Sovereign Network Homes (Former Network Homes) (202306041)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202306041

Sovereign Network Homes (Former Network Homes)

25 November 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 response to the resident’s reports of long-standing issues with his adapted shower room, and subsequent compensation offered.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The landlord is a housing association. The property is a 3-bedroom house. The house has an upstairs adapted shower room and an additional downstairs toilet. The resident lives with his 2 children.
There are multiple resident vulnerabilities noted on file as the resident has a history of poor physical and mental health.
The resident’s bathroom was adapted in 2016. Further to this, the resident reported multiple leaks and flooding from the shower in the bathroom. He reported that the shower was leaking and going through the downstairs ceiling into the electrics and that he had been electrocuted whilst using the shower. He also reported that he could not use the adapted toilet as it was positioned too high up for his needs.
The landlord attended on multiple occasions from 2016 until 2018. It made safe the electrics and noted that the shower needed new bi-fold doors to resolve the leaks. It also noted that the bathroom floor had a “slight dip.”
On 22 June 2021, the resident reported a further leak from the shower room. He reported that the water was leaking through to the ceiling below and affecting the electrics. The landlord’s contractor attended and made safe the electrics. It noted it could see no leaks or blockages.
The resident reported further leaks from his shower room into the ceiling below on 20 September 2021. The landlord’s contractor noted that the floor in the shower room was falling the wrong way, causing excess water to escape through the shower doors and damaging the ceiling underneath. It noted that the floor had to come up and the tray and waste needed to be dropped so that any water in the room would fall correctly into the waste. He reported further leaks from the shower on 4 occasions between 12 September 2021 and 2 November 2021.
On 11 November 2021, the resident engaged a solicitor, who sent the landlord a pre action protocol letter of claim. The solicitor appointed a surveyor who noted that the wet room had drainage issues, the toilet was leaking and the ceiling below it was damaged by the leak.
The landlord’s surveyor inspected the property on 30 November 2021. It noted the following:
1. The dining room ceiling was damaged by previous leaks.
2. The shower room floor level was showing a “very slight fall towards the doorway.” It also noted a slight fall of level into the shower area and a significant fall where the floor/shower doors met the wet room shower tray. The shower drained away, but the issue was the retro fitted shower doors and water escaping via the threshold doors or over it.
3. There were issues with the fitting of the stack pipe, which may have caused blockages to the toilet.
On 7 December 2021, an occupational therapist (OT) sent a report to the landlord, asking it to resolve the repair issues with the leaking shower and replace the toilet with a standard height toilet.
The resident reported another severe leak, going into the electrics on 23 June 2022, which the landlord attended to on the same day to make safe.
The resident submitted a stage 1 complaint to the landlord on 23 June 2022. He said the following:
1. His shower had been leaking since 2016. It leaked again that day into the electric lights and smoke detector below and he was electrocuted again. This was the fifth time he had been electrocuted since 2016. The fire brigade and ambulance had attended that day.
2. This was having a severe and enduring impact on his physical and mental health and was dangerous and unsafe.
3. The upstairs toilet was too high for him to sit on, and he had to sleep downstairs, as he was using the downstairs toilet only.
4. He wanted compensation for six and a half years of not being able to use the shower without the risk of harm, injury, or death.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 12 July 2022. It said the following:
1. It believed the resident had an active legal disrepair claim and recommended he contact his solicitor.
2. It was unable to find any records of the resident reporting previous electric shocks.
3. It took the incident of 23 June 2022 very seriously and took prompt action once the resident reported this.
4. Its head of repairs had met with the resident to discuss alternative arrangements whilst the resident’s shower was out of action. This included access to an empty sheltered housing scheme flat and agreeing to reimburse the resident for using the local leisure centre’s facilities.
5. As a long-term solution, it was willing to review installing a ground floor wet room but needed an OT assessment and recommendation to progress with this. It would also need Disability Funding Grant (DFG). approval. It had already been in contact with the local council to start the grant application process.
6. In the meantime, it intended to carry out the repairs identified in the disrepair claim and its own survey. It would reposition the toilet and lay new flooring to address the fall of water.
An OT submitted a further report and recommendations to the landlord on 2 August 2022. It noted that no works had been done since the previous OT report of December 2021. It requested that the shower room be converted back to a family bathroom, and the downstairs toilet be converted into a level access shower. This report was presented to the council’s professional adaptations team on 18 August 2022, who declined the request for a DFG, as it stated this was disrepair and not an aid and adaptation. The council noted that it was concerned for the safety of the resident’s household due to water damaging the bathroom ceiling and being close to electrics. It asked for the landlord to respond urgently and to conduct a fire safety check.
The landlord arranged bathroom works for 12 September 2022, and expected the repair to take 7 days, finishing on 20 September 2022.
The resident submitted a stage 2 complaint on 15 September 2022. He said the following:
1. There had been some progress on the bathroom since the landlord’s stage 1 response.
2. He did not feel the landlord had fully dealt with the complaint as he had issues with his bathroom from 2016 to 2022. He had “torrential leaks” from the shower. He also had to use the downstairs toilet so had to sleep downstairs.
3. He had been kept under threat of harm, injury, and death from 2016 to 2022. His mental health had suffered, and he was on “suicide watch.”
4. He wanted financial compensation for the distress and adverse effect.
The bathroom works were completed on 3 October 2022.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 24 October 2022. It said the following:
1. It apologised that the resident’s expectations had not been managed when raising his complaint. Its complaints policy covered issues raised within 6 months of occurrence or within a reasonable time. This was in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance at the time.
2. There was no evidence that there was a constant threat of harm, injury, or death during the period in question.
3. Since the resident had a disrepair claim from November 2021, it could not consider a request for compensation as it was being considered under the disrepair claim.
On 5 December 2022, the landlord and the resident’s solicitor signed a memorandum of agreement as an out of court settlement. The landlord admitted no liability and agreed to pay the resident £1000 damages and £1000 for legal costs.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 2 March 2023. He confirmed he was no longer pursuing a legal disrepair case and had no plans to do so. He once again asked for compensation for faulty bathroom facilities from 2016 to 2022. He also wanted compensation for psychological distress as he had been too afraid to use the bathroom until October 2022.
The landlord issued a follow-on stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 5 May 2023. It said the following:
1. The resident’s claim had been resolved between the resident’s solicitors and the landlord’s solicitors and the resident had been awarded £1000 damages and £1000 legal fees cover.
2. It would consider the resident’s complaint under its complaints procedure, on top of the resolved disrepair claim (which settled out of court).
3. It started its calculation from when the resident raised the disrepair claim (18 November 2021) until October 2022. It would have awarded £500 for medium delay, £500 for medium distress and £150 for medium time and trouble. This would have been a total of £1150. As the resident had already received £1000 compensation from the disrepair claim, it would award a further £150 under its compensation policy.

Post Internal Complaints Procedure

The resident approached this Service on 18 May 2023. As an outcome to his complaint, the resident would like increased compensation for the distress and inconvenience, time and trouble and impact on the enjoyment of his home.
As of 12 November 2024, the resident reports that the shower pipes block on a regular basis, causing water to overflow into his shower room. He also states that the replacement toilet is the incorrect size for him to sit on. He advises that he has an OT working with him, who is liaising with the landlord to find a permanent suitable solution for the resident’s bathing and toilet needs. He would like the toilet to be replaced, and for the shower to be converted to a standard bath.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

The resident has stated that the issues with his shower room, date back to 2016. Although we understand the resident’s distress, paragraph 42. c. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, states that this Service can only investigate matters which were brought to the landlord’s attention within 12 months of the matters arising. As such, this investigation will focus on matters from 22 June 2021, 11 months before the resident submitted his stage 1 complaint to the landlord.
The resident has said that the issues with his shower room have caused him to be electrocuted and in danger of serious harm. This Service understands the resident’s distress; however, this is not something the Ombudsman can investigate. This is because paragraph 42. f. of the Scheme states that we will not investigate matters where we consider it fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, other tribunal, or procedure. The resident may wish to seek advice from a legal representative in pursuing a personal injury claim.
The resident has advised that the handling of this matter by the landlord has led to a deterioration in his health. Whilst we empathise, the Ombudsman cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This is outside our jurisdiction, but consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience that may have been caused to the resident by the landlord’s handling of the adapted shower room repairs.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of long-standing issues with his adapted shower room and the subsequent compensation offered

The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will attend to emergency repairs within 4 hours, routine repairs within 5 working days, and complex repairs within 90 days.
It is not appropriate that the landlord did not complete a full repair of the issues with the shower room until 3 October 2022. The resident reported the leak on 22 June 2021. Although it was appropriate that the landlord’s contractor attended to make safe the electrics on 22 June 2021, in line with its policy, there is no evidence on file that it attempted to carry out any further investigations on this occasion to ascertain the cause of the leak. This caused the resident distress and inconvenience and had a significant impact on the enjoyment of his home.
Although the landlord’s contractor noted that the floor fell the wrong way, causing the leaks, on 20 September 2021, and advised that follow up works were needed, it is unclear why these works were not scheduled to take place straight away. This caused the resident further distress and inconvenience and continued to impact on the enjoyment of his home.
Although the Ombudsman understands that complex works take time, had the landlord scheduled the works on this date, the repair could have been completed sooner. The delay had a significant impact on the resident’s enjoyment of his home and caused him further distress and inconvenience which is particularly pertinent, as the landlord’s vulnerable residents policy states that it will accelerate repairs for people with health/vulnerability issues. The landlord did not follow, either its repairs policy or its vulnerable resident’s policy. This was not resident focussed and is a failing on the part of the landlord.

Although, in its communication of 19 October 2021, it was appropriate that the landlord advised that it needed an OT report to change the toilet and bathroom, this was not originally an aid and adaptation, and the Ombudsman would have expected the repair works to be undertaken in a timely manner. The resident told the landlord that the water was “torrential” and sent it video evidence to illustrate this. This is particularly pertinent as the water from the shower had penetrated the downstairs ceiling and the electrics. This caused the resident significant adverse effect in terms of distress and anxiety and the fear of using his shower. The landlord was aware of the resident’s significant mental health issues, and although it did refer the resident to its mental health team, it made no provision to hasten the works. Once again, it did not act within its repairs or vulnerable residents policy and this is a failing.
Although it was appropriate that the landlord visited the resident’s property to carry out a survey on 24 November 2021, this was after it received a pre action protocol letter of claim from the resident’s solicitor in respect of disrepair. This delay caused the resident additional distress and frustration, time, and trouble in pursuing the issue and continued to impact on the enjoyment of his home. The shower continued to leak into the electrics in the downstairs ceiling. The resident was fearful for his safety and that of his children.
The landlord’s internal correspondence of 6 January 2022 shows that it needed permission from the resident’s solicitor to agree and commence works. Although this was reasonable, it took the landlord until 21 April 2022, for the landlord’s solicitors to decide to start the works without the resident’s solicitor’s approval. This delay was not reasonable.
Good record keeping is a prerequisite to providing a good housing management service. The landlord’s notes between its own departments and with its contractors show that it was unclear how to progress the works, due to the pre action disrepair claim. This lack of clear communication further delayed the works and is a failing on the part of the landlord. This continued to cause the resident distress and frustration, time, and trouble in pursuing the issue and continued to impact on the enjoyment of his home.
Although it was appropriate that both an electrician and a plumber attended on 23 June 2022, when the resident reported a severe leak, it was not reasonable that the substantive issue for the cause of the leak had still not been rectified. This was now 1 year after the resident reported the issue in June 2021 and an unreasonable delay. This continued to cause the resident severe distress and impacted on the enjoyment of his home.
Additionally, the resident reported that he had been electrocuted. Although this Service has seen no evidence to either confirm or deny this, the fact remains that the resident was extremely distressed, the ambulance and fire brigade attended, and he continued to genuinely fear for his safety.
Although the landlord offered the resident alternative shower arrangements on 29 June 2022, this was a year after the resident reported issues with his shower. Further, the landlord offered a room in a sheltered scheme and to reimburse costs of bathing at a local leisure centre. Although it went some way to providing an interim solution, this was again 1 year after the resident had first reported the shower issue. This caused the resident additional distress and frustration, and time and trouble in pursuing the issue.
The repairs to the bathroom were not completed until 3 October 2022. This is 16 months after the resident reported the issue, and significantly outside the landlord’s repair time scales. This protracted delay continued to impact on the resident’s enjoyment of his home and caused him distress and inconvenience and time and trouble in pursuing the issue.
Further, the resident advises that the shower room was repaired, and the toilet replaced, but he cannot use the toilet and the shower blocks on a regular basis, as there appears to be an issue with drainage.
The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will pay the following to put things right:
1. Medium impact – £10 per week for delays, £10 per week for distress, and £3 per week for time and trouble (a total of £23 per week).
2. High impact – a serious failure in service standards with severe consequences which took a considerable amount of time and effort to resolve. A major impact on the resident’s lifestyle or enjoyment of their home – £20 per week for delays, £20 per week for distress, and £5 per week for time and trouble (a total of £45 per week).
The landlord offered the resident £150 in addition to the £1000 compensation it had awarded as part of its settlement agreement. This is a total of £1150. It calculated this as being based on ‘medium impact,’ Further, it based its calculations from November 2021, when the resident’s solicitor issued the pre-action protocol, rather than 22 June 2021 when the resident first reported the shower leaking. This compensation was not proportionate to the adverse effect on the resident. The resident was severely impacted by the delays to his shower room repairs. The landlord was aware of the continued issues with the shower leaks and of the resident’s significant vulnerabilities.
Although it was appropriate that the landlord offered compensation, it left the resident and his household without adequate bathing facilities for too long and at risk of further flooding, which severely impacted the enjoyment of his home. Further, this compensation offer was made 7 months after its initial stage 2 complaint response. It was made outside of its published internal complaints procedure, which is not in line with the Code. The resident continued to expend time and trouble in seeking appropriate redress for the distress and inconvenience. As such, a finding of severe maladministration is made, along with orders for redress.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord has a two stage complaints procedure. It will respond to Stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. Its complaints and service recovery policy state that if a resident is pursuing a disrepair claim, it can still consider a complaint about the same topic until the disrepair case is given a court date.
It did not respond to the resident’s stage 1 complaint until 13 working days after it was made, which is outside of its policy and not in line with this Service’s complaint handling code. Although this is a short delay, this caused the resident distress and inconvenience, as he was anxious to have the issues resolved.
The resident’s disrepair case did not go to court, so a court date was never given.
It is not reasonable that in its stage 1 response of 12 July 2022, the landlord advised the resident to contact his solicitor as he had a legal disrepair claim. There was no court date given and the landlord did not act within its own policy. This caused the resident distress and frustration and time and trouble in pursuing the issue. It also impacted on the landlord/resident relationship.
It is further unreasonable that in its stage 2 response of 24 October 2022, that the landlord refused to consider a request for compensation as the issue was being considered under the disrepair claim. There was no court date given, so it would have been reasonable for the landlord to consider this request as part of its stage 2 complaint response.
Although it did consider the request for compensation, in its follow-on complaint response of 2 March 2023, this was 7 months after its stage 2 complaint response. It would have been reasonable to address this in its stage 2 complaint response. This delay caused the resident frustration and time and trouble in pursuing the issue.
Due to the above, a finding of maladministration is made, along with orders for redress.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of long-standing issues with his adapted shower room, and subsequent compensation offered.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report. The apology needs to be from a member of the senior leadership team.
2. Arrange for a suitably qualified person to survey the pipework and drainage under the shower and provide a timeline for repairs if any repairs are identified.
3. Pay the resident £1820 compensation for the distress and inconvenience, and time and trouble in pursuing the shower room issue. This is calculated as follows:
  1. 66 weeks (from 22 June 2021 to 3 October 2022) x £45 (high impact) = £2970.
  2. £2970 less £1150 already paid by the landlord = £1820.
4. Pay the resident £200 for the complaint handling failures identified in this case.
Within 8 weeks, in line with paragraph 54.g of the Scheme, the landlord is ordered to complete a review of the failings identified in this investigation. The Ombudsman orders that a senior manager review the following:
1. The reasons for not following its repairs policy when handling the resident’s reports of faults with his adapted shower room.
2. The reasons for it not following its vulnerable residents policy.
3. The reasons for it not following its complaints policy.
4. Identifying staff training and any identified process changes needed to avoid the same issues reoccurring, when dealing with repair issues, vulnerable residents, and complaints.
The landlord to provide this Service with evidence of compliance with the above orders.

Recommendations

Liaise with the resident’s OT to agree appropriate bathing and toilet options.