Phoenix Community Housing Association (Bellingham and Downham) Limited (202112913)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202112913

Phoenix Community Housing Association (Bellingham and Downham) Limited

12 August 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:
   1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of recurrent leaks from the property above.

Background

2. The resident is a tenant of the landlord which is a housing association and the property is a flat within a block of flats. The reports of leaks in this investigation refer to one property above the resident’s home and will be referred to as ‘the neighbour’.
3. According to the landlord’s records, the resident initially reported water leaking into her property from the flat above in 2015. Its records showed that two further leaks were reported by the resident between 2016 and 2020, in which the landlord carried out repairs and resolved the issue. An internal email showed the resident phoned the landlord on 15 July 2021 stating that the leak had been ongoing for five years. She said as a result she had experienced “extreme damp and mould” in her property. The landlord responded thereafter noting it had investigated the issue and found that incomplete works carried out by the neighbour had caused the lea, and that it would ask the neighbour to complete works. The landlord said that it would arrange for a decorator to assess the resident’s property and determine if it needed to complete repairs caused by the water damage.
4. The resident raised a formal complaint (this Service has not seen a copy of the actual complaint) and the landlord’s records suggest that it was raised on 10 August 2021. She raised concern regarding the recurrent leak and the condition of her property. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response on 27 August 2021. It explained that it had asked the neighbour to rectify the works undertaken. The landlord noted that as the resident was still experiencing water ingress, it had attempted to gain access the neighbour’s property but was unsuccessful. The landlord advised that it had arranged to re-attend the neighbour’s home on 6 September 2021 in which he agreed to be at home. It said if it gained access it would carry out the necessary repairs to prevent further leaks, and if unable to, it would refer to housing management to assist. The landlord apologised to the resident for the delay, and provided contact details to inspect her home for any required repairs and assist with the damage.
5. The resident brought her complaint to this Service on 6 September regarding the landlord’s lack of response to her escalation request (this Service has found no evidence of an escalation request). She advised that each year from 2015, there had been a period of leakage into her bathroom from the flat above but was unresolved. The resident asked that the landlord fix the leak and/or provide her another property. The landlord wrote to the resident on 17 September 2021, explaining that it had checked its records but was unable to locate her escalation request. It apologised that it was unable to resolve her complaint at stage one and noted that her complaint had been escalated. According to an internal email in late September 2021, the resident phoned the landlord stating that her bathroom was ruined and had been unable to use it for four months. She said that she could not live in the property as it was dangerous, unfit for purpose and feared the ceiling would collapse.
6. Internal emails confirmed that it attended the resident’s property on 6 September 2021. It reported that the property was “leaking quite badly”, and that it had arranged to inspect the neighbour’s property on 7 September 2021. The landlord explained that it had reattended the resident’s property on 4 October 2021. It noted that the resident showed that the damage had spread from the bathroom area to the adjoining toilet and to the airing cupboard. It reported that the bathroom ceiling was heavily stained with water marks and a deep crack, the walls in the bathroom, toilet and airing cupboard were also soaked and damp. The landlord advised the resident that a surveyor would attend the following day to reinspect the extent of the damage and how to resolve it.
7. The landlord said that it attended the neighbour’s property on 11 October but there was no response. It noted in mid-October that it had issued the neighbour a note informing that forced entry would be carried out on 19 October to inspect and trace the cause of the leak to the resident’s property. The landlord said it attended the neighbour’s property along with a plumber and locksmith on 19 October 2021, but the neighbour allowed access before forced entry was required. It reported that the plumber carried out works and reported no further leaks on departure. The resident contacted this Service in mid-October as she had not received a final response, we contacted the landlord thereafter and relayed the resident’s concern.
8. The landlord issued its final complaint response on 28 October 2021. The landlord noted that the leak had caused significant damage to the resident’s bathroom. It highlighted the importance of undertaking repairs to the above property before carrying out repairs in her home. The landlord explained the issues in gaining access to the neighbour’s property, it said that following a recent visit by its repair team, there was concern that the leak was ongoing. The landlord informed the resident that due to the condition of her bathroom and the extensive nature of the works required, it would temporarily rehouse her. The landlord apologised for the condition of the resident’s bathroom and that it was unable to address the leak more quickly .it offered the resident a gesture of good will (GOGW) of £250 for the delay in completing repairs and the inconvenience caused. The landlord said that although her bathroom had the required water supply, it was unreasonable to use in its current condition, and noted it was the reason it wanted to urgently rehouse the resident.
9. In recognition of the loss of the resident’s bathroom, it offered to pay £35 per week, totalling £455 to cover the period from 22 July to 21 October 2021. It also advised that it would continue to credit the resident £35 per week until she had moved from the property. The landlord explained that it was open to discussing the option of permanent rehousing, and noted that it would initially temporarily decant the resident to resolve the repair issue and then discuss the longer-term options. It advised that it would review its process to ensure that delays did not reoccur. The resident passed her complaint to this Service on 8 November 2021 as she was dissatisfied with its final complaint response. She raised similar concern as in her formal and escalation request, and said that she wanted to be appropriately compensated.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

10. In the resident’s correspondence, she has referred to historical issues of leaks since 2015. However, there is no evidence of a formal complaint being raised to the landlord about this until August 2021. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner, so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and whilst the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events which occurred. As the substantive issues become historical, it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as the Ombudsman, to conduct an effective review of the actions taken to address those issues. In view of this, whilst the historic issues add context to the current complaint, the Ombudsman’s investigation will not take into consideration any specific events prior to February 2021 which is six months prior to the formal complaint being raised with the landlord.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of recurrent leaks from the property above

11. The landlord’s repair policy advises that the landlord is responsible for keeping the structure and exterior of the property in repair and proper working order, including installations for the supply of water and sanitation. The policy sets out a timescale of four hours for same day emergency repairs and 28 days for routine repairs.
12. The resident reported a leak entering from her upstairs neighbour’s property in July 2021. When a resident reports a leak into a property, it would be expected that the landlord investigates, first and foremost, to establish if the issue was structural in nature, as per its repairs policy. If so, it would be responsible to repair the issue and make good any damage caused to the resident’s property. However, leaks caused by other leaseholders (the neighbour in this case) are usually not the landlord’s responsibility to resolve, and are matters for the leaseholders to resolve directly between themselves, potentially with assistance from the landlord. Therefore, it was appropriate for the landlord to attend and inspect the neighbour’s property to determine the cause of the leak in the resident’s home. It was also appropriate to ask the neighbour to complete the outstanding repairs to avoid further water ingress in the resident’s property. A landlord would be responsible for repairing any damage caused to the structure or installations owned by it (as opposed to those owned by the resident). And so it was reasonable for the landlord to provide details to inspect the resident’s home and assist with the damage.
13. The landlord said as the resident was still experiencing water ingress, it had attempted to gain access the neighbour’s property but was unsuccessful. Best practice would be for the landlord to identify the cause and resolve the leak before attempting to repair damage to the resident’s property. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to attempt forced entry to inspect the neighbour’s property and trace the leak. A landlord’s inability to completely resolve a repair issue within its published time frames is not, in and of itself, automatically a service failure. In this case the landlord’s attempts to gain access to the neighbour’s property were unsuccessful and delayed resolving the leak. This is outside a landlord’s control, and therefore have a clear impact on the time needed to resolve a repair. In such cases a landlord would reasonably be expected to show evidence of actively working towards a resolution, managing a tenant’s expectations, and providing meaningful updates. The landlord has done so in this case.
14. The resident said she had been unable to use her bathroom for several months as it was dangerous and unfit for purpose. The landlord advised that due to the condition of the resident’s bathroom and the extensive nature of the works required, it would temporarily rehouse her. This was a pertinent action taken by the landlord. In line with its decant and temporary transfers policy, the landlord will temporary decant a resident where essential repairs can not be carried out while the resident and their household is living in the property. 
15. In the landlord’s final complaint correspondence, it apologised to the resident and offered a GOGW of £250 for the delay in completing repairs and the inconvenience caused. It also offered compensation of £455 for the loss of her bathroom totalling £705. The landlord also advised that it would continue to credit the resident £35 per week until she had moved from the property. In this case this case although the delay in repairs was out of the landlord’s control, there remained a significant delay in resolving the leak which caused major damage to the resident’s property. The remedies guidance suggests that the Ombudsman may award compensation in the range of £700 and above, in recognition of maladministration / severe maladministration that has had a severe long-term impact on the complainant. Remedies in this range will be appropriate when there has been a significant and serious long-term effect on the resident, including physical or emotional impact, or both. Therefore, the landlord’s offer of £705 was appropriate and in line with the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance. As the landlord compensation policy does not set out the level of compensation, the Ombudsman has assessed the level of compensation which should be paid using our own remedies guidance, which is published on our website.
16. Accordingly, the landlord’s retroactive realisation that its handling of matters, had not met a standard it considered appropriate was a positive one, albeit overdue. The learnings, explanations, acknowledgements, apology, and compensation it set out in its response to this Service were also reasonable and appropriate remedies to the failings it had identified, when considered against the Ombudsman’s remedy guidance.

Determination

17. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Recommendations

18. The finding in this investigation is contingent on the landlord providing to the resident, within four weeks of this report, the repairs and compensation set out in its letter to the resident, and referred to in this report. The landlord should update this Service when it has done so.