Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited (202301459)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202301459

Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited

1 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a repair to the roof, due to a leak.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord in a 2 bedroom house, and her tenancy started in August 2003. The landlord does not have any recorded vulnerabilities for the resident.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord’s out of hours repairs team on 3 October 2022 to report the roof was leaking, and there was water coming through the ceiling in her bathroom. The resident contacted the landlord again on 6 October 2022 to report the issue to its repairs team. The landlord erected scaffolding on the 21 November 2022 to enable it to inspect the roof.
  3. The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 5 January 2023. She said the scaffolding had been up for “months” and it had not inspected the issue. She explained she had reported leaks in the past, but the works appeared not to have resolved the issue.
  4. The landlord completed an inspection of the property on 10 January 2023, and identified an issue with water ingress from the roof around the chimney stack. The notes from the inspection state it needed a roofer to investigate the source of the leak.
  5. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 25 January 2023. It said the scaffolding was still “in situ” because the roofing works had not yet been done. It upheld the resident’s complaint and offered £65 in compensation for its handling of various repairs. It is unclear how much of the offer was for its handling of the roofing issue.
  6. The landlord’s contractor inspected the roof on 30 January 2023, and provided a scheme of works to resolve the leak from the roof.
  7. The resident asked the landlord to take her complaint to stage 2 on 6 February 2023, and said the issue was ongoing and the cracks were “growing” and stains on the ceiling were getting worse. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 3 March 2023. It upheld the resident’s complaint, and apologised for the delays in attending to the roofing works. It advised it had now approved a quote from its contractor and would be in touch when it had a date for the works to start. It offered the resident £115 in compensation for its handling of the matter.

Events after the complaints process

  1. The landlord’s contractor completed works to the roof in May 2023. The exact date the works were completed is unclear, but the works were ‘signed off’ as completed on 12 May 2023.
  2. The resident raised further concerns about a leak from the roof in August and September 2023, as well as raising concerns about other repairs in the property. The landlord instructed an independent surveyor to complete an inspection in relation to the repairs. The inspection took place on 17 October 2023, and in relation to the rood leak it found the roof repair to be complete and found no evidence of water ingress into the bathroom. The inspection report noted the bathroom ceiling still had a board covering the hole, and the ceiling repair had not yet been completed.
  3. The landlord repaired the ceiling in the bathroom on 20 October 2023. The scaffolding was dismantled on 4 January 2024.
  4. The resident contacted this Service on 29 January 2024 and asked us to investigate her complaint. She was unhappy the scaffolding had only just been removed, and the time it took to complete the roof repair. The landlord made an increased offer of £750 in compensation to the resident in February 2024.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to the roof due to a leak

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 obliges the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property.
  2. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy has 5 categories of responsive repair. The policy states it aims to complete “complex and major repairs” within 40 days.
  3. When the resident raised her stage 2 complaint, in February 2023, she raised a concern that the landlord’s handling of the repair had impacted on her mental health. The serious nature of this is acknowledged and we do not seek to dispute the resident’s comments. However, this aspect of the resident’s complaint ultimately requires a determination of liability for personal injury.
  4. Claims of personal injury, including damage to health, can be considered via a landlord’s public liability insurance or in a court of law. Such claims will take into consideration medical evidence and allegations of negligence. These matters fall outside of the Ombudsman’s remit. The resident may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim, if she considers that her health has been affected by any action or lack thereof by the landlord.
  5. This investigation has focused on the landlord’s handling of the repair to the roof, as this was the subject of the landlord’s final complaint response. It is noted the resident raised numerous repair issues as part of her stage 1 complaint, in January 2023. However, when escalating her complaint to stage 2 only a reference to the outstanding roof repair was made. As such, it was reasonable for the landlord to only respond to that concern at stage 2. As outlined in our Scheme, we are only able to assess matters that have exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. As such, this investigation is limited the landlord’s handling of the roof repair.
  6. It is also noted that the resident raised concerns about further repairs not related to the roof in August and September 2023. As the subsequent repairs issues were raised after the landlord issued its final complaint response, in March 2023, the later repairs are not within the scope of this investigation. Again, this is due to the fact the landlord has not had the opportunity to respond as part of a formal complaint.
  7. The evidence shows as the roof repair was outstanding at the time of its final complaint response, and was not fully resolved until May 2023. For fairness, this Service has increased the scope of the investigation beyond the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response. As set out above this is limited to the roof repair, and the associated works. If the resident remains unhappy with the landlord’s handling of other repairs, she may wish to raise a further complaint with the landlord.
  8. The landlord was put on notice about the leak issue on 3 October 2022. Due to the nature of the repair, it is reasonable to conclude that it would fit under the landlord’s “complex and major” repair category. The evidence indicates it was completed well outside of its 40 day target timeframe which amounts to an unreasonable delay. The delay caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
  9. It is noted the need to erect scaffolding in order to properly inspect the roof would have increased the time it took to attend to the repair. However, that the landlord did not erect scaffolding for over a month after first on notice about the issue amounts to an unreasonable delay. The landlord’s comments, in its stage 2 response of March 2023, about delays with its scaffolding contractor are noted. The delay was somewhat outside of the landlord’s control, but we have seen no evidence that the landlord was proactive in explaining the delays to the resident. It failed to help manage her expectations, and reassure her it was taking the matter seriously. This was a failing in its handling of the matter that contributed to the distress and inconvenience the resident experienced.
  10. The landlord did not complete its inspection of the issue until January 2023, this was 2 months after it had erected the scaffolding. This was an unreasonable delay that increased the inconvenience the resident experienced. It is noted that the inspection did not happen until after the resident raised her formal complaint. The resident was cost time and trouble due to the need to raise a complaint in order to get the landlord to inspect the roof. This was unreasonable and evidence the landlord was not proactive in progressing with the repair.
  11. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, of January 2023, lacked detail about this specific repair, and was dismissive. While it was appropriate to explain why the scaffolding was still up, it offered no assessment of its handling of the issue up to that point, or when it hoped to start works. This was unreasonable, and the resident was inconvenienced by the fact it offered no explanation, or learning, about its handling of the repair.
  12. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response, of March 2023, went some way to putting right the failings of its stage 1 response. It gave a detailed history of the repair, and accepted failings with transparency. It explained what learning it had done to improve its service, which was appropriate. However, as the matter was outstanding at the time of its response, the £115 in compensation it offered did not fully put things right for the resident.
  13. Despite the landlord approving a quote from its contractor in January 2023, the works were not signed off as completed until May 2023, 4 months later. This was an unreasonable delay and supports the conclusion the landlord did not appropriately oversee repairs being carried out on its behalf by contractors. The evidence shows that the landlord did not appropriately oversee repairs being carried out on its behalf by contractors.
  14. When the resident raised further concerns about the roof in September 2023, as well as other repairs. The landlord instructed an independent surveyor to inspect the property. This was appropriate in the circumstances as it instructed a contractor with the appropriate expertise to assess the roof works and whether the issue was resolved. The landlord took reasonable steps to satisfy itself the leak was resolved when further concerns were raised
  15. As well as the unreasonable delay in completing the works to the roof, there was also an unreasonable delay in completed the remedial works to the ceiling in the bathroom. It was appropriate to wait until it was satisfied the leak was resolved before completing remedial works. That they did not take place for 5 months after the roof works was unreasonable, and well outside of the timeframes set out in its repairs policy. The resident was evidently distressed at the condition of the bathroom ceiling, as set out in her email in August 2023. That it did not repair the ceiling for 5 months after fixing the leak increased the distress and inconvenience she experienced.
  16. It is unclear why the scaffolding remained in place until January 2024, 7 months after it completed the roofing works. This was an unreasonable timeframe following the works being completed. The resident was inconvenienced by this delay as the presence of scaffolding impacted on her use of her garden and she was evidently distressed it remained in place for so long.
  17. While this Service welcomes the landlord’s decision to revisit its offer of compensation in order to try and put right its evident failings. It is concerning that after the resident exhausted its complaints procedure, the delays in completing the works continued. The landlord did not revisit its offer of compensation for nearly a year after its final complaint response. This means that this Service does not consider it an offer of compensation made as part of the complaint. It is recognised that the later offer of compensation was made, and it was a reasonable offer in the circumstances. However, considering it was made nearly a year after the resident exhausted its complaint procedure, this has impacted on the degree to which the offer put right the evident failings.
  18. There were unreasonable delays in completing the repairs, and even after accepting such failings in its final complaint response, the landlord failed to learn from the outcomes, and delays continued to occur. Due to the fact its final of offer of compensation was made well after its final complaint response, and its evident later failings, we have determined its offer of compensation did not fully put things right. We have found there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the matter, and have made an appropriate series of orders below. We have determined that the landlord’s offer of compensation was reasonable in the circumstances, and have therefore not made an order for additional compensation for its handling of this issue.

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 repair to the roof, due to a leak.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident the £750 in compensation it offered for its handling of the roof repair (if it has not already done so).
  2. Within 8 weeks the landlord is ordered to conduct a review into its handling of the repairs to identify how it can prevent similar failings happening again. The review should have a particular focus on:
    1. Following up on reports of repairs, and booking repairs in a timely manner.
    2. How it can better oversee contractors operating on its behalf.
    3. How to improve communication with residents when there are delays.