Onward Homes Limited (202118782)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202118782

Onward Homes Limited

18 July 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Reports of damp and mould in the resident’s property.
    2. Repairs to a leak in the resident’s property.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a house.
  2. In October 2021 the resident contacted this Service to advise of leaks and damp and mould issues in the property. A contractor discussed these issues with the resident in May 2021 and had raised orders to attend to the repairs within the property, but the work had not been completed.
  3. The landlord provided a formal complaint response to the resident on 20 September 2021, in which it said that it the work would be completed by 20 September 2021. At this point the landlord offered £225 compensation in light of its delays. Throughout the complaint, the resident voiced her frustrations and concerns that several months had passed without the work being completed, and that she been given clear timeframes for when the work would be carried out, but contractors had repeatedly not turned up for appointments. The resident stated that she was concerned about the potential health and safety risks that untreated damp and mould could pose to herself and her family.
  4. The landlord issued a stage two complaint response on 02 November 2021. The landlord acknowledged its failings in allowing the repair issues to remain untreated for such a timescale and recognised its ‘poor levels of service’. It also admitted that it was unacceptable that the resident had to contact the landlord on multiple occasions to enquire about the works. It stated its surveyor had attended the resident’s home and had scheduled scaffolding to be erected to inspect the roof and determine any further repairs needed. The landlord explained that it was working closely with its contractors to improve the performance of its repairs services and that it had reminded the team of the importance of maintaining a good level of communication. The landlord explained that the coronavirus pandemic had caused delays in its repair timelines and stated that several appointments had been rescheduled by both the landlord and the resident, which had caused further delays. The landlord increased its compensation offer to £400 for its delays and poor communication and stated the works would be completed by 21 November 2021.
  5. In her complaint to this Service the resident stated that she was disappointed that repairs to her home remained outstanding. 

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

  1. The resident has said the issues affecting her property have impacted her mental health as well as her family’s physical health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments about hers and her family’s health. However, it is outside the remit of the Ombudsman to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. The resident may be able to make a claim damage to health to court or the landlord’s liability insurer (if it has one). This is a legal process, and the resident should seek independent legal advice if she wants to pursue this option. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident. This is an accordance with paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme which says the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure.

Policies and procedures

  1. The tenancy agreement confirms the landlord is expected to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the building including roofs, walls, chimneys, doors, window frames and catches, glazing and windowsills, gutters, eternal pipes and drains, pathway steps and other means of access. The agreement also states the landlord is responsible for the repair of certain indoor elements such as (but not limited to): internal walls, floors, ceilings, doors, door frames, skirting boards, gas pipes and water pipes.
  2. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy provides timeframes for repairs, depending on their severity: Emergency: to complete within four hours. Urgent: to complete within five working days. Examples of common urgent repairs given by the landlord are those such as: partial loss of power, a broken toilet flush or blocked sink, water leaks that can be easily contained, minor roof leaks and broken windows. Routine: within 20 working days.
  3. The landlord’s compensation policy states that goodwill payments can be made to residents as part of its resolution to a complaint at stage one of the landlord’s complaints process. It states the landlord should award payments for roof/celling leaks and damp/mould complaints in its highest category, at £150 and £125 respectively, if the issue had been ongoing for over five months.

Landlord’s handling of a leak in the resident’s property.

  1. In accordance with the tenancy agreement, the landlord should keep in repair the structure and exterior of the building, including the roof and external pipes, which, in this case, were the likely root cause of the leak, according to the landlord’s repair records. Thus, when the resident reported a leak from the roof area coming into the property, the landlord was obliged to attend such repairs within the stipulated timeframes, as per its repairs and maintenance policy, depending on the severity of the leak.
  2. According to the evidence provided to the Ombudsman, the resident reported the leak to the landlord in March 2020. The landlord appropriately scheduled an inspection to take place at the resident’s property and set an appointment to carry out the works on 1 April 2020. However, the resident requested the appointment to be cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic for health and safety reasons. The works were rescheduled to resume on 9 June 2021, after restrictions had eased and the resident contacted the landlord again regarding the repairs. However, the appointments were rescheduled a further three times by the landlord, causing delays. In its complaint response, the landlord apologised for its delays and set clear timescales for when the works to resolve the leak would commence. It was appropriate for the landlord to compensate the resident and further increase its compensation to £400 after the resident expressed her dissatisfaction with the ongoing delays. The amount of £400 compensation was in line with this Service’s remedies guidance (published on our website), which suggests awards of between £250 to £700 where there has been service failure or maladministration, but there may be no permanent impact on the complainant. 
  3. Whilst this has been undoubtedly frustrating for the resident, the landlord has put matters right by completing the repair to resolve the issue and it provided proportionate compensation for the failings identified. It is noted that the resident accepted the landlord’s offer of £400 compensation in good faith on the basis that the above repair works would provide a permanent resolution.
  4. If there are any further issues with leaks, the resident should report these to the landlord and the landlord should attend any repairs in line with its published timescales. The resident can raise a further complaint to the landlord if she is dissatisfied with its handling of any further repairs.

The landlord’s handing of reports of damp and mould in the resident’s property

  1. The resident’s first report of damp was given to the landlord in March 2020. The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore it is expected that a landlord should assess and respond to these types of reports appropriately.
  2. As stated above, the initial appointments to attend to repairs were cancelled by the resident, due to safety concerns regarding the coronavirus pandemic. The landlord had several opportunities after the restrictions had eased to attend to address the resident’s reports of damp and mould. However, at the time the resident raised her complaint to this Service, the reports of damp and mould remained outstanding and there is no evidence that the landlord had taken action to investigate or resolve these issues.
  3. It should also be noted that a key aspect of the resident’s initial complaint was that she said she had no use of her bedroom for 18 months, due to the ongoing damp and mould. However, there is no evidence that this issue was addressed by the landlord in its complaint responses. Moreover, the landlord did not meaningfully engage with the resident’s complaint regarding the loss of the use of her bedroom and did not provide detailed responses to the issues raised. The landlord also did not address the concerns the resident raised about the damage the damp and mould in the property had caused to her floors. 
  4. The incomplete responses from the landlord would have inevitably caused the resident distress and inconvenience. The landlord’s responses were also not in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (published on our website) which sets out guidance for landlords on how to address complaints. The Code states that each response must confirm the decision on the complaint and the reasons for any decisions it made. There is a lack of evidence regarding the extent of the damage to the resident’s bedroom. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to investigate all the key aspects of the resident’s complaint, and provide an explanation as to whether the it agreed that the resident was unable to use the bedroom in the property, and offer compensation accordingly.
  5. Additionally, a key component of the resident’s complaint was the potential health and safety risks of damp and mould within the property. The resident also noted in her complaint escalation request that she was very concerned about her and her children’s health with the continuing growth of black mould. This is something that the landlord should have addressed in its formal response as it was a clear concern of the resident. The failure to respond to this aspect of the resident’s complaint is a service failure and should have been addressed in the landlord’s complaint response. It would be appropriate for the landlord to schedule an inspection of the outstanding issues of damp and mould and set a clear plan of works to address it.
  6. The landlord had offered multiple dates in which it would complete the work yet on each occasion the work was left incomplete, and the resident had not been offered an explanation as to why. In addition, it appears that aspects of the work still remain incomplete. In this case, it is unclear as to what works remain outstanding, The Ombudsman would expect a landlord to keep a robust record of contacts and repairs, yet the evidence has not been comprehensive in this case. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures.  It is recommended that the landlord review its staff’s training needs in relation to its record keeping to prevent a recurrence of its above service failures.
  7. The landlord should pay the resident an additional £350 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to fully address her complaint. As referenced above. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests awards of between £250 and £700 where there has been repeated failure to meaningfully engage with the substance of the complaint, or failing to address all relevant aspects of complaint, leading to considerable delay in resolving complaint. Examples include: a complainant repeatedly having to chase responses and seek correction of mistakes, necessitating unreasonable level of involvement by that complainant and repeated failure to meaningfully engage with the substance of the complaint, or failing to address all relevant aspects of complaint, leading to considerable delay in resolving complaint. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to refer the resident to its liability insurer in view of the damage she stated had occurred to her flooring.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to our investigation in regard to its handling of the leak in the resident’s property which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £350 compensation to the resident for the service failures identified. This is in addition to the £400 compensation previously offered to the resident.
  2. The landlord is to carry out an inspection and draw up a schedule of works to address the damp and mould. A copy of the schedule of works should be shared with the resident and the Ombudsman within for weeks. The landlord should carry out any repairs identified as necessary following the inspection in line with the timescales given in its repairs policy.
  3. The landlord is to carry out an inspection of the resident’s bedroom. If the bedroom is to be found unusable, the landlord should consider offering further compensation to the resident for the loss of use to the bedroom. If the resident remains unhappy with the compensation offered, she can raise this as a new complaint to the landlord. 

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord refers the resident to its liability insurer, in regard to the damage to the resident’s flooring, if it has not done so already.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord review its staff’s training needs in relation to its record keeping to prevent a recurrence of its above service failures.