Southwark Council (202218826)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202218826
Southwark Council
26 September 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
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
- repairs to a waste pipe.
- the complaint.
Background
- The resident holds a secure tenancy with the landlord in a 2-bedroom flat within a block. The resident occupies the property with her son.
- On 29 September 2022 the resident reported a smell from the gully in the kitchen. On 4 October 2022 the landlord’s contractor attended the property and found that a specialist contractor would be needed to extend the sewage waste pipe stack to the roof. The following day the resident requested an update and was unhappy that the landlord was unable to fix the issue. She said she had reported this matter numerous times and felt the landlord had failed to deal with it. She also requested temporary accommodation until it resolved the issue. The same day the landlord logged the resident’s concerns as a formal complaint and informed her that it would provide a written response by 27 October 2022.
- On 28 October 2022 the landlord’s contractor attended the property. They were unable to complete the work and again they highlighted that a specialist contractor would be needed to resolve this. On 2 November 2022 the resident informed the landlord that it was the same engineer who had attended the previous 4 October 2022 inspection and that no repairs had been carried out. She was concerned the pipe was located in an area where food was prepared and asked the landlord when it would complete the repair. In response, the landlord raised an order for its contractor to attend the property on 18 November 2022. However, the contractor cancelled the appointment. The resident again repeated her request for temporary accommodation and expressed concerns that her son had been in hospital with respiratory issues which she believed was due to being exposed to raw sewage. She added that the property was uninhabitable and that the health of the household was being compromised.
- On 30 December 2022 the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns at stage 1 of its complaints process. It provided a timeline of events during October 2022 and in addition:
- It apologised for the late response.
- Raised a work order on 15 November for its contractor to attend on 17 November 2022.
- Its contractor had confirmed that works had been authorised and aimed to erect scaffolding and complete the work by the week ending 16 December 2022. However, there was a delay as its contractor erected scaffolding on the wrong block.
- All scaffolding and roofing jobs were on hold until after Christmas and the New Year.
- It understood the importance of ensuring it completed repairs within a reasonable timescale and would keep the resident updated on progress.
- On 2 March 2023 following contact from the resident this Service asked the landlord to escalate the complaint. The resident was unhappy that the repair had not been carried out by 16 December 2022 and that scaffolding was put on the wrong block. She added that the scaffolding had since been correctly put up, but nothing had happened. She explained that she had lived with the smell of excrement for the past 6 years and was unhappy that the landlord had not offered any compensation. On 27 March 2023, the landlord’s plumbing contractor renewed the valve to the stack.
- On 6 April 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 final response. It upheld the complaint, in summary, it said:
- On 17 March 2023 it raised an order to ‘renew valve to sewage pipe’, which Its contractor installed on 27 March 2023.
- It assigned the work to a specialist contractor due to the requirement to extend the sewage pipe to the roof.
- It apologised for any inconvenience the foul smell caused, and the service provided and offered £100 compensation for the resident’s time and trouble.
- In the resident’s referral to this Service, she said the landlord had not resolved the issue and there was still a foul sewage smell entering the property from the pipe. She disputed that the pipe was for kitchen waste only and believed that the pipe’s purpose was to take sewage smells away from the ground floor bathrooms and out through the roof. As a resolution she wanted the landlord to investigate and fix the issue.
Assessment and findings
Scope of investigation
- The resident stated that this situation had been ongoing for a number of years. Indeed, the landlord has provided this Service with repair logs which show historical reports of a smell of sewage in the property from 2017. However, under the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we may not consider complaints that were not brought to the landlord’s attention as a formal complaint within a reasonable period (usually within 12 months) of the matters arising. This is in accordance with paragraph 42c of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The historical issues provide contextual background to the current complaint, but this assessment is focused on the landlord’s actions and handling of reports from September 2022 when the most recent and regular reports were made.
- The resident has also advised that the handling of this matter by the landlord has led to a deterioration in the health of the household. The Ombudsman cannot conclude the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This is outside our jurisdiction, but this Service has considered the general distress and inconvenience that may have been caused to the resident.
The landlord’s handling of repairs to a waste pipe
- When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
- Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.
- Put things right.
- Learn from outcomes.
- The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.
- Following the resident’s 29 September 2022 report of a smell from the gully in the kitchen the landlord acted promptly by arranging for its contractor to attend and inspect the issue on 4 October 2022. However, the landlord did not follow up on their recommendations for a specialist contractor to extend the waste stack to the roof. This is particularly concerning given its repair record stated that the smell was unbearable. Instead, the landlord appeared to refer the matter to its new homes team to investigate, as a latent defect. Given the historical context of this case, the potential health and safety issues and the fact the landlord had attended to similar reports in the past, it was inappropriate for it to do so and would have caused delays in resolving the matter.
- Furthermore, when the landlord’s contractor attended at the end of October 2022, it was, again, unable to complete the work. It noted, once more that a specialist contractor would be needed to place the stack ‘outside or on the roof’. Considering the landlord had been made aware of this on 4 October 2022, it is unclear why it instructed the same contractor to attend this appointment. Instead, it should have acted on the contractor’s initial recommendation and instructed a specialist contractor to resolve the issue. Its failure to do so would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident who would have likely felt the landlord was not dealing with the matter properly.
- Subsequently the landlord booked another appointment with a contractor for 18 November 2022, however, this appointment did not go ahead. The resident questioned what had happened and advised that she had taken time out of work to allow access. In response, the landlord informed the resident that its contractor had cancelled the appointment without its knowledge. Although it acted appropriately by apologising for the inconvenience caused, this would have delayed matters further. In addition, the landlord did not appear to provide a new appointment date to the resident, which led to her chasing it for an update at the beginning of December 2022. This would have caused time and trouble for the resident.
- The landlord then chased its contractor for an update and was told that the scaffold was erected on the wrong block. Although the landlord updated the resident accordingly, this was another avoidable delay that would have caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident. Moreover, the landlord’s stage 1 response stated that all scaffolding and roofing jobs were placed on hold until after the New Year. However, the landlord did not attempt to resolve this issue until March 2023, some 4 months after the November 2022 failed appointment. The landlord’s records suggested it resolved the issue on 27 March 2023 by renewing the valve to the sewage pipe. This was almost 6 months after the resident’s initial September 2022 report. This was an unacceptable delay, and the landlord failed to complete the repair within its 20-working day routine repair policy timescales.
- In the resident’s referral to this Service, she stated that the landlord had failed to resolve the issue. She added that the pipe’s purpose was to take sewage smells away from the ground-floor bathrooms and out through the roof. While this Service cannot comment on the design and purpose of the pipe, the contractor informed the landlord on 2 occasions as early as October 2022 that the waste stack should be extended to the roof. In addition, its final response acknowledged that it had assigned a specialist contractor to the job due to the ‘requirement’ to extend the sewage pipe to the roof. Yet its records suggested that this did not happen, and it is unclear as to why. This likely caused frustration to the resident who would have reasonably believed this was what would happen. In addition, there was no evidence of an explanation as to why it had not done so.
- Overall, the landlord’s handling of repairs to a waste pipe was poor. The delays were avoidable, and the landlord failed to deal with the matter with any urgency despite the historical context. It also failed to consider and address the resident’s concerns regarding the health of the household. This was demonstrated by the landlord’s failure to consider whether a decant was appropriate in this case, particularly given the resident had requested temporary accommodation on more than 1 occasion.
- While the landlord apologised for its service and offered £100 compensation to put things right, it is the Ombudsman’s view that this does not go far enough for the failures identified in this report. This amounts to maladministration. This Service remedies guidance suggests awards from £100 should be considered where there has been an adverse effect, and the offer of compensation was not proportionate for the failings identified. In view of this orders have been made below for remedy.
- This Service recognises that the resident continued to report the same issue to the landlord on several occasions after its final response. While this Service has not carried out any meaningful assessment of these reports it is unclear if the landlord has fully resolved the matter. Furthermore, it is noted that the landlord acknowledged internally that it did not follow up on these further reports to ensure that the issue was resolved. This has been considered and forms part of the Ombudsman’s orders below.
Complaint handling
- Despite the landlord appropriately recording and acknowledging the resident’s 5 October 2022 concerns as a complaint, it failed to respond at stage 1 of its complaints process within its 15 working day policy timescale. Instead, it took almost 3 months to issue its stage 1 response. This was an unreasonable delay that would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident who would have likely felt that the landlord was ignoring her concerns.
- While it was appropriate for the landlord to apologise for the delayed response it failed to identify any learning from the complaint. Furthermore, its stage 1 response failed to address or acknowledge the resident’s concerns regarding the health of the household and her belief that the property was uninhabitable. Nor did it respond to her requests for temporary accommodation, despite this being part of the resident’s original complaints. This would have caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident who would have likely felt that the landlord had overlooked the household’s needs as well as her health and safety concerns. This amounts to service failure and an order of compensation is made below for remedy.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to a waste pipe.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.
Orders
- The landlord must do the following within the next 4 weeks:
- Provide a written apology for the failures identified in this report.
- Pay the resident compensation of £600 comprised of:
- £100 as offered in its final response if it has not already done so.
- A further £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of repairs to a waste pipe.
- £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling.
- Inspect the valve to ensure it is fit for purpose. If the smell persists the landlord must consider what other steps to take to prevent this from happening and provide an action plan to the resident and this Service. The action plan must consider whether it is appropriate for the pipe to be extended through the roof.
- The landlord should provide this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescale set out above.