Orbit Group Limited (202220029)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220029

Orbit Group Limited

28 May 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 response to the resident about:
    1. Leaks at the property.
    2. A defective underfloor heating system.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured shorthold tenant whose tenancy commenced in 2016. The property is a 2-bed flat in a large block with a ‘green’ roof. At the time of the complaint, the resident occupied the property with her 10 year old son and newborn baby.
  2. On 24 October 2022, the resident reported a leak to her son’s bedroom, and raised concerns about the ceiling collapsing and the impact of living conditions on her and her family including her newborn baby. The landlord’s contractors attended the same month and identified that a leak was coming from a walkway, gully, and flat roof. In November 2022, contractors carried out temporary repairs, and the landlord also booked temporary accommodation which the resident did not use as the location was unsuitable.
  3. Between December 2022 and January 2023, further investigations, repairs, drying out of the property and internal works were done, and the resident lived in various temporary accommodation from early January 2023. In February 2023, the resident moved back into the property, after which she reported a further leak which was resolved the same day. After completion of works, the landlord carried out deep cleans, recarpeted, fitted new window coverings, replaced a bed and wardrobe, redecorated the ceiling and woodwork in the resident’s son’s bedroom after the further leak, and agreed to redecorate the whole property when the resident wished.
  4. In November 2022, the resident also made reports about the underfloor heating not working properly. Prior to this, she raised issues with the heating in 2020 and said she had not had heating for 2 years. Following this, temporary heaters were supplied, and investigations were carried out, which identified issues including incorrectly fitted pipework and a back to front flow and return. The heating issue was resolved in March 2023 when pipework was replaced and a new valve, pump and actuators were fitted.
  5. The resident complained from November 2022. She raised dissatisfaction with the delays repairing the leak and heating, and her son having to sleep in the cold lounge due to his bedroom being unusable. She said she was affected mentally by the landlord’s poor handling and communication and struggled to cope with a young child and a newborn in living conditions that included black mould and damp smells. She raised dissatisfaction with various incidents in the course of the works, such as receiving a call from the landlord’s safeguarding team without prior notice, finding the property unlocked on one occasion when she had returned to it, and being sent a possession notice. She raised dissatisfaction with various temporary accommodation, which included one whose heating she said had emitted fumes and led her to take her baby to hospital due to concerns about carbon monoxide poisoning. She requested a move from the property.
  6. The landlord provided stage 1 and 2 responses in November 2022 and February 2023, and follow up responses in March and July 2023. It acknowledged and apologised for issues including delays resolving the leak and heating, frustrations with temporary accommodation, and complaint handling. It noted the resident sought to move and subsequently confirmed it would arrange a management move.
  7. It awarded £3,924, which included £2,485 for delay since 2016 resolving the heating repair, £450 for complaint response delays, £400 for distress and inconvenience, £70 for loss of 1 bedroom between 24 October 2022 and 10 November 2022 before the resident moved into temporary accommodation, and £519 for other issues during the time the leak was being resolved. It offered to consider if additional energy costs were incurred due to the delay resolving the heating issue and awarded a further £4,044.43 after reviewing bills dating back to 2016 (£7,968.43 in total). In addition to completing further recommended works, it said it intended to instruct a survey of the roof for the entire block. This was carried out in December 2023, identified issues with the roof, and made a number of recommendations.
  8. In December 2023, the resident reported a further leak, this time to her main bedroom, which she made a further complaint about.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident says that a further leak occurred in December 2023, she made a new complaint, and she received a new stage 1 response. The resident will have found the recurrence of leaks understandably distressing, however the main focus of this investigation is on the previous complaint about the roof leaks up until the landlord’s final response in July 2023. The resident has the option, if she has not done so already, to progress her new complaint through the landlord’s complaint procedure, and to refer its final response to the Ombudsman for separate investigation.

The landlord’s response to the resident about leaks at the property

  1. The ongoing leak to the resident’s son’s bedroom was clearly upsetting for her and it is understandable that the events caused her significant disruption, worry, distress and inconvenience, particularly being a mother to a newborn baby with health issues. The landlord has not disputed that there were delays and issues, but the resident does not feel that the landlord’s response and compensation went far enough to recognise this and the impact on her and her family, including their physical and mental health. The Ombudsman should note that it is not within our authority or expertise to make definitive decisions about negligence and liability for the impact on health. The Ombudsman should also note that we are not ‘punitive’ and where there have been service failings, we aim to consider if a landlord has reasonably acknowledged these and offered suitable redress.
  2. The landlord says that the identified roof works were major works which, from when the leak was reported in October 2022, were completed within the 90 day timeframe for such works. However, there were issues such as delays approving works and poor communication with the resident at points. The landlord shows that it considered the resident’s concerns in detail. It apologised for issues with its handling of the leak and acknowledged that it could have handled matters differently, such as escalating the issue earlier and communicating better about the complaint. It also acknowledged, apologised, and compensated for a number of specific incidents, such as the resident receiving a call from its safeguarding team without prior notice, returning to find the property unlocked on one occasion, and being sent a possession notice.
  3. The landlord arranged temporary accommodation for the resident around the time of external and internal works, and it is evident that it arranged to reimburse various costs the resident incurred during this time in line with its decant policy. However, there were issues with the temporary accommodation, including some being unsuitable for the resident, and one whose heating she said emitted fumes and led her to take her baby to hospital due to concerns about carbon monoxide poisoning. The evidence shows that the landlord responded every time the resident raised concerns about temporary accommodation. This included arranging different accommodation when the resident said accommodation booked was unsuitable, and contacting hotels and hosts about concerns she raised such as the heating that emitted fumes. The landlord shows that it considered the resident’s concerns about temporary accommodation in detail. It reviewed the chronology for various temporary accommodation, noted actions it had taken, and recognised the frustration the resident had experienced with the temporary accommodation.
  4. The landlord demonstrates that it acknowledged and compensated for various issues and service failings, acknowledged that the resident experienced significant distress and inconvenience, and took some reasonable steps in response to the complaint. This included a commitment to a survey of the roof of the block, which it carried out in December 2023, that shows it is seeking to resolve the apparent ongoing vulnerability of the roof to leaks. Its award of £989 for issues in respect to the leaks, in addition to £450 for complaint handling, shows it sought to further acknowledge and put right the impact on the resident.
  5. The resident felt that the compensation did not go far enough to reflect the impact on her and her family and was unhappy with £70 for a contractor leaving her property unlocked, as this could have resulted in losses significantly more than this amount. While the Ombudsman understands the resident’s concern about her property being unlocked, the landlord’s response for this aspect seems reasonable, as she did not report that she suffered any loss as a result of the issue, and the landlord provided compensation in recognition of her distress and confirmed it was taking steps to try to prevent the issue happening again.
  6. The £70 for loss of 1 bedroom between 24 October 2022 and 10 November 2022 before the resident moved into temporary accommodation was not entirely satisfactory. The basis for the amount is unclear and it does not seem to accurately reflect events. While the landlord booked temporary accommodation for 4 days in November 2022, the resident did not move into temporary accommodation, and the repairs were not completed, until January 2023. The resident’s account and the landlord’s repairs logs both refer to the resident’s son’s bedroom not being usable, including in November and December 2022, and she says her son slept in the lounge. The landlord should have based any compensation for this aspect on an assessment of the extent and duration the bedroom was affected, and on the rent that the resident will have paid during the period. However, the compensation of £989 that the landlord provided for the leak issues seems to reasonably reflect the 3 month timeframe involved, and what the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance may consider to be applicable compensation, including for the loss of the bedroom.
  7. The Ombudsman therefore finds reasonable redress in the landlord’s response about leaks at the property, as while it is clear there were service failings and the resident experienced much worry, distress and inconvenience during the course of events, it is also evident that the landlord sought to respond and acknowledge her concerns and sought to provide what is a reasonable level of redress.

The landlord’s response to the resident about a defective underfloor heating system.

  1. The resident reported issues with the heating and said this had not worked since 2016. The evidence confirms there were issues with the underfloor heating installation, the effects of which are understood to have included the thermostat not working, so that heating only ran at the hottest temperature and was uncomfortable to keep on for long periods of time. The frequency of reports about the issue is not entirely clear from the evidence seen, and before November 2022, reports of the issues in the landlord’s records seem limited to a report in 2020.In the timeframe of the complaint, the landlord’s contractors attended on a number of occasions from November 2022, identified issues including incorrectly fitted pipework and a back to front flow and return, and carried out works in January and March 2023which resolved the issue.
  2. The landlord was appropriate to resolve the issue in the timeframe of the complaint, but it took 4 months to fully resolve the issue from when the resident reported issues in November 2023. The landlord was therefore right to consider compensation, and positive to award £2,485 for a delay since 2016 in resolving the issue, in line with approaches it noted in other Ombudsman decisions. This demonstrates that the landlord was seeking to acknowledge and remedy the full extent of distress to the resident caused by the delay in the issue being fully resolved. The landlord was also positive to invite the resident to provide historic utility bills, and its £4,044.43 reimbursement of her estimated excess energy costs showed it was seeking to acknowledge and remedy the full extent of the impact on her. The compensation that was offered reflects considerations that the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance recommends landlords to have, and in the Ombudsman’s opinion reasonably put things right.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was:
    1. reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident about leaks at the property.
    2. reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident about a defective underfloor heating system.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord is recommended to pay the resident the £7,968.43 it previously offered, if it has not done so already.
  2. The landlord is recommended to review the status of the current leak and ensure that it is taking appropriate steps to repair the leak, rectify damage in the resident’s property, and provide the resident with any applicable support.
  3. The landlord is recommended to liaise with the resident to progress her recent complaint about the current leaks.
  4. The landlord is recommended to, if it has not done so already, review the recommended actions in the December 2023 roof report and consider formulating an action plan to assess the frequency and impact of roof issues in individual properties at the block, and to communicate with residents at the block about the issues with the roof and its short and long term intentions to resolve these.
  5. The landlord is recommended to review its compensation policy and procedure and ensure that this provides sufficient guidance for reimbursing residents a proportion of rent where they have an unusable room.