Luton Borough Council (202220071)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220071

Luton Borough Council

23 July 2024

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:
1. The landlord’s handling of various repairs to the property (including to the doors, flooring and bathroom ceiling) following the orders in a previous Ombudsman report.
2. The handling of the associated complaint.

Background

The resident has a secure tenancy with the landlord. The property is a mid‑terrace 3 bedroomed ground floor maisonette. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
In June 2020 the Ombudsman issued a report following a previous complaint from the resident about the way the landlord dealt with reports of repairs. The outstanding repairs were:
1. Replace the patio doors.
2. Replace the damaged laminate flooring.
3. Remove fan in kitchen window.
4. Repair the hallway floorboards upstairs.
5. Repair the bathroom ceiling.
6. Fit new front and balcony doors.
We found maladministration by the landlord at that time and made several orders including that it should complete an action plan to be shared with the resident setting out when these repairs would be undertaken – to include dates agreed with the resident in advance and in line with the fact that her husband was shielding and any current COVID-19 arrangements the landlord might have in place.
An appointment was subsequently made for 24 July 2020. However, the resident cancelled this saying that she considered the measures the landlord had adopted relating to COVID-19 were “insufficient”. She said a further inspection during the lockdown period was not possible. She suggested photos rather than an inspection in person. The landlord subsequently put the inspection (and any repairs) on hold.
We understand the landlord contacted the resident in April 2021 to arrange a visit, after COVID-19 restrictions had been lifted. In response she said she had contacted this Service and would await the outcome of that. The landlord took no further action at that time.
In January 2022 we told the resident to make a fresh complaint to the landlord. Some 11 months later, on 25 November 2022, the resident did so. The complaint was about its lack of action in relation to the orders relating to repairs made in the Ombudsman’s report of June 2020.
On 17 April 2023 the landlord issued its stage one complaint response. It apologised for the delay in doing so. The main points were that the resident had felt unable to progress matters during COVID-19 due to the risk to her husband who had been vulnerable. It said it had agreed to carry out any outstanding repairs. It explained that it believed an inspection of the property was necessary to find out the best way of organising the repairs to minimise any disruption to the resident. The landlord said it had arranged an inspection for 24 April 2023.
The evidence suggests that this inspection did not go ahead because the landlord wrote to the resident on 24 April 2023 suggesting alternative dates in May and June 2023.
On 21 June 2023 the landlord noted another inspection had been arranged with the resident for 4 July 2023. This did not go ahead as the resident told the landlord she wanted a response to a letter she had sent it earlier that month before allowing an inspection. This undated letter which we understand the landlord received on 14 June 2023 explained, among other things, that she did not believe an inspection was necessary.
The evidence suggests that, following a telephone call from the landlord, the resident agreed to provide convenient dates for an inspection. It explained that it would not respond to her recent letter and that the schedule of works would cover all issues.
On 17 August 2023 the landlord told the resident an inspection had been arranged for 4 September 2023. The resident cancelled that appointment and 3 subsequent appointments. The landlord subsequently wrote to the resident explaining that, under the terms of the tenancy agreement, she had to allow access for inspections and repairs.
On 27 September 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. This said, among other things, that the landlord had been unable to agree upon a way of progressing the outstanding repairs. It accepted the repairs manager had previously inspected the property and some of the work had been completed, but other issues had not been inspected. It said by completing an inspection prior to starting any work, the correct repairs could be raised for the correct operative with the correct time allocated to the job thereby minimising the number of visits it had to make. It went through the repairs that the resident had raised and its understanding of the issues. It emphasised that an inspection was required to progress matters and urged her to contact it to arrange such an inspection. The landlord signposted the resident to the Ombudsman.
In November 2023 the landlord carried out an inspection of the property and drew up a schedule of works. This schedule included the outstanding repairs from 2018 apart from the patio doors which we understand had been replaced under a street-wide refurbishment. The landlord undertook some repairs in March and May 2024.
When the resident approached the Ombudsman, she explained that repairs had started to be done following our intervention, but she and her husband remained concerned that there would be a further leak from the flat above. She said, despite writing to the landlord in June 2024, she had not had an assurance about that.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

We have used our discretion in this case to look at matters from June 2020, following our previous investigation report to the date of the more recent issues in September 2023. This report is concerned with the repairs identified in 2018 (at paragraph 3) and not those subsequently identified including to the kitchen and various radiators because they were not considered as part of the formal complaint that led to this investigation. Paragraph 42.a of the Scheme says that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which are not made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure. If the resident wants to complain about the landlord’s handling of these later repairs, she can contact the landlord. If she remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response to her concerns, she may be able to refer the matter to the Ombudsman as a separate complaint at that stage.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the property following the orders in a previous Ombudsman report

Under the terms of the tenancy agreement, the landlord must keep the structure of the property in a good state of repair. It says the landlord will repair and maintain, among other things, the walls, ceilings, floors, window frames and outside doors. The landlord’s website sets out the response times for different categories of repair. This includes 30 working days for a standard repair, which it defines as a non-urgent job.
Following the Ombudsman’s previous report of June 2020 the landlord decided that an inspection would be appropriate to identify all repairs within the property. (There had been a leak in the property which was not part of that investigation). That was a reasonable approach. However, the resident did not want anyone entering the property at that time as her husband was shielding and she was concerned about the landlord’s COVID-19 measures. The resident’s concerns were understandable and given that the repairs were not of an urgent nature, it was reasonable for the landlord not to take further action at that time.
In about May 2021, after lockdown had ended, the landlord contacted the resident but did not take any action because the resident said she had again approached this Service and wanted to await the outcome of that before agreeing to an inspection. That pause by the landlord was also reasonable in taking into account the resident’s wishes.
The resident’s actions meant that no action was taken from mid-2020 to mid‑2021. The Ombudsman is not questioning the resident’s reasons for refusing the works, but this ultimately impacted the landlord’s ability to resolve the issues and the landlord is not therefore responsible for delays caused by the lack of access for that time.
However, there is no evidence of action by the landlord until it responded to a further, formal complaint from the resident in April 2023. That almost 2-year delay was not reasonable because the landlord was aware of outstanding repairs since 2018 that it did not require a further inspection to initiate. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have contacted the resident later in 2021 to find out if there had been an outcome from her contact with this Service and try to make appointments to carry out the outstanding repairs from 2018.
It was also not reasonable for the landlord to refuse to respond to the resident’s letter that it received on 14 June 2023. The resident had raised various issues, so she had a right to expect the landlord to respond to them. By not considering the resident’s concerns, the landlord missed a chance to put forward its approach in response to her concerns which might have improved the landlord/resident relationship.
After the stage one complaint response, several appointments were made for an inspection, but one did not go ahead. Given the time that had passed, along with the further leak that the resident described in the formal complaint of November 2022, the landlord’s decision that an inspection was necessary was reasonable at that time to ensure all repairs were identified and resolved. The landlord therefore cannot be held responsible for the delay in carrying out the repairs over this period from April to November 2023. It was also reasonable for the landlord to remind the resident of the terms of the tenancy agreement which says residents must allow the landlord into the property to inspect or carry out improvements and repairs.
After the inspection on 7 November 2023, the landlord drew up a schedule of works which included 5 of the 6 repairs identified in 2018. Since then, 2 further repairs have been completed – the extractor fan was disconnected and removed from the kitchen on 26 March 2024 and the front and balcony doors were replaced on 20 May 2024. Three of the repairs remain outstanding. An order has been made for the landlord to take action on these repairs as a matter of priority.
The Ombudsman’s role is to provide fair and proportionate remedies where maladministration or service failure has been identified. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies. We also consider any extent to which the resident’s actions might have contributed to the situation in which they found themselves, in other words whether they exacerbated or did not take reasonable steps to minimise the impact.
We have given careful consideration to compensation in this case given that the resident did not give access until November 2023. However, there is a clear period of time when the landlord could have taken action to try to gain access to initially carry out the repairs, and it did not do so. We have also considered the fact that the resident gave access after she was reminded of her tenancy responsibilities by the landlord in October 2023. That suggests that, had such a reminder been given sooner, the resident would likely have allowed access earlier for those outstanding repairs.
While it is clear there have been barriers to the landlord taking action, it was not fair to leave a resident with repairs outstanding from 2018 for some 6 years. We cannot say with any certainty that that was wholly a result of the resident’s actions and therefore consider that compensation is appropriate in this case.
It is evident that the failings outlined have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident. Financial compensation of £475 is appropriate which reflects the period from September 2021 (the time we consider it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have followed-up with the repairs with the resident) to April 2023 when an initial inspection date was arranged. Compensation has been calculated at £25 a month for those 19 months.
The sums awarded in this report are in line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance (published on our website) which sets out our approach to compensation. Awards in this range include cases where there have been significant delays in investigating and remedying repair issues which had a detrimental impact on the resident.

Complaint handling

The landlord has a 2 stage complaints procedure. The policy says it aims to respond to the complaint within 15 working days at stage one and within 25 working days at stage 2. It adds a full response is required within this time unless there are exceptional circumstances.
The landlord’s complaint handling was not appropriate. There were delays at both complaint stages but, in particular, a 4-month delay by the landlord in issuing the stage one complaint response. At both stages this Service had to chase the landlord to respond. At stage one, the landlord apologised for the delay but did not consider that compensation was appropriate for the impact of its failure to meet its service standards in line with its housing compensation policy.
It was not appropriate for the landlord to delay the stage 2 complaint response on the basis that an inspection of the property was needed. The landlord needs to ensure that it does not allow complaints about repairs to stay open indefinitely whilst waiting for them to be completed. This runs the risk of residents being blocked from escalating their complaints should repairs continued to be delayed. The Ombudsman’s position is that a response can normally be sent detailing the landlord’s assessment of the service provided so far and its proposed plan to put things right. It should then monitor the progress of any plan and send further responses if appropriate in consideration of any additional delays.
We acknowledge that the landlord’s complaint handling delays would have caused the resident frustration and inconvenience. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance as referenced above, financial compensation of £150 is appropriate for that impact.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its:
1. Handling of various repairs to the property (including to the doors, flooring and bathroom ceiling) following the orders in a previous Ombudsman report.
2. Handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

The landlord shall take the following action within 4 weeks of the date of this report and provide evidence of compliance with these orders to the Ombudsman:
1. A senior manager to apologise in writing to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident the sum of £625 made up of:
  1. £475 for the impact on the resident as a result of the delays in carrying out the repairs identified in 2018.
  2. £150 for the impact on the resident by the delays in its complaint handling.
3. Within 6 weeks, the landlord should take action to fully resolve the outstanding repairs from 2018. For clarity, these are:
  1. Replace the damaged laminate flooring.
  2. Repair the hallway floorboards upstairs.
  3. Repair the bathroom ceiling.
4. We acknowledge that this order depends on the co-operation of the resident.

Recommendations

We recommend that the landlord takes the following action:
1. Completes the repairs set out in the schedule of works that were drawn up after the inspection of November 2023 as a matter of priority.
2. Writes to the resident to explain what action it is taking in relation to leaks from the flat above, which we understand have been happening on an intermittent basis since 2009.