The Riverside Group Limited (202204382)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202204382

The Riverside Group Limited

15 February 2023


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 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 leak at the property.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord and the property type is a flat. The complaint relates to a leak emanating from the roof of the building, causing water ingress to the property. The landlord has acknowledged its repair obligations towards the property area, including its responsibility to repair and maintain the roof area.
  2. There is evidence of historical leaks reported by the resident in both 2017 and 2018. In September 2020 she also reported a leak to the property which had resulted in water ingress and damage to her personal belongings. The landlord attended the property, unblocked guttering and carried out repairs to both the downpipe and the leadwork surrounding the chimney on the roof throughout November 2020. Compensation in the sum of £400 was given to the resident due to the damage to the resident’s personal possessions.
  3. The resident reported a further leak to the property on the 29 October 2021. The landlord attended the property on the 2 November 2021 to inspect the roof and guttering of the property, where it identified and cleared the gutters, but found no defects that might cause water entry. It contacted the resident throughout November 2021 and she confirmed that no further leaks had occurred.
  4. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord for damaged personal belongings and possessions following her October 2021 report of the leak, believing the landlord to have been at fault due to it not clearing and maintaining the gutters external to the property. The landlord’s final response of 13 December 2021 concluded that the leaks from November 2020 and October 2021 were not related and it was therefore not liable for any damaged possessions resulting from the latter occurrence. It advised that the resident could make a claim through her own contents insurance.
  5. The resident remained dissatisfied with the outcome and brought her complaint to the Ombudsman on 5 July 2022. She raised concerns that the property would leak further due to blocked gutters, stating that claiming off her own home and contents insurance was unfair as she believed the landlord to be liable for her damaged possessions.  The resident has expressed that she wished for her damaged items to be replaced, would like the gutters to be routinely maintained on an annual basis, and requested compensated for the distress and inconvenience she had experienced.
  6. In more recent reports to the Ombudsman, the resident has confirmed that she has experienced a further leak at the property, with the landlord confirming that this was a new issue, albeit one that again required the guttering to be unblocked. The resident has confirmed that she has raised a new complaint with her landlord regarding this recent leak, including her concerns that the issue is linked to the previous occasions when she has experienced leaks at the property.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident reported historical leaks at the property in 2017, 2018 and a reported leak in September 2020. The landlord’s actions in relation to these historical events are not the focus of this investigation, which relates to issues focused around the reported leak in October 2021. Therefore, any reference to these historical issues is only included in this investigation for contextual purposes.  This is in accordance with the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, which states we are only able to consider complaints brought to us within 12 months of a landlord’s concluding/final response. Although it is recognised that the historical factors are of significance in terms of the overall stress and inconvenience experienced by the resident, the role of the Ombudsman is to assess how the landlord responded to the reports of a leak and, in this instance, how it handled the subsequent complaint. 
  2. Similarly, the more recent leak that has occurred is also outside the scope of this investigation as it is not an issue that progressed through the landlord complaint process under investigation. It is noted that the resident has raised this new issue with the landlord as a new complaint and she will have the option of progressing this new complaint to this Service should she remain dissatisfied at the completion of the landlord’s complaints process.
  3. Whilst this investigation will not make specific findings about the historic leaks (those occurring prior to the complaint under investigation), nor the recent leak (which occurred following the complaint under investigation), they remain relevant to the Ombudsman’s understanding of how the landlord responded to the leak that was considered by the landlord’s complaints process. The Ombudsman expects a landlord to take into account relevant considerations when responding to complaints, including historical context; it is also expected that a landlord will follow through on agreements made during a complaints process.
  4. The resident sought reimbursement for her damaged possessions following the reported leak on 29 October 2021. This is outside the scope of this investigation, because the Ombudsman cannot investigate complaints concerning matters where the resident is seeking an outcome that is not within our authority to provide. As we do not have the authority to determine liability or award damages for damaged possessions in the way that a court or insurer might, we are unable to consider the landlord’s liability for any damaged goods. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident, and any subsequent failings in the landlord’s action, which may lead to an offer of appropriate redress. 

Relevant policies

  1. In accordance with the resident’s tenancy agreement, and the landlord’s obligations under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord is responsible for repairing and maintaining the drains, gutters, and rainwater pipes external to the property, as well as keeping in good repair the roof of the building.
  2. The landlord’s compensation guide for tenants confirms its process for potential claims against it for damage to personal property. This confirms that, in cases where the tenant disputes a landlord decision to refuse their request for compensation for damaged items, then it should proceed down its Third Party Property Damage (TPPD) claims process. This involves firstly identifying whether the tenant is part of its contents insurance scheme. If not, then the TPPD framework requires it to send a letter which provides details of its contents insurance process, outlines how to claim on the tenants own contents insurance (if applicable) and confirms that further guidance notes will be sent if the tenant still wishes to pursue a claim, with a form to be returned and sent. This will then enable the landlord to make a decision, based upon the information provided.

Landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak and resulting damages to personal possessions

  1. In accordance with the resident’s tenancy agreement and responsive repairs policy, the landlord is responsible for repairing the drains and guttering to the property. it was therefore appropriate, following the residents reports of a leak to the property on 29 October 2021, that it attended the property as an urgent appointment on 2 November 2021. It attended in order to assess the roof and identified a blocked gutter, which it unblocked at the time; it found no further defects present during its inspection.
  2. Having unblocked the gutters, it then followed up with the resident throughout November 2021 to ensure that no further issues had ensued. In addition, the landlord requested to inspect the resident’s loft space on 3 November 2021, although it is noted this was declined by the resident at the time, as she raised concerns that the reported leak in October 2020 and September 2021 were related.
  3. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a leak in October 2021 were reasonable and appropriate, when looking at in isolation. It attended promptly, inspected the issue, took appropriate remedial action and then took steps to ensure that no further issues had taken place. It also looked to carry out a further inspection but was unable to do so.
  4. The landlord relayed its findings to the resident in its stage one response on 3 December 2021, concluding that as repairs it had carried out in September 2020 were to the roof and that the leak in October 2021 was caused by a blocked gutter, the repairs were not linked and it was therefore not liable for any damages to personal possessions. Although the Ombudsman is unable to make any assessment on the landlord’s liability in such cases, we would expect a landlord to clarify its position and offer options moving forward, such as referral to the appropriate body/insurance where the resident could claim for damaged belongings.
  5. The landlord had found no service failure or defects during its inspection and therefore concluded that it would not offer compensation for the resident’s damaged items. It is noted however that the landlord’s compensation guide requires it to follow a specific process in cases where the tenant disputes the landlord’s position that it is not responsible for damage to personal possessions. There is no evidence that the landlord followed its TPPD framework in this instance as it restricted its response to confirming that it did not consider itself to be at fault, and it did not comply with the guidance notes/forms as required by the framework.
  6. The landlord’s failure to progress the case down the TPPD framework means that the resident may have missed the opportunity to progress a claim against the landlord in respect of possessions she said were damaged during the leak in 2021. The Ombudsman is unable to reach a definitive decision as to whether the landlord was in fact liable, as such an outcome is not within the authority of this Service, however, the landlord’s failure has been noted and the compensation order included below includes an amount to reflect this.
  7. In addition, recommendations have also been included for the landlord to review the case and consider whether staff training is required for those that would need to progress down its TPPD framework, and to confirm to the resident what her options are for progressing her request for reimbursement for damaged items.
  8. Whilst the landlord’s response to the 2021 leak presents as reasonable, when considered as a standalone issue, it is of significant concern that this leak was just one of a series of at least five leaks that have occurred between 2017 and the date of this report. The landlord has reached a conclusion that the October 2021 leak was not the same issue as that it had resolved previously, referring to repairs it completed to the roof in 2020, whilst unblocking the gutters resolved the 2021 issue. Whilst the evidence indicates that the landlord response was not identical on each occasion, it was required to unblock the guttering each time. The resident has also provided a recent landlord email (3 October 2022) that refers to the new leak issue also requiring unblocking of the gutters.
  9. It is not known whether the area of the guttering that has become blocked is the same area on each occasion, however, the fact that guttering has required unblocking on three separate occasions, at yearly intervals, is indicative of a recurring pattern. The landlord’s position, as outlined in its final response, that the reported leak of 2021 was a different one to that previously reported, is therefore called into question as the evidence indicates that each leak has required similar (if not identical) resolution action.
  10. The Ombudsman is unable to conclude definitively what caused the leak in 2021, or the other reported leaks, as this Service does not have the authority or expertise to make such a finding. However, the evidence provided clearly confirms a pattern with the leaks in terms of the consistent resolution action required. As such, an order has been included below for the landlord to complete a further inspection to ensure no structural issues, including to the loft space if deemed necessary, and report back to the resident (and this Service) whether the leaks that have taken place within the property have required unblocking to the guttering in the same area. If so, the landlord is to confirm what it will do in order to fully resolve this issue so that no further leaks occur.
  11. In its communications to the Ombudsman, the landlord has confirmed that it does not have a cyclical maintenance programme for the roof at the property. This indicates that the only option for the resident is to report issues as they arise. Given the history of the case, with blocked gutters seemingly a recurring theme, the landlord’s lack of a regular maintenance programme brings into question whether they are adhering to their repair responsibilities at the property, which includes maintenance responsibility for the structure and exterior of the building.
  12. Given all the service failures identified here, including the failure to progress down its TPPD framework, the recurrence of blocked gutters and the acknowledged lack of a regular maintenance regime, an overall determination of maladministration has been identified here. Compensation reflecting these failures has been calculated in accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for cases involving maladministration with no permanent impact upon the household, together with the additional orders and recommendations outlined above.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration with respect to the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about a leak at the property.

Orders and Recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord to pay the resident compensation of £500 for the service failures identified. This amount to be paid directly to the resident.
  2. The landlord to inspect the property, including an inspection of the loft space if considered appropriate, to determine whether any structural issues present which are contributing to the recurrent leaks within the property. This inspection to also assess the guttering.
  3. Following the inspection, the landlord to write to the resident (and this Service) confirming whether the same area of guttering at the property has contributed to each of the leaks that have occurred at the property in 2020, 2021 and 2022 and, if so, to take appropriate next steps, including confirming to the resident what it intends to do to resolve the issue so that no further leak’s occur.
  4. The above orders to be completed within 28 days of this report, with evidence of compliance to be provided to this Service by the same date.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord to review this case and consider whether staff training is required in relation to its own TPPD framework.
  2. The landlord to confirm to the resident her options for progressing a request for compensation for items damaged following the 2021 leak.