Manchester City Council (202213862)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202213862

Manchester City Council

26 July 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 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:
1. The landlord’s handling of works to replace the resident’s chimney and fireplace.
2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident is a tenant of the landlord of a house.
The resident’s home was part of the landlord’s planned works scheme, from at least several years prior to her complaint, to demolish the surrounding estate’s chimneys. After she then chased it for an update on the works on 28 April 2022, it erected scaffolding at her property on 3 May 2022, but she reported that this had damaged the plant pots in her garden that it agreed to compensate her £20 for at the time, and it subsequently visited to inspect her chimney on 16 May 2022.
The landlord found that the resident’s gas fire posed a health risk, which could be resolved with a new fire and flue, and so it disconnected and removed the existing fire on 18 May 2022, but left this at the property. She then made a stage one complaint to it on 30 May 2022 about its chimney works damaging her garden plant pots without compensating her as agreed, and its lack of communication regarding the works. The resident also stated that her gas fire had been removed two weeks earlier, and that she had not been told when the rest of the works to replace her fire, which she had not been given any of the agreed options for, or to demolish the chimney, would begin.
The landlord told the resident on 7 June 2022 that it would replace her plants and pots after the works at her property were completed, and it attended the property on 8 June 2022 to discuss replacement gas fire models. She then contacted the landlord on 4 July 2022, stating that, despite no further works being undertaken, it had started to remove her property’s scaffolding. The landlord subsequently explained to the resident on the next day that it had decided to put the old gas fire back as this originally was. She explained that she had disposed of the old gas fire, however, as she had been told that this would be replaced.
The resident then made another complaint to her local councillor, which was forwarded to the landlord for investigation on 5 July 2022. She was unhappy that, despite stating that her chimney stack and gas fire were unsafe, the landlord had now decided to cease works and re-fit her old fire. The resident also complained about its lack of communication regarding the timetable of works in general, and the damage in her garden.
The landlord attended the resident’s property to discuss the issue on 8 July 2022. It then began arranging for a flueless fire to be fitted in the property. However, on 21 July 2022, the resident explained that she used her gas fire as a primary heating source, yet she had discovered that the new fire would have a much lower heating output. She later added that she also wished to keep her fire surround and hearth. After it held a progress meeting about the works and agreed to update residents on this on 28 July 2022, the landlord’s contractor was not able to accommodate this, and required the resident to choose a new surround and hearth, and so they declined to continue working on the renewal.
Although it offered her a selection of new gas fires that would let her keep her existing surround on 21 September 2022, the resident re-submitted her stage one complaint to the landlord on 29 September 2022. She added that she was still without a fire and had a draughty hole in her living room where the previous one had been removed. The resident was unhappy as the landlord had not supplied a start date for the renewal works. As an outcome, she wanted it to remove the chimney stack and install a chimney liner and gas fire. The landlord then reportedly sent the resident correspondence regarding her stage one complaint on 30 September 2022, which its internal communications suggested was a holding letter, but the Ombudsman did not receive a copy of this.
Following the landlord’s new contractor’s proposed chimney and fireplace works being approved and ordered by it on 4 October 2022, the resident asked to escalate her complaint on 13 October 2022. She further complained that she did not think that it was necessary for her fire to have been removed in May 2022. The resident was also still unhappy with the landlord’s continued lack of communication regarding the works, and she said that its correspondence of 30 September 2022 regarding her stage one complaint did not address the concerns in the complaint, which she considered had only been progressed through her local councillor.
The landlord subsequently sent the resident a final stage complaint response on 26 October 2022. It stated that the chimney and fireplace replacement delays, following the removal of the gas fire to allow necessary chimney inspections, had first occurred for several weeks due to its original contractor being reluctant to undertake the works, which it apologised for. The landlord stated that it had offered alternative solutions for the works to be completed more quickly, such as the flueless fire, which the resident had declined.
The landlord said that it had then worked with the resident and its new contractor to find a way for her to keep her surround and hearth, while demolishing the chimney and fitting the new fire of her choice, which had meant undertaking lengthier, more complex works. It apologised if any of her communications went unanswered, but it stated that it had overcome a number of obstacles in organising her repairs, as the solution was not straightforward and it had IT issues, which meant that it was unable to confirm the dates of the works yet. Although the landlord agreed to make good all of the damage to the resident’s garden when all of the works were completed, and to arrange a contribution for her damaged pot plants.
Despite having agreed to complete the works and following chasing by the resident on 2 November 2022, the landlord’s second contractor declined to undertake the resident’s works on 4 November 2022. The landlord met with another contractor on 9 November 2022 and arranged for the works to commence on 28 November 2022. Following inspections by the new contractor, the landlord attended the resident’s property on 29 November and 1 December 2022, undertaking repairs to the roof. It attended again on 2 December 2022 and fitted a flue liner.
The landlord arranged to fit the resident’s new gas fire on 7 December 2022, but found that further works were required. It arranged for new screed to be laid in the fire opening as the existing surface was uneven. The landlord undertook further works on 12 and 13 December 2022, fitting the fire in place, as well as carrying out additional decorating in the living room as a goodwill gesture. It then inspected the works and confirmed that they were completed on 16 December 2022, after confirming that the fire was fit to use following testing, apologising for the resident’s inconvenience.
In her subsequent complaint to this Service, the resident explained that she was unsure that the removal of her fire had been necessary. She remained unhappy with the landlord’s delays and lack of communication throughout the works, and her resulting inconvenience from cold in her living room causing her to live in her bedroom and not invite visitors, as well as with the extensive delays, which had affected her mental health. The resident added that the landlord had neither cleaned her garden after completing the works, nor compensated her for her damaged pot plants, as it had agreed to do.

Assessment

Scope of investigation

It is very concerning that the resident has reported that her mental health was affected by the delayed chimney and fireplace works at her property, and by the lack of communication about this. This is nevertheless not something that can be considered as part of this investigation. This is because, in accordance with the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider complaints concerning matters where the resident is seeking an outcome that is not within our authority to provide, and we do not have the authority or expertise to determine liability or award damages for mental ill-health. This investigation has instead therefore considered the distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble experienced by the resident, and has recommended below that the landlord provide her with details to enable her to make a liability claim for her ill-health.

The landlord’s handling of works to replace the resident’s chimney and fireplace

The resident’s tenancy agreement states that the landlord must keep the structure and exterior of her property, and the installations for supplying gas, in repair and proper working order within a reasonable time, telling her when repairs will be completed and clearing up afterwards. This includes installations such as those for supplying heat. Additionally, under the landlord’s gas work policy and procedures, it is required to maintain and keep in safe condition any relevant gas fitting and any flue which serves any relevant gas fitting. The policy states that, if it considers any appliance unsafe, it should isolate and make the appliance safe, and issue warning notices informing the resident of the unsafe situation.
The landlord has stated that, due ongoing structural issues with the construction of similar chimneys at other properties in the area, it had arranged for the resident’s chimney stack to be removed during planned works. It has explained that this was to be undertaken proactively, before the chimney deteriorated and needed to be removed for health and safety reasons.
The landlord decided to also replace any gas fires with electric ones, in line with its carbon reduction plans. The landlord has not provided a repairs policy, as it recently acquired the resident’s property from another social housing provider and does not have the correct policy. Typically, planned works are identified and then completed over longer periods of time in comparison to routine repairs. The works should be scheduled for specific dates with the resident prior to the works commencing.
On 16 May 2022, the landlord’s surveyor attended the property to inspect the chimney in preparation for the planned chimney works, after she chased it for an update on this on 28 April 2022 and it erected scaffolding there on 3 May 2022. It found that the gas fire had been installed incorrectly at the property, without a flue or fire back. The landlord deemed this to be a risk to the resident’s safety. The resident has stated that it removed the fire on 18 May 2022, but that it left this at the property.
The resident then complained to it on 30 May 2022, as she was not given an indication on when the landlord would be commencing the gas fire replacement and chimney works. It was appropriate for it to have disconnected the fire, if this was unsafe to use. However, in line with its service standards, the landlord would have been expected to explain to the resident what works it was undertaking, and to communicate a schedule of works to her.
In response to the resident’s request for an update, the landlord attended on 8 June 2022, with options for the resident to choose a new gas fire. It nevertheless then did not contact her about these works for almost a month. On 4 July 2022, the resident alerted the landlord to the fact that its operatives were removing the scaffolding from her property, despite having not undertaken any works to her chimney. It had originally told her that the chimney and gas fire were unsafe, yet it had now decided to not remove the chimney and to refit the gas fire. This was because the resident wished to keep a gas fire at the property. The landlord decided that, as the chimney was being removed as a precaution for future issues, it would simply re-fit the original fire correctly.
The landlord is entitled to undertake works that it deems are necessary to the resident’s home, as long as it keeps this safe and well maintained in line with the tenancy agreement. However, it would again be expected to communicate any changes to the planned works to her. It was not appropriate for the landlord to fail to communicate to the resident that the works would not be going ahead. This is particularly the case because she was now concerned that the chimney was unsafe.
Due to the landlord informing the resident that the gas fire would be replaced, she had already disposed of the fire in June 2022. Therefore, when it decided to re-fit the fire, it could no longer do so. The landlord started looking for alternatives to this throughout July 2022. It acted appropriately by liaising with the resident, and by trying to find a solution that would work with her needs. The landlord’s original contractor was nevertheless reluctant to fit a fire with a flue, as they felt this would need extensive works to the chimney.
However, the resident explained that she used her gas fire as the main source of heat in her home, and the suggested alternatives would not provide the same warmth. She also explained that her fire surround held great sentimental value to her and she wished to keep this. The landlord’s contractor was not able to undertake these works, and so again the landlord acted appropriately by working to find a solution to the problem. It investigated various options for the resident’s new gas fire, and assured her that it would find a way of keeping her fire surround.
Despite this, there was a gap in the landlord’s communication to the resident from 28 July to 21 September 2022, when it agreed to update her on its progress and offered her a selection of new gas fires that would let her keep her existing surround, respectively. It stated that it was working on a solution to the issue, however it should also have been communicating with her. Again, in line with its service standards, the landlord would be expected to manage the resident’s expectations and assure her that the works were still being progressed. It found a new contractor and ordered the works again on 4 October 2022. However, due to the complex nature of the works, this contractor also declined to continue with the renewal on 4 November 2022. The landlord therefore found yet another contractor and finally completed the works on 16 December 2022.
The issues with the resident’s chimney, combined with her desire to keep her gas fire and surround meant that the works in this case became more complex and difficult to solve. This caused delays to the works, totalling around seven months, from May to December 2022. During that time, the resident was without a fire, which she has stated was her primary source of heat. She also had a large hole causing draughts in the living room, where her fire had been removed.
Delays to works are not always seen as a failing, if the issue is particularly complex. However, in this case the landlord added to the complexity by failing to properly communicate to the resident that her property may not be appropriate for the planned works scheme. The evidence shows that it was aware that she had a gas fire, and wished to keep this, in April 2022, before it arrived to inspect the property in May 2022. Therefore, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have discussed this with the resident at the start, and to have communicated with her properly on whether the chimney was safe, or if this needed to be removed. Further delays occurred because it had IT issues, did not explain that it had changed its original plan, and had decided to re-fit the fire.
According to the Ombudsman’s complaint handling code, the landlord should identify any failings, explain how they occurred and try to put them right. In its complaint response, it failed to acknowledge that its lack of communication had worsened the delays, and caused frustration to the resident. It also did not accurately explain why it had removed the gas fire, or why it had changed the works to be undertaken to the chimney. This meant that the landlord did not acknowledge the impact these actions had on the delays to the resident’s works.
The landlord did undertake some additional decoration in the resident’s living room, in recognition of its delays to the works. While this was appropriate. it would have been reasonable for it to have offered her an apology, and compensation, to recognise her distress and inconvenience in this matter. Although the landlord was working on resolving the resident’s repairs issues throughout, it failed to communicate with her about the proposed works on several occasions.
Due to the landlord’s lack of communication, the works became more extensive and complex. The resident was required to chase it for updates, and had numerous visits from it over the seven months that the works were outstanding. It also meant that she was without her primary heat source throughout several of the winter months. In accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, the landlord should have offered the resident compensation to acknowledge the disturbance that its errors in this case caused. This is also because it agreed to compensate her with £20, make good her garden, and replace her plants and pots damaged by its scaffolding installation after the works at her property were completed, but she reported that it did not do so.
The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance recommends over £100 compensation for failures by the landlord that adversely affected the resident that it did not acknowledge or attempt to put right, or for when its acknowledgement and attempt to put things right failed to address the detriment to her, or were not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. Therefore, it has been ordered below to pay her £250 compensation in recognition of any distress and inconvenience that she experienced from its delays and lack of communication in replacing her chimney and fireplace, as well as its damage to her garden, plants, and pots. This has taken into account the effect of the difficulties from the resident’s request for a gas fire and to keep her surround and hearth, and from the landlord’s IT issues and contractors twice declining the works.
The landlord has also been ordered below to pay the resident the £20 that it previously offered her for the damaged plants and pots, if she has not received this already, and to write to her to acknowledge, apologise for and explain its failings in her case. It has additionally been ordered below to contact her to arrange for it to make good any outstanding damage caused to her garden by its scaffolding, and to clear up afterwards in accordance with the tenancy agreement, if it has not done so already. The landlord has been recommended below to review its staff’s and contractors’ training needs regarding progressing and communicating about outstanding long-term works, to ensure that these are completed promptly and residents are kept up-to-date in every case.

The landlord’s complaint handling

According to the landlord’s compliments and complaints policy, it will respond to stage one complaints within 10 working days. If this is not possible, it will explain the reason for the delay to the resident and give the date that the response can be expected wherever possible. The landlord will respond to stage two complaints within the same timescales as those from stage one.
The resident complained about the landlord’s removal of her gas fire, and its lack of communication regarding the planned works, at stage one of its complaints procedure on three occasions. She first complained on 30 May 2022. After the landlord did not respond within its complaints procedure, she contacted her local councillor, who raised a complaint with the landlord and asked it to investigate on 5 July 2022. After not receiving a response, the resident complained again on 29 September 2022.
The landlord should have responded within 10 working days of the first stage one complaint to the resident by 15 June 2022. While not all delays are classed as a failing, it was inappropriate for it to have not done so, without any explanation or new response date to her, which was contrary to its compliments and complaints policy’s requirement for it to do so. This was a failing in the circumstances, as the resident should not have been required to raise the same complaint on multiple occasions to get a formal response, which she may not have received from the landlord at all at stage one of its complaints procedure, as the Ombudsman did not receive its stage one correspondence of 30 September 2022.
The resident escalated her complaint to stage two of the complaints procedure on 13 October 2022, as the landlord had not responded within 10 working days of her complaint in September 2022. It had 10 working days to respond to this under its compliments and complaints policy, and so it responded within the correct timescale at stage two on 26 October 2022. However, this was 103 working days later than the resident’s original complaint of 30 May 2022, which was an unreasonably lengthy and unexplained delay that caused her unnecessary additional time and trouble, including from having to complain to the landlord repeatedly to get a response.
In accordance with the Ombudsman’s above remedies guidance, the landlord has therefore been ordered below to pay the resident £100 compensation for its poor complaint handling, as well as recommended below to review its staff’s training needs in relation to their application of its subsequent complaints and compliments policy. This is in order to ensure that it issues timely complaint responses, and explains and gives new timescales for its delays, in every case.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of works to replace the resident’s chimney and fireplace.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord is ordered to:
1. Pay the resident compensation totalling £370 within four weeks, which is broken down into:
  1. £250 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of works to her chimney and fireplace.
  2. £100 in recognition of its poor complaint handling.
  3. £20 that it previously offered her for her damaged plants and pots, if she has not received this already.
2. Write to the resident within four weeks to acknowledge, apologise for, and explain its failings in her case.
3. Contact the resident within four weeks to arrange for it to make good any outstanding damage caused to her garden by its scaffolding, and to clear up afterwards in accordance with her tenancy agreement, if it has not done so already.
It is recommended that the landlord:
1. Contact the resident to provide her with details to enable her to make a liability claim to it or its insurers for the damages that she reported to her mental health.
2. Review its staff’s and contractors’ training needs regarding progressing and communicating about outstanding long-term works, to ensure that these are completed promptly and residents are kept up-to-date in every case.
3. Review its staff’s training needs in relation to their application of its complaints and compliments policy, in order to ensure that it issues timely complaint responses, and explains and gives new timescales for its delays, in every case.
Evidence of compliance with the above orders and recommendations must be sent to the Ombudsman within four weeks.