Wandle Housing Association Limited (202125432)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202125432

Wandle Housing Association Limited

03 October 2022

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:
   1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s bathroom.
   2. The associated complaint handling.

Background

2. The resident is a tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a flat within a block of flats.
3. The resident initially reported multiple repair issues in her bathroom between November 2020 and May 2021. She reported her toilet leaked from the base, the bathroom shower railing collapsed damaging the wall, the ceiling plastering was flaking, and that the bathroom radiator had come off the wall. According to the repair records, a survey was completed in May 2021, whereby the landlord’s contractor identified that the walls were “fine” but raised an order to replace the shower rail only. Throughout this report, there were no records of repairs being completed or evidence that showed an inspection took place; nor had it attempted to resolve the other bathroom issues raised.
4. The resident raised a formal complaint in November 2021 as she was dissatisfied with the outstanding repair issues in her bathroom and believed that no one had taken her seriously. She said that the contractor had advised he was unable to source the shower rail and was waiting for stock since April. The resident stated that, since the inspection, the shower rail had fallen and hit her on the head.
5. In response to the resident’s complaint the landlord arranged an appointment for January 2022 to carry out refurbishments to the resident’s bathroom, including replacement of her shower rail (it is unclear if this appointment was attended). The landlord apologised that the wall had not been strengthened as advised by its heating contractors, and noted it would ensure it was resolved to enable the repairs to her radiator. The landlord apologised that it had not sufficiently resolved the resident’s concerns. It later added that it had arranged an inspection of the resident’s property in June 2022.
6. The resident referred her complaint to this Service as she remained dissatisfied with the outstanding repair issues in her bathroom. She said the walls needed to be restored, the skirting boards and bath panels needed replacing, and a new fan and shower needed to be installed. She noted the lino also needed replacing as urine had been leaking on to it for months. The resident said that she believed due to the multiple issues, the entire bathroom needed redoing.

Assessment and findings

7. The tenancy agreement advises that the landlord is responsible for the structure of the property. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy confirm that the landlord is responsible for installations for the supply of water, repairs to heating, plumbing, and internal structural ceilings.
8. The repairs policy sets out timescales in which repairs should be completed. Emergency repairs such as uncontainable leaks should be completed within 24 hours. Appointed or routine repairs should be completed within 28 days. The landlord would be expected to provide regular updates on the progress of the works and confirm an expected completion date.
9. In this case, the resident reported multiple issues requiring repair in her bathroom on 27 November 2020 and 22 April 2021. It was therefore necessary for the landlord to investigate the resident’s reports and take appropriate action to resolve any issues it identified, in accordance with the above obligations. However, repair records provided to this Service are limited and those provided fail to indicate the completion of the raised repairs. There is also no confirmation that the inspections scheduled for June 2021 and January 2022, were in actual fact attended.
10. There is a record that a contractor attended on 17 May 2021 and identified that the walls were fine and ordered a replacement shower rail, which indicated that the landlord was working to fulfill its obligations. However as of June 2022, there is no evidence that the repairs raised have been completed. It is noted that the resident reported four separate repairs, and beside one repair record stating the shower was to be replaced, inadequate evidence has been provided to suggest anything had been done to resolve the other outstanding issues.
11. Given the insufficient records, provided, the Ombudsman is unable to determine that the repairs were completed within the timescales set out in the landlord’s repair policies and procedure, or at all. The Ombudsman would expect a landlord to keep a robust record of contacts and repairs, yet the evidence has not been comprehensive in this case. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures. In this instance, because we are unable obtain a full narrative of events, this would constitute a failing by the landlord as the onus would be on a landlord to provide clear repair records.
12. Additionally, whilst the landlord set out in its final response that it would inspect the property and come to a resolution, there is evidence that the resident referred the outstanding issues to the local authority’s environmental health department, who in turn contacted the landlord on 2 occasions, April and May 2022, highlighting that an inspection was needed to address the issues in the resident’s bathroom, however again, there is no evidence to suggest that the landlord did indeed heed these instructions. Whilst these actions were post the landlord’s final response, they support the conclusion that the landlord failed to adequately address the resident’s concerns.
13. Similarly, the landlord’s repairs policy states that it will ensure there is a good line of communication with residents regarding repairs and will effectively manage expectations for the completion of repairs. The landlord has not done so in this case, which is also a failing. There has been very little evidence provided to the Ombudsman which sets out the communication from the landlord to the resident regarding repairs. As such it has been increasingly difficult to determine the reasons for unattended inspections and or the landlord’s failure to complete repairs. Taking all the failings together, this amounts to maladministration.
14. The landlord should pay £700 compensation to the resident in view of this. As the landlord does not have a compensation policy the Ombudsman has assessed the level of compensation which should be paid using our own remedies guidance, which is published on our website. This remedies guidance suggests awards of £250 to £700 for cases where the Ombudsman has found that there has been service failure or maladministration, but there may be no permanent impact on the resident. Examples include failure over a considerable period of time to act in accordance with policy, to address repairs and make adequate adjustments.
15. The landlord should also arrange an inspection of the resident’s bathroom, and, if any remedial works are required, the landlord should ensure these are carried out within the timescales set out in the landlord’s repairs policy. The landlord should also include a substantial action plan providing next steps and expectations. Further compensation should be considered if they are any further delays.

The associated complaint handling

16. The landlord’s complaint policy has a two-stage complaints process. At stage one it states that the landlord should provide a response within ten working days. If the resident remains dissatisfied they can escalate the complaint to stage two. At stage two the landlord should respond within 20 working days. If at any stage there is likely to be a delay, the landlord would be expected to inform the resident of the reason for the delay.
17. The resident raised a formal complaint (this Service has not seen a copy of the actual complaint), but internal emails note that the resident had been complaining since March 2021. Whilst the landlord’s stage 1 complaint was provided in June 2021, it is unclear when or what the resident’s actual complaint was and therefore the Ombudsman is unable to confirm whether the landlord’s response was timely or adequately addressed the issues raised. However, given no records relating to communication to the resident from the landlord, the Ombudsman concludes that the stage 1 response was indeed delayed.
18. Furthermore, the landlord’s records suggest that the resident escalated her complaint on 15 November 2021. The landlord issued its stage two response on 29 December 2021, which was 8 working days outside its complaint procedure. This Service was not provided with a copy of the resident’s escalation request, therefore, we are unable to determine whether the landlord’s final response was in line with its complaint procedure. However, the landlord did delay in responding.
19. As part of this investigation the landlord was asked twice to provide documents (19 and 26 August 2022), this included a copy of the escalation request, clarity on its complaint responses, and any other evidence relevant to the resident’s complaint, however a response was not provided. Only limited information has been provided and as such the omissions and delays indicate poor record keeping and poor complaint handling by the landlord. Taking these failings altogether, this constitutes service failure and compensation of £150 is due in view of this.

Determination

20. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in way the landlord it handled repairs to the resident’s bathroom.
21. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders

22. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay £850 compensation to the resident, broken down as follows:
       1. £700 for the failings identified in relation to its handling of the bathroom repairs.
       2. £150 for its poor communication and record keeping, and the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident for its poor complaint handling.
    2. arrange an inspection of the resident’s bathroom, and, if any remedial works are required, the landlord should ensure these are carried out within the timescales set out in its repairs policy. The landlord should also include a substantial action plan providing next steps and expectations. Further compensation should be considered if they are any further delays.
    3. carry out a review of its record keeping, to reduce the likelihood of a similar situation occurring in the future. It should ensure that all contact from a resident (and any representatives) is recorded and retained so that it can be provided to this Service upon request.
23. The above orders should be completed within 4 weeks of the date of this report.