Peabody Trust (202233695)

Back to Top

 

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202233695

Peabody Trust

28 February 2025

 

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 the:
    1. Resident’s reports of a leak.
    2. Associated complaints.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The property is described as a 2-bedroom flat. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
  2. The resident raised a stage 1 complaint on 30 January 2023 regarding a leak into her bedroom that had been going on for a month. She said the landlord (surveyor) visited a neighbouring flat to investigate the cause of the leak, but was not allowed access. The resident referred the matter to us on 24 March 2023. The landlord responded to the stage 1 complaint on 11 May 2023. It apologised for the delay in addressing the repair and assured her that the leak had been resolved.
  3. The resident escalated her stage 2 complaint through us on 7 June 2023. She said although there was no leak at the time, the bedroom ceiling had not been repaired. We wrote to the landlord on 12 July 2023 and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint within 15 working days. The landlord and the resident discussed the outstanding issues by phone on 7 August 2023. It noted her concerns about damp and mould on the bedroom ceiling due to the leak and its adverse effect on her health.
  4. The landlord responded to the stage 2 complaint on 23 August 2023. It apologised for the delay in responding and for the service received. It said it had arranged for a surveyor to start a leak detection process as it had not been able to find the source of the leak. It said it would provide fortnightly updates, and any follow-on works would be agreed once the leak had been resolved. The landlord apologised that these actions were not taken earlier in the case. It offered £1422 as compensation to the resident.

Events after the complaints process was exhausted

  1. The resident advised us on 22 October 2023 that she had not heard from the landlord. She said tenants in neighbouring properties advised her that it had not inspected their properties.
  2. The landlord noted in its internal communication on 24 October 2023 that it was having difficulties accessing 1 of the neighbouring flats.
  3. The resident informed us on 17 January 2024 that the leak was still occurring and making her health worse.
  4. The landlord noted on 19 January 2024 that it had delivered letters to neighbouring flats and given them 7 days’ notice to arrange an inspection, or it would seek legal action.
  5. The landlord advised the resident on 13 March 2024 that it had found the source of the leak and completed the repairs. It said it was coming from the boiler in a neighbour’s flat as a pipe was detached.
  6. The landlord received confirmation from its contractor on 10 June 2024 that the repairs to the resident’s bedroom ceiling had been completed apart from the painting. It said it would follow this up.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak

  1. Section 11.a of the Landlord and Tenant Act (1985) states that landlords have a duty to keep in repair the structure and exterior of its properties, including drains, gutters, and external pipes.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out that it has a general responsibility to keep tenants’ homes in good repair. The policy defines emergency repairs as those repairs that need a rapid response to safeguard the wellbeing of customers, the structural stability and integrity of properties and or health and safety of people using the affected area. It would aim to attend to them within 24 hours and if required finalise the repair within its routine repair target of 10 working days. The landlord may consider carrying out some repairs as a higher priority where the customer or someone in their household is known as needing assistance.
  3. Our knowledge and information spotlight report (KIM) explains how landlords’ services can be held back by weaknesses in data and information, which can turn an ordinary service request into an extraordinarily protracted complaint. It further notes that if information is not created correctly, it has less integrity and cannot be relied on. This can be either a complete absence of information, or inaccurate and partial information.
  4. The landlord failed to provide the repair records for the property, so we have not been able to determine the date the resident first raised the repair and actions taken to address the issue. This has made it difficult to assess the events that happened before and after the resident’s stage 1 complaint dated 30 January 2023. It advised us that it had provided as much information as it had available, but it did not explain the missing information. The landlord has also not provided information such as the resident’s tenancy agreement and records of visits or correspondence with neighbouring residents (for the relevant period). The lack of evidence brings to light concerns about its record keeping.
  5. From the resident’s complaint in January 2023, the leak had been going on for a month and the landlord had sent a surveyor to inspect neighbouring properties. The resident said the landlord was unable to access the property, but we have not been able assess its handling of this concern due to the limited information. The landlord acknowledged in its stage 1 response dated 11 May 2023 that there were access issues, but it had resolved this. It said its contractors confirmed the leak had been resolved. The landlord apologised for the delay, the poor service experienced and offered compensation in the amount of £350. It said it would review its procedures to ensure that it deals with any future issues more efficiently.
  6. The resident contacted us on 19 May and 7 June 2023 to say that the issue had not been resolved. She provided video evidence which showed the damage to the ceiling and some damp and mould. We have seen from the evidence that she tried to find out from the landlord (surveyor) on 19 June 2023 if any repairs had been carried out. The surveyor asked if she still had a leak and the resident responded that she did, a few weeks before, but it had stopped due to the warm weather. She asked if the neighbouring flats had been inspected. We have not seen evidence that the landlord responded to the resident’s request for an update. This was unreasonable. Due to the poor communication the resident asked the landlord to investigate her complaint at stage 2.
  7. The resident advised the landlord (in her complaint on 30 January 2023) that the condition of the bedroom ceiling was making her ill. Despite its policy stating it would prioritise repairs for vulnerable residents it delayed in taking this into consideration. The resident expressed further concerns on 7 August 2023 that severe damp and mould on the bedroom ceiling (caused by the leak) was adversely affecting her health. The landlord assured the resident that it would arrange for the repair to be dealt with as a priority and keep her updated on the progress. Although the landlord did an inspection on 8 August 2023 (deduced from its stage 2 response) it failed to evidence efforts made to address the repair as a priority. This is not appropriate.
  8. The landlord acknowledged through its stage 2 response on 23 August 2023 that it had not provided the expected the level of service to the resident. It said:
    1. From its records this was a historical issue which it found difficult to resolve as the leak was intermittent.
    2. The leak mostly occurred in the winter period so it should have resolved this in the previous year.
    3. Following its inspection on 8 August 2023 no leaks were found, so an order had been raised to carry out a leak detection gas tracing of the neighbouring properties including the resident’s.
    4. Access to the neighbouring properties had not been the main cause of the delay but rather the difficulty in locating the cause of the leak.
    5. Due to the resident’s health concerns it had arranged for the repairs to be completed without additional delay, to prevent any further distress and provide fortnightly updates.
    6. The resident can make a claim through its public liability insurance if she feels her health had been impacted due to the landlord’s fault.
  9. As part of the stage 2 response the landlord identified some learning from the case. It said later in the year all repairs would be reported directly to it, rather than its contractor, to provide better oversight of its repair services. The landlord acknowledged the time and trouble and inconvenience experienced by the resident and apologised for it. It assured the resident it would assist with the cost of replacement of furniture damaged due to the leak if required. This was reasonable.
  10. In line with its compensation policy, the landlord offered £500 for the time and trouble incurred. In recognition of the loss of full use of the bedroom it offered £772.50 (10% of the resident’s weekly rent in the winter month October 2022 to end of April 2023). This went some way in addressing the significant impact to the resident. While the landlord’s compensation accounted for the inconvenience in the previous year, we have not seen evidence of the events that occurred in that period. Therefore, we have not been able to assess if this was reasonable. The landlord said a further review of the compensation would be done after the works had been completed, but we have not found evidence that it did so.
  11. Overall, the landlord followed its compensation policy and agreed actions to monitor and resolve the repair. It identified areas of improvement in its service and acknowledged it missed opportunities to resolve the repair in a timely manner. However, the resident continued to incur time and trouble and inconvenience in chasing the landlord for updates. She contacted this Service and the landlord, (between September 2023 and February 2024) expressing concerns about the continued leak and exposure to mould on the ceiling. She said she had chest infections as a result. The delays and poor communication caused her further distress and frustration.
  12. We have seen from the evidence that the leak was resolved (in March 2024) more than 12 months after the resident reported them. According to the landlord the issue occurred during the winter months, so the resident experienced further inconvenience from October 2023 until February 2024. The landlord has not shown that it kept her updated as promised nor reviewed the compensation after the repair was completed. Due to the above and failures identified in its information management, we have determined there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak.
  13. The landlord advised that the resident’s rent was £139.18 per week for the relevant year. We have calculated 10% of the weekly rent for the period between October 2023 and February 2024 (approximately 21 weeks @ £13.91) where she had partial use of the bedroom. This adds up to £292.28 bringing the total compensation (including the landlord’s previous offer) to £1564.82.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint process has 2 stages. It will aim to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. If it needs more time, it will inform the resident, but this should not exceed a further 10 days without good reason. If an extension beyond 10 working days is required, this should be agreed by both parties.
  2. Further it says that all actions that are agreed would be completed within a complaint’s response will be monitored and followed through to resolution with updates to the complainant provided as and when needed.
  3. The resident raised her stage 1 complaint on 30 January 2023 but the landlord responded on 11 May 2023 (70 working days later). It did not adhere to the timescales published in its complaints policy. The resident contacted us for assistance on 24 March 2023. She said she had tried to escalate the complaint to stage 2 but was having difficulty doing so on the landlord’s website. We have not seen evidence that the landlord provided an explanation for the prolonged delays or that it requested an extension in line with its policy. This is not appropriate.
  4. We contacted the landlord on 12 July 2023 on behalf of the resident. She advised us in May and June 2023 that she had not been able to raise a stage 2 complaint on the landlord’s website. We do not have evidence that the landlord had received her complaint before we contacted them. The landlord acknowledged the complaint within 5 working days and advised that it would respond within 20 working days. There were additional delays in responding to the stage 2 complaint, but the landlord followed its policy and requested additional time to respond. This was appropriate.
  5. The landlord provided a detailed stage 2 response. It acknowledged areas of service failure and agreed actions to resolve the outstanding issues. It said there were delays in responding to the complaints and apologised for the inconvenience caused. The landlord also apologised that the stage 1 response was not adequate as there was no evidence of investigation. It said feedback had been provided to the relevant team leader for future learning. In addition, it offered £150 as compensation for the inconvenience due to its handling of the complaint. These actions were appropriate.
  6. As we have identified earlier in this report, we have not seen sufficient evidence that the landlord kept its commitment to provide regular updates to the resident. While there is evidence of some internal monitoring of the case by its complaints team, the resident was not informed of what was happening. This caused her further distress and frustration. It is for this reason that we have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £1814.82 comprised of:
      1. £1064.78 for the distress and inconvenience due to the partial loss of use of the bedroom.
      2. £500 for the time and trouble and inconvenience due to the delays in repairs.
      3. £250 for the time and trouble and inconvenience due to its handling of the complaint.
      4. The landlord may deduct from this total any compensation it has already paid in relation to this complaint.
      5. Any compensation awarded should be paid directly to the resident with proof provided to us.
    3. Share this decision with staff who deal with complaints and repairs. It should deliver training to:
      1. Emphasise the importance following up any agreed actions in its complaint responses in adherence to its policy.
      2. Ensure they follow its repairs policy in prioritising repairs for vulnerabilities (where identified). This should include guidance for staff on any support that can be offered to vulnerable residents.
    4. Provide evidence of compliance with the above orders.
  2. The landlord has recently self-assessed against this Service’s spotlight report on knowledge and information. The Ombudsman has therefore not made further recommendations in this report but expects the landlord to take all relevant learning points from this case into account in its overall reviews of record keeping.