Sanctuary Housing Association (202347263)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202347263
Sanctuary Housing Association
25 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
- This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
- The resident’s reports of several repairs required in the property, including damp and mould.
- The associated complaint.
Background
- The resident is an assured tenant of the property owned by the landlord; a 2-bedroom flat. She lives in the property with her partner and 4 children.
- The landlord is aware the resident has asthma and rhinosinusitis. She also informed it that her partner is recovering from a stroke and has a heart condition, and 1 of her children has vulnerabilities. It is unclear from the evidence available whether the landlord has recorded vulnerabilities for all members of the household.
- The resident complained to the landlord on 25 October 2023. She said it failed to fix the issues she reported on 23 June 2023 concerning the front door, toilet, bathroom, damp, and mould. She raised a further complaint about the outstanding repairs on 18 November 2023. Records indicate works started in December 2023 to the bathroom. On 18 January 2024, the resident complained about the quality of the workmanship and said contractors did not damp proof the bathroom and painted over the mould.
- The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 24 April 2024. It said it completed a damp survey on 15 August 2023 and received a quote for the recommended works on 7 November 2023. It explained its records showed it had completed the repairs by 31 December 2023. As the resident was unhappy with the quality of the work, it would arrange for a joint inspection with its surveyor and a representative from its contractor. It offered £500 compensation to the resident.
- On 22 May 2024, the landlord issued its stage 2 response. It confirmed a joint inspection took place on 25 April 2024. It identified several repairs and said contractors needed to treat mould in various areas of the property. It committed to track the remedial work through to completion and said its contractor would investigate the issue with the front door separately. It hoped that replacing 4 radiators within the property would help with the excess heat to the toilet radiator, but if it remained unresolved, the resident should contact the repair centre. It offered the resident £3017 compensation. It is unclear whether this sum replaced the £500 offered at stage 1.
- The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s final complaint response. She felt the proposed works outlined by the landlord did not address the root cause of the damp in the property and it failed to complete all the repairs as promised. She referred the complaint to this Service.
Assessment and findings
Scope of investigation
- The resident was concerned about the impact the living conditions had on the health of her and her family. The Ombudsman empathises with the resident. However, as this Service is an alternative to the courts, we are unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action had a detrimental impact on the health of a resident. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspect of the resident’s complaint. This matter is better suited for consideration by a court or a personal injury claim.
- Within the resident’s correspondence to the landlord and this Service, she referenced several requests for repair going back to 2017. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence that the resident raised a complaint to the landlord about this, completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure, or referred the matter to this Service at the time for support in engaging with the landlord.
- The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords at the time the events happen. This is because with the passage of time, evidence may be unavailable, which makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be conducted, and for informed decisions to be made.
- Paragraph 42.b of the Scheme states the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within 12 months of the matter arising.
- Taking this into account, and the availability and reliability of evidence, this assessment focuses on the period from 23 June 2023 when the resident made the more recent request for repair. This investigation considers matters up to the date of the landlord’s stage 2 response dated 22 May 2024. Reference to historical and more recent events is to provide context only.
- This Service can only investigate matters which have completed the landlord’s complaints procedure, as per paragraph 42.a of the Scheme. We recognise that after the landlord issued its final complaint response, the resident raised other concerns, such as the landlord’s handling of her request for temporary accommodation and dissatisfaction that it scheduled works without agreeing dates with her. However, as these did not form part of the complaint initially raised, the Ombudsman will not assess the landlord’s response to them within this report. It is open for the resident to contact the landlord directly and make a separate complaint.
Several repairs required in the property, including damp and mould
- Where a landlord admits failings, the Ombudsman’s role is to assess whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. The Ombudsman also considers whether the landlord acted in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
- The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy set out that it aims to complete appointed repairs within 45 days. Where any discrepancies over quality of work becomes apparent, a surveyor must conduct a post inspection.
- Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair.
- The landlord has a responsibility under the housing health and safety rating system (HHSRS), 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 must consider whether any mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard that may require remedy. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under HHSRS and are expected to conduct additional monitoring of a property where potential hazards are identified.
- Following a resident’s report of damp and mould within a property, the Ombudsman expects a landlord to conduct an inspection to understand the extent of the problem, the probable cause, and decide an appropriate course of action.
- The Housing Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould states a landlord should have a zero-tolerance approach and must ensure its response to reports of the above are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue. Additionally, we expect landlords to ensure there is effective internal communication between teams and departments and to ensure 1 team or individual has overall responsibility for ensuring complaints/reports relating to damp and mould are resolved, including follow up or aftercare.
- Records show the resident reported damp and mould to the landlord on 23 June 2023 and 31 July 2023. A surveyor attended on 15 August 2023 and raised various work orders, some of which related to mould treatment, others related to other aspects of disrepair reported by the resident. They also arranged for a damp and mould specialist to conduct an internal inspection, which took place on 21 August 2023. The Ombudsman finds that while the landlord took too long to initially attend the property, it acted reasonably by arranging a specialist damp survey and raising mould washes in the interim.
- It is a concern that the landlord has not provided documentary evidence of its investigations into the damp and mould. For instance, it did not submit a copy of the full damp survey to this Service – just the front page. This Service expects a landlord to retain and provide accurate contemporaneous records of any assessments it undertook (whether visual or technical) such as photographs, written notes, or reports.
- The front page of the damp survey reported that damp and mould was present in the property, in addition to exterior issues which required investigation. It also mentioned cold bridging and extractor fans in the bathroom. From the limited information provided to the Ombudsman, it is not clear if the landlord identified the cause of the damp and mould in the property at this time or arranged subsequent investigations.
- It is of particular concern that the landlord neglected to assess the property at the earliest opportunity to evaluate habitability. There is no evidence to suggest that the hazard of damp or mould, and the impact upon the resident or her family was appropriately considered or addressed. The lack of a risk assessment and exploring options with the resident indicates a lack of regard for the vulnerabilities of the household.
- We asked the landlord to provide its records relating to the resident’s request for repairs to the door, toilet, and bathroom, which she initially raised on 23 June 2023. We expect to see information like repair logs, copies of any surveys or inspection reports, feedback from employees or contractors, an explanation of any work conducted, confirmation that the issue has been resolved and completion dates for any repairs. The limited information provided does not sufficiently evidence the landlord’s decision-making regarding these repairs. For example, contractors attended the property on several occasions, but it is not clear what actions were taken, with unreasonable delays in-between recorded actions. It is of concern that the landlord has not evidenced active management of the repairs.
- In its complaint submission to this Service in July 2024, the landlord said it had resolved all the repairs excluding the radiator. However, when asked to provide more information about this, the landlord then said it had scheduled damp repairs to start on 28 October 2024 – 5 months after its final complaint response. The landlord’s lack of awareness of the status of the repairs is worrying to the Ombudsman.
- Records show the resident repeatedly chased the landlord for updates and explained the impact that the repair issues had on her and her family. The Ombudsman finds the landlord failed to communicate effectively with the resident throughout this case. The resident did not receive clear and concise updates and spent an unreasonable amount of time trying to progress the works. Further, there were delays responding to emails and a failure to return calls. The Ombudsman determines that the communication failings throughout exacerbated the situation, delayed the resolution of the substantive issue, and worsened the impact on a vulnerable resident. This further undermined the landlord/resident relationship.
- Following a resident’s reports of poor workmanship, the Ombudsman would expect a landlord to complete a post-inspection, as per the landlord’s repair policy. In this case, the landlord acted appropriately by doing so and clearly set out the outstanding works to the resident.
- The Ombudsman recognises that the resident raised concerns about the effectiveness of the proposed mould treatment works on several occasions. The landlord provided a copy of a surveyor’s report including photos and the surveyor’s recommendations, which it shared with the resident. The landlord was entitled to rely on the professional advice of its surveyor in this regard. However, the Ombudsman cannot see that the landlord addressed the resident’s concerns about whether the proposed works would result in an effective and lasting repair. The Ombudsman has made a recommendation regarding this.
- Within its final complaint response, the landlord apologised for the repair delays and poor workmanship. It offered £3017 compensation comprising:
- £400 for the time, trouble, and inconvenience of multiple visits.
- £2367 to recognise the resident’s loss of enjoyment of her home from 18 August 2023 (45 days after the repairs were first reported) up to the end of August 2024.
- £250 for the complaint handling failures at stage 1 and 2.
- Overall, the landlord did not treat the resident fairly in the way it managed the repairs within the property. It acted with a lack of urgency and failed to communicate effectively. There were avoidable delays progressing repairs, a lack of active repair management and poor record keeping. The landlord failed to provide an appropriate level of service which had a detrimental impact on the resident.
- The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (available on our website) sets out compensation ranges we consider when determining cases. In the Ombudsman’s view, the £500 compensation initially offered at stage 1 was not proportionate to the circumstances of the case. The increased offer at stage 2 of compensation falls within our highest range of compensation for situations where there has been a severe and long-term impact on the resident. However, the substantive issues remained outstanding significantly after the completion of the landlord’s internal complaint procedure. This indicates it did not learn sufficient lessons, demonstrating a failing to put things right and learn from outcomes. As such, the Ombudsman cannot determine that the landlord resolved the complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances.
- In April 2024, the landlord wrote to the Ombudsman setting out its lessons learnt following a senior management review into its repairs processes and procedures, record keeping, contractor management, complaint handling and its response to reports of damp and mould. Therefore, the Ombudsman has not made recommendations concerning the above but expects the landlord to take all relevant learning from this case into account.
The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint
- The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (“the Code”) is applicable to all member landlords. It specifies that a stage 1 complaint should be finalised in 10 working days from the acknowledgement of the complaint, with no more than a further extension of 10 days. A stage 2 complaint should be finalised within 20 working days from the acknowledgement of the complaint, with a further extension of 10 days if required. A landlord should not exceed these timescales without good reason.
- It is important to note that when a resident makes a complaint, there is an accepted expectation that some time and energy will be spent in pursuing the matter. The Ombudsman in this respect considers whether the landlord’s actions were reasonable, fair, and appropriate in response to a complaint and the way it managed it.
- The resident initially complained on 25 October 2023 and made several additional complaints chasing a response. It took the landlord 26 weeks to issue its stage 1 response on 24 April 2024. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 24 April 2024. It issued its stage 2 response 4 weeks later on 22 May 2024. The Code serves to illustrate that the landlord kept the resident’s complaint open at stage 1 for an unreasonable duration.
- In the Ombudsman’s opinion, the complaint handling delay at stage 1 compounded the detriment to the resident as she was uncertain how seriously the landlord was taking her concerns. It is evident the resident spent more than a reasonable period pursuing the repairs and her complaint. The landlord’s delay in progressing the complaint also prevented the resident from referring her case to this Service at the earliest opportunity and contributed to further delays resolving the substantive repair issues. Nonetheless, the landlord recognised its failures in its complaint handling, apologised to the resident and offered compensation. This was fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
- The Code states that when responding to a complaint the “remedy offer must 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.” At stage 2, the landlord accepted that it did not complete works to an acceptable standard which resulted in the need for further visits to the property. It was appropriate for the landlord to identify and apologise for its failing and offer compensation for it.
- Under the dispute resolution principles, it is good practice for a landlord to evidence learning from a complaint. The Ombudsman expects a landlord to identify clear learning points and outline specific actions to ensure similar service failures will not occur in the future. While the landlord recognised failings, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, it could have done more to reference specific learning from the resident’s experience within its complaint responses to improve its complaint handling, communication, and repairs provision.
- The landlord offered £250 compensation for its complaint handling failures. In the Ombudsman’s view, this sum was reasonable and in line with our remedies guidance to reflect the extent of its shortcomings and the impact its service failures had on the resident. As above, we would like to draw its attention to its April 2024 commitment to improving its processes, including with respect to complaint handling.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of several repairs required in the property, including damp and mould.
- In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the complainant, which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its complaint handling satisfactorily.
Orders and recommendations
Orders
- Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
- Apologise to the resident in writing for the failures identified.
- Pay the resident the £2767 compensation it offered at stage 2 for the complaint elements excluding complaint handling (this has been addressed separately below).
- Explain to the resident in writing why its proposed actions are sufficient to resolve the matter, long-term, and then provide possible dates for the completion of the works.
- Contact the resident to discuss any vulnerabilities she and the members of the household may have and update its internal records accordingly (subject to any data protection requirements).
- The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to this Service within 4 weeks of the date of this determination.
Recommendations
- The landlord should contact the resident to discuss her request for temporary accommodation and her concerns about the proposed works. It should then write to the resident setting out its position.
- The landlord should consider whether any additional compensation is due to the resident from the date of its stage 2 response, up to the date it completes the repairs. It should write to the resident to set out its position.
- The landlord should pay the resident the £250 previously offered for its handling of the complaint, as this recognised genuine elements of service failure, and the reasonable redress finding is made on that basis.
- Given the resident’s concerns that the proposed repairs will not be effective, the Ombudsman recommends the landlord undertakes a follow-up inspection 8 weeks after it completes the repairs.