Bromford Housing Group Limited (202220665)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220665

Bromford Housing Group Limited

30 June 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 reports of damp and mould in the property
2. the landlord’s handling of repairs to:
  1. external doors
  2. windows
  3. external lights
  4. kitchen fitting
3. the landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.
The Ombudsman has also decided to investigate the landlord’s record-keeping practices in this case.

Background

The resident lives in a 2-bedroom bungalow under an assured tenancy agreement.
On or around 3 January 2023, the resident raised a complaint. It is understood that the resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of:
1. repairs to the external doors
2. reports of damp and mould throughout the property
3. an unspecified issue with an external light
4. reports that the windows were in need of replacement.
In its stage 1 complaint response on 31 January 2023, the landlord:
1. explained the external doors had been replaced in September 2019 and that it had no record of any related repair requests following this
2. confirmed the doors had been realigned on 30 January 2023 and that the front door was in need of replacement
3. explained it had no record of any reported window repairs since August 2021
4. confirmed it had submitted a request for the windows to be replaced.
The landlord issued a second stage 1 complaint response on 26 June 2023. The landlord:
1. reiterated the information it provided in its first stage 1 complaint response about the doors and windows
2. acknowledged the resident had raised concerns about damp and mould in a complaint made in January 2023
3. also stated it had no record of the resident raising any concerns about damp and mould since March 2019
4. stated it would inspect the property for damp and mould and decide what action it needed to take, if any at all
5. stated it had carried out unspecified repairs to an external light on 14 June 2023
6. explained that it had completed repairs within a time that was consistent with its policy
7. acknowledged the resident had raised concerns about how her kitchen had been fitted in June 2023 and that there were snagging issues, which included:
  1. touching up paintwork
  2. replacing a cupboard door
  3. removing waste from the garden
8. confirmed it had ordered a replacement kitchen cupboard door and would confirm the appointment to fit this at a later date
9. confirmed its contractors had agreed to return to resolve the other snagging issues.
The resident escalated her complaint on 8 and 11 August 2023. The resident was dissatisfied that:
1. the quality of the kitchen fitting was poor and there were other snagging issues, including:
  1. the floor had not been sealed
  2. waste had not been removed
  3. missing kickboards
  4. metal carpet runner at the kitchen entrance did not fit
  5. scratched doors
2. nothing had been done about the doors and windows
3. the landlord had not told her what it would do about the damp and mould
4. the house would be draughty in winter.
In its first stage 2 complaint response on 7 November 2023, the landlord:
1. apologised that it delayed providing its first stage 1 complaint response in January 2023
2. confirmed it had added replacement of the front and back doors to its major works plan for 2024/25
3. confirmed a damp and mould inspection was carried out on 15 August 2023 which identified several repairs, including:
  1. loft insulation
  2. CCTV drain survey
  3. install additional drainage
  4. renew rainwater items
  5. inspect cracks to the external walls at the side and rear of the property
  6. mould wash and insulate the hallway, bedrooms, kitchen, and living room
  7. install thermal plasterboard to the external walls in the kitchen and bathroom
  8. fill holes around pipework in the kitchen
  9. extend tiling in the bathroom
4. acknowledged there had been significant delays in progressing the repairs and the resident’s complaint and apologised for this
5. offered £500 compensation.
The landlord issued a second stage 2 complaint response on 16 January 2024. The landlord:
1. reiterated the information about replacing the doors
2. stated that the following external repairs had been completed at various dates between 15 November 2023 and 5 January 2024:
  1. the installation of additional drainage
  2. renewed mortar
  3. renewed windows
  4. inspection of cracks to the side and rear of the property
  5. renewed rainwater items
  6. CCTV inspection of drains
3. explained that on 21 December 2023 the resident had asked for the internal repairs to be delayed until after Christmas
4. confirmed various dates for the internal repairs to be completed between 26 January and 16 February 2024
5. explained that there had been some delays in progressing the repairs as it believed the resident had changed her telephone number, which had not been communicated to its contractors.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s record-keeping

The Ombudsman expects, and it is well established good practice, that landlords to create and maintain a robust record of contacts and repairs. This is because clear, accurate, and easily accessible records provide an audit trail and enhance landlords’ ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise. Clear records also demonstrate that landlords have complied with their legal and regulatory duties. Good record keeping can resolve disputes as and when they arise.
It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the landlord has failed to maintain adequate records, which has impacted this service’s ability to carry out a thorough investigation, as highlighted at various points throughout this report. This was a failure by the landlord and contributed to the other failures identified in this report.

The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the property

The landlord’s repairs policy states it will respond to routine repairs within 28 working days. The policy also states that it will respond to planned routine repairs, which are repairs which require additional time or cost to plan, within 60 working days.
The Ombudsman expects landlords to complete repairs within a reasonable time. What is reasonable will depend on the circumstances and the nature of the repair. Where there is a delay in completing repairs, the Ombudsman expects landlords to be proactive in:
1. communicating the cause of delays to residents
2. explaining to residents what it intends to do about the delays
3. identifying what it can do to mitigate the impact of delays on residents.
The landlord inspected the property for damp and mould on 27 January 2022. That report identified ‘light’ mould growth in some areas of the property, but did not identify any structural causes or any evidence of rising or penetrating damp. The report recommended that the resident continuously heat the property.
In January 2023, the resident told the landlord that the mould growth had become worse since the last inspection.
In its first stage 1 complaint response on 31 January 2023, the landlord noted the resident’s concerns and told her how to report problems with damp and mould. There is no evidence that any inspection was done at or around this time. This was a significant failure by the landlord.
In the Ombudsman’s opinion, the landlord’s response implied that it would not take any action in relation to the damp and mould until the resident raised those concerns in a specific way. This is despite the resident already raising those concerns as part of her complaint. It was not reasonable for the landlord to then tell the resident that she needed to report those same problems to the landlord again in a different way.
Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to determine what concerns were raised by the resident about the damp and mould after this time, if any at all. What is known is that the resident approached this service for support in escalating her complaint about the damp and mould in June 2023.
In its second stage 1 complaint response on 26 June 2023, the landlord acknowledged that the resident had raised concerns about damp and mould in January 2023. Despite this, the landlord went on to state that it had no record of the resident raising any concerns about damp and mould since 2019. Again, this was not appropriate.
A damp and mould survey was conducted on 31 July 2023 and a report was produced on 15 August 2023. It therefore took the landlord at least 6 months to inspect the property. There is no evidence on which the Ombudsman could conclude that this delay was either reasonable or unavoidable. This was a failure by the landlord.
The August 2023 report identified mild to moderate levels of damp and mould throughout the property. It identified degraded windows, a bridged damp proof course (DPC), and a lack of ventilation as the likely causes. The report recommended the landlord take immediate action.
The report identified extensive repairs, which included:
1. allow 150mm clearance to the DPC around the property
2. further inspection to identify whether cavity wall insulation was present
3. CCTV inspection of the drains
4. renew rainwater items
5. repointing mortar to the side and rear of the property
6. renew all windows
7. structural engineer to survey cracks to the side and rear of the property
8. mould wash, redecorate with anti-mould paint, and install thermal wallpaper to all rooms in the house
9. installation of thermal plasterboard to external walls in the kitchen and bathroom
10. extend bathroom tiling to the washing area
11. adjust external door in the kitchen to eliminate gaps between the door and the frame
12. fill holes around pipework in kitchen cupboard
13. relay loft insulation
14. renew loft hatch and frame.
In its first stage 2 complaint response on 7 November 2023, the landlord confirmed that these repairs remained outstanding, acknowledged there had been a delay in progressing repairs, apologised for this, and offered £500 compensation. While this went someway to recognising things had gone wrong – there was an opportunity for the landlord to have learned what went wrong and why in order to avoid further delays moving forward. This is part of learning from outcomes as set out in the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles.
The CCTV inspection of the drains was completed on or around 30 November 2023. No further repairs were identified at that inspection. However, the contractor which conducted the inspection told the landlord on that day:
1. the property was significantly affected by damp and that there was black mould on many of the internal walls
2. the doors were poorly fitted which allowed significant draughts
3. the property was cold, despite the heating being turned on
4. they were concerned for the resident’s health and wellbeing.
The resident contacted this service on 14 December 2023 and was dissatisfied that the damp and mould repairs had not progressed and that the landlord was ignoring her. Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to determine if and when the resident may have contacted the landlord about this before 14 December 2023.
In its second stage 2 complaint response on 16 January 2024, the landlord acknowledged the repairs had been identified on 15 August 2023, but it had not raised the repairs until 8 November 2023. There is no evidence on which the Ombudsman could conclude that this delay was reasonable or unavoidable. Therefore, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the delay in raising the repairs unnecessarily delayed progress on responding to the damp and mould. Moreover, the landlord had already recognised avoidable delays in its initial stage 2 response. This was a failure by the landlord.
The landlord stated the resident had asked for the internal repairs to be delayed until after Christmas in 2023. The resident has not disputed this. Therefore, the landlord cannot be held responsible for the additional delay between December 2023 and January 2024.
The landlord also stated that the external repairs had been completed at various dates between 15 November 2023 and 5 January 2024. Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to verify:
1. what repairs the landlord completed and when, if any at all
2. that the landlord made reasonable efforts to check the effectiveness of any repairs that may have been completed.
In an email to the landlord on 22 March 2024, a contractor told the landlord that it had completed the external repairs at or around that date. Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to verify what external repairs were carried out at or around this time. It also indicates that the claims made by the landlord about the external repairs in its second stage 2 complaint response were incorrect.
A second damp and mould survey was conducted on or around 23 April 2024. It is not known why another survey was conducted. The April 2024 inspection identified mild to moderate levels of damp and mould throughout the property. The report identified extensive repairs, which included:
1. remove newly laid ACO drain and rear patio paving
2. relay below damp proof course
3. clean out gutters and downpipes
4. install roof tile air vents
5. remove moss from roof
6. install new roof membrane at the bottom of the roof
7. replace all external windows including trickle vents
8. remove concrete ramp to the property and replace with a ‘vertical DMP’ ramp
9. professional to inspect and assess whether the size of the radiators in each room was adequate
10. install ventilation fans in the kitchen and bathroom
11. renew defective plaster in kitchen
12. install ventilation grills to hallway cupboard
13. install thermal plasterboard to external wall in the living room
14. install new carpets and underlay
15. remove insulation from eaves in the loft to allow airflow
16. renew remaining loft insulation.
Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to determine which of these repairs were completed by the landlord or when, if any at all. It is also not possible to determine which repairs identified in the August 2023 inspection report were completed, if any at all. This was a significant failure by the landlord.
There is no evidence the landlord has considered the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould.

Summary and conclusions on the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould

Considering all the circumstances, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that there was maladministration by the landlord in its response to the reports of damp and mould, in that it:
1. unreasonably told the resident to report concerns about damp and mould which it was already aware of
2. unreasonably delayed in inspecting the property.
Furthermore, due to the lack of adequate records it is not possible to determine:
1. what associated repairs were carried out, or when
2. if repairs were completed, whether the time taken to complete those repairs was reasonable or consistent with the landlord’s policy
3. whether the landlord had taken reasonable steps to check the effectiveness of any repairs.

The landlord’s handling of repairs

The resident has complained about repairs to the:
1. external doors
2. windows
3. external lights
4. kitchen fitting

The Ombudsman has investigated these repairs (below) separately to aid clarity.

The repairs to the external doors

The landlord’s repair obligations and the Ombudsman’s expectations in relation to repairs are detailed at paragraphs 12 to 13 of this report.
A copy of the resident’s original complaint has not been made available to this service. However, it is understood the resident raised concerns about the external doors being warped, on or around 3 January 2023.
In its first stage 1 complaint response on 31 January 2023, the landlord stated the doors had been replaced in 2019. In an ‘update’ to its first stage 1 complaint response on 17 March 2023, the landlord told the resident it had referred the external doors for replacement as part of its major works programme.
There is no evidence that the landlord inspected the doors at any time between January and March 2023. Therefore, there is no evidence on which the Ombudsman could conclude that the landlord’s decision, or the time taken to reach that decision, was reasonable.
In its second stage 1 complaint response on 26 June 2023, the landlord confirmed the external doors had been added to its 2024/25 major works programme, and that it would confirm an appointment for this nearer the time. It also stated it would continue to repair the doors in the interim and that it had booked an appointment to inspect the doors on 27 June 2023. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, this was reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances – but should have happened much sooner.
Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to verify:
1. whether an inspection of the doors was in fact carried out on or around 27 June 2023
2. if an inspection was carried out, whether any repairs were identified
3. if repairs were identified, whether they were completed
4. if repairs were completed, whether they were done within a reasonable time.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the windows

As noted at paragraph 37 of this report, a copy of the resident’s original complaint has not been made available. However, it is understood that in January 2023 she was dissatisfied because she had been told the windows would be replaced, but nothing had been done.
In its first stage 1 complaint response on 31 January 2023, the landlord stated the windows had previously been repaired on 1 November 2021 and that it had no record of any repairs relating to the windows being raised since then.
In its update to the first stage 1 complaint response, the landlord stated it could find no evidence that the windows were due to be replaced.
There is no evidence that the landlord undertook any inspection of the windows following the resident’s complaint, or otherwise made any efforts to understand why the resident believed the windows were in need of replacement. This was a failure by the landlord.
In its second stage 1 complaint response on 26 June 2023, the landlord confirmed the windows had been added to its 2024/25 major works programme for replacement. It also stated it would continue to repair the windows in the interim and had booked an appointment for 27 June 2023 to inspect them. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, this was reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances, but it is not clear why this action could not have been taken sooner.
Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to verify:
1. whether an inspection of the windows was in fact carried out on or around 27 June 2023
2. if an inspection was carried out, whether any repairs were identified
3. if repairs were identified, whether they were completed
4. if repairs were completed, whether they were done within a reasonable time.
In its second stage 2 complaint response on 16 January 2024, the landlord stated the windows were renewed on 3 January 2024. There is no evidence to corroborate the landlord’s claim. This was a failure by the landlord.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to an external light

As noted at paragraph 37 of this report, a copy of the resident’s original complaint has not been made available. It is therefore not known what specific concerns the resident raised about an external light in January 2023.
In its first stage 1 complaint response on 31 January 2023, the landlord acknowledged the resident had raised concerns about an external light in her complaint and stated it had previously told the resident how to report repairs. The response did not specify any action the landlord intended to take in response to the resident’s concerns. This was not appropriate.
In its second stage 1 complaint response on 26 June 2023, the landlord stated it had inspected and repaired an external light on 14 June 2023. There is no evidence to corroborate what repairs the landlord may have made to an external light, if any at all.
Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible for the Ombudsman to draw any meaningful conclusions about what the nature of the repair was, the landlord’s response to it, and whether this was fair and reasonable in the circumstances. This was a failure by the landlord.

The landlord’s handling of repairs about a kitchen fitting

The landlord replaced the resident’s kitchen, which was completed on 7 June 2023. In its second stage 1 complaint response on 26 June 2023, the landlord stated the resident had complained about the quality of the kitchen fitting and outstanding snagging issues during a conversation on 20 June 2023.
No contemporaneous record of a conversation between the resident and the landlord on or around 20 June 2023 has been made available. It is therefore not possible to determine whether the landlord’s account was accurate.
In its second stage 1 complaint response, the landlord stated that a cupboard door, which had been scratched by its contractors, had been ordered and was due to be replaced the following week. It also stated that its contractors would touch up paintwork on internal doors and remove waste from the resident’s garden.
Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not known if or when the contractors returned to resolve the snagging issues. This was a failure by the landlord.
On 8 August 2023, the resident contacted the landlord for an update on the repairs. She was dissatisfied that she had tried to contact the contractors on several occasions but heard nothing back. She stated that the floor had not been sealed, there was a missing kickboard, the metal runner separating the kitchen did not fit, and doors were scratched. This indicates that the landlord had not completed the repairs as it had previously said it would.
In response, the landlord stated it had booked an inspection for 17 August 2023. Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to determine:
1. whether an inspection of the kitchen took place on or around 17 August 2023 and if it did, whether any repairs were identified
2. if repairs were identified, whether these were completed and when
3. if repairs were completed, whether this was done within a reasonable time.
The resident contacted the landlord for an update on the kitchen repairs again on 31 August 2023. This indicates that the kitchen repairs had not been completed. As of the date of this determination, it is not known whether any of the kitchen repairs have been completed.

Summary and conclusions on the handling of the repairs to the external doors, windows, external lights and kitchen fitting

Considering all the circumstances, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the repairs. Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to determine:
1. what inspections have been carried out or when, and whether the time taken to do so was reasonable
2. whether any repairs were identified or completed, and whether the time taken to do so was reasonable
3. whether the landlord has taken any action to check the effectiveness of any repairs completed, and whether the time taken to do so was reasonable.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints

The landlord operated a 2-stage complaints policy. The policy states that the landlord will provide a stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days of the complaint being logged. The landlord will provide a stage 2 complaint response within 20 working days of the complaint being escalated.
The landlord stated the resident raised her first complaint on 3 January 2023. A copy of that complaint has not been made available to this service. Therefore, it is not possible to determine precisely what the resident complained about, or for the Ombudsman to conclude with any confidence that the resident had not raised those complaints earlier. This was a failure by the landlord.
The landlord provided its first stage 1 complaint response on 31 January 2023, which was at least 20 working days after the resident raised her complaint. This was not appropriate, as it was not consistent with the landlord’s policy.
The resident approached this service for support in June 2023. She told this service she had experienced difficulty in escalating her complaint. Due to the lack of adequate records, it is not possible to verify the resident’s account. However, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that given the landlord’s lack of adequate records generally, the resident’s account is plausible.
This service instructed the landlord to provide the resident with a complaint response. In reply to this service, the landlord explained it would provide a new stage 1 complaint response, as the resident’s complaint included new matters. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, this was reasonable in the circumstances.
The landlord provided its second stage 1 complaint response on 26 June 2023, which was 10 working days later. This was appropriate as it was consistent with the landlord’s policy.
The resident expressed dissatisfaction with the landlord’s second stage 1 complaint response on several occasions. This included a telephone call on 11 August 2023 in which she explicitly stated she did not want the complaint to be closed. The landlord does not appear to have identified these expressions of dissatisfaction as complaint escalations. This was a failure by the landlord.
The landlord provided its first stage 2 complaint response on 7 November 2023, which was at least 62 working days after the resident had escalated her complaint. This was not appropriate as it was not consistent with the landlord’s policy.
In its first stage 2 complaint response, the landlord stated the resident escalated her complaint on 6 September 2023. No record of any complaint escalation on that date has been made available to this service. This further indicates the landlord has not maintained adequate records. This also further indicates the landlord had not recognised the resident’s complaint escalation in August 2023.
In its first stage 2 complaint response, the landlord commented on the external doors and the damp and mould repairs. The response did not mention the other repairs which the resident had complained about. This was not appropriate. The Ombudsman expects landlord’s to be able to effectively manage complaints without the involvement of this service. This includes responding to all aspects of a resident’s complaint.
The landlord provided a second stage 2 complaint response on 16 January 2024. This was not appropriate. The landlord in effect followed a 3-stage complaints process. This is not consistent with the expectations set out in the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
The Ombudsman notes that this service had already accepted the resident’s complaint for investigation before the landlord issued its second stage 2 complaint response. Therefore, the landlord’s decision to issue further complaint responses which were not consistent with its policy did not cause any detriment to the resident, or delay her ability to seek redress through this service.
Considering all the circumstances, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the associated complaints, in that it:
1. did not maintain adequate records of the resident’s complaint
2. unreasonably delayed in providing complaint responses
3. did not recognise the resident’s complaint escalation at the appropriate time.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its record-keeping practices in this case.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of reports of damp and mould in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of repairs to the:
1. external doors
2. windows
3. external lights
4. kitchen fitting
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the associated complaints.

Orders

The landlord must within 28 days of the date of this determination:
1. pay the resident £1,250 (an additional £750), comprised of:
  1. £750 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the unreasonable delay in responding to the reports of damp and mould
  2. £400 for the impact caused by the delay in progressing the repairs
  3. £100 for the complaint handling failure identified in this report
  4. this sum is inclusive of the £500 previously offered by the landlord, which it may deduct from the total if it has already paid this to the resident.
2. provide evidence of the above payment to the Ombudsman
3. contact the resident and arrange to inspect the property to identify what repairs remain outstanding. The surveyor must produce a report with details of all works, set out in a scope of works. The report must include date-stamped photographs. The landlord must provide a copy of this report to the resident and the Ombudsman within 5 working days of receipt.
The Ombudsman orders the landlord to, within 56 days of this determination:
1. make all reasonable efforts to complete all outstanding repairs in the survey report
2. provide evidence of completed repairs to the Ombudsman in a post-inspection completion report, together with date and time-stamped photographs.
3. review and consider the findings in this report as well as the Spotlight Report on Knowledge Information Management. It must then decide if further guidance and training is required for its front-end staff on the importance of creating and maintaining accurate records. The landlord must set out its decision on this in a report to the Ombudsman.