Yorkshire Housing Limited (202200048)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202200048

Yorkshire Housing Limited

2 February 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.

Jurisdiction

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.

After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with paragraph 41(c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (The Scheme), the aspect of the resident’s complaint that concerned a £250.00 excess that they had paid out-of-pocket following the sewage leak in their property is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

This is because the Ombudsman cannot consider complaints (or aspects of complaints) which concern matters that are the subject of court proceedings or were the subject of court proceedings where judgement on the merits was given.

The complaint

The complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s handling of reports of sewage flooding into the property and the associated works to repair the damage caused.
2. The landlord’s handling of the complaint through its internal complaints procedure.

Background and summary of events

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, occupying a two-bedroom flat on the ground floor of a building.

Policy and procedures

The landlord’s repairs policy sets out the timeframe within which responsive repairs should be addressed:
1. Emergency Repairs. These are described as “those that create significant risk to life or wellbeing or cause considerable damage to the property”.
  1. The aim is to attend within 4 hours of the repair being reported to make safe the immediate danger.
  2. To attempt to complete the works within 24 hours of the initial report.
2. Urgent repairs are to be completed within 7 days of being reported.
3. Routine Repairs to be completed within 28 calendar days of reporting.
The repairs policy also contains information on the use of a decorations allowance. A decorations allowance may be given “where damage has been caused to the decorations of a resident’s property, … It should not be used in circumstances … if Yorkshire Housing could not foresee the damage occurring. In instances such as this, residents should be encouraged to claim through their Home Contents Insurance”.
The landlord operates a two stage complaints policy. This policy sets out the timescales for responding to each stage of a complaint.
At stage one the complaint should be acknowledged within two working days and a full response provided within 10 working days of receipt of the complaint.
The complaint will be investigated by a Complaints Officer from within the relevant service area who will:
1. Investigate the complaint thoroughly.
2. Provide a full response within the agreed timescales.
3. Keep the resident fully up to date with the progress of their complaint. The Complaints Officer dealing with the complaint will contact the resident before completing their investigations.
At stage two the complaint should be acknowledgement within 2 working days and a full response given within 20 working days of receipt of the escalated complaint.
The procedure establishes who will handle the complaint on behalf of the landlord at this stage, with the oversight of a head of service or director who may not be from the same service area that investigated the stage one complaint.
At stage two the investigation will:
1. Thoroughly review the full stage one investigation.
2. Consider and investigate any new and additional evidence that relates to the original stage one complaint.
3. Provide a final response letter within the agreed timescales.
4. Keep the resident fully up to date with the progress of their complaint.
5. Advise the resident of their rights to have their complaint investigated by the Housing Ombudsman.
The procedure provides for extensions to the timescales set out for responses on a case-by-case basis. In such circumstances an extension of up to 10 working days may be agreed with the resident. Any extension is to be confirmed in writing via letter or email to the resident.
The policy identifies under section 4.4.11 that: “Compensation is not an automatic outcome from the Complaints and Compliments Policy; however, it may be considered where appropriate and will be applied fairly, honestly, consistently, and proportionally. We will consider any quantifiable losses, time, trouble, distress and inconvenience and any payment that will put the resident back in the position that they would have been had the issue not occurred”.

Summary of events

On 19 February 2022 the resident called the landlord’s out of hours service to report sewage coming up into his bathroom, causing flooding to the bathroom and the adjoining bedroom.
The resident reported a significant delay in the telephone being answered, stating that he had been on hold for two hours before his call was answered at 7.50pm. He reported that sewage had come up through his toilet and was flooding the bathroom floor. As the bathroom was ensuite this was also affecting his bedroom.
It is recorded within the landlord’s repair records that the call handler raised a repair request with the landlord’s out of hours contractor after completing the call, just after 8.00pm. The repair records show that this was then passed to a specialist contractor at 8.12pm.
The resident made three follow-up calls to the out-of-hours service to find out when the contractor would be attending and to see if a different contractor could be dispatched.
On the second of these calls, he explained that the contractor had just called to tell him that they had another job to attend to before coming to his home, and that it was likely that they would not be with him before 4.00am. He asked the call handler if they could again speak to the contractor to find out why there was this delay and see if someone else could attend. The call handler subsequently confirmed that as a specialist contractor was required there was no one else who could attend.
The resident asked the call handler for the details of the person she had spoken to at the contractor. He advised that he wished to call them himself and raise a complaint. The call handler refused to pass on this information and told him to call back on Monday to log his complaint.
The contractor attended in the early hours of 20 February 2022. The repair records indicate they attended between 12.00pm and 2.00am. The contractor jetted the drains and gained access to the soil stack within the resident’s property 4 to try to clear the blockage but were unsuccessful in doing so. In gaining access to the soil stack, they created a hole in the wall of the bathroom.
The contractor then passed on the works to Yorkshire Water having determined that the blockage was within the remit of the water company. Yorkshire Water attended later on 20 February 2022 and cleared the blockage.
The resident reported the issue to his own insurers and advised that they would be visiting his home to clean and sanitise the affected areas on 22 February 2022. He also informed the landlord that his insurers would be arranging for the flooring to be replaced.
A further leak was reported by the resident on 23 February 2022. This was attended to by a specialist contractor on behalf of the landlord who fixed the leak and cleaned and sanitised the areas affected within the bathroom.
The repair records show that follow on works were required to repair the hole created in the bathroom wall. It was noted that this wall should be redecorated to match the existing décor. An appointment was booked for 21 March 2022.
The resident asked for a surveyor to carry out an inspection of the damage caused to his home and confirm the full scope of works required. On 23 February 2022, the landlord spoke to the resident and agreed that the surveyor would visit on 10 March 2022.
The resident raised a stage one complaint with the landlord on 21 February 2022. This complaint focused on the length of time taken to attend the emergency on 19 February 2022 and the level of service he received from the call handler on the landlord’s out of hours service.
The landlord contacted the resident by telephone following receipt of his complaint to discuss the issues raised. A note made on 24 February 2022 of this call recorded that the landlord “confirmed that unfortunately on this occasion the second phone call … did fall short of our standards and advised that I agreed she had been quite confrontational towards the end of the call”. It told the resident that feedback had been given to the call handler about her handling of this call.
The resident’s claim for compensation for distress and inconvenience was also discussed as part of this telephone conversation. He was advised that this would not be handled by the landlord’s claims team. A direct offer of compensation was made, and agreement reached at a level of £120.00.
The level of compensation was confirmed by email on 1 March 2022 and the resident provided his bank details by return to allow payment to be made to him.
The landlord provided a written response to the stage one complaint on 1 March 2022.
This addressed the following key points:
1. The timeliness of passing on the repair to a specialist contractor and follow-up attendance by Yorkshire Water. An apology was given for the length of time this took.
2. The call handling and the service provided by the out of hours service. It acknowledged and apologised that the service failed to meet its expected standards. It confirmed that feedback had been given to the call handler and additional training would be provided.
3. It was noted that follow on works were required and appointments were confirmed for both the landlord’s surveyor to attend on 10 March 2022 and its contractor on 21 March 2022.
4. The agreement of £120.00 compensation was confirmed as recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by this situation.
The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response to his complaint and escalated this to stage two on 14 March 2022. He felt that his complaint should not have been closed until after the surveyor had completed their inspection on 10 March 2022. He requested a copy of the surveyor’s report for his insurers and stated that he wanted the repairs to his home completed.
The stage two response was provided on 29 March 2022. This contained the following:
1. An apology was given for the closure of the stage one ahead of the surveyor’s visit. It acknowledged that although the leak had been fixed the extent of follow-on works were unknown at that point. It was accepted that in line with the complaints policy the stage one could have been held open for a further 10 days in agreement with the resident.
2. Confirmation that the recordings of the resident’s phone calls with the out of hours service were provided on 18 March 2022. These had been requested initially as part of the stage one complaint but had not been addressed. An apology was given for the delay.
3. Confirmation that the scope of the works agreed with the surveyor covered the repair to the damaged wall, replacement of the shower plinth and damaged skirting boards. A contractor was scheduled to carry out these repairs on the 21 March 2022.
4. It was agreed that as a gesture of goodwill the whole ensuite bathroom would be redecorated. These works were fully completed by 28 March 2022.
5. Confirmation that the resident’s insurers had submitted a claim to the landlord’s insurers in respect of the damage caused by the flood. If liability was accepted the £250.00 excess incurred by the resident would be refunded.
6. It was agreed that the paperwork completed by the surveyor on his visit to the residents home on 10 March 2022 would be shared with the resident. This was an action to be followed up on the surveyor’s return to work on 31 March 2022.
To resolve the complaint the landlord reconfirmed its offer of £120.00 made at stage one and the redecoration of the ensuite as compensation at stage two. The landlord’s insurers declined the claim made by the resident’s insurers on 10 August 2022. Notification was sent direct to the resident’s insurer.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

This investigation will not consider the matter of liability for the cost of damages to the resident’s furniture and flooring for which he made a claim against his home contents insurance.
We are advised that his insurers subsequently lodged a counter claim against the landlord.
It is noted that the landlord’s insurers have declined the claim made by the resident’s insurers, on his behalf, as they ruled that liability sits with the water authority. The resident may wish to continue to pursue a claim via his insurers in regard to repayment of the excess cost he incurred.
The landlords handling of reports of sewage flooding into the property and the associated works to make good the damage caused.
The landlord’s out of hours service handled the resident’s reports of sewage flooding into his property on 19 February 2022. Its records show that the call was taken at 7.50pm and the repair passed to the out-of-hours contractor and then to a specialist contractor at 8.12pm.
The landlord’s repairs policy specifies an aim to respond within four hours for emergency repairs. With repairs to be fully complete within 24 hours. The records provided do not present a specified time for when the specialist contractor attended. However, it is clear that the resident’s call was acted on promptly in making arrangements for a specialist contractor to attend.
Once the contractor identified that they could not clear the blockage, they appropriately referred the matter to Yorkshire Water. The water authority attended the same day and cleared the blockage.
A further leak was reported by the resident on 23 February 2022. The landlord responded in line with the timescales detailed in the repairs policy. The contractor who attended completed the repair, and cleaned and disinfected the affected bathroom floor.
An appointment for 21 March 2022 was scheduled by the landlord at the time of the initial repair, to cover the follow on works required. It was noted that the contractor had damaged the wall in trying to access the soil pipe and that this would need to be repaired and redecorated.
In contact with the landlord the resident requested that a surveyor inspect the damage caused by the flood as he was concerned that the wooden supports to his shower were rotting as a result of water damage. This was arranged for and carried out on 10 March 2022.
Whilst the surveyor’s visit could have been carried out earlier following the flood, it does appear from the records provided that this date was agreed with the resident.
Works carried out to the bathroom covered repairs to the wall, redecoration of the whole bathroom, replacement skirting boards and plinth for the shower, and a replacement toilet pan. These were completed by 28 March 2022.
Whilst the nature of the flood that occurred was both unpleasant and distressing to the resident, the Ombudsman is satisfied from the evidence that is available, that the landlord responded appropriately and in line with its policy.
In addition, the landlord took on board the resident’s complaints about its call handling service, appropriately investigated the complaint by considering the content of the call and followed up with feedback and additional training for the staff involved. This was a proportionate response by the landlord in the circumstances.
The landlord’s complaints policy advises that compensation should be “considered where it is appropriate to do so and that this should be applied fairly, honestly, consistently and proportionally.”
Internal guidance provided by the landlord relating to offers of compensation sets out that consideration of an offer of compensation should take account of the impact of the failure on the customer.
Compensation of £120.00 was agreed with the resident in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the initial flood. The landlord’s efforts to agree the level of compensation with the resident were resolution-focused. The offer was reasonable and within the guidelines set out in the Housing Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies, as well as being in line with the landlord’s own internal guidance. The landlords handling of the complaint through its internal complaints procedure.
Both the stage one and stage two complaints were responded to within the landlord’s stated timeframes, as detailed above.
It is noted that the stage one investigation was concluded ahead of the surveyor’s visit scheduled for 10 March 2022, the appointment being confirmed within the response letter to assess the damage caused by the leak. The resident felt that a thorough investigation could not be done without this report and this prompted his escalation to stage two.
It was acknowledged in the stage two response that his initial complaint could have been held open longer with his agreement. The landlord apologised that this did not happen. It was appropriate that the landlord considered the flexibility within its complaints policy when addressing the resident’s concerns, and that it apologised where it found that it could have done things differently. The apology was appropriate redress given that the adverse effect caused by the premature complaint response was limited.
In handling the stage two complaint the landlord picked out the items identified by the surveyor to ensure that the necessary repairs were completed and agreed to extend the redecoration works to the bathroom to cover the whole room. This was a discretionary offer outside the landlord’s repairs policy and demonstrated the landlord’s commitment in trying to put things right with the resident.
One item remained outstanding at stage two. This was the agreement to share paperwork completed by the surveyor during his inspection. This was to be followed up with the surveyor on his return to work on 31 March 2020. The landlord appropriately set out the timescale for this in its response. It is not clear to this service if this action was completed as no copy of this report or the surveyor’s notes have been provided.
The landlord has taken positive steps to acknowledge where it got things wrong and offered an apology to the resident at each stage. It also identified learning for the call centre staff, and in its acknowledgment of how it could have better handled the stage one complaint by agreeing an extension to the timeframe.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint in respect of sewage flooding into the property and the associated works to repair the damage caused.
In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, addresses its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Reasons

The landlord took steps to ensure that a suitable contractor attended to rectify the issue of sewage flooding into the property. Their contractor then referred this to the relevant water authority when identifying the full scope of the repair required.
In consultation with the resident through its complaints process the landlord extended the scope of the repair works to include the full redecoration of the resident’s bathroom. This was completed to the resident’s satisfaction.
The offer of £120.00 compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident as a result of the flood was reasonable within the context of the landlords compensation policy.

Recommendations

The landlord should ensure that a copy of the surveyor’s notes taken during the inspection of the property on 10 March 2022 are shared with the resident. This would ensure that it has actioned the commitment given within its stage two complaint response. A copy of the same should be provided to this service.
The landlord, if it has not already done so, should pay the resident £120.00 offered in compensation as part of its stage one response.