Southwark Council (202228633)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202228633

Southwark Council

19 February 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:
1. Repair works, including the resident’s concerns about scaffolding and damage to paving slabs.
2. The resident’s complaint.

Background

The resident lives with her partner at the property, of which she has been a secure tenant since 2001. The property is a ground floor 1 bedroom flat owned and managed by the landlord, a local authority.
The landlord’s contractor wrote to the resident on 27 April 2022 to confirm it would be erecting scaffolding from 3 May 2022 to enable the works it was completing.
The contractor sent a handover sheet to the landlord on 1 September 2022 confirming it had completed all the works except the roofing repairs.
The resident emailed a complaint to the landlord on 28 September 2022, in which she said:
1. The landlord’s contractor had erected scaffolding on 10 June 2022 at the front and 5 July 2022 at the back of the building. It had told her the works would take 6-8 weeks. The scaffolding had been in place for 16 weeks, rather than the 6 to 8 weeks she was told, and was still up. She wanted this to be taken down.
2. The contractor had fitted the new door and windows and completed the painting. However, there was a leaking roof they had not repaired, which had resulted in flooding during heavy rain on 6 September 2022. She had heard nothing from the contractor about the roof repairs.
3. The contractor had cracked two of her paving slabs, which she expected it or the landlord to replace.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 29 September 2022 and told the resident it would issue its response by 19 October 2022.
The resident sent further emails to the landlord on 19 November 2022, 24 November 2022 and 27 November 2022 stating she had received no response to her complaint or emails. The resident said the repairs to the roof and replacement of the paving slabs were still outstanding.
The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 23 December 2022, in which it said:
1. Its contractor had said it was aiming to complete the roof repairs and remove the scaffolding before Christmas. It was sorry for the delays.
2. The scaffolding needed to remain in place for the works.
3. The contractor would attend to the broken paving slabs “in the new year”.
4. It upheld the resident’s complaint.
5. The resident could escalate the complaint to stage 2 of its process if she was dissatisfied with the response.
The resident wrote to this Service on 3 March 2023 stating:
1. The contractor had removed the scaffolding on 2 March 2023, 9 months after erecting it.
2. She had received no apology from the contractor for the anxiety and upset caused over the “dangerous” structure being in her garden for this time.
3. The scaffolding had not been checked for safety during the time it had been erected.
4. The roof repairs had taken approximately 15 hours to complete once attended to, after the scaffolding being in place for 9 months.
5. The scaffolding had taken up a third of her garden and obscured most of the daylight through her windows.
6. She had spent a significant amount of time contacting the landlord and contractor, and she wanted the Ombudsman to review the matter.
As the landlord had not yet completed its internal complaints procedure, this Service wrote to it on 22 April 2023 asking it to respond to the issues the resident had raised. We sent a further urgent request on 16 August 2023 when the resident told us she had not received a response.
The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 23 August 2023, in which it said:
1. It had sent an incorrect stage 2 escalation form to the resident in its stage 1 response, which meant it would not have seen any stage 2 requests the resident sent. It apologised for this.
2. It had received the escalation request via this Service on 23 April 2023 but, due to human error, it had not responded as required.
3. It was upholding her complaint for the complaint handling failures it had identified and offered £100 compensation.
4. It was awaiting further information from the contractor, and would send a follow-up email to the resident when it had received a response.
5. It would re–evaluate her complaint upon receiving more information from the contractor, and would make an additional resolution offer if applicable.
6. The resident had the right to bring her complaint to this Service for consideration.
The landlord sent a follow-up email to its stage 2 response on 30 August 2023, in which it said:
1. It had received confirmation that the contractor had removed the scaffolding on 2 March 2023, which was 10 weeks beyond the expected timeframe. It awarded £5 per week for this delay, totalling £50.
2. Its contractor had said it had tried contacting the resident regarding her paving slabs but had not reached her. It had asked the contractor to attempt further contact to resolve the issue.
3. It would like to provide £170 for the inconvenience caused by the paving slab issue.
4. It still wished to provide £100 for the complaint handling failures and time and trouble.
5. It would send her a cheque for the total compensation of £320 within 4 to 6 weeks.
The resident duly made her complaint to this Service on 18 September 2023. Following this, the landlord wrote to the resident again and said it had reconsidered its stage 2 response. The landlord said its contractor submitted the works handover to it on 1 September 2022 so it should have removed the scaffolding within 4 weeks of this. Accordingly, the delay had been 22 weeks rather than 10 weeks as previously thought. It offered to provide £10 per week for this delay, totalling £220. This replaced the offer of £50 the landlord had previously made for the scaffolding delays. The landlord sent the resident a further cheque for £170 to make up the difference.
The resident has told us she has refused to accept any cheques the landlord has issued to date.

Assessment and findings

Repairs, scaffolding delays and broken paving slabs

The works handover sheet that the contractor provided to the landlord on 1 September 2023 included a section on roof works, which covered renewing the roof tiles and the lead steeped flashing. However, rather than completing this work, it was confirmed that a new lower flat roof was to be priced up. This was the reason the roof repairs were not completed when the other repairs were.
Section 3 of the landlord’s repairs policy (“when will your repair be done?”) includes “roofing faults causing problems e.g. rain penetration” as a non-urgent repair. Under the policy, the landlords contractors are meant to complete non-urgent repairs within 20 working days.
The resident reported to the landlord on 28 September 2022 that there had been a water leak from the roof following heavy rain on 6 September 2022. We have seen no evidence that the landlord took any action to repair the roof in response to this. Even with the more extensive roof repairs being planned, the landlord should have arranged a temporary repair of the roof during this period to prevent or limit further leaks.
The roof was only attended to in late February 2023, shortly after which the scaffolding was removed. This was 5 months after the resident had reported the roofing issues in September 2022.
The Health and Safety Executive states scaffolding must be inspected at least once every 7 days once it is installed. As part of the resident’s complaint, she claimed the scaffolding was never checked for safety during the 9-month period it was in place.
We have seen no evidence to support whether the scaffolding was ever checked for safety. Considering the scaffolding was left in place for 6 months after the contractor had sent its completed works handover sheet to the landlord on 1 September 2022, it is likely that this was not checked for safety once every 7 days. This is a serious failure from the contractor, which was acting as an agent of the landlord.
There are no specific timescales for garden-related repairs or repairs to paving slabs in the landlord’s repairs policy. However, the landlord has an obligation to complete any repair within a reasonable time under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The photographs of the broken paving slabs the resident has provided suggest they may have also been a trip hazard.
In response to the resident’s report, the landlord said its contractors would attend to the paving slabs “in the new year”. We have seen no evidence to show the landlord took any steps to follow this up with the contractor until it dealt with the stage 2 complaint 8 months later.
It is not known whether the paving slabs have been replaced, so this report will order the landlord to complete this. However, if the contractor or landlord have already completed this by the time the landlord comes to implement our orders, this order will be satisfied.
The resident has provided photographs showing debris below the scaffolding that appears to have fallen from above. This, and the broken paving slabs, suggests there was a lack of care taken by the contractors on site.
The resident has also described that the scaffolding took up a third of her garden and obscured much of the daylight entering the property. The Ombudsman considers the scaffolding would have caused the resident significant inconvenience for the delayed period it was left in place.
Due to the delays in the roof repair faced by the resident, her inconvenience caused by this, the scaffolding being in place for considerably longer than expected, and the difficulty she faced trying to get the paving slabs replaced, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the repairs.

Complaint handling

Section 4 of the landlord’s complaints policy (“how we handle a complaint”) says it will:
1. Acknowledge receipt of a complaint by telephone or in writing within 3 working days.
2. Provide a stage 1 response within 15 working days.
3. If the complaint is escalated, provide a stage 2 response within 25 working days of the escalation request.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 29 September 2022, which was the day after she raised it. The landlord said it would provide its stage 1 response by 19 October 2022. However, it sent the response over two months after this on 23 December 2022. This was a significant delay and failure to follow its policy, but the landlord did not provide an explanation for this.
We have seen no evidence that the landlord responded to the emails the resident sent requesting updates on 19 November 2022, 24 November 2022 and 27 November 2022. This was despite the resident receiving automated responses stating it would get back to her within 3 working days.
Section 6.2 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) says any remedy the landlord offers must reflect the extent of any service failures and the level of detriment caused to the resident.
The landlord upheld the resident’s complaint in its stage 1 response and recognised there were delays with the works and an issue with broken paving slabs. It also acknowledged there had been a delay in issuing the response. It would have been reasonable to offer compensation to recognise the resident’s inconvenience, but the landlord only offered an apology.
The landlord included an invalid link to the stage 2 escalation request form in its stage 1 response. This link allowed the resident to submit her escalation request but, because it was invalid, the request never reached the landlord. This resulted in the complaint being delayed considerably.
The complaint was then further delayed significantly when the landlord did not follow this Service’s request to respond to the resident in April 2023.
For the significant delays in all stages of its complaint handling, and its inadequate responses, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there has been maladministration with the landlord’s handling of:
1. Repair works, including the resident’s concerns about scaffolding and damage to paving slabs.
2. The resident’s complaint.

Orders

It is ordered that, within 6 weeks, the landlord replaces the broken paving slabs, if it has not done so by the date of this report.
It is ordered that, within 4 weeks, the landlord provides the resident with an apology written by a senior member of staff.
It is ordered that, within 4 weeks, the landlord provides the resident with a payment of £700. This comprises:
1. £600 for the repair delays.
2. £100 for the complaint handling failures.