Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited (202110713)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202110713

Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited

18 May 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 the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of the kitchen being in disrepair.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The resident lives in a house and became a tenant via a mutual exchange agreement. 
  2. In February 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to report that her kitchen worktop was coming off the wall and the kitchen units were loose from the wall. The landlord’s contractors arrived to carry out the inspection in February 2021 and found that the units were falling apart, and the worktops were rotten. Following the inspection, the contractor concluded that the kitchen was in severe disrepair to the point where no further works could be done to repair the kitchen due to the rot, damp and mould caused by a substantial water leak under the sink. The contractor concluded that the kitchen needed to be replaced as soon as possible.
  3. The resident then contacted the landlord to inform it that the kitchen had been in a state of disrepair for at least three years. The resident sent photos to the landlord in March 2021 showing the condition of the kitchen. During the same period, another contractor attended to repair the kitchen worktop and kitchen units, screwing them back into place as a temporary fix. Following these temporary repairs, the resident reported her concerns to the landlord: that she was not willing to have any further repairs done to the kitchen as it was now beyond repair.
  4. The resident had also raised concerns that her driveway was unsafe; however, the landlord addressed her concerns and it appears from the available evidence that the driveway repairs are now complete.
  5. Arrangements were made between the landlord and resident to carry out further repairs in March 2021. The resident received no contact from the landlord to arrange appointments for the works.
  6. In May 2021, the landlord issued its final complaint response to the resident. It stated that the resident was misadvised by the contractor that the kitchen would be replaced and apologised for any confusion this may have caused.
  7. The landlord explained to the resident that her property was due to undergo a full kitchen replacement as part of a separate planned program scheduled to go ahead in 2029. It stated that it would continue to carry out repairs until this time or review matters if the kitchen became beyond repair. It offered the resident £125 compensation, providing a breakdown in costs which covered its failures to communicate with the resident as well as its quality of service provided to the resident.
  8. In her complaint to the Ombudsman, the resident explained that, to resolve matters, she would like the landlord to replace the cupboards that were broken, the countertop which had come away from the wall, and to address the leak under the sink that had been ongoing for a year.

Assessment and findings

Policies and Procedures

  1. The tenancy agreement says the landlord is obliged to maintain and keep in good repair and proper working order any installations provided for the supply of water including sinks, flushing systems and waste pipes.
  2. A ‘responsive repair’ is defined as day-to-day maintenance work carried out following a request from a resident. ‘Emergency repairs’ are classed as affecting the structure of the building adversely and are carried out within 4 hours of the resident reporting the issue.
  3. A ‘non-emergency repair’ will be arranged through a routine appointment to carry out the repair. The landlord is obliged to attend all non-emergency repairs by appointment, at the time agreed with the resident and to complete the repair within 20 working days.

 

 

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of the kitchen in disrepair.

  1. In this case, the landlord has not followed its obligations as set out per the tenancy agreement. The landlord was obliged to maintain and keep installations as to the supply of water in good repair and working order. The resident reported a leak under the kitchen sink in February 2021. The landlord failed to address this issue throughout its complaint’s procedure. It had recognised in its final response to the complaint that it did not adhere to its obligations in maintaining communication with the resident to keep her informed of repair appointments and works to be carried out but there was no mention of works to be carried out to fix the leak which was raised as part of the resident’s formal complaint.
  2. The landlord’s contractor had advised that the kitchen needed to be replaced. The contractor made clear it was not possible to carry out further repairs due to the build-up of rot and mould and so the repairs would not be sustainable long term.
  3. Following the contents of the contractor’s response that no further repairs were possible, this Service would have expected the landlord to send its surveyor to obtain a second opinion of the state the kitchen. The landlord had previously attended repairs, but the resident continued to experience problems with the kitchen since the repairs were last completed. The latest contact from the resident in January 2022 to the Ombudsman confirmed there is still a leak which is continuing to cause damage to the kitchen. Therefore, it appears the kitchen now needs replacing as repairs have been attempted previously but have not been successful in resolving the problems experienced by the resident. It was reasonable for the landlord to attempt repairs in the first instance rather than opting to replace the kitchen ahead of its scheduled replacement date. However, it would be unreasonable for the landlord to attempt further repairs at this stage when repairs have been attempted already as this would cause further inconvenience to the resident and it is not clear what repairs could be carried out to resolve the issues as the landlord’s contractor has suggested nothing can be done. The landlord has not provided any evidence from a qualified operative who has inspected the kitchen to counter the contractor’s opinion.
  4. The landlord’s decision not to replace the kitchen was based on photographs and was not based on a site visit. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have arranged for a surveyor to visit and inspect the kitchen with a view to arranging a kitchen replacement in light of the contractor’s findings. In some internal notes and correspondence with the Ombudsman, the landlord had suggested the kitchen was due for renewal in the next financial year, but in its complaint response, it had said the kitchen was due for replacement in 2029. Therefore there was a lack of clarity concerning when the kitchen would be replaced.
  5. Overall, the landlord did not adhere to its responsive repairs policy for works to be carried out within 20 working days. Although the contractor did attend to carry out repairs to kitchen cabinets by temporarily screwing them back into place, this was a temporary fix which did not resolve the resident’s concerns about the leak and kitchen units coming off the walls. To resolve matters, the landlord will need to establish where the leak is coming from and to fix this before any further works are to be carried out to the kitchen. If the leak is not fixed then it is likely it would continue to cause damage to the kitchen meaning that any future kitchen replacement works will not be sustainable unless the leak is fixed.
  6. In this case, the landlord had recognised it had failed to communicate with the resident to arrange appointments with the resident before attending and failed to adhere to the timescales given in its responsive repairs policy. The landlord’s proposal of £125 compensation was not adequate in the circumstances of this case as it had not only shown failures in its obligations to arrange appointments, but the landlord did not adequately investigate the resident’s reports that it was in a state of disrepair.
  7. It is, therefore, reasonable for the landlord to offer £500 in compensation to the resident for its failures in recognising the extent of disrepair to the resident’s kitchen as well as for its failures in communicating with the resident. This is in line with the Service’s remedies guidance (published on our website)  which suggests awards of between £250-700 where the Ombudsman has found considerable service failure or maladministration by the landlord, but there may be no permanent impact on the complainant. Examples include failure over a considerable period of time to act in accordance with policy – for example to address repairs.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of the kitchen being in disrepair.

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident a total of £500 compensation.
  2. This is inclusive of the landlord’s offer of £125 compensation for its failures in communicating with the resident, which can be deducted from the total awarded by the Ombudsman if it has already been paid.
  3. The payment should be made within four weeks of this decision.
  4. The Ombudsman orders the landlord arrange for an inspection of the kitchen within four weeks of the date of this decision. Following this inspection, the landlord should arrange for the leak in the kitchen to be repaired in line with the timescales in its repairs policy.
  5. Once the leak has been fixed, the landlord should make arrangements for the kitchen to be replaced and it should correspond with the resident regarding the plans for the kitchen replacement and the expected timescale for this.