Walsall Housing Group Limited (202233755)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202233755

Walsall Housing Group Limited

24 March 2025

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 handling of:
1. Repairs to the resident’s roof.
2. The associated complaint including the offer of compensation.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. She moved into the property, a 3-bedroom house, in September 2006. The resident has disclosed medical conditions affecting her mobility, which the landlord is aware of.
On 16 January 2023 the resident told the landlord that there was a leak from her roof into her bedroom. The landlord made an appointment for 17 January 2023 but due to issues with the landlord’s computer system the appointment did not go ahead.
The resident made a complaint on 17 January 2023 as she had waited in for the appointment and it had not gone ahead. She said she had health conditions and disabilities which affected her sleep, and it had been hard for her to be awake for the appointment which the landlord did not attend. She said the issue with the roof had been ongoing for 2 years and had affected her financially, as well as affecting her physical and mental health.
She followed this up with another email on 18 January 2023 and said:
1. She had her upstairs ceilings reboarded and replastered the previous year due to leaks from the roof.
2. The ceilings were now bowing in the same place.
3. Her carpets were still damaged from the previous year and were being further damaged by this leak.
4. She had lost furniture and carpeting because of the previous leak and did not want to experience this again.
Internal records show that a contractor attended on 18 January 2023 and noted that a surveyor was needed as the resident was not happy with them completing patch repairs.
The landlord completed a stock condition survey on 3 February 2023 which found that:
1. The chimney and roof needed replacing.
2. The front door had not been installed property and needed adjusting.
3. The landing light fitting had exposed wires.
On 1 March 2023, after an update request from the resident, the landlord told her that it was waiting for scaffolding to be delivered so that it could complete repairs. She raised another complaint on 29 March 2023, and internal records say that the landlord told her it would raise an “investigation”. She contacted us for advice on 2 May 2023, and on 10 May 2023 the landlord formally acknowledged her complaint. It gave a timescale of 10 working days for a response however on 24 May 2023 it requested an extension of 10 additional working days.
The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 8 June 2023 and apologised for the delays. It confirmed appointment dates for all outstanding repairs, which included the roof, an internal stop-tap, and adjustment of the front door. It agreed to compensate the resident for water staining on her ceiling but encouraged her to take out contents’ insurance for the future. It awarded £200 compensation as “full and final settlement” of her complaint, made up of:
1. £50 for failure to appoint contractors in a timely manner.
2. £50 to cover the cost of decorating the bedroom ceilings.
3. £50 for poor communication throughout.
4. £50 for failing to escalate her concerns to the formal complaint procedure.
It completed patch repairs to the roof on 6 June 2023 and internal notes show that contractors attended on 15 June 2023 to inspect it further. The inspection found that the roof needed to be replaced as its construction was not fit for purpose. The roof was replaced on 31 July 2023 and the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 23 August 2023 as she was unhappy with the level of compensation offered at stage 1.
The landlord issued its final complaint response on 13 September 2023. It confirmed that it would reboard and replaster the ceilings upstairs which were affected by water damage. It offered an additional £75 compensation, made up of £50 for additional inconvenience experienced while the roof was being replaced, and £25 towards costs of redecorating the bedroom. The replastering was completed on 24 October 2023.
The resident remains unhappy with the landlord’s handling of repairs to her roof, and the level of compensation offered during the complaint process.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident has informed us that her hardwood floors were damaged because of contractors mixing plaster without appropriate floor coverings. She also reported that other furniture and carpets were damaged, and she has not been able to replace them. This is not within the scope of this investigation as she did not make a separate complaint regarding the damage, and we can only investigate issues which have completed the landlord’s internal complaints process.
She has also informed us that the leak has been reoccurring since 2019, and that for an 8-month period in 2021 she was unable to use the upstairs rooms. We empathise with the resident and the distress she has experienced because of the roof leaks. However, in accordance with the Housing Ombudsman Scheme we can only consider issues which took place within the previous 12 months of the complaint being made

Roof repairs

The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will attend:
1. Emergency repairs within 24 hours.
2. Urgent repairs within 3 working days.
3. Routine repairs within 45 days.
Repair records show that the original report of the roof leaking was categorised as a routine repair even though the notes confirm that the leak was affecting the bedroom. This should have been an urgent appointment to look at temporary repairs as a minimum, as the resident had made it clear that it was affecting the ceiling.
The landlord’s records for the resident state that she does not have any vulnerabilities or medical conditions. There is evidence that the resident informed the landlord when she first reported the leak that she had chronic health conditions which she felt were debilitating. In almost all subsequent contact that we have seen, the resident referenced her health conditions and the impact she felt the repair delays were having on her. Earlier records also show that the landlord installed additional pipework in the kitchen so the resident could install a dishwasher, and this was logged as being agreed due to her health conditions.
There is no evidence that the landlord considered the resident’s health conditions at any point during the period we investigated. We expect landlords to take a resident focused approach and consider the vulnerabilities of a household when communicating with the resident or responding to service requests.
When she originally raised the repair, the landlord asked why she had not reported the leak sooner. However, it had already attended to repair a leak in the same place the previous year and there was still residual water damage to the ceiling. This could have made it difficult for the resident to determine that this was a separate leak.
The resident was provided with the details of the landlord’s insurer if she wished to make a claim for her belongings, which was reasonable. Its decision to make good the plaster, board the ceiling and provide a contribution towards decoration was positive as the leak was not the fault of the resident.
Once it was determined that the roof needed to be replaced it was done in 32 working days. This falls within the expected timescale for a routine repair and was reasonable given the scale of the work. The landlord also completed additional patch repairs on 23 June 2023 to minimise any damage in the interim.
The landlord offered £225 compensation for its handling of repairs which included £75 towards redecoration of the ceilings. This is consistent with the landlord’s compensation policy which awards up to £250 for moderate failures in service. It is not clear whether the resident accepted this compensation so an order will be made to ensure this is paid to the resident.
There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the roof repairs. It did not consider the resident’s vulnerabilities and the cumulative impact of the roof issues considering issues had been ongoing for several years. There were 122 working days between the stock condition survey finding that the roof needed to be replaced, and the date of replacement. There was a leak throughout this period, and although the landlord did complete some temporary repairs this delay added to the inconvenience to the resident.

Handling of complaint and level of compensation

The landlord has a 2-stage complaints policy. It promises to respond within 10 working days at stage 1, and 20 working days at stage 2. The policy states that if residents are unhappy with something the landlord has done it could be logged as an escalated service request instead of a complaint. However, this would always be agreed with the resident who would be given both options and be encouraged to make an informed decision.
The resident made her original complaint on 17 January 2023 using the landlord’s online system. When she complained again on 1 March 2023, the landlord did not respond until 29 March 2023 when it told her it would log an escalated service request as one had not been raised. This implied that the escalated service request was the first part of the complaints process, not an alternative. There is no evidence that the landlord explained the difference to the resident, or that she was given the choice.
The compensation policy states that it can award compensation for distress and inconvenience up to £50 for minor failures, £50-£250 for moderate failures and £250-£500 for major failures. The landlord did apologise for not raising the complaint correctly and provided £50 compensation. However, this came 98 working days after she originally made her complaint.
The landlord’s use of the phrase “full and final settlement” when offering compensation at stage 1 was not appropriate. This term is more commonly used in a legal setting and may have given the resident the impression that accepting the compensation meant she could not proceed with her complaint any further. A recommendation will be made at the end of this report for this phrasing to either be removed from the complaint and compensation wording or for a clarification note to be added.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling and associated compensation. The compensation offered for complaint handling throughout the internal complaints process was not proportionate to the level of inconvenience experienced by the resident. She tried to make a complaint 3 times over several months, and it was only correctly logged after she contacted the Ombudsman. It did not explain the difference between an escalated service request and a complaint, so the resident did not have the opportunity to make an informed decision on what she wanted to raise. It also failed to consider the resident’s disclosed vulnerabilities and whether this may have increased the level of distress and inconvenience she experienced during the process.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of roof repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling and associated offer of compensation.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report relating to the landlord’s complaint handling.
2. Pay the resident £425 made up of:
  1. £225 as offered during the complaints process for time, trouble, distress and inconvenience in relation to the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s roof. If this has already been paid, proof should be provided to the Ombudsman.
  2. £200 for time, trouble, distress and inconvenience in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling and offer of compensation. If the £50 offered during the complaints process has already been paid, this can be deducted.
3. Contact the resident to gain more information about her health conditions and determine whether any service adjustments or reasonable adjustments are appropriate. It must update its systems with this information and provide a copy of the records to us as evidence of compliance.

Recommendations

The landlord should ensure that it either:
1. Removes any reference to “full and final settlement” in its compensation documents.
2. Alternatively, it should add a qualifying statement to explain that accepting any compensation does not prevent residents escalating their complaint.