Onward Homes Limited (202342254)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202342254

Onward Homes Limited

28 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:
1. Reports concerning repairs to the garden and drainage system.
2. Reports of damp and mould in the property.
3. Associated complaints.

Background

The resident has been a joint assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association since 2016. The property is a 3-bedroom house. The resident lives in the property with her partner and two children.
The following repairs were raised to the garden:
1. On 24 May 2021, the landlord raised a repair request to unblock the drains at the side of the property. The landlord unblocked the drains in June 2021.
2. On 8 June 2021, the landlord raised a repair request to remove the stone flags and reinstate the gully. The landlord’s records show an engineer attended and could not rectify the issue.
3. On 9 December 2021, the landlord raised a request to top up chippings, so they were level in the garden. The landlord’s records show this was completed on the 17 December 2021.
On 6 January 2023, the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord. Her complaint concerned:
1. The customer service received.
2. She had to chase repairs.
3. Repairs to the garden were still outstanding.
4. Quality of repairs completed.
5. Damp in the property, reported on 29 December 2022.
6. The issues were affecting her mental health.
On 9 January 2023, the resident sent an email to the landlord asking about the status of her complaint. The landlord responded that no complaint was recorded on her account. After exchanging further emails, the resident and landlord arranged a call. The landlord informed this service that it treated it as an informal complaint.
On 22 June 2023, the resident emailed the landlord stating that there was damp on her wall following a leak. They stated that this had resulted in damage to the wallpaper, carpet, canvas pictures and a chest of drawers. The resident stated she had accepted compensation of £100 for the carpet during a call with the landlord the day prior. However, the resident requested further compensation for the other damaged items.
On 22 June 2023, the landlord informed the resident it could not consider further compensation, as the resident had already accepted and received £100 as compensation.
On 29 June 2023, the resident emailed the landlord asking for her complaint to be re-opened or a new complaint be raised. On 10 July 2023, the landlord issued a stage 1 complaint acknowledgement letter.
On 24 July 2023, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It stated:
1. The resident had contacted the landlord since 2021 regarding repairs to the garden and drainage system. However, she had not received any updates.
2. Its contractor would carry out the outstanding repairs.
3. The date when repairs were due to commence had not been confirmed but it would contact the resident to arrange a suitable date.
4. It would highlight service failures with its contractor and repairs team to improve its communication and learn from this experience.
5. It was offering compensation of £425. This was £300 for the length of time taken to complete the repairs, £50 for the lack of communication and £75 for the damage to the drawers.
On 11 January 2024, the resident reported the concrete in the front pathway had sunk causing water to sit in two areas.
On 28 February 2024, the resident contacted the landlord to escalate her complaint. She advised the repairs were still outstanding and the garden was a dangerous hazard. Furthermore, she claimed the contractor had told the landlord about the necessary repairs, but the landlord would not cover the costs.
On 27 June 2024, the landlord issued a complaint acknowledgement letter to the resident and advised it intended to provide its stage 2 complaint response by 4 July 2024.
On 4 July 2024, the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It advised:
1. It had contacted the contractor to complete outstanding repairs to the garden and drainage.
2. It apologised for the experience received by the resident.
3. It would improve its services by staying in contact with customers who have cause to complain. It would also implement a procedure to prevent customers from having to chase for updates. Furthermore, it would ensure a repairs specialist inspected all completed works following completion.
4. The landlord re-assessed and increased the compensation offered to the resident in stage 1 to £700.

Post–complaint process

On 11 July 2024, the resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s complaint response and offer of compensation and referred her complaint to this service.
On 23 July 2024, the resident reported damp and mould in the property. The landlord completed a mould wash treatment on 19 September 2024.
On 24 July 2024, the resident informed this service:
1. The landlord reinstated the drain. However, this did not resolve the issue as the garden still floods with excess rainwater.
2. The landlord carried out various repairs, but this resulted in the garden being unusable.
3. The landlord identified a breakage in part of the underground draining system. However, the repair was still outstanding, and the landlord failed to provide a date for repair.
4. There was damp and mould in the property. The landlord had used damp proof paint to cover up the mould, but this did not resolve the cause of the damp and mould.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident stated that the landlord’s handling of her complaints and repairs negatively impacted her health. While the Ombudsman does not dispute this, it is beyond the expertise of this service to determine a causal link between the landlord’s actions (or inaction) and the impact on the resident’s health. Such a determination is more appropriate through an insurance claim or by a court. Should the resident wish to pursue a claim relating to the impact on her and her family’s health, she has the option to seek legal advice.
The Ombudsman has, however, considered the general distress and inconvenience that the landlord’s service delivery may have caused.
This report has not considered the resident’s report of damp and mould dated 23 July 2024. This was after the landlord’s stage 2 complaint process and following her referral to this service. The Ombudsman cannot consider it unless it has exhausted the landlord’s complaint process per 42.a of the Scheme.
However, if the damp and mould reported on 23 July 2024 has not been resolved and has completed the landlord’s complaints process, she is able to refer it to the Ombudsman for an investigation.

The landlord’s obligations

The landlord has a statutory duty under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (LTA 1985) to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property.
The landlord’s responsive repair policy states it will provide an effective, responsive, and accessible repairs service to its customers.
The landlord’s online guidance states it will attend to emergency repairs on the same day. The landlord will offer an appointment for other repairs that can be completed in one visit and carry out the repairs within 20 days. The landlord will agree on a date with the resident for bigger and more complicated repairs, which may include an initial inspection. The landlord will stay in touch with residents until completing the work within 90 days.
Further as a registered provider of social housing, the landlord is to provide a cost-effective repairs and maintenance service to homes and communal areas that responds to the needs of, and offers choices to, tenants, and has the objective of completing repairs and improvements right first time.
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 its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process. Its complaint policy states it aims to resolve complaints informally at the first point of contact if not it progresses it to stage 1.
The landlord’s stage 1 process states it will contact the complainant within 2 workings days and aims to resolve the complaint within 10 working days. If more time is required, it will regularly update the complainant.
The landlord’s stage 2 process states it will contact the complainant within 2 workings days and aims to resolve the complaint within 20 working days. If more time is required, the landlord will regularly update the complainant.

Repair to the garden and drainage system

The landlord raised garden repairs in May 2021, June 2021 and December 2021 following contact from the resident.
The Ombudsman finds the landlord did complete some repairs in a reasonable time. However, a routine repair was raised on 8 June 2021 concerning removing stone flags and reinstating the gully. This was to improve the water flow into the property. The landlord advised an engineer attended and could not rectify the issue and referred it back to the landlord.
This service has not seen evidence of how this was communicated to the resident or what follow up actions were taken by the landlord. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord confirmed the issue had not been resolved. It remained outstanding at the time of its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord failed to complete the repair in a reasonable time in line with its online guidance.
Where it is unable to complete a repair, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to communicate this to the resident and discuss alternative solutions. This service has not seen evidence of this.
The landlord missed opportunities to set timescales for repairs. The landlord stated in its stage 1 complaint response that further works were necessary. However, the landlord did not communicate to the resident detailing the actions it intended to take to rectify the garden and drainage system, other than allocating it to its contractor. The work to remove the stone flats and reinstate the gully was showing as unresolved in its stage 2 complaint response issued a year later. From reviewing the evidence there was a failure to repair the issue in a reasonable time or explain to the resident why it could not be rectified.
The resident reports that there is still an issue with the garden and drainage system in the property which requires repairs as it affects the enjoyment of the property for the resident and her family.
The landlord acknowledged its failures in its handling of the repairs to the garden and drainage system. The landlord offered compensation totalling £700 in its stage 2 complaint response. £350 was for the outstanding work required to the garden. There were delays in completing repairs as the issues with the garden and drainage system were still outstanding for over 3 years.
The Ombudsman therefore finds there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of repairs to the garden and drainage system.

Damp and mould

Prior to hercomplaint on 6 January 2023, the resident reported damp and mould to the landlord on 29 December 2022.The landlord’s records state a repair,and an inspection of the property were scheduled. However, the landlord’s records statethat the repair was cancelled on 19 January 2023.
The landlord’s records do not confirm if the repair and inspection was rescheduled, nor the reasons for cancellation. Further, there is no evidence as to how the landlord informed the resident of the cancellation.
There is no evidence in the records provided to this service whether a further inspection or mould wash treatment was carried out. However, the resident advised this service that the landlord attended the property and applied damp proof paint, but it did not resolve the root cause of the damp and mould.
The Ombudsman expects a landlord to investigate the cause of damp and mould and to take action to prevent it in its properties. After carrying out any damp and mould treatment, the Ombudsman would expect a landlord to follow up with the resident to check if the issue has been resolved. Having reviewed the evidence, there is nothing to show whether the landlord did this.
In her complaint dated 29 June 2023, the resident does not refer to damp and mould in the property. Instead, she advised she was seeking compensation due to damage caused to her belongings by damp and mould. The resident’s stage 2 complaint also did not refer to damp and mould in the property.
Having considered the available evidence, the Ombudsman finds there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould in the property.
The resident sought compensation of £175 due to damaged caused by damp and mould. The landlord offered compensation of £100 prior to the stage 1 complaint. During the stage 1 complaint response, the landlord offered a further £75 compensation due to damage to the chest of drawers as sought by the resident.
The landlord offered the resident a total of £175 in compensation for damage to her belongings due to damp and mould. This exceeds the Ombudsman’s remedies for a finding of service failure. As such the Ombudsman believes the offer made was adequate.

Complaint handling

The Ombudsman’s complaint handling code (the Code) expects landlords to acknowledge a stage 1 complaint within 5 working days and then to issue its stage 1 complaint response in 10 working days. Further, the Code expects landlords acknowledge a stage 2 complaint within 5 working days and issue a stage 2 complaint response within 20 working days.
The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 6 January 2023. The landlord has informed this service that it treated it as an informal complaint. Further, the landlord did not log this until the resident asked for confirmation her complaint had been received. The Ombudsman finds the landlord failed to record this as formal complaint. The resident specifically stated she was making a formal complaint and therefore the landlord should have treated it as a complaint. There is no record of the landlord issuing a stage 1 complaint response until the resident asked for her complaint to be re-opened on 29 June 2023. By treating it as an informal complaint, the landlord was not able to effectively investigate and resolve the resident’s complaint. Had it done so, it could have prevented further complaints from arising.
In her complaint dated 6 January 2024, the resident advised damp and mould had caused damage to the property and to her personal belongings. The landlord replied and advised a further inspection of the property had been requested. However, it encouraged the resident to take out contents insurance which could be used to claim for any damages.
There is no evidence to indicate what investigation was undertaken by the landlord to determine what had caused damage to the resident’s property. The landlord’s complaint policy states it does considers compensation for damage to personal belongings if it was the result of the landlord’s actions. The Ombudsman would expect a landlord to investigate and determine whether the damage caused was the result of its actions or lack thereof. Additionally in further communication to the resident, the landlord offered compensation for the damage caused to the resident’s property.
Section 5.2 of the Code states, it is not appropriate to have extra stages such as informal complaints as this causes unnecessary confusion. Further, section 5.3 of the code says a process with 2 or more stages is not acceptable under any circumstances as this will make the complaint process unduly long and delay access to this service.
The resident made a further complaint on 29 June 2023 regarding damage to her property and outstanding repairs. The landlord advised that as the resident had accepted compensation of £100, the landlord could not offer further compensation. However, in the stage 1 complaint response, the landlord offered £75 in compensation for damage to the resident’s drawers. It is likely that the landlord could have offered further compensation for damage before the resident requested her complaint be re-opened.
The landlord stated it intended to improve its communication concerning the handling of its repairs. However, the resident stated this is what was promised in previous responses from the landlord, yet the same issue persisted. Further, there were issues with communication and repairs as the resident had to contact the landlord to request updates regarding outstanding repairs. While the Ombudsman finds it is reasonable for the landlord to inform the resident it intends to improve its communication, the Ombudsman finds it unreasonable that the issues with communication persisted after the complaint response.
On 28 February 2024, the resident sought to escalate her complaint. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 4 July 2024. This was more than 4 months after the resident raised her complaint and after this service had contacted the landlord. The landlord failed to issue a timely response in line with its policy and what would be expected by the Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman finds there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaints.

Determination

The Ombudsman finds in accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports concerning repairs to the garden and drainage system.
The Ombudsman finds in accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of damp and mould in the property.
The Ombudsman finds in accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaints.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Pay the resident a total of £875 composed of:
  1. The £700 offered during its internal complaints process, for the failings identified in this report including:
    1. in its handling of the resident’s reports concerning repairs to the garden and drainage system.
    2. its handling of the resident’s complaints
  2. The £175 offered for its handling of damp and mould in the property and the damage caused to the resident’s belongings.
The compensation must be paid directly to the resident and the landlord must provide this service with evidence of the above payment within four weeks of the date of this determination.
Within 4 weeks of this determination, the landlord must carry out an inspection of the property. Within 2 weeks of this inspection, the landlord must write to the resident with the outcome and inform them if further repairs to the garden are needed. The landlord should confirm whether the damp and mould issue in the property has been rectified. The landlord should forward a copy of this letter to this service.