Westminster City Council (202006854)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202006854

Westminster City Council

17 June 2021

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 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 response to the resident’s concerns regarding:
1. The delayed redecoration of her property, following a leak from the upstairs flat.
2. Repairs to her front door and frame, and the communal shed gate lock.
3. Its associated complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

Policies and procedures

The landlord’s tenant handbook states that “If [the resident’s] decorations are damaged as a result of a flood caused by another resident it will be [the resident’s] responsibility to make good the damage. This is not covered by the [landlord’s] building insurance.”
As per the landlord’s compensation and payment schemes, the following amounts can be paid:
1. £500 per year for delays in carrying out minor repairs.
2. £250 per year for time and trouble in pursuing a complaint.
3. £500 – £2,000 per year for distress and inconvenience, dependent on the severity and number of people affected.
4. For not replying to a letter, it could pay £10 for the first letter, and £5 for subsequent letters.
As per the landlord’s tenant handbook, it is responsible for the repair of outside doors. Furthermore, it confirms that, when a repair is reported, it would advise the resident of a target date for the completion of the repairs. For non-urgent appointments, no guideline response time is detailed. The landlord further confirms that it would notify residents of any delays.
As per the landlord’s best practice guide for effective complaints handling, all complaints should be acknowledged within two days, and it targets a full response within ten working days. If more time is needed to respond to the complaint, the resident should be advised in writing of a date when they can expect to receive the landlord’s response.

Background

The resident is a tenant of the landlord, residing in a two-bedroom, first-floor flat.
The resident has experienced historical issues with leaks from the upstairs flat; this is not owned by the landlord, and is rented out by a different leaseholder with a different housing association. It was in this property that the leak repairs were required, to allow for the redecoration of the resident’s ceiling, as detailed in this report.

Summary of events

On 17 March 2020, the resident submitted her stage one complaint to the landlord, stating the following:
1. For “several years”, she had suffered “considerable damage” to her ceiling and light fittings due to a leak from the flat above.
2. She was still waiting for the ceiling to be sanded down and repainted, following the completion of the repair in December 2019.
3. The landlord had damaged the lock on her front door, when making changes to the door, to meet fire and safety regulations. It had addressed this; however, the changes had impacted her home contents insurance because she had not been able to securely lock the door, which had also locked her out on at least two occasions.
4. She therefore requested that the landlord repair her ceiling, fit a new front door, and change the lock on the communal shed’s gate which had not been repaired to the original standards.
On 31 March 2020, the landlord provided its stage one complaint response to the resident, which is summarised as follows:
1. It confirmed that it had visited the resident on 20 March 2020, and confirmed that the leaks into her property from the flat above had stopped.
2. It had therefore raised work orders to: make good and repaint the resident’s ceiling; request quotations to install a new front door and frame; and request quotations to cover and secure the communal shed’s gate lock.
3. The work to decorate the resident’s ceiling was scheduled for 7 April 2020, but it explained that the quotations for the front door and the communal shed’s gate lock would take some time to obtain and process. The landlord also apologised for the delays that she had encountered in resolving the above issues, and that it appreciated the distress and inconvenience that this had caused.
The landlord’s records confirm that remedial work to the communal shed’s gate was completed on 11 June 2020.
On 22 September 2020, the resident emailed the landlord to submit her final stage complaint to it and stated the following:
1. The leak in October 2019 had “caused water [to get into the] electrics and ruined [the] ceiling” in her property. She also reported that there was a new water leak into her ceiling, and that there were water marks along her hallway ceiling from the flat above. Despite this being reported by the resident, she had received no contact, and the previous damage had not been repaired, for which the landlord missed a surveyor’s appointment with her on 18 September 2020 without notifying her in advance after she had taken time off work this and had given it her contact details, leaving her a handwritten note.
2. She had not received a response regarding the issue with her front door, which was “not sitting in the frame”. The resident also highlighted that the door lock was damaged, and that this had already been replaced four times.
On 7 October 2020, the resident contacted this Service to advise us that she had not received an acknowledgement to her above final stage complaint of 22 September 2020.
On 8 October 2020, this Service wrote to the landlord to request that it respond to the resident’s final stage complaint from 22 September 2020 in no more than 20 working days. If this was not possible, it was asked to update her and provide a timescale for her to receive the landlord’s final stage complaint response.
On 9 October 2020, the landlord submitted the resident’s final stage complaint, as detailed in paragraph 11 above, onto its system.
The landlord’s records confirm that it had attended the resident’s property on 19 October 2020, where it took readings and pictures. It suggested that corroded water pipes in the ceiling could be the issue causing the leak from above, as identified during an historical visit, and that more intrusive work was required to establish the actual cause of this.
The landlord recorded that it had subsequently attended the resident’s site on 20 October 2020, and that it completed the work order in respect of the communal shed’s gate by re-aligning and tightening this, leaving the gate operating correctly.
The landlord’s records confirm that it had then attended the site on 5 November 2020, and completed the work order in respect of the resident’s front door by replacing this with a new door.
On 14 November 2020, the resident informed this Service that, although her front door had been replaced, the landlord had missed the original appointment for this so that she had to make several calls to rearrange the appointment, as well as that her ceiling was still damp with mould and the problem with the leak had not been rectified. She reported that she had also spoken to the tenant of the upstairs flat, who had informed her that the leak issue had also not yet been rectified in their property, and that she had not yet been contacted about her final stage complaint.
On 30 November 2020, the landlord wrote to the landlord of the upstairs flat, informing them of the leak from their property. It requested that a permanent repair be completed for this within seven days or it would escalate the matter to legal proceedings for breach of their obligations.
The landlord’s records confirm that it wrote to the resident on 2 December 2020. It apologised for the delay in its response to the resident’s final stage complaint, which it aimed to provide by 16 December 2020.
The landlord recorded that an inspection appointment was subsequently booked for a surveyor and plumber to visit the resident and her upstairs neighbour on 3 December 2020. As the resident had informed on the morning of the inspection that she was self-isolating, as required following the corona virus pandemic, this appointment did not go ahead.
On 15 December 2020, the landlord provided its final stage complaint response to the resident, stating the following:
1. In response to the damage to the resident’s ceiling following a leak from the flat above her own, it had put the decoration work on hold. This was due to issues accessing the flat upstairs, which was necessary to ensure that the repair work to the cause of the leak had been completed.
2. The corona virus national restrictions imposed from 23 March 2020 were also highlighted as a reason for the delay in completing the resident’s required decoration work. The landlord stated that it would progress this once it had received confirmation that the works to rectify the leak had been completed, as the restrictions had been lifted on 26 October 2020, and that it was liaising with the tenant of the leaseholder of the upstairs flat for access for or evidence of this. It explained that this was because it had so far been unable to reach the leaseholder after writing to them to do so, who it would seek legal redress against if they did not respond to it.
3. It confirmed that it had completed remedial work to the communal shed’s gate on 11 June 2020. In respect to the resident’s front door, the landlord confirmed that this was replaced with a new fire door on 5 November 2020.
4. It also acknowledged that there had been a “clear lack of communication with [the resident]” since its visit to her on 20 March 2020, apologised that its surveyor had left her a handwritten note after missing its appointment with her on 22 September 2020, and accepted that it failed to keep her updated on the situation, apologising for the poor service that she had received.
5. It therefore offered £670 total compensation to the resident, comprising of: £85 for the delays in completing the painting and decorating; £375 for the distress and inconvenience; £190 for the resident’s time and trouble in pursuing her complaint since March 2020; and £20 for its delayed final stage complaint response.
On 18 December 2020, the landlord’s records confirm that work orders were raised for the following:
1. To check the resident’s hall, toilet and bathroom light fittings, which may have been affected by the leak from the upstairs flat.
2. To seal stains, make good and paint the “hall, wc and bathroom ceilings only.”
3. It also highlighted that the resident had limited availability due to her work commitments.
On 19 January 2021, the landlord recorded that it had visited the resident, taken down her lights to check for water, and found no water present. It noted that she had suggested a possible source of the water ingress, which the operative had explained was not possible.
On 19 January 2021, the resident emailed the landlord, stating the following:
1. The landlord’s surveyor had advised her during a visit to her property on 3 December 2020 that the issues in the upstairs flat had been fixed. It had also advised the resident that the leaks were down to general water splashing around the upstairs flat’s bathroom basin, which meant that further leaks could be expected into her electricity supply even after the repair had been completed that it had given seven days’ notice to fix.
2. The resident did not feel that she should have to claim on her personal insurance, given that the landlord of the flat upstairs was responsible for fixing the problem that she had reported as recurring for several years, and had formally complained about.
3. She expected the entire rooms and doors to be repainted by the landlord, as part of its redecoration of her bathroom, toilet and hall, in settlement of her complaint, as she had previously decorated her property 15 months earlier.
On 20 January 2021, the landlord responded to the resident, stating the following:
1. It “[did] not appear to hold a record” of a visit by one of its surveyors to her on 3 December 2020, and queried whether they had been a representative of another housing association.
2. It expected the issue to be fully resolved, and if an issue with water splashing from the upstairs flat remained, it would still expect the housing association of that property to resolve this.
3. It considered that the required work to the resident’s property to be a “reactive repair”, which meant that it would only redecorate the damaged ceiling areas there, which it would do once it received confirmation that the issues with the flat upstairs had been resolved.
On 5 February 2021, the landlord emailed the resident to confirm that it had received confirmation that the housing association of the upstairs flat had authorised the repair work to that property, and so the landlord would notify her when this had been carried out in order to arrange an appointment for it to decorate her property.
On 1 March 2021, the resident emailed this Service, stating the following:
1. Her complaint had still not been resolved. The resident had signed and returned the compensation form attached to the landlord’s final stage complaint response, but she had not received the compensation payment.
2. She had been told the repairs were complete in the flat upstairs; however, she was informed in January 2021 that the work to the flat upstairs was not complete.
3. She had spoken to the tenant of the flat upstairs, who had informed her that their radiators were leaking, and that their housing association had not rectified the issue. Therefore, the resident was now expecting further issues in her property as a result of this new leak.
4. There was black mould on her ceilings and damage to paintwork, as a result of the landlord of the flat above neglecting the upstairs flat, causing distress to the resident and damp to her property.
The landlord’s records confirm that, on 9 March 2021, the housing association of the upstairs flat confirmed that their plumber was “organising [their] diary”, and would carry out the work “as soon as [they] can”.
The landlord recorded that, as of 29 March 2021, it was yet to receive a response from the housing association of the upstairs flat on the completion of the required repairs to that property. It subsequently confirmed to this Service on 18 April 2021 that the decoration works to the resident’s property were still outstanding as of that date.

Assessment and findings

The delayed redecoration of the resident’s property

Following the resident’s reports of a leak to the landlord from prior to 17 March 2020, it had visited her property, including on 20 March 2020, and had identified that the source of the leak was from the flat upstairs that it did not own or manage. Therefore, as it had no responsibility to complete the necessary repairs to the upstairs flat itself, it should have contacted the landlord of the flat above to arrange the leak repair, and communicated the expected repair timescales to the resident.
As per the landlord’s tenant handbook, detailed in paragraph 2 above, it was not responsible for the redecoration to address the damage to the resident’s decorations caused by the leak from another tenant of a different landlord. However, it committed to doing so to her from 31 March 2020 and it therefore set the legitimate expectation on her part that it would do so, so that its continued agreement to carry out the decorative work at her property was reasonable, and demonstrated its desire to address her concerns.
The impact of the restrictions imposed following the corona virus national lockdown from 23 March 2020 meant that the landlord was unable to complete the repairs to the resident’s decorations on 7 April 2020, as scheduled, which was understandable. However, no evidence has been provided to this Service in respect to communications between it and her to update her on her complaint about this, following its stage one complaint response to her on 31 March 2020.
This resulted in the resident requesting the escalation of her complaint to the final stage of the landlord’s complaints procedure on 22 September 2020. This was not fair to her, as she should have been better informed of the progress of her repair by it. Failure on the landlord’s was therefore found for this by it in its final stage complaint response to the resident on 15 December 2020, with it also accepting there had been a lack communication by it in respect of this since it had visited her on 20 March 2020, as detailed in paragraph 22 above.
It is recognised that, although the landlord had committed to the redecoration of the affected areas in the resident’s property, it needed confirmation that the leak repairs to the upstairs flat had been completed by that property’s landlord first, and that these repairs were outside of the landlord’s control. However, it was within its control to contact the landlord of the upstairs flat and seek to progress their completion of the repairs to their property. The first example of such correspondence being evidenced as sent from the landlord to do so was on 30 November 2020, however, as detailed in paragraph 19 above.
Although the resident had been updating the landlord of the work carried out in the upstairs flat from discussions with her upstairs neighbour, it should have written to and pursued the landlord of that property earlier to assist in the resolution of her complaint, particularly as the leak had reportedly occurred in October 2019. Failure was therefore also found for the landlord’s delay in requesting that the landlord of the upstairs flat address the leak there, in the final stage complaint response to her.
Following the landlord’s final stage complaint response, it offered the resident £670 total compensation, including £85 for its delays in completing the painting and decorating at the property and £375 for her distress and inconvenience. She accepted this and reported that she had returned the necessary paperwork to it to receive this, as detailed in paragraph 28 above, but she did not receive the payment from it as of 1 March 2021. It is acknowledged that the necessary repairs to the upstairs flat had not been completed at this time.
However, the landlord should have explained its reasons for not paying the compensation that it had offered in settlement of the resident’s complaint to her at the time. The level of the compensation accorded with its compensation and payment schemes above at paragraph 3, and so was proportionate to recognise its delays and her distress and inconvenience from the delayed redecoration of her property.
Nevertheless, the landlord’s lack of communication to the resident on this aspect of her complaint is of concern, and so it has been recommended below to both pay her the above compensation, if it has not done so already, and review its compensation offer. This is to reflect the subsequent additional redecorating delays, distress and inconvenience that she continued to experience. The landlord also highlighted to the resident on 20 January 2021 that it would only be redecorating the areas affected by the leak, which is fair and reasonable, particularly as this was being completed by it as a goodwill gesture.
However, as of 18 April 2021, when the landlord provided documentation to this Service, the decorating work at the resident’s property remained outstanding. This is despite it being informed on 9 March 2021 by the housing association of the upstairs flat that the outstanding leak repair there was with their contractor, who would carry out the work as soon as they could.
This demonstrated the challenges faced by the landlord in arranging for the completion of the repairs to the flat upstairs that it continued to chase that property’s housing association for as of 29 March 2021, which would then allow the landlord to address the resident’s concerns and complete her property’s outstanding decorating work. As it has evidenced that it has been in contact with the housing association of the upstairs flat to seek to arrange their repairs, the action taken by the landlord was fair and reasonable under the circumstances. Although it has also been recommended below to, if it has not done so already, check on the progress of the repairs and inform the resident accordingly, along with the timescale for her decorating work.

Repairs to the resident’s front door and frame, and communal shed gate lock.

Following the resident’s request in her stage one complaint on 17 March 2020 for repairs to both her front door, and the communal shed gate lock, the landlord was obliged to complete the necessary work to repair these items and to inform her of the timescales for this. This was in line with its tenant handbook, as detailed in paragraph 4 above, which required it to do so but did not specify a guideline response time for these repairs.
In response to the resident’s stage one complaint on 31 March 2020, the landlord raised work orders for the above repairs to request quotations for these, which it explained to her would take some time to obtain and process. However, the corona virus national lockdown from 23 March 2020 resulted in a delay in the completion of the repairs, which was outside of its control. Nevertheless, the repairs to the resident’s front door were not completed until 5 November 2020, representing a delay of over six months for the work to be carried out, with no further updates having been provided to the resident.
Although the landlord subsequently confirmed to the resident on 15 December 2020 that the restrictions on its repairs to her property were not lifted until 26 October 2020, its above lack of updates to her on this was not reasonable. This is because she should have been kept informed of the expected timescale for the completion of the repair to her front door, particularly given her security concerns about the damage to the door’s frame and lock and about being locked out. The landlord therefore also found failure on its part in its final stage complaint response for its lack of communication for this aspect of the complaint, and awarded her the above £375 compensation for her distress and inconvenience from this, which was appropriate.
In respect to the communal shed gate repairs, it is noted in the landlord’s final stage complaint response, as detailed in paragraph 22 above, it completed remedial work to this on 11 June 2020, following communal works also being put on hold for non-emergency trades. This Service has been provided with no further information on this visit, and it is noted that it also completed work to realign and tighten the communal shed gate to leave this operating correctly on 20 October 2020, as detailed in paragraph 16 above. It is therefore unclear whether the latter date was the date that the repair had been completed by the landlord, which would have represented a seven-month delay in the completion of the repair.
The above delay and the landlord’s lack of updates to the resident about this would have been unreasonable, and so its final stage complaint response also found failure on its part, and awarded the above £375 compensation for her distress and inconvenience, for its lack of communication with her for this aspect of the complaint. This was appropriate in view of the fact that the required work to the communal shed gate was previously carried out on 11 June 2020, and so it should have completed any outstanding work necessary for this repair sooner than 20 October 2020. The landlord should additionally have notified the resident of a suitable timescale for the completion of the repair, if the work was more complex and time-consuming than it had anticipated.

Complaint handling

In response to the resident’s stage one complaint on 17 March 2020, the landlord issued its stage one complaint response to her on 31 March 2020. This was within its best practice guide for effective complaints handling’s ten-working-day response target, as detailed in paragraph 5 above, and so this was a reasonable timescale for it to respond to her. However, the resident submitted a further final stage complaint to the landlord on 22 September 2020, as detailed in paragraph 11 above, to which she did not receive a response within this timescale.
Failure was therefore found by the landlord in its final stage complaint response for this aspect of the complaint, which added time and trouble to the resident in pursuing her complaint. This was then referred by her to this Service, when it was asked to respond to the complaint by 5 November 2020. The landlord did subsequently issue the resident with a letter requesting additional time to respond to her complaint on 2 December 2020, and it provided its final stage complaint response to her on 15 December 2020, within which it acknowledged its failure to provide a timely final stage response, which was reasonable.
This is particularly because the landlord’s final stage complaint response recognised its above complaint handling failings by awarding the resident compensation for the impact of these upon her, which was in line with its compensation and payment schemes above at paragraph 3. It did so by offering her £20 compensation for its delay in responding to her final stage complaint and £190 for her time and trouble in pursuing the overall complaint since March 2020, which was proportionate to the amounts recommended by the schemes for such failures.
In summary, there were failures in the landlord’s communication with both the resident and the landlord of the upstairs flat, as well as with the timeliness of the repairs to her front door and communal shed gate lock. It has taken the opportunity of its full complaints process to identify its failings, and to offer redress which proportionately reflected the detriment experienced by her, and was in line with this Service’s remedies guidance, as well as its own compensation and payment schemes. However, in view of the landlord reportedly not paying this compensation to the resident, and the fact that further time has since lapsed with the redecoration outstanding, it is appropriate to for it to review the compensation awarded by it.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint concerning the delayed redecoration of her property satisfactorily.
In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint concerning the repairs to her front door frame and communal shed gate lock satisfactorily.
In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint concerning its associated complaint handling satisfactorily.

Reasons

There had been a lack of communication from the landlord, both to the resident and to the landlord of the upstairs flat. There were also delays in the completion of the repair orders for the resident’s front door and communal shed gate lock.
The landlord acknowledged its failures in service to the resident and offered her compensation which was proportionate to the likely impact that its failures had on her.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord:
1. Pay the resident the £670 compensation that it previously awarded her, if she has not received this already.
2. Review its compensation offer to the resident in view of the continued delay in the completion of the work, to reflect the additional delays in completing the redecoration, and her resulting distress and inconvenience, and inform her of the outcome of its review.
3. If it has not done so already, check on the progress of the repairs to the upstairs flat, and inform the resident accordingly, along with the expected timescale for the redecoration of the areas affected by the leak.
The landlord should contact this Service within four weeks to confirm whether it will follow the above recommendations.
The Ombudsman accepts that, because of the present restrictions due to the corona virus pandemic, the timing of the above actions will depend on what is reasonable in the light of Government guidance regarding the health of the resident and of the landlord’s staff.