Wakefield And District Housing Limited (202118426)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202118426

Wakefield And District Housing Limited

16 January 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a sink    to be installed in the downstairs toilet and a toilet to be installed in the upstairs bathroom.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is the assured tenant of the property owned by the landlord. The                            tenancy commenced on 11 February 2021. The property is a three-bedroom house of Cornish style construction.
  2. The property has a toilet downstairs, which leads into the hallway. There is no sink in the toilet and hand washing needs to be undertaken in the kitchen or in the bathroom upstairs. Upstairs there is a sink and a bath with an overhead shower.
  3. The resident lives at the property with her three young children, all under the age of four.
  4. The property was allocated to the resident after successfully bidding on the property through a choice based letting process and was accepted in the current layout.
  5. The landlord has advised that no information has been provided in relation to any known health conditions for the resident or her children. The resident advised that she was shielding during the pandemic due to being pregnant in 2021.
  6. The landlord has a complaints policy that sets out a formal two-stage process where it is required to respond within 10 working days (at stage one) and 20 working days (at stage two) respectively. If the matter cannot be resolved at stage one the resident can make a request to escalate the matter to stage two. However, the landlord can refuse to escalate the matter if they believe it falls into the one of the following  categories:

‘Section 2.15 

a. the complaint was upheld at Stage 1 and an appropriate and proportionate resolution was offered to the customer.

b. the resolution requested cannot be provided, as it is disproportionate, or   outside of our control to influence or change.

c. a customer’s behaviour is deemed to be unacceptable and they have  refused to engage with us in an acceptable manner during the investigation of their Stage one complaint, or their request to escalate is considered to be a vexatious complaint.’

  1. The landlord has a home improvement procedure which has been used to process the resident’s request to install a sink and toilet in the property. The procedure states that an acknowledgement of the request will be sent within  7 working days of being received and that a full response to the request will be given within 20 working days.
  2. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure outline the landlord’s repairing obligations. This procedure covers the landlord repairing responsibilities to fixtures and fittings that they have installed. It makes reference to its home improvement procedure for alterations and improvements that do not meet the criteria for a request for an adaptation in the property.

Scope of investigation

  1. On 25 February 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to discuss the installation of a sink in the downstairs toilet and a toilet upstairs. The resident advised that the current layout was causing her difficulty in ensuring that her young children were learning to use the toilet properly. She reported that the layout of the property was leading to the children having accidents, causing them distress. The resident also advised that she was concerned about the spread of germs throughout the property. 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.

 

 

Summary of events

  1. On 19 February 2021, the resident made a request to the landlord to seek permission to install a sink in the downstairs toilet and a toilet in the upstairs bathroom of the property. This request was made through the landlord’s home improvement procedure. On the same day the landlord sent a letter to the resident acknowledging receipt of the request and setting out next steps in the process.
  2. The landlord contacted the resident by telephone on the 25 February 2021, to discuss her request. On the same day the landlord wrote to the resident granting permission to carry out the requested works, with some conditions around workmanship attached.
  3. On 4 March 2021, the resident spoke to the landlord via telephone. The resident advised that she had received a quote for the works and could not afford for them to be undertaken. The resident asked the landlord if they would be willing to undertake the works. The landlord declined and advised that works requested were a home improvement and not a responsive repair, so permission had been granted to the resident to undertake these works. 
  4. On the same day, the landlord wrote to the resident and requested a copy of the builders’ scoping document regarding the works. This was requested due to the landlord not undertaking home inspections, as the country was bound by lockdown restrictions due to the pandemic.
  5. On 24 March 2021, the resident spoke to the landlord by telephone. The resident again advised that she believed that landlord should undertake the works requested. The landlord advised the resident that they would not be undertaking the works. It explained that the property was let in a safe and lettable standard and there were currently no plans for home improvement works in the property.
  6. The landlord wrote to the resident on 25 March 2021, to advise that the permission to carry out requested works had been cancelled. It said that this was in light of the resident’s phone call on 24 March 2021, when she stated that she was unable to undertake the works due to the associated cost.
  7. On 1 April 2021, the resident made a stage one complaint to the landlord, requesting that they install a sink in the downstairs toilet and a toilet in the upstairs bathroom.
  8. On 6 April 2021, in a telephone call with the landlord, the resident advised that the property was not ‘ideal’, but that as a homeless applicant she had to accept the property. This was due to the risk of her banding being removed as she had previously refused offers of accommodation. The resident went on to say that the property layout was making daily activities surrounding potty training and building positive toilet habits difficult. She was worried about the spread of germs throughout the home. The resident confirmed to the landlord that there were no medical conditions within the household.
  9. On 14 April 2021, the landlord sent the resident the stage one response outcome by letter. The landlord advised that the complaint had not been upheld due to the following reasons:

a. All properties in the area have the same layout and features;

b. The resident viewed the property and accepted the tenancy with its current layout;

c. Permission had been granted to the resident to undertake the works herself and to meet the costs of these works;

d. The property was in a safe and lettable standard when the tenancy commenced.

  1. On 21 April 2021, the resident made a written request (via email) to the landlord to escalate the matter to stage two of their complaint process. The resident advised of the ongoing impact upon potty training of the children and daily toileting activities.
  2. The landlord recorded the receipt of this request on 23 April 2021. On the same day, the landlord wrote to the resident and advised that the matter had been rejected for escalation to stage two as no valid reason was given to escalate the matter. The landlord advised that this was in line with its policy position and advised that no medical evidence had been provided.
  3. The landlord was contacted by the resident’s MP (representative) on 13 May 2021. The MP asked the landlord to review the matter and requested if a payment plan could be arranged (if the landlord could undertake the works).
  4. The landlord replied to the representative on 18 May 2021 and advised that their position remained unchanged and they were not able to offer payment arrangement plans for home improvement works.
  5. The resident’s representative subsequently wrote to the landlord requesting the matter be further considered due to the age of the children. This letter was undated.
  6. On 4 August 2021, the landlord replied to the resident’s representative and advised that there were approximately 40 properties in the area of the similar lay out and that there were no sinks in the downstairs toilet, unless they had been installed by the resident themselves, at their own expense. The landlord stated that when the property was assessed for home improvements, there was no room in the downstairs toilet to install a sink. However, the landlord went on to say that should a product come to market that would fit in the space, they would reconsider this position. This would be in the form of a planned programme of works for home improvements in this area. The landlord confirmed that no home improvements were planned in this area at the time of the correspondence.

Assessment and findings

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement, at ‘section C 2 Repairs and Maintenance – the right to improve’, sets out the resident’s rights in relation to making improvements to the property. The tenancy is clear that permission must be sought prior to making any improvements and that this includes works to add, change or replace fixtures or fittings. The resident followed this process and made a request to undertake the works.
  2. The landlord managed the resident’s request for the installation of a sink in the downstairs toilet and a toilet upstairs, through their home improvement procedure.  This was the correct process to use. The resident holds a qualifying tenancy and the works requested were ‘to add to or change or replace any fixtures and fittings provided by us’.
  3. The landlord followed its process and provided the resident with permission to carry out the works requested within 20 working days, as outlined in the home improvement procedure. The landlord’s decision was therefore made within the appropriate timescale.
  4. The landlord did not attend the property to assess the viability of the works being requested. The procedure states that a home inspection may be needed. In an email dated 4 March 2021, the landlord advised that it would not be undertaking an inspection due to ongoing restrictions imposed due to the pandemic. The landlord requested a copy of the builders’ scoping report to be shared by the resident, to ensure they were happy with the agreed works. This report has not been provided in evidence and the landlord has confirmed that it did not receive a copy of the document from the resident. The resident has advised this Service that a written report was not provided by the builder that surveyed for the works.  Given the Covid-19 related lockdown restrictions, it was reasonable for the landlord not to attend and seek clarification of works from the resident. This remained in line with the landlord’s procedural position.
  5. The works requested did not fall under the adaptations procedure as the resident did not meet the qualifying criteria set out at section 3 of this procedure. This procedure seeks to ensure that residents can live in their homes as independently as possible, when suffering from a long term physical illness or disability. Given the requested permission did not fall under the adaptations qualifying criteria, it was appropriate that the landlord did not class the request as an adaptation.
  6. The works requested also did not fall under the landlord’s repairing obligations as the works were to install additional fixtures and fittings, rather than repairing and maintaining current appliances. Under the Decent Homes Standard, the lay out of this property is deemed to meet the standard and the landlord was therefore under no obligation to conduct a repair or renewal of any facilities. For a property to fail to meet the standard it must lack three or more modern services and facilities.
  7. In the landlord’s correspondence to the resident’s representative on 4 August 2021 (following the end of the complaints process), the position of the landlord became unclear. In all previous correspondence, the landlord had advised that the works would not be undertaken as they were a home improvement. Furthermore, it noted that many properties in the area had similar layouts. The landlord advised that those who did have a sink in the downstairs toilet had installed it at their own cost.
  8. The landlord went on the state that, after a review of home improvements to the property, there was not enough space in the downstairs toilet to install a basin. It is unclear how the landlord reached this conclusion and a recommendation is therefore made below in this regard.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a sink to be installed in the downstairs toilet and a toilet to be installed in the upstairs bathroom.

Reasons

  1. The landlord managed the resident’s initial request for the installation of a sink in the downstairs toilet and a toilet in the upstairs bathroom through its home improvement procedure. This was the correct procedure to accommodate this request. The resident had a qualifying tenancy and was seeking to add to current fixtures and fittings. The landlord followed this process correctly.
  2. The works requested were not part of the landlord’s repairing obligations and would not fall under its repairs and maintenance procedure, as they are not referring to current fixtures and fittings.
  3. The resident was unable to have this request considered through the landlord’s adaptations procedure as the resident does meet the qualifying criteria for this process.

 

Recommendations

  1. In order to ascertain if there is room in the downstairs toilet for a sink to be installed, the Ombudsman recommends an inspection of the property be undertaken. It should then write to the resident to provide clarity in relation to the prospect of any future planned home improvements as outlined in its correspondence dated 4 August 2021 to her representative.
  2. The landlord should confirm its intentions in regard to this recommendation to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.