Town and Country Housing (202226449)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202226449

Town and Country Housing

4 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of leaks, damp and mould.

Background

  1. The resident was an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association, between March 2011 and June 2023. The property was a 4 bedroom house and the resident lived there with her children.
  2. In January 2022, the landlord raised a works order to replace fascia’s and clear guttering, which was later cancelled. In August 2022, the landlord raised a works order to provide scaffolding for roof works to be carried out, which was recorded as completed.
  3. On 21 September 2022, the resident made a complaint to the landlord. She said she had been waiting 2 years for the roof and guttering to be repaired. She had leaks coming in to the property and tiles were falling off the roof. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 5 October 2022 and said it upheld the complaint because the service the resident had received had fallen short. It apologised and arranged to inspect the property on 11 October 2022. It would also arrange for scaffolding to be put up within the next month to inspect the gutters and the roof.
  4. The landlord raised a works order on 17 October 2022 for works to be completed following an inspection of the property. It arranged to attend on 17 November 2022 to complete these, but this did not go ahead. The resident asked to escalate her complaint the same day. She said the appointment that day had been cancelled and she had not heard anything from the scaffolders about the roof repairs.
  5. In November 2022 the resident reported that a roof leak had caused a ceiling to collapse. The landlord raised a works order to investigate this and said works were completed on 19 December 2022. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 21 December 2022 and said it upheld the complaint because it had not responded quickly enough to the resident’s reports about roof leaks, damaged guttering and damp and mould. It apologised and offered her £700 compensation.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint to this Service in January 2023. She confirmed the leak had stopped but had caused damage to the ceiling and damp and mould, which had caused her and her children to be ill. The landlord had said it would fix the damage, but not told her when this would happen.
  7. In March 2023, the landlord cleared blocked gutters and completed some making good works to the damaged ceiling. It noted that it could not replaster the area due to a new leak and follow on works were required. These were still outstanding when the resident moved out of the property in June 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has reported that the roof leaks were ongoing for several years. Complaints should be brought to the attention of the landlord within a reasonable time of the problem occurring, usually within 12 months. This is so that the landlord has an opportunity to resolve the issues while they are still ‘live’ and the evidence is available to properly investigate them (reflected at paragraph 42.c of the Scheme).
  2. In this case, the resident raised her formal complaint in September 2022. Therefore, the scope of this investigation has covered events 12 months prior to this. Anything that occurred before September 2021, has been considered for context but not assessed as part of the investigation.
  3. The resident reported a new roof leak in her son’s bedroom in February 2023. As this was 2 months after the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response, it did not have the opportunity to assess its handling of this leak as part of its internal complaints procedure (reflected at paragraph 42.a of the Scheme). Therefore the landlord’s handling of the leak reported in February 2023 falls outside the scope of this investigation.
  4. The resident has told this Service that these matters have negatively affected her and her children’s health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments; however, it is beyond the remit of this Service to make a determination on whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions and the ill-health of the resident and her children.
  5. The resident may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if she considers that her or her children’s health has been affected by any action or failure by the landlord (reflected at paragraph 42.f of the Scheme). While the Ombudsman cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any service failure by the landlord.

Handling of leaks, damp and mould

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy said that it was responsible for the structure and exterior of the property, which included the roof. The landlord was also responsible for addressing damp and mould in line with section 9(a) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. This says that it has an obligation to ensure the property is fit for human habitation during the term of the tenancy, in relation to freedom from damp.
  2. From the records provided it is not clear what prompted the works orders raised in January and August 2022; however, it is likely this was as a result of reports from the resident. It is also not clear from the records provided what the outcome of these orders were and whether any works were actually carried out, which is a concern. A recommendation has been made below for the landlord to review how it records works orders, including the reason they are raised and the outcome, and provide staff guidance on this.
  3. The landlord inspected the property on 11 October 2022; however, there is no record of this inspection. This is a concern as there was damp and mould in the property but no record that the landlord carried out any assessment of the severity or considered any potential risk to the resident and her children.
  4. It is noted that the landlord has subsequently implemented a damp and mould policy in 2023, which confirms that it will assess the type and severity of damp during initial investigations, which is positive. It is important that these observations are properly recorded and so a recommendation has been made below for the landlord to review how it records inspections and provide staff guidance on this, including the importance of documenting an assessment of damp and mould and any risk.
  5. The landlord raised a works order to make safe a collapsed ceiling in November 2022, however, there is no record that it attended or whether any works were completed. It is not clear if this was because the landlord failed to attend or because it failed to properly record this. Either way, this was a failure by the landlord.
  6. The missing records in this case have presented challenges for the Ombudsman in investigating this complaint as we have been unable to assess whether some of the landlord’s actions were fair and reasonable. It is vitally important that landlord’s keep detailed records of all actions taken in respect of repairs, including inspections and works completed. This allows the landlord to account for its actions and decisions to resident’s and this Service, where required.
  7. As part of the stage 1 response, the landlord committed to put up scaffolding within 1 month, to investigate the roof leaks. However, there is no record that it did this until more than 2 months later, on 15 December 2022, and only after the resident had escalated her complaint and a further roof leak had occurred, resulting in a ceiling collapsing. This left the resident feeling that the landlord was not taking the matter seriously.
  8. The landlord said that the roof repairs were completed on 19 December 2022. From the records provided, it is unclear how long the leak was ongoing prior to this. While the landlord raised an order to put up scaffolding in August 2022, there is no record any works were carried out at that time and the resident reported that the leak was ongoing for many years. It is unclear the extent of the delay; however, it is evident that the leak went on for an extended period and by the landlord’s own admission, it did not respond quickly enough to the resident’s reports of leaks.
  9. It is not clear why an appointment on 17 November 2022 did not go ahead. This was understandably frustrating for the resident, but in some circumstances cancellations are unavoidable,. As there is no record of the reason for the cancellation, the Ombudsman is unable to assess whether there was any failure by the landlord in respect of this. Where appointments are cancelled, landlord’s should clearly document the reasons for this and explain this to the resident. That did not happen in this case and this left the resident feeling let down by the landlord.
  10. The works order raised on 17 October 2022, included a mould wash. The landlord’s repairs policy at the time said that non-urgent repairs would be completed within 28 calendar days. It was reasonable that the landlord treated this job as non-urgent as the mould wash was to a small area around a window in the hallway. This was completed on 23 November 2022, which was 24 working days later, and so in line with the committed timescale set out in its repairs policy.
  11. The landlord was aware there was damp and mould in the property caused by the leaks and in December 2022, it asked the resident for details of this to consider as part of the complaint investigation. The resident provided information to the landlord, including pictures and told it that the damp and mould had negatively affected her health.
  12. The landlord considered this as part of its assessment of the complaint and used this to inform its decision in respect of compensation. This showed that it took the impact on the resident seriously; however, there is no evidence that the landlord took any action to treat the damp and mould, for example, arranging a mould wash or providing dehumidifiers. This would have been appropriate in order to improve the living conditions for the resident and her family.
  13. The landlord first raised a works orders for blocked gutters in January 2022; however, this was cancelled. There is no record that it did anything to address this issue until a year later when a further works order was raised on 30 January 2023. It then completed the works on 9 March 2023, which was 14 months after it first identified this issue. This was a significant delay.
  14. After the stage 2 complaint response was issued in December 2022, the resident had to chase the landlord on at least one occasion for further works to be completed to make good the damage caused by the leak. It was only after this that the landlord raised a works order, on 6 January 2023.
  15. The landlord identified what works were required later that month and while some were completed in March 2023, it was unable to complete these in full due to another leak that had started. The landlord’s handling of this leak falls outside the scope of this investigation for reasons set out in paragraph 11. However, it is a concern that a further leak occurred so soon after works were completed in December 2022 and raises questions about how thoroughly the roof was inspected.
  16. The resident moved out of the property before the works to repair the damage from the leak were fully completed. While the exact period of delay is unclear, the evidence indicates that this issue was happening from at least January 2022 and had while the leak was resolved in December 2022, the making good works not been fully completed when the resident moved out of the property 17 months later. This was disappointing for her and caused her to lose faith in the landlord.
  17. The landlord has acknowledged there were failures in its handling of this matter. It has apologised and offered compensation, which is in line with the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles to put things right and learn from outcomes.
  18. As part of its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord offered the resident £700 compensation. Considering the full circumstances of the case, this was reasonable and in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance. Therefore, the landlord has offered reasonable redress to the resident for its handling of leaks, damp and mould. A recommendation has been made below for the landlord to pay the resident the £700 compensation already offered, if not done so already. The reasonable redress finding is made on the basis of this sum being paid to the resident, as it recognised genuine elements of service failure by the landlord.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint about its handling of leaks, damp and mould.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord to review how it records works orders, including the reason they are raised and the outcome, and provide guidance on this to all staff responsible for raising works orders.
  2. The landlord to review how it records inspections and provide staff guidance on this including the importance of documenting an assessment of damp and mould and any risk.
  3. Pay the resident the £700 compensation already offered for its handling of leaks, damp and mould, if not done so already. The reasonable redress finding is made on the basis of this sum being paid to the resident, as it recognised genuine elements of service failure by the landlord.
  4. The landlord to update this Service on its intentions regarding the above recommendations within 4 weeks.