Stonewater Limited (202322828)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202322828

Stonewater Limited

30 January 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 the resident’s reports of a leak from the neighbouring property causing damage including damp and mould.
We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association, which started in September 2004. The property is described as a 1-bedroom flat. The resident has physical disabilities and mental health issues.
The resident reported a leak from the properties above into his flat around 17 May 2022. The landlord contacted the neighbouring properties between June and September 2022 and discussed access to investigate and resolve the leak. The landlord attempted several visits to the flat above the resident’s and noted on 17 November 2022 that it had not been able to gain access. It wrote to them on 3 January 2023 to request access on 6 January 2023. It said failure to provide access may result in further action. The landlord was not able to get in as arranged.
The landlord inspected the resident’s property around 23 January 2023 and took photographs of the damage caused by the leak. It also inspected the flat directly above the resident’s around 23 March 2023 and noted extensive repairs were required. Repairs were carried out around 4 April 2023, but the resident reported that the leak was still present. The resident reported damp and mould in the bathroom around 11 May 2023. The landlord attended on 31 May 2023 and carried out mould treatment to the walls and ceiling. The landlord also attended on 5 July 2023 and carried out temporary mould treatment to the ceiling. It noted the condition of the bathroom was in a poor state. The resident said he was unhappy that the issue had been ongoing for a year.
The resident complained around 24 August 2023. He said it had taken the landlord over a year to find the source of a sewerage waste leak into the property. The landlord responded on 8 September 2023 and apologised for the inconvenience caused. It explained that it had not been able to resolve the leak due to problems accessing some of the properties involved. It offered £150 as compensation for the time and trouble incurred by the resident.
The resident asked the landlord to investigate his complaint at stage 2 of its complaints process. He said the resolution offered by the landlord did not reflect the distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble incurred over the 16 months he had been pursuing the matter. In its stage 2 response sent on 15 December 2023 the landlord acknowledged it had taken an unacceptable length of time to address the leak into the resident’s property.
The landlord assured the resident that it would provide an action plan by 20 December 2023. It said this would set out how it would address the repairs and ensure this was monitored to completion. It offered £1200 for the overall failures identified in addition to the £150 previously offered.

Events after the internal complaints was exhausted.

The landlord attended the property on 18 January 2024 and treated mould in the resident’s flat. It noted the mould would persist until the leak was resolved.
The resident informed this Service on 31 January 2024 that some works had been carried out to 1 of the properties above his, but the landlord had still not been able to access the flat directly above his. He said there was still dampness and mould in the flat, so he was not satisfied that the leak had been fully resolved. He said he had accepted compensation offered by the landlord, but he wanted the Ombudsman to investigate the complaint to determine if further compensation should be awarded to him.
The landlord accessed the flat above the resident’s between 14 and 23 February 2024 when it became void, and it completed the repairs. It advised this Service that the repairs were fully resolved on 20 March 2024.
The landlord noted in February 2024 that the resident’s bathroom would be renewed during the financial year for 2024 to 2025.

Assessment and findings

The resident’s reports of a leak from the neighbouring property causing damage including damp and mould.

Under the landlord’s repairs policy, a major or un-controllable leak is classed as a high priority repair. It would aim to attend repairs within a maximum of 24 hours from receiving the notification. The policy further states non-emergency repairs would be completed within 28 days. The resident reported a leak into his flat around 17 May 2022. On 7 June 2022 he requested repairs to his bathroom ceiling as it was cracked and damp. The landlord contacted the neighbour above the resident’s flat on 8 June 2022 to investigate the leak, but the evidence suggests it was not allowed in.
The landlord advised us that it attended the resident’s flat on 19 July 2022. This was approximately 45 working days after the resident first reported the leak which was outside the published timescales in its policy. While the impact or severity of the leak was not determined by the landlord during this period, it failed to treat this as either an urgent repair (for attendance with 24 hours) or a non-emergency repair (to complete within 28 days) as set out in its repairs policy. This is not appropriate.
The landlord’s repairs policy sets out that residents must allow reasonable access where given notice at least 24 hours’ notice before the appointment. Where tenants prevent access, it may take legal action to gain entry. The evidence suggests the leak was unresolved as of September 2022 due to problems getting into the neighbour’s flat. After 2 further failed visits to the neighbour on 1 and 28 September 2022 the landlord noted it may have to force entry. This was in line with the provisions set out in its policy, though late in the process.
While we have not seen records of further contact from the resident (between June and October 2022), the contractors noted on 14 November 2022 that the resident’s ceiling was still very wet and being slowly damaged due to the leak. They agreed an inspection with the neighbour for 17 November 2022 but they could not get in. We have seen records of calls made to the neighbour and its concerns about their wellbeing, but the dates are not clear from the evidence. It sent the neighbour a warning letter on 3 January 2023 and asked for access on 6 January 2023. It was not able to get in. The resident had waited 8 months and continued to experience further distress and inconvenience.
The landlord’s policy does not clearly set out its procedures for dealing with no access cases. Although its contractors re-raised forced access on 3 February 2023 the landlord has not shown it followed this up. It did not consider if any support or assistance could be provided to the resident despite his numerous requests for updates, while it resolved access or tenancy enforcement issues with the neighbour. The evidence indicates some works were carried out around 4 April 2023 as it was able to get into the neighbour’s flat. However, the resident advised the landlord on 12 April 2023 (approximately 12 months after he reported the leak) that the issue remained unresolved.
The landlord’s repairs policy states that it would prioritise repairs depending on the seriousness of the defect, the impact on the household and potential damage to the property. According to the landlord’s damp and mould policy it is committed to working with residents, to ensure any household either experiencing or at risk of experiencing damp, mould or condensation is provided with targeted and proportionate support to address this. The policy further states it would consider an interim move immediately where this poses a risk to a resident’s health.
On 11 May 2023 (approximately 12 months after the landlord was notified of the leak) the resident reported damp and mould. He said he had tried to clean it, but this was difficult due to his disability. The resident reported that water continued to leak through a large hole in the bathroom ceiling, left by the contractors who had tried to trace the leak (date unknown).
The landlord raised this as an urgent matter for investigation the same day. It also asked its tenancy services team to consider decanting the resident. We have not seen evidence that it considered whether it was necessary to provide alternative housing for the resident as suggested by its staff or in accordance with its policy. This is not appropriate.
Although the landlord raised the mould report as an urgent repair, this was not attended until 31 May 2023 (approximately 2 weeks after the resident’s report). This is not appropriate. The landlord carried out temporary mould treatments to the property on 31 May, 5 July 2023 and around 16 August 2023. The operative noted that the bathroom condition was in a poor state as:
1. Some tiles had fallen off the walls.
2. The walls were soaking wet.
3. There was a hole in the ceiling.
4. The soil stack was leaking and required urgent repairs before remedial works could be done.
Our spotlight report on damp and mould published in October 2021 explains that landlords miss opportunities to address issues early on either because of a protracted diagnosis or by failing to extend their investigations to other properties within a block after a problem is reported. The Ombudsman notes that the landlord was taking some steps to address the damp and mould, but it had not resolved the possible cause which was the leak. This is unreasonable.
The resident escalated the matter through his stage 2 complaint on 22 August 2023 and his follow up email on 12 September 2023. He said he had:
1. Experienced sewerage waste leaking into the bathroom for more than a year.
2. Cleaned up the leak every day.
3. Lived in unsuitable conditions for approximately 16 months and had travelled several miles to access bathing facilities at his mother’s.
4. Lived with recurrent damp and mould.
From the evidence this was the first time the resident reported the sewerage leak. Despite concerns raised by its contractors (on 4 September 2023) for urgent intervention due to severe damage to his flat the landlord failed to take steps to address this urgently. The landlord said in its internal email on 13 November 2023 that this could be a potential health and safety issue. However, the resident continued to experience delays with no resolution agreed with him.
Through its stage 2 response on 15 December 2023 the landlord apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused due to the prolonged delays in dealing with the repairs. It said the level of service experienced by the resident fell below the expected standards and that it had let him down. It assured him that it would provide an action plan on the steps it would take to address the repairs and monitor the works to completion. It said learning from its handling of the case would assist in improving future performance. The landlord offered £1250 in total to the resident to acknowledge the inconvenience caused and time and trouble incurred.
Despite its assurances, the resident experienced further delays, as the landlord did not have full access to the flat above his until February 2023. This was approximately 21 months after the resident requested the repair. The landlord failed to show it adhered to its repairs policy in taking legal action where a resident is refusing access. It did not have full access to the neighbour’s property until they moved out.
The resident experienced distress, frustration, inconvenience and time and trouble in pursuing the matter for several months. During this period, the landlord’s communication was poor, and his expectations were not managed. The resident described the conditions he lived in as unpleasant, where wastewater leaked into his bath, which posed a safety issue to his health for many months. He said he lived with damp and mould and struggled to clean the sewerage waste from the bathroom because of his disability.
Based on his reports he was unable to use his bathroom and had to travel to his mother’s by public transport to use their bathing facilities. The landlord failed to consider the overall impact on the resident despite his vulnerabilities or work collaboratively with its contractors to address the repairs quickly.
The Ombudsman notes the actions taken by the landlord, but these did not go far enough in putting things right for the resident. He advised this Service on 14 May 2024 that the repairs remained unresolved (after 2 years), and he had not heard from the landlord. Also, the landlord has not evidenced that it carried out remedial works to the resident’s property, which its operatives described as being in a poor state. The landlord’s compensation policy states that:
1. Compensation payments will be fair, proportionate, and accurately reflect the extent of its service failure and detriment to the resident.
2. It will consider any vulnerabilities and identify whether the impact is worsened through disability, old age, or the presence of young children.
3. It will consider compensation payments where the resident has had loss of use of part of the property where an unreasonable time is taken to resolve a problem.
The landlord offered £1250 which went some way in addressing the significant impact to the resident. It said this was for time and trouble, communication failure, delays and inconvenience. However it has not evidenced it considered compensation for the loss of use of the bathroom as set out in its policy. The resident also advised that the repairs remained unresolved. Due to the above we have determined there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak from the neighbouring property causing damage including damp and mould.
The landlord has provided the below weekly rent charges for the years relevant to the resident’s complaints. We have calculated 20% of the weekly rent for the period he was unable to fully use the bathroom as:
1. April 2022 to March 2023 was £115.51 (approximately 45 weeks @ £23.10).
2. April 2023 to March 2024 is £122.63 (approximately 45 weeks @ £24.53).
This adds up to £2143.35. We have deducted compensation previously offered by the landlord (£2143.35 – £1250) which leaves £893.35 to acknowledge the inconvenience for the loss of use of the bathroom.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints

The landlord’s stage 1 response to the resident’s complaint was delayed by approximately 2 working days. The resident expressed dissatisfaction regarding the delay in resolving the repairs on 22 August 2023 and the response was sent on 8 September 2023. According to its complaints policy it would respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days of receiving the complaint. The landlord did not acknowledge the delay or offer the resident an apology for the inconvenience. This is not appropriate.
The landlord’s policy states it will work to resolve the complaint as quickly as possible, fully consider the issues and whether any urgent action is required. Its responses will identify any service failure, outline resolution as appropriate, and share commitments for any follow up. While the landlord acknowledged a service failure in dealing with the repairs it did not offer a clear resolution in its response. This left the resident with no other choice than to request the investigation of the complaint at stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process.
According to the landlord’s complaints policy it would aim to respond to stage 2 complaints within 10 working days and notify the resident of any delays. The resident raised the stage 2 complaint on 12 September 2023, but the response was not sent until 15 December 2023. This was approximately 68 working days after the complaint was raised which fell far outside the landlord’s agreed timescales. It also took intervention from this Service before the landlord escalated the complaint to stage 2.
This caused the resident some frustration and inconvenience which is noted from his communication with this Service on 10 October 2023. It also left him unable to refer his complaint us at the earliest point. This is not appropriate.
There is evidence of some learning on the landlord’s part as it apologised for the delay in responding to the complaint and offered £100 for the inconvenience caused. It assured the resident that a plan to resolve the outstanding issues would be set out and sent to him. It promised to monitor the works and ensure they were completed to a good standard. The landlord also committed to reviewing its handling of the case to improve its services to residents.
These actions are appropriate, but we have not seen from the evidence, that it provided an action plan as promised in its stage 2 response. Its policy states it will act if there has been a delay to put things right. The landlord has not demonstrated that it did this through its handling of the complaint. Due to the above the Ombudsman has found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak causing damp and mould in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
A senior member of the landlord’s to apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
1. Pay the resident a total of £1093.35 broken down as:
  1. An additional amount of £893.35 to acknowledge the inconvenience for the loss of use of the bathroom.
  2. £200 to acknowledge the time and trouble for its handling of the complaint.
2. Records indicate the resident has already accepted compensation payment in the amount of £1350 previously awarded by the landlord. The landlord should provide evidence of this payment to us.
Within 12 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
1. Assess its handling of the resident’s case. This should identify what went wrong and determine measures to prevent a reoccurrence. This should include:
  1. training for the relevant staff to ensure they adhere to the landlord’s repair and complaint policies, when dealing with vulnerable residents.
  2. The training should emphasise the importance of taking residents’ vulnerabilities into account in the provision of services and assessing where additional support is needed.
  3. A review of its internal policies and processes for repairs to ensure a clear and detailed procedure for staff to follow when dealing with no access issues.
2. Agree a date for the renewal works to the bathroom to be completed within 12 weeks of the date of this report. This should be confirmed in writing to the resident and a copy provided to this Service.
3. If the landlord anticipates further delays it should assess the current condition of the bathroom and decide if temporary repairs are required. This should be confirmed with the resident in writing.