Torus62 Limited (202224234)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202224234

Torus62 Limited

11 September 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 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:
    1. repairs to the radiators in the property;
    2. repairs to the roof and;
    3. reports of damp and mould.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenantof the landlord of a 2-bedroom house. The resident advised he and his child have health conditions, including breathing conditions affected by damp and mould, compromised immunity requiring consistent heating, and open wounds needing hot water to cleanse.
  2. On 6 November 2022, the resident reported to the landlord that there was a leak from the roof of the property. He stated that there were serious water stains on the ceiling in his front bedrooms. On 15 November 2022, the landlord inspected the roof and found that scaffolding would be needed to carry out remedial works.
  3. On 8 November 2022, the resident reported that 2 radiators in his property were not heating properly. The landlord subsequently raised a repair job for 23 November 2022.
  4. On 13 and 16 November 2022, the resident informed the landlord that the issue with his radiators had got much worse. He explained that all the downstairs radiators were not heating up as well as the main bedroom one. Additionally, he reported that his bed was soaking wet with damp, provided a photograph of damp on the ceiling, and explained that his child had breathing problems. He asked the landlord to come out and fix the radiators sooner. On 17 November 2022, the landlord attended the property and raised a repair for the radiators and heating system to be flushed out.
  5. On 17 November 2022, the resident complained to the landlord at stage 1 of its complaint’s procedure. He said that he was unable to heat his living room and bedroom and that “severe” damp and mould was affecting his and his child’s breathing. He said that the operative had arrived without notice at 8.30pm to fix his radiator but was unable to resolve the issue. He wanted both radiators to be flushed and compensation for the landlord failing to resolve the matter within the agreed timescales. He also said that a 2-month wait to have the roof repair resolved was unacceptable and that he wanted this completed sooner.
  6. On 28 November 2022, the landlord removed and flushed the radiators and heating system and restored the heating. The resident subsequently reported that the issue was still unresolved. Additionally, he asked for an update on the roof repairs and stated that the ceiling was still wet, and that mould continued to grow, while he had a compromised immune system. The landlord responded and stated that, following its inspection of the roof for leaks on 30 November 2022, the scaffolding would be erected on 9 January 2023 and the repair to his roof would be completed the following day.
  7. On 8 December 2022, the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 of its complaints process. It said:
    1. A 20-day priority repair for his radiators was raised on 8 November 2022.
    2. The repair was cancelled on 16 November 2022 following contact from the resident and was escalated to a 48-hour emergency priority repair.
    3. He should have been informed on the day it planned to attend the emergency repair and that the process was not followed in this case.
    4. It was not possible to complete the works as an emergency repair and a new job was raised and attended to on 28 November 2022.
    5. It acknowledged that the living room radiator was still not working properly and stated that a new appointment would be raised to check the system.
    6. A scaffolding request was sent through for the roof repair, but the operative did not follow the correct process, causing a delay.
    7. It did not have the capacity to bring the roof repair forward and this would be attended to on 10 January 2023.
    8. A mould treatment would be applied on 17 January 2023, following the resolution of the leak, to allow the area to dry.
    9. It apologised if the experience fell below the standard expected and said that it would be speaking with the teams concerned.
  8. On 14 and 22 December 2022, the landlord attended the property to inspect the radiators. On both occasions, it was unable to gain access.
  9. In the resident’s final stage complaint escalation request on 29 November and 19 December 2022 he said that “nobody had addressed the ceiling and damp roof issue as of yet”, and that its scaffolders had been sent to the wrong address, while he remained in a damp bedroom with mould that had continued to lose heat due to the issue with the roof for 3 months. On 9 January 2023, the landlord issued its final response. It said that appointments for his radiators were made for 14 and 22 December 2022, and that on both occasions it was unable to access his home. Additionally, it apologised and offered £20 compensation for the inconvenience caused by the radiator repairs not being resolved in full on 28 November 2022, asking him to contact it to arrange the repairs.
  10. The landlord then attended the resident’s roof on 10 January 2023, but it was prevented from carry out repairs to this due to “inclement” weather. It subsequently completed mould/fungi washes at the property on 17 January 2023, but the resident informed it on 20 January 2023 that he had been using a dehumidifier there for this for the past 3 months at his own expense. He additionally liaised from January to March 2023 with it and the local authority, which also contacted the landlord directly, about the lack of adequate heating, hot water, and air quality at the property, as well as the damp and mould problems affecting his health issues as a vulnerable person.
  11. The landlord went on to repair the property’s roof for leaks on 7 February 2023, and it confirmed to the local authority on 3 March 2023 that a surveyor had attended the property and ordered a larger bedroom radiator and a ventilation system for the whole property. It subsequently provided the resident with 2 temporary heaters on 3 March 2023, inspected his living room radiator on 6 March 2023, and completed a further fungi wash and installed the ventilation system at the property on 7 March 2023. The landlord additionally carried out loft insulation and bedroom window works on 13 March 2023, and completed bedroom radiator renewal and replacement works on 14 and 29 March 2023. It then carried out roof, loft space and brickwork repairs on 12 June 2023.
  12. In the resident’s complaint to the Ombudsman, he said that the landlord failed to address, or event mention the roof repair issue in its complaint responses, which led to damp and mould in living spaces that made him anxious for his child’s breathing issues. He also said that he had an independent air quality assessment of his property carried out, which confirmed a serious ventilation issue and inadequate heating, and that he was left struggling financially by trying to heat and use a dehumidifier at the property to control the damp and mould there while waiting for the roof to be fixed. The resident complained that the landlord had instead sent scaffolders to the wrong address and delayed repairs.
  13. The landlord subsequently informed the Ombudsman that it agreed to reimburse the resident £900 for estimated additional heating and dehumidifier costs, which it said were in the process of being paid directly into his bank account. However, he then informed us that he had not received a payment of £950 that it had agreed for this, and that the ventilation system that it had installed at the property had been turned off by its engineer, so that his family was still at risk from the lack of air quality there. The resident therefore sought the agreed payment from the landlord, compensation for his stress and anxiety from its handling of the original repairs, the remedial works, and his complaints, and a formal apology from it.

Assessment and findings

  1. 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 only three principles driving effective dispute resolution:

a.         Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes; 

b.         Put things right, and; 

c.         Learn from outcomes. 

  1. 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’.

Repairs to the radiators in the property

  1. The landlord’s responsive repairs and maintenance policy states that “all repairs are prioritised as either Emergency, by Arrangement or Programmed Repair”. The landlord will make safe emergency repairs within 4 hours and will aim to complete the job within 24 hours. It will aim to complete all routine repairs that can wait without causing major inconvenience by arrangement within 20 calendar days. Residents will be informed of any potential delays and, where appropriate, temporary measures will be put in place to mitigate the situation, such as providing temporary heating.
  2. The policy also states that it recognises that some residents are vulnerable and may require an enhanced repairs service either on a permanent or temporary basis, and that it will work with its contractor to ensure those residents’ needs are known and acted upon.
  3. Following the resident’s initial report on 8 November 2022 that the radiators in his property were not heating, the landlord logged this as a routine repair under its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 20-calendar-day response timescale and arranged for an engineer to attend to the property within 15 days on 23 November 2022. The landlord therefore attempted to deal with this report in accordance with its policy. Although the fact that the resident reported a lack of heating at the property during the winter suggested that it would have been more appropriate to have treated this as an emergency repair, with a 24-hour response timescale.
  4. During the intervening period, the resident reported on 13 and 16 November 2022 that the situation had got worse and informed the landlord that the downstairs and main bedroom radiators were failing to heat. He also mentioned that the bed was soaking wet and that his child had breathing problems and asked the landlord to come out sooner.
  5. The landlord subsequently cancelled the original appointment and arranged for an engineer to attend on 17 November 2022. Although the evidence from the resident showed that this was initially raised with the landlord via email on 13 November 2022, the resident followed this up via telephone on 16 November 2022, where an engineer attended the following day as an emergency priority. Given the resident’s concerns, the landlord acted appropriately in this respect by providing him with an enhanced repairs service for vulnerable residents, and eventually attending within its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 24-hour emergency repair timescale.
  6. However, when the engineer attended, they were unable to fix the issue and a follow-up appointment for a routine repair was raised for 11 days’ time on 28 November 2022. It was unclear why the landlord, having reassessed that an emergency response was required, raised a new job, and altered this to a routine repair with a 20-calendar-day response timescale. Following the visit on 17 November 2022, the resident was entitled to expect that the landlord would re-attend within its 24-hour timescale for an emergency repair. This would have caused distress and frustration to the resident.
  7. Furthermore, the landlord acknowledged in its final response that it had failed to update the resident on the expected timescale for the work. While it was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge this, it failed to provide an explanation or apologise for this failing. This would have caused further frustration to the resident.
  8. Following the completion of the repair job on 28 November 2022, the resident reported that the radiators were still not working properly. The landlord subsequently raised a new routine repair job and attended the property on both 14 and 22 December 2022, where it was unable to access the property. The landlord’s records showed that the appointments were pre-arranged with the resident and that it had made reasonable efforts to obtain access within its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s 20-calendar-day timescale. Although it would have been more appropriate for it to have done so within 24 hours as an emergency.
  9. The landlord acknowledged in its final response on 9 January 2023 that the resident would have expected the radiators to have been working at full capacity following its visit on 28 November 2022. In recognition of this, it offered £20 compensation for not fully resolving the issue at this visit, and it invited him to contact it to arrange the repairs. While it was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge this and offer redress ‘to put things right’ for the resident, this investigation has identified fallings from the landlord that have not been ‘put right’ for the resident for its radiator repair delays.
  10. This was a failure on its part and the resident reported that he struggled financially to continue to pay increased heating costs to try and heat the property because the radiators were not working properly. However, it did not provide him with temporary heaters during the winter until 3 March 2023, despite its responsive repairs and maintenance policy stating that it would put temporary measures in place to mitigate the situation, such as providing temporary heating, which was unreasonable. It also did not re-inspect, renew, and replace the resident’s living room and bedroom radiators until 6, 14 and 29 March 2023, respectively, which was a further inappropriately lengthy delay.
  11. Therefore, the following orders are made below for the landlord to remedy its failings in the resident’s radiator repairs case. It was appropriate for it to have subsequently followed its discretionary compensation policy by offering him compensation for quantifiable financial loss in the form of increased heating bills due to the repairs. However, it is very concerning that the landlord only did so after the resident had completed its complaints procedure and complained to the Ombudsman, and that he reports that he has still not received this, so it has been ordered below to pay him the £970 that it previously offered him if it has not done so already. This is broken down into the £20 awarded in its final response, the £900 that it told us that it had agreed to pay him, and the further £50 he informed us that it had offered him.
  12. The landlord has also been ordered below to pay the resident £100 further compensation for the confusion and frustration caused by the additional failings in its handling of his radiator repairs identified by this report. This is line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, which recommends up to £100 compensation for failures including delays in getting matters resolved, where the landlord has made an offer of compensation that does not quite reflect the detriment to the resident or is not quite proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. It has additionally been ordered below to apologise to him for these and carry out a case review to determine how to prevent them occurring again and recommended below to review its relevant staff and contractor training needs.

Repairs to the roof

  1. The landlord’s responsive repairs and maintenance policy states that it will aim to complete complex programmed repairs, such as structural repairs that may require a higher degree of planning, within 60 days of reporting.
  2. On 6 November 2022, the resident reported water stains on his front bedroom ceiling which he attributed to a possible leak from the roof. The landlord carried out an initial inspection of the roof within a reasonable timescale on 15 November 2022, as this was within 20 calendar days under its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s routine repair timescale and found that scaffolding would be needed to complete remedial works. Its records indicated that the work would originally be due to be completed on 10 January 2023.
  3. However, the records also indicated that this timescale for the works was not conveyed to the resident. This led to him chasing the landlord for an update on at least 13, 16, 17 and 28 November 2022. He subsequently advised the landlord, after it informed him of the repair timescale following its further roof inspection of 30 November 2022, that he felt a wait of 2 months was unacceptable for someone with a compromised immune system.
  4. Although the proposed date for the completion of the roof works was broadly in line with its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s programmed repair timescale of 60 days for such complex structural repairs that may require a higher degree of planning, it ought to have sought to do so sooner in all the circumstances of the resident’s case. This is because there was no evidence that the landlord gave any consideration to the resident’s vulnerabilities, or whether an enhanced repair service may have been appropriate in the circumstances. This was a failure on the part of the landlord.
  5. Moreover, the landlord acknowledged in its stage 1 response that, following its inspection on 15 November 2022, the operative failed to follow the correct process for raising a scaffolding request which caused delays. Although it is unclear the extent of the delay, this would have caused distress and frustration to the resident. This would have been worsened by further delays on 10 January 2023, as the landlord was unable to undertake the work due to adverse weather. The landlord’s records showed that remedial works to the roof were carried out on 7 February 2023, approximately 1 month outside of its original timescale under its responsive repairs and maintenance policy.
  6. In the resident’s final stage complaint escalation request on 29 November and 19 December 2022, he stated that the landlord had failed to address the roofing issue and explained that there had been a loss of heat because of this. The landlord’s final response failed to address the roofing issue at all. Instead, it solely concentrated on the issues with his radiators. This demonstrated that the landlord failed to listen to his concerns or take them seriously, which would have caused significant distress and frustration.
  7. Overall, these roof repair failures from the landlord were therefore not acknowledged by it, and it made no attempt to put them right other than its late completion of the repair. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests compensation of up to £600 should be considered where there have been such failures from the landlord that have adversely affected the resident. In view of this, an order of £300 compensation is made below for it to pay him to remedy the failings in its handling of his roof repairs identified by this investigation. This has taken into account its attempt to comply with its responsive repairs and maintenance policy’s programmed repair timescale, and the adverse weather preventing it from doing so.
  8. The landlord has also been ordered below to apologise to the resident for its failures in repairing his roof and to carry out a case review to determine how to prevent them occurring again and recommended below to review its relevant staff and contractor training needs.

Reports of damp and mould

  1. The landlord’s damp and mould policy states that, to safeguard children and vulnerable adults, it will use agreed procedures to record and refer any tenancy concerns to a specialist officer for follow-up. In addition, the policy states that it will inspect the property to “determine whether there is a sufficient means of ventilation in the property and, if not, take steps to create appropriate arrangements”.
  2. The landlord’s records indicated that the resident first reported damp and mould in his property at on 6 November 2022, following a suspected leak from the roof. The landlord initially inspected the roof and planned for remedial works in a timely manner, as outlined above, and its repair log stated that it would apply mould treatment to the affected areas following the resolution of the leak, to allow the area to dry. Overall, the landlord’s initial response to the resident’s damp and mould report was therefore seemingly reasonable, in line with its responsive repairs and maintenance policy. This is because this could not be addressed until the leak suspected to be causing the problem was resolved, and the affected area dry enough for treatment.
  3. However, the resident raised further concerns from 13 November 2022 onwards about “severe” damp and mould in his bedroom. He reported that his child had health concerns and breathing problems and that, since the mould, their breathing was now affected. At this point, the landlord should have followed its damp and mould policy’s requirements to safeguard children and vulnerable adults, by assessing the risk to the household and referring the concerns to a specialist officer for follow-up. In this case, the landlord failed to do this, which was highly inappropriate.
  4. Further, the resident reported that the landlord was leaving him in a bedroom that was “uninhabitable” and queried why the landlord had not risk-assessed the situation. The landlord failed to respond to these concerns in its formal complaint responses, which was unreasonable given that he had continued to raise them on 16, 17, 28 and 29 November and 19 December 2022, including in his stage 1 and final stage complaints to it.
  5. The landlord’s records showed that it was not until after its final response on 9 January 2023, over 2 months after the resident’s initial report, that it arranged for mould/fungi washes at the property, and it only confirmed to the local authority on 3 March 2023 that it had arranged for a surveyor to attend the property. It subsequently completed a further fungi wash and fitted a whole new ventilation system there on 7 March 2023. Given the resident’s concerns and reported health conditions, it is unclear why efforts were not made earlier by the landlord to survey the property. The landlord’s failure to act in line with its damp and mould policy at the earliest stage would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident.
  6. The Housing Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould is referred to by the landlord’s damp and mould policy and outlines that “landlords should recognise that issues can have an ongoing detrimental impact on the health and well-being of the resident and should therefore be responded to in a timely manner”. The report continues that “landlords should consider appropriate timescales for their responses to reflect the urgency of the case and set these out clearly to manage resident’s expectations”. In this case, the vulnerable resident and his child had been left exposed to damp and mould in his property because of the landlord’s inability to investigate the issue within a reasonable timescale. It is also very concerning that he reports that its engineer turned off the ventilation system that it installed to deal with this.
  7. Overall, the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould was unsatisfactory. The landlord also failed to provide redress to ‘put things right’ for the resident for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings identified in its handling of damp and mould by this report. In view of this, the following orders are made below for it to remedy this.
  8. The landlord has been ordered below to contact the resident to arrange for it to attend the property to inspect and address his concerns about the ventilation system there being turned off by its engineer. It has also been ordered below to pay him £400 additional compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of his reports of damp and mould. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance’s above suggestion of compensation of up to £600 for failures from the landlord that have adversely affected the resident, which it has not acknowledged or attempted to put right. This has taken into account the need to first address the leak at the property, and its subsequent mould and fungi washes and installation of a ventilation system.
  9. The landlord has also been ordered below to apologise to the resident for its failures in handling his damp and mould reports and to carry out a case review to determine how to prevent them occurring again and recommended below to review its relevant staff and contractor training needs.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of repairs to the radiators in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of repairs to the roof.

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Orders and recommendation

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing within 4 weeks for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident the £970 compensation that it previously offered him within 4 weeks if it has not done so already.
    3. Pay the resident £800 additional compensation in total within 4 weeks, comprised of:
      1. £100 further compensation for the confusion and frustration caused by the landlord’s handling of repairs to the radiators in the property.
      2. £300 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of repairs to the roof.
      3. £400 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould.
    4. Contact the resident within 4 weeks to arrange for it to attend the property to inspect and address his concerns about the ventilation system there being turned off by its engineer.
    5. Carry out a case review of the failings identified in this report, to determine what action has been/will be taken to prevent a recurrence of these. The landlord should write to the resident and to the Ombudsman with the outcome of this review within 6 weeks.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord review its staff and contractors’ training needs regarding their implementation of its responsive repairs and maintenance and damp and mould policies, in order to ensure that its failings in the resident’s case do not occur again in the future.
  3. The landlord shall contact the Ombudsman within 4 and 6 weeks to confirm that it has complied with the above orders, and whether it will follow the above recommendation.