Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (202210570)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202210570

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

15 February 2023


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 repair works following the resident’s reports of a leak from the above property, including the length of time taken and the standard of the redecoration works.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. In September 2021, the resident reported that there was damp accumulating on her hallway ceiling. The landlord attended the property in October 2021, however it was unable to gain access to the upstairs neighbour’s property in order to trace the source of the leak. The resident complained to the landlord on 10 December 2021, as the damp issue was still ongoing, and had now spread to her bathroom ceiling.
  2. The landlord attended the property on 24 December 2021. It gained access to the above neighbour’s property, tracing the leak to under the bathtub and repairing it. On 29 December 2021, the landlord responded to the resident. It explained that it had been trying to contact her neighbour through various means, and had been struggling to gain access to the property. It apologised for the delay and stated that it had authorised works to repair and decorate the resident’s bathroom and hallway ceiling.
  3. The resident escalated her complaint on 10 February 2022, due to the landlord’s failure to schedule an appointment to redecorate her flat, despite her chasing for a response. The landlord attended on 18 February 2022 and undertook the redecoration repairs. On the same day the resident added to her complaint that the operative who had redecorated had left paint over her mirror, bathroom tiles, floor, toilet top and new front door. Additionally, the decoration itself was of poor quality. The landlord reattended the property on 4 March 2022, and again redecorated the bathroom and hallway ceilings.
  4. The landlord responded on 16 March 2022. It apologised for its initial delay in finding and fixing the leak. It also apologised for the delay in booking the re-decoration works and acknowledged that they were subsequently completed to a poor standard. It stated that it had talked to the relevant staff member and would be monitoring the quality of their work in future. It offered the resident £200 compensation in recognition of the disturbance, inconvenience, time and trouble caused to her.
  5. The resident contacted the landlord on 4 April 2022, stating that the redecoration works were again starting to crack. She explained that she felt the paint used was not suitable for the bathroom. She wanted the paint to be removed and for the landlord to repaint the bathroom in bathroom paint that would not collect moisture and thus prevent mould. The landlord attended to inspect the issue on 28 April 2022. It stated that it couldn’t remove the paint, but offered to sand the ceiling down and repaint. The resident did not feel this would resolve the issue, so on 10 June 2022, the landlord agreed to sand back the paintwork, prime and plaster the ceiling and then re-paint with bathroom paint. This was accepted by the resident. The landlord subsequently stopped responding to the resident, and no appointment for the agreed work was offered. It eventually contacted her on 21 October 2022, booking the works for November 2022.
  6. In her complaint to this Service, the resident has explained that she is dissatisfied with the delay in the landlord tracing and repairing the leak. She is also unhappy with the subsequent delay and quality of the repairs to her ceiling. As an outcome, she would like the works to be completed and for further compensation to be considered.

Assessment

  1. In the landlord’s repairs policy, it states that an urgent repair, such as a minor leak, should be responded to within five working days. Routine repairs should be responded to within 20 working days. The same policy states that its contractors will minimise mess in the resident’s home, and that they will work carefully around the resident’s possessions and property, or use temporary covers when necessary. 
  2. The landlord has acknowledged that it did not respond to the resident’s initial reports of a leak within the above timescales. The resident reported the leak in September 2021. The landlord attended in October 2021 but didn’t manage to trace the leak or complete the repair until 24 December 2021. An effectual repair was therefore not completed for nearly three months after the resident reported it.
  3. A delay to repairs is not always seen as a service failure, if the landlord is continuing to work on the repair and is communicating with the resident to keep them updated. However, in this case the landlord did not communicate with the resident effectively during this time, leaving her to chase for an update. The landlord should have acted more proactively to gain access to the above property in order to trace the leak. Leaving the issue for a protracted period of time would have resulted in further damage to the resident’s ceiling, and caused her stress and inconvenience. The landlord’s handling of the initial repair report was a failing in the circumstances.
  4. In its first complaint response in December 2021, the landlord acted appropriately by acknowledging that it had failed to handle the reports of the leak effectively. It explained why the delays had occurred, but acknowledged that it needed to be more proactive when trying to gain access to neighboring properties to undertake urgent repairs. It apologized to the resident and stipulated that it would undertake the repairs to her ceiling. However, the landlord then delayed in arranging an appointment for the these works. It booked the appointment and attended the property in February 2022, after numerous chaser emails from the resident, but then did not complete the repainting to an acceptable standard. This was a further failing.
  5. In the landlord’s final complaint response in March 2022, it again identified its failings appropriately. It acknowledged that it had failed to book a follow-on appointment for the  repairs to the ceilings until the resident had escalated her complaint. It also recognized that the repair works had not been to carried out to a reasonable standard. It apologized and stated that it had discussed this issue with the relevant operative and taken steps to stop this issue from reoccurring. It offered the resident £200 compensation in a fair recognition of its repeated failings. This demonstrates that the landlord was taking action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’, in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles.
  6. As part of its complaint response and attempts to ‘put things right’, the landlord reattended the property in March 2022, and attempted to remedy the decoration works. In–line with its repair policy, it would be expected to undertake these repairs appropriately and to a good standard. However, the resident has explained that the landlord used paint unsuitable for the damp conditions of the bathroom. In response to the resident’s concern, the landlord acted appropriately by inspecting the issue in April 2022. It discussed with the resident her options for the repairs, eventually agreeing to re-plaster the bathroom before again repainting in bathroom paint. This was reasonable, and had the landlord continued to undertake these repairs in good time, it is likely that this complaint would not have continued to this Service.
  7. However, after agreeing to undertake these works in June 2022, the landlord stopped responding to the resident. After four months, it contacted her in October 2022, as she had continued to chase her repairs. It cited staff shortages as its reason for not replying and apologized. The delay in responding to the resident, and undertaking her repairs was a further failing, exacerbating the resident’s frustration.
  8. According to this Service’s Complaint Handling Code, when dealing with complaints, the landlord should identify its failings, acknowledge them and attempt to put things right. It explains that when offering a remedy, landlords should clearly set out what will happen and by when, in agreement with the resident where appropriate. Any remedy proposed must be followed through to completion. While in each of its responses, the landlord has endeavored to ‘put things right’ for the resident, it has repeatedly failed to follow through with the actions agreed, resulting in time, trouble and frustration for the resident.
  9. The landlord has stated that the resident’s repairs were due to be completed in November 2022. It is not clear from the evidence if this appointment was undertaken successfully or not.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of repair works following the resident’s reports of a leak from the above property, including the length of time taken and the standard of the redecoration works.

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £150 compensation in recognition of the failings identified in this report. This is in addition to the £200 compensation amount already offered in its complaint response (which should also now be paid, if it has not been already).
    2. Complete the repairs, in the manner it has agreed with the resident (if it hasn’t done so already).
  2. Evidence of compliance with the above orders must be sent to this Service, within the specified four weeks from the date of this report.