
4. There appeared to be no structure or organisation of the work that needed to be done and the repair issues had affected her physical and mental health. She wanted a surveyor to attend and assess the work to determine the order in which the repairs would be carried out. She also wanted a schedule of the repairs and the dates she could expect the works to be completed by.
The Ombudsman wrote to the landlord on 1 April 2021, asking it to consider the resident’s complaint in line with its complaints policy. The landlord responded and asked for the resident’s property address to enable it to investigate the complaint.
The landlord’s records show that the work to clear the resident’s gutters was completed on 7 April 2021.
The Ombudsman supplied this information on 10 May 2021 and added that the resident had expressed further dissatisfaction regarding an appointment for a bricklayer originally scheduled for 7 April 2021. This appointment was required before the roofers could attend the property. She had been told on the day that the appointment was going ahead. Later that day she received a phone call advising that the appointment had been moved to 22 June 2021. She was dissatisfied with the further delay in repairs.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 10 May 2021. It said that it would aim to respond within ten working days. The Ombudsman wrote to the landlord again on 25 May 2021 and asked it to provide a complaint response to the resident within five working days as she had not received a response.
The landlord issued its stage one complaint response to the resident on 25 May 2021 and explained the following:
1. It had completed an inspection of the resident’s property on 2 December 2020 following her reports of damp and mould. Following the inspection, a number of repairs were agreed (as detailed above).
2. It found that there was an initial delay in raising the repairs. The repairs specialist had asked for the repairs to be raised on 2 December 2020, but these were not raised until 21 January 2021. On 1 February 2021, the contractors had referred the repairs back to the landlord due to the amount of work that needed to be carried out.
3. On 5 February 2021, the repairs were authorised and sent back to the contractors. It understood that there had been further delays in the repairs being fully completed. It had spoken to the contractors who had confirmed that the roofing repair would be completed on 1 June 2021, followed by the pointing on 10 and 11 June 2021. The contractors had also confirmed that a surveyor would be attending the property on 25 May 2021 to identify the remaining works and would update it within five working days following the appointment. It had asked that one of its own surveyors also monitored the repairs and that a post-inspection is conducted to ensure the resident was satisfied with the repairs.
4. It acknowledged that the length of time taken to carry out the repairs was not acceptable and apologised for the poor service the resident had received. Feedback had been provided to its repairs team to highlight the failures that had occurred. It offered the resident £200 compensation as a gesture of goodwill in recognition of the time taken to carry out repairs. She could escalate her complaint if she remained dissatisfied.
The landlord’s records show that it had attempted to visit the property on 26 May 2021 to assess the progression of the repairs. It was not able to gain access and booked another appointment with the resident.
The resident emailed the landlord on 1 June 2021 and explained the following:
1. She was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and said that there had been no formal communication regarding the changes made to the planned repairs. She had been told that the roof repair was originally booked for that day and scaffolding had been erected on 28 May 2021 in preparation. She had since been told that the repair had not been booked for that day.
2. She had taken the day off as unpaid as she had previously used her holiday allowance for repairs that had been cancelled. She worked and attended university, thus, needed to be contacted if there were any changes to repairs.
3. The issues were affecting her health due to the stress involved. It had been 19 months since one of the repair issues was first reported.
The landlord responded on 8 June 2021 and apologised for its delayed response. It also apologised that there had been a lack of communication since its initial complaint response. It had now asked for a joint inspection to take place so that all issues could be addressed. This had been booked for 16 June 2021. It had also asked its repairs specialist to keep the resident updated. It confirmed that its offer of £200 still stood as an apology for the time it had taken for repairs to be carried out.
The resident responded on 11 June 2021 and asked for her complaint to be escalated. She said that the repairs scheduled for the previous day had not been completed and she had needed to call and chase this with the landlord. She said that the inspection on 16 June 2021 would be the third inspection of repairs and she did not feel any progress was being made. She understood that the roof repair was a large job but did not understand why the work to her kitchen windows and windowsills could not be done and the other jobs were everyday repairs. She added that the situation was causing a great deal of stress.
The landlord’s records suggest that an inspection took place on 16 June 2021 and the same repair issues were raised. On 21 June 2021, a contractor attended the property as the resident had reported a burnt smell coming from her bathroom extractor fan. The fan was then replaced.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 22 June 2021 and said it would provide a response by 6 July 2021.
The landlord issued its stage two complaint response to the resident on 7 July 2021 and explained the following:
1. It acknowledged that the resident had first reported a number of damp related repairs in November 2020 which resulted in a property inspection being carried out on 2 December 2020. Due to the volume and nature of the works, there had been a delay in planning and completing the works. More recently this had resulted in further involvement by its repairs specialist who subsequently agreed a programme of works. It confirmed that works were progressed on 28 June 2021 and were now nearing completion.
2. It apologised for the poor level of service the resident had received and acknowledged that the repairs had taken longer than anticipated to complete. It noted that some of the delays were exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic and it had experienced some delays during this period. It felt that the compensation offered at stage one was proportionate, however, in an attempt to bring the matter to a satisfactory conclusion it offered an additional £100, bringing the total to £300.
The resident referred her complaint to this Service as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s actions. She said that the works had not been completed as of 16 September 2021. She also remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s communication regarding the repairs and missed appointments.
The work required to repair two broken roof slates was reported as completed on 4 September 2021. The landlord’s repair records show that the work to replace the resident’s back door and kitchen window was completed on 19 October 2021. The mould wash of the resident’s bedrooms was reported as completed on 21 October 2021. The landlord confirmed that a joint inspection was carried out on 28 October 2021 where each of the repair issues were inspected. All of the original repairs had been completed, however, the landlord identified that further works were required to re-plaster the kitchen wall and remove a socket, as well as pointing on the external wall. These works were reported as completed on 15 November 2021. The landlord advised the resident that the works raised to replace the external kitchen windowsill, seal around the back-bedroom window, renew the bedroom internal window sill and work to the internal parts of the kitchen were not required.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

The resident has said she considers that the issues affecting her property have impacted her health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments. However, it is beyond the expertise of this Service to make a determination on whether there was a direct link between the repair issues and the resident’s health. The resident therefore may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if she considers that her health has been affected by any action or lack thereof by the landlord. Whilst we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any errors by the landlord.

The landlord’s handling of damp repairs to the resident’s property.

The tenancy agreement states that the landlord would be responsible for repairs required to the external structure of the property, including the gutters, the roof, outside walls, doors and windowsills including any external painting and decorating. It would also be responsible for the internal walls, floors and ceilings and doors.
The landlord’s repairs policy has several timescales for different repairs:
1. Emergency repairs should be completed within four hours.
2. Urgent repairs should be completed within five working days.
3. Routine repairs should be completed within 20 working days.
4. Planned repairs include the replacement of kitchens or roofs and replacing windows and doors and may take longer than usual to complete due to the complexity of work required. The landlord would be expected to provide regular updates to the resident to manage their expectations of when the repairs should be completed.
In this case, it is not disputed that the repairs took a significant amount of time to complete. The landlord has acknowledged the delays and explained that these were caused largely due to the volume of works and its planning and coordination. It said it had identified that for multiple or extensive repairs, its planned works team would need to coordinate with its contractors. It identified that the delays were also partly caused by the impact of Covid-19, such as staff resource issues and material shortages. It is noted that some delay was to be expected as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, which was outside of the landlord’s control. However, this does not account for the entirety of the significant delay in this case. The repairs needed to the resident’s property were initially identified on 2 December 2020, with some repairs not fully completed until October/November 2021.
Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The landlord acted fairly in acknowledging the delayed repairs and apologising to the resident. It put things right by offering £300 compensation. The compensation award was in line with the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance. Which states that amounts in this range are proportionate where there has been considerable service failure but this may not have had a permanent impact on the resident, such as, failure over a considerable period of time to act in accordance with policy – for example to address repairs. The landlord offered compensation that the Ombudsman considers was proportionate to the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident in relation to the landlord’s failings. The landlord demonstrated that it learnt from outcomes by identifying what should be done differently when handling extensive or multiple planned repairs.
For the reasons set out above, the landlord has made redress to the resident in regard to the delayed repairs which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily. The measures taken by the landlord to redress what went wrong were proportionate to the impact that its failures had on the resident. It is, however, noted that the resident has advised that there were missed, and failed appointments and the landlord’s communication was poor, which will be discussed in more detail below.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint and record keeping

The landlord’s complaint policy states that it has a two-stage procedure for handling complaints. At stage one, the complaint should be responded to within ten working days. If the resident remains dissatisfied they can escalate their complaint to stage two. At stage two, a complaint response should be issued within ten working days. The landlord would be expected to address each point of the resident’s complaint in its responses. It would also be expected to contact the resident if there is likely to be a delay in its response to explain the reasons for the delay and provide a new complaint response timescale.
In this case, it is unclear if the resident had asked for a complaint to be raised prior to her contact with this Service in March 2021. Following the Ombudsman’s correspondence on 10 May 2021, the landlord acknowledged the complaint and provided a stage one response within a reasonable timescale. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 11 June 2021. The landlord did not issue its stage two complaint response until 7 July 2021, which was eight working days outside of its complaint timescales at stage two.
As part of her complaint, the resident expressed dissatisfaction about missed and failed appointments and the landlord’s poor communication. The landlord has acknowledged the delayed repairs but had not explained its position regarding its communication and alleged missed or failed appointments. The landlord has, therefore, not satisfactorily demonstrated that it had investigated these concerns within its complaint responses which is likely to have caused the resident inconvenience. The Ombudsman has not been able to fully investigate these aspects of the resident’s complaint due to the lack of documentary information provided.
As part of this investigation the landlord was asked to provide documents, correspondence, and any other evidence relevant to the resident’s complaint. Only limited information was received, which did not include comprehensive information related to the resident’s communication or the details of any missed appointments. In this particular case the investigation has been able to reach a determination based on the information to hand. However, the omissions indicate poor record keeping by the landlord in that it was not able to provide the relevant information when asked.
There has been service failure by the landlord in regard to its handling of the associated complaint and its record keeping. Due to its delayed response at stage two and failure to address the resident’s concerns related to its communication and appointments. In view of this, the landlord should offer the resident additional compensation. It is recommended that the landlord take steps to establish a system of record keeping that ensures that all contact from a resident (and any representatives) is recorded and retained so that it can be provided to this Service upon request, in response to a complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation in relation to the delayed repairs which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in regard to its handling of the associated complaint.

Reasons

The landlord has acknowledged and apologised to the resident for the delayed repairs to her property. The landlord offered suitable redress in the form of compensation to the resident for the inconvenience caused and has demonstrated that it had learnt from the service failures identified.
There was a delay in issuing a stage two complaint response and the landlord has not acknowledged or explained this delay to the resident. It has also failed to address the resident’s concerns about missed and failed appointments, and its communication in its complaint responses.

Orders

The Ombudsman orders that the following actions are taken within four weeks:
1. The landlord is to pay the resident £375, comprised of:
  1. £300 as previously agreed in recognition of the inconvenience caused by the delayed repairs if this has not already been paid.
  2. £75 in recognition of the inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord take steps to establish a system of record keeping that ensures that all contact from a resident is recorded and retained so that it can be provided to this Service upon request, in response to a complaint.
It is recommended that the landlord takes steps to identify points of learning from the resident’s complaint in regard to its communication and the repair delays to prevent similar service failures in the future.