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

Leeds City Council (202234201)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202234201

Leeds City Council

31 May 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

  1. The complaint is about:
    1. The landlord’s handling of a roof leak and associated remedial work.
    2. The conduct of a landlord contractor.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling in this case.

Background

  1. The resident lives in a 3-bedroom house on a secure tenancy agreement with the landlord from October 2022.
  2. The resident first reported a roof leak to the landlord on 2 November 2022. The landlord attended to repair the roof on 8 November 2022 and conducted a temporary repair.
  3. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 9 December 2022 about the length of time it was taking to complete the permanent repair. The landlord provided a verbal response as part of stage 1 of its complaint process on 22 December 2022. The landlord acknowledged it had not communicated fully with the resident about the roof repairs and it apologised to her. The landlord assured the resident that additional follow-on repairs to damaged internal walls caused by rain penetration would be completed once the roof repair was resolved.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint to the landlord on 26 January 2023. The resident also raised a complaint about the landlord’s contractor’s conduct while  working on the roof. The resident alleged the contractor was playing loud music, and when she asked them to turn it down, one of the operatives swore at her and then left the property without completing the work. The repairs to the roof were subsequently completed on 27 January 2023.
  5. The landlord responded to the resident at stage 2 of its complaints process on 16 February 2023. The landlord offered the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the inconvenience caused to her by its delayed action. The landlord acknowledged the resident was unable to use a bedroom and it accepted the roof repairs had been delayed and this had resulted in damp at the property for an extended period of time. The landlord told the resident it had referred her complaint about the conduct of operatives onto its contractor and assured her the matter would be dealt with appropriately.

Summary of events after the landlord’s complaints process

  1. In January 2023, the landlord arranged for a damp and mould treatment of the internal damaged areas. The landlord has recorded the resident refused access. The landlord attended the property on 26 April 2023 to complete a quality control inspection and the resident refused access. The resident contacted the landlord the following day and said all work was complete and there was no need to inspect the property.
  2. The landlord did not receive any reports from the resident between January 2023 to October 2023 about any concerns with the roof or internal damage.
  3. The resident reported another roof leak to the landlord on 10 October 2023 and work to repair the leak was completed on 24 November 2023. The landlord’s technical report showed that there was water damage from the roof and the previous leak caused to upstairs bedrooms. It recommended plaster work to these areas.
  4. Plaster repairs were arranged for 13 December 2023, however, the operative who attended reported the roof was still not fully fixed and the internal walls were wet and therefore the work could not be completed. The landlord returned to conduct roof repairs on 3 January 2023 in a different location from the original repair.
  5. The landlord arranged the subsequent required plaster repairs but recorded ‘no access’ when it attended on  5 June 2023. The landlord has advised this Service the work was rebooked for 2 February 2024; however, the work was again not completed due to no access.
  6. The resident raised concerns to the landlord as she believed the roof leak had not been stopped. The landlord inspected the property on 24 February 2024 and confirmed the roof leak was made good by its repairs. The landlord attempted to arrange further internal plaster repairs and despite its attempt to conduct the repairs on three separate occasions, the resident did not make contact with the landlord. The landlord has stated it is continuing attempts to contact the resident to arrange the plaster repair.
  7. In January 2024, the landlord reviewed its handling of the whole roof issues at the property and revised its offer of compensation to include an additional £900 from its original £100 to make a total of £1000 as follows:
    1. £600 in recognition that the resident could not use all rooms in the property and re-decoration costs;
    2. £150 to reflect the time and trouble sustained by the resident in making their complaints;
    3. £150 for distress and inconvenience caused to the resident;
    4. £100 offered at stage 2 of its complaints process to reflect the landlord’s initial delayed action to repair the roof.

Assessment and findings

Jurisdiction

  1. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
  2. After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with paragraph 42(h) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the following aspect of the complaint is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction:
    1. The conduct of a landlord contractor.
  3. Paragraph 42(h) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme concerns terms of employment or other personnel issues, or the ending of a service tenancy following the ending of a contract of employment. As the matter deals with personnel matters, it falls out of scope for the assessment of this investigation to make . However, this Service has seen information provided by the landlord which shows that the resident’s complaint regarding the conduct of a contractor was forward in full to the contractors employer who dealt with the matter using their internal processes.

Scope of Investigation

  1. The landlord has provided information to this Service about a separate roof leak that occurred 11 months after the roof leak referred to within this complaint investigation. This investigation deals with the landlord’s handling of the roof leak relating to the complaint made on 9 December 2022. If the resident is dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of recent repairs to her roof, she should complain to the landlord using its complaints process and in turn, use the Ombudsman’s service if she remains dissatisfied.

Roof leak and associated remedial work

  1. The resident first reported a roof leak to the landlord on 2 November 2022. The landlord arranged an urgent repair the following day and attended the property on 8 November 2022. The landlord’s roof contractor inspected the roof and conducted a temporary repair. The landlord’s responsive roof repair policy states that it will conduct priority repairs within 3 working days. The landlord responded slightly outside of its target response time in 4 working days.
  2. The landlord’s contractor identified additional work was required to the roof for which it required approval from the landlord before it could be commenced. The landlord approved the required work on 28 November 2022, 2 weeks later. 
  3. The landlord arranged for scaffolding to be erected at the property on 19 December 2022. The landlord told this Service the delay in starting the works were because the scaffold company did not complete the erection of scaffolding over the Christmas holiday period. 
  4. The landlord’s contractor attended to complete the additional works to remove and refix roof tiles, supply and fix new eaves ventilators and renew the roof felt and battens on 27 January 2023. The landlord’s responsive roof repair policy states it will conduct general roof work within 20 working days. Given the resident had reported her initial concerns to the landlord about the roof leak at the beginning of November 2022, it was inappropriate that the landlord did not comply with its policy and it was unreasonable that it delayed in completing the full extent of roof works by 3 months.
  5. The resident raised her dissatisfaction to the landlord about its delayed handling of the roof leak on 9 December 2022.  She was concerned because some internal walls were wet and mouldy. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident verbally on 22 December 2022. It recorded its conversation with the resident and it apologised for the lack of communication about when the follow-on roof works would be completed. It had raised additional work to wash, treat and paint the wall affected by the roof leak and it would arrange work for a date after the roof work was complete. It recorded its learning from the complaint to improve its communication with resident’s about outstanding repairs.
  6. The landlord inspected the property on 17 January 2023. Photographs from the inspection showed significant damage to internal areas. However, the photograph location is not recorded and therefore it is unclear what rooms the damage relates to.
  7. On 26 January 2023, the resident escalated her complaint as she was still experiencing issues with the roof. The landlord registered a stage 2 complaint and acknowledged the complaint the same day .
  8. The landlord responded to the resident at stage 2 of its complaints process on 16 February 2023. It had spoken to the resident on 13 February 2023 to fully understand her complaint. In its response it recapped on its action to date and acknowledged its delay in completing roof work. The landlord recognised the damage caused to the property internally and that the resident was unable to use a bedroom and offered the resident compensation of £100. While the landlord had acknowledged some of its failings through its internal complaints process, its initial offer of £100 compensation falls short of what the Ombudsman would expect for such significant failings that had impacted the resident’s full use of the property.
  9. In conclusion, the landlord delayed slightly in conducting an initial temporary roof repair and then delayed significantly by 3 months in completing full roof works. This resulted in significant internal damage and the resident’s inability to use a bedroom. There is evidence the landlord attempted to conduct internal repairs to damaged areas, however, the resident refused access to the landlord and it is still actively seeking to resolve this issue. There are gaps in the landlord’s proactive communication with the resident about how it intended to resolve the internal damage given the resident had refused access, it was aware a bedroom was not in use and it had a duty to fulfil its obligations under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to ensure the structure of the property was maintained.
  10. The landlord did increase its compensation offer to the resident to £1000, 11 months after the landlord’s internal complaints process had ended to reflect the development of other unrelated roof issues. It is noted the landlord has already paid this sum to the resident. This level of compensation was fully reflective of the landlord’s failings within this complaint. However, it was inappropriately offered significantly after the landlord’s complaints process had ended. The failure to provide suitable compensation at the material time of the complaint amounts to maladministration.

Complaint handling

  1. The resident raised her complaint with the landlord on 9 December 2022. The landlord provided a stage 1 verbal complaint response to the resident on 22 December 2022. Section 5.1 of the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code states “landlords must respond to the complaint within 10 working days of the complaint being logged. The landlord responded within 9 working days which was an appropriate timeframe. However, it provided a verbal response and did not follow this up in writing to the resident. The landlord could have followed up its complaint response in writing for completeness and to assist in robust record management.
  2. The resident escalated her complaint on 26 January 2023 and the landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaints process on 16 February 2023. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code states landlords must respond to the stage 2 complaint within 20 working days. The landlord responded to the complaint within 15 working days this time in writing and this was therefore an appropriate response by the landlord.
  3. The landlord did eventually reflect on its full roof repair failures; however, this was at a much later date, 11 months after the landlord’s complaint process had ended and because further issues had arisen with the leak. The landlord increased its compensation offer to the resident from £100 within its complaint process to £1000. While the landlord was right to re-evaluate, its compensation offer as roof repairs progressed, it missed an opportunity to fully reflect on its failures identified within its complaint investigation and this was inappropriate.
  4. The landlord’s revised compensation offer includes £150 in recognition of its complaint handling failures which is an amount equivalent to that which would be ordered by the Ombudsman to put right the service failure in this instance. It is noted the landlord has paid the resident this amount of compensation.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the roof repairs and associated work.
  2. In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord should provide the resident and this Service with its action plan for resolving the incomplete plaster repairs.
  2. The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance within the timescales set out above.