Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

London Borough of Enfield (202327727)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202327727

London Borough of Enfield

28 July 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of a leak.
    2. Request for a surveyor’s report
  2. The Ombudsman has also decided to investigate the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has lived in the property as a leaseholder since May 2017. The property is a 3-bedroom maisonette.
  2. On 21 January 2023 the landlord asked a contractor to repair a leak affecting the resident’s property.
  3. The resident complained on 9 March 2023 about a leak affecting a bedroom ceiling and a light fitting. He said the leak was hazardous. The landlord dealt with the complaint as a service request.
  4. On 8 May 2023 the resident said he had complained, but the landlord had not fixed the leak. He also said the landlord had not sent the survey information he had asked for. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 12 May 2023.
  5. The landlord responded to the information request on 18 May 2023 and sent the information it said it had available. On the same day, the resident replied and said the landlord should provide a detailed report.
  6. In its complaint response on 12 June 2023 the landlord said it had arranged an inspection to trace the source of the leak for 15 June 2023. It also sent a further response to his information request on 12 June 2023.
  7. On 11 November 2023 the resident escalated his complaint. He said it was 6 months since he complained about a leak. He said the landlord had not acted and he was still waiting for the information he asked for.
  8. In its final response on 12 December 2023 the landlord apologised that its first complaint response lacked information. It said it had repaired a balcony on 7 December 2023 and had raised another repair. It said there had been “extensive delays” with the repairs, which it had not yet completed. It apologised for the delays. It said its first complaint response was late. It offered £25 for the late response and £600 for repair delays.
  9. The resident escalated his complaint to the Ombudsman. He said he wanted the landlord to complete the repairs and pay compensation for inconvenience.

Jurisdiction

  1. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is set out in the Scheme. When the Ombudsman receives a complaint, the Ombudsman must consider all the circumstances of the case, as there are sometimes reasons why we will not investigate.
  2. In line with paragraph 42.j of the Scheme, the following aspect of the complaint is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction:
    1. The landlord’s handling of a request for a surveyor’s report.
  3. Paragraph 42.j of the Scheme says that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints that fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator, or complaint-handling body.
  4. In his complaint, the resident said the landlord had not provided the information he requested and referred to the landlord’s legal obligation to provide information under the Freedom of Information Act. The Ombudsman does not have the authority or expertise to decide on whether the landlord’s actions amounted to a breach of the Freedom of Information Act. This is a complaint that the Information Commissioner’s Office may decide.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of reports of a leak

  1. The landlord is responsible under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for repairing the structure and exterior of the property. This means the landlord has an obligation to repair external leaks. The landlord confirms this in the lease agreement, which says the landlord will keep in a reasonable state of repair the structure and exterior of the block including roofs, walls, and brick work. The landlord did not dispute it had responsibility for the repairs.
  2. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy sets out the timescales for dealing with different types of repairs. It says it will deal with emergency repairs within 24 hours. Urgent repairs are those that cause discomfort, inconvenience, or nuisance and it will complete these within 5 days. It says it will do routine within 30 calendar days.
  3. It is unclear from the records provided by the landlord when the resident first reported a leak. But the records show a contractor attended on 21 January 2023, following a request by the landlord to trace a leak. The contractor reported a slipped roof tile. The landlord’s records show a contractor inspected water damage in the resident’s home on 10 February 2023. The contractor said it thought there was a problem with a pipe in the flat above. It said the neighbour was not at home and it had left a card. It said the landlord needed to send a plumber to the neighbour’s property. Based on the information provided, it is reasonable to conclude the landlord was aware of a leak affecting the resident’s home from 21 January 2023.
  4. On 9 March 2023 the landlord received a complaint from the resident. The resident said there was water leaking from a balcony, which affected a ceiling light. He said it was dangerous as the electrics were tripping. He said he had contacted the repairs team, but they told him he would have to wait until the week beginning 13 March 2023 for an appointment.
  5. The landlord asked its repairs team to deal with the complaint as a service request. Because of the concerns about electrical hazards the resident had raised, it was reasonable for the landlord to ask its repairs team to respond. In the circumstances where electrics are tripping, the resident could expect the landlord to deal with his concerns as an emergency or urgent repair. However, the Ombudsman has seen no evidence the landlord contacted the resident about his report. In the absence of evidence, the Ombudsman has found the landlord did not follow its repairs and maintenance policy at this time.
  6. On 8 May 2023 the resident complained there was a leak in the bedroom and into a ceiling light. He said the landlord had not fixed the problem. He wanted to escalate his complaint and asked for an update from the landlord.
  7. The landlord spoke with the resident about his complaint on 25 May 2023. It said the leak was coming from the neighbour’s balcony and it had made several attempts to contact the neighbour but had been unsuccessful. It said it was working to gain access. It said it would update him by 9 June 2023.
  8. The Ombudsman accepts that in situations where a leak is coming from another property, and there are different property owners, arranging access can be difficult. The landlord said it made several attempts to gain access but had been unsuccessful. The Ombudsman has not seen evidence of the attempts and so cannot comment on these. However, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to write to the neighbour and property owner in these circumstances.
  9. The landlord spoke with the resident on 9 June 2023. It told him it had arranged to attend on 15 June 2023 to trace the source of the leak. It confirmed this in its complaint response on 12 June 2023. On 22 July 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and said he had not had an update. On 28 July 2023, the landlord told the resident it had to reschedule the survey to 11 August 2023 as it was not able to access the neighbour’s property. The Ombudsman again accepts the difficulties accessing the property of a third party. However, there is no evidence the landlord told the resident about the delay. This was a communication failure by the landlord.
  10. The survey took place on 11 August 2023. It found the landlord needed to do work on the balcony to fill holes a gas utility company had drilled when doing pipe work. It said there were also works at the rear of the building and internal works to the resident’s property.
  11. The resident escalated his complaint on 11 November 2023. He said it was 6 months since he complained, and the landlord had not acted. He said it was unacceptable, and the landlord had not met the timescales in its policy.
  12. On 7 December 2023 the landlord did another inspection and found a fault with rendering that could be affecting the resident’s home.
  13. In its final response on 12 December 2023 the landlord said it had difficulty accessing the neighbour’s property but accepted it should have done more to get access. It said it eventually arranged an inspection for 15 June 2023 but had to reschedule as there was no access. It said the survey took place on 11 August 2023 and found it needed to do. It said it had fixed the holes on 7 December 2023 and at the same time found a problem with rendering. It said it had raised an order to repair this. It accepted there were extensive delays and apologised for these and the failure to find the cause of the leaks sooner. It offered £600 compensation for time, trouble and not managing repairs.
  14. The Ombudsman has found there was a significant failing in the landlord’s handling of the repairs. The landlord did make some investigations when the resident first reported a leak in January 2023 but does not appear to have taken any action. When the resident complained the leak was affecting his electrics in March 2023, the landlord did not deal with this in line with its repairs and maintenance policy. The landlord tried to arrange an inspection but in mitigation there were access problems. When it made an appointment for 15 June 2023, there were further access problems, but the landlord did not tell the resident. The landlord finally arranged a survey on 11 August 2023, and this found the cause of the leak. However, the landlord did not do the repairs until December 2023, after the resident escalated his complaint. This was a significant delay and during this time the resident had rainwater affecting his home.
  15. The Ombudsman has seen that the landlord accepted these failings in its final response and set out what it would do to put things right for the resident. It also offered the resident £600 compensation for the delays. It would have been helpful if the landlord had said what it had learnt from the complaint. However, it is the Ombudsman’s view that the apology and offer of compensation were reasonable redress in the circumstances.
  16. Following the final response, the landlord’s record show it did work on 5 February 2024. It said it did not need to do work on the rendering but did work on the facias. The landlord’s records also say the resident told it he would arrange his own internal repairs. In December 2024, the resident told the Ombudsman there was still a leak. He said this was evidence the landlord had not done work to fix the leak. The Ombudsman cannot decide whether this leak was related to the report in February 2023 but has seen the landlord arranged a further inspection on 13 January 2025. The landlord told the Ombudsman that it did work in February 2025 that fixed the leak.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy says it aims to respond within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. It says when a resident escalates a complaint it will respond in 30 working days of the acknowledgement. The response time in the second stage is not in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, which says landlords should respond in 20 working days.
  2. On 9 March 2023 the landlord received a complaint about the landlord’s response to a leak at the property. The landlord sent an email to its repairs team and said, “this came through as a complaint, however please deal with this as a service request”.
  3. The resident said on 8 May 2023 that despite a complaint raised on 8 February 2023, the landlord had not fixed the leak. He said he wanted his complaint escalated. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 12 May 2023. It said it aimed to respond in 10 working days.
  4. The Ombudsman has not seen evidence of a complaint made on 8 February 2023. However, the resident clearly made a complaint on 9 March 2023. The landlord decided to deal with this as a service request instead of a complaint. It is the Ombudsman’s view that this was a failure to follow its complaints policy. This is because there was already an open service request relating to the leak and the resident had made a clear expression of dissatisfaction. Because of this there was a 2-month delay in acknowledging the complaint.
  5. On the 14 May 2023 the landlord emailed the resident and said it aimed to respond by 26 May 2023, which was 10 working days after the acknowledgement. On 26 May 2023, the landlord told the resident it was trying to contact the neighbour and needed to extend the complaint response deadline until 9 June 2023.
  6. The landlord sent its complaint response on 12 June 2023. This was a total of 21 working days after it acknowledged the complaint. However, the landlord had told the resident it needed longer to respond and was in contact with him.
  7. The resident escalated his complaint on 11 November 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 15 November 2023. It sent its final response on 11 December 2023, which was 18 days later and within its timescales.
  8. In its final response the landlord apologised for the lack of information in its first response. It said it extended its response time at stage 1 and responded after the date it agreed. It apologised for this and offered £25 compensation.
  9. The Ombudsman has found it was reasonable for the landlord to apologise and offer compensation for the minor delay. However, the landlord did not acknowledge the failure when the resident first complained in March 2023. There was a 2-month delay in acknowledging the complaint, which contributed to the overall delay in dealing with the repairs. This caused inconvenience for the resident who had to chase the landlord about his complaint. Because of this the Ombudsman has found there was service failure by the landlord.
  10. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, the Ombudsman find service failure when there has been a failure that causes inconvenience. Because of this the landlord must pay the resident an additional £100 compensation.

Determination

  1. In line with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord on its handling of reports of a leak.
  2. In line with paragraph 42.j. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the complaint about the landlord’s response to a request for a surveyor’s report is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
  3. In line with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord on its handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord must pay the resident £125 compensation for the inconvenience caused by the delay in acknowledging his complaint. The £25 previously offered by the landlord can be deducted from this, if already paid. It must pay compensation within 4 weeks of the date of this report. It must pay it directly to the resident and not offset it against any arrears.

Recommendations

  1. Our determination of reasonable redress is made on the understanding that the compensation offered of £600 is paid to the resident within 28 days of this report, if the landlord has not already paid it.