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

Camden Council (202317774)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202317774

Camden Council

28 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 the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of low hot water pressure.
  2. The Ombudsman has also taken the decision to investigate the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The property is a second floor flat.
  2. On 24 June 2023 the resident reported problems with the hot water pressure in her property. The landlord’s operative attended the property on 24 June 2023 but was unable to resolve the problem. Dissatisfied with the service provided by the landlord, the resident made a complaint on 1 July 2023. The resident stated she had persistently low hot water pressure which was affecting her ability to have a shower and maintain her personal hygiene. The resident expressed the embarrassment this was causing and how it had affected her self-confidence.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 13 July 2023 in which it partially upheld the resident’s complaint. The landlord said it could not see any record of the resident contacting it to report further issues after the appointment on 24 June 2023, therefore it thought the problem had been resolved. It acknowledged there was an appointment booked for 7 July 2023 to inspect the water tanks, but it did not attend. The appointment was rescheduled for 31 July 2023. The landlord said it was unable to bring forward the rescheduled appointment as there were not any appointments available sooner. It acknowledged this would be an inconvenience to the resident as she would not be able to use her shower until it attended.
  4. When further appointments did not resolve the low hot water pressure, the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 10 August 2023. She was dissatisfied the landlord had not contacted her as it had stated it would and the low hot water pressure had been a problem since June which was affecting her ability to wash her hair and maintain personal hygiene. Prior to a stage 2 response, the landlord issued a “review stage complaint” response on 16 August 2023. In this, the landlord stated the time it had taken to address the low hot water pressure was in line with its repairs policy and as such, compensation was not warranted.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 24 August 2023. It upheld the resident’s complaint. The landlord stated the problem was more complex than initially evident. It said a works order had been closed without resolution which it acknowledged was poor customer service. The landlord awarded £50 compensation for the resident’s time and trouble in bringing the complaint and asked the repairs team to contact the resident within 5 working days regarding how it was going to progress the repair. The landlord booked an appointment to attend the resident’s property on 19 September 2023. When the landlord was unable to bring this appointment forward it issued a “review stage complaint” response on 29 August 2023 offering the resident £50 compensation for the delays she was experiencing.
  6. On 22 March 2024 the resident told this Service she was dissatisfied with the final response from the landlord. She was not happy with the length of time it had taken to address the low hot water problem and the compensation she was offered. The resident said the repair was completed in September 2023, but she is still having problems with the water pressure and the hot water temperature being too hot. The resident wants her request for compensation to be reviewed.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

9. The resident referenced in her correspondence to the landlord and the Ombudsman that her mental and physical health have been affected. While the Ombudsman is sorry to hear this, it is beyond the expertise of this Service to determine a causal link between the landlord’s action (or lack thereof) and the impact on the resident’s health.

  1. Often, when there is a dispute over whether someone has been injured or a health condition has been made worse, the courts are able to rely on expert evidence in the form of a medico-legal report. This will give an expert opinion of the cause of any injury or deterioration of a condition. This would be a more appropriate and effective means of considering such an allegation and so should the resident wish to pursue this matter, she should do so via this route.  This investigation will only consider whether the landlord acted in accordance with its policy and legal obligations, and fairly in the circumstance.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of low hot water pressure.

  1. The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Section 11 requires landlords “to keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling-house for the supply of water, gas and electricity and for sanitation”. It also requires landlords “to keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling-house for space heating and water heating”. Therefore, once on notice, the landlord is required to investigate the resident’s repair reports and carry out the works it is responsible for within a reasonable period of time, in accordance with its obligations in law and the resident’s tenancy agreement.
  2. The landlord’s Tenant’s Guide states “We are responsible for the water supply from the meter, which is normally outside your home, to appliances and fittings that use water inside your home”.
  3. When the resident raised her initial report of low hot water pressure on 24 June 2023, the landlord responded appropriately and sent an engineer to attend the same day. The engineer removed an airlock. Another appointment took place on 30 June 2023. However, the outcome of that appointment was unclear from the evidence.
  4. Another appointment was made for 7 July 2023, but this was cancelled by the landlord as a plumber was needed, not an engineer which had been originally scheduled by the landlord. It is the Ombudsman’s view, that the landlord should have established in the first instance which was the correct operative for the job when originally booking the appointment. This would have prevented the need for the landlord to cancel the appointment. The resident said she was not advised of this cancellation. This would have caused the resident frustration as she had unnecessarily taken a day off work to wait in for this appointment. The appointment cancellation also meant there was no resolution to the low hot water pressure problem and therefore further delays, this would have caused the resident more frustration. The landlord could have reduced the resident’s frustration by managing her expectations on the timescale for her repair. It is not clear from the landlord’s communication or policies which timescale this repair falls into.
  5. The landlord rescheduled the appointment for 31 July 2023 which meant the resident had a further 24 calendar days with low hot water pressure at her property. In the stage 1 complaint response the landlord said it had tried to bring the appointment forward, which was appropriate and reasonable. However, the landlord advised it had been unsuccessful in bringing the appointment forward as there was no availability for an earlier appointment. The stage 1 complaint response acknowledged the wait for an appointment would be an inconvenience for the resident and that she would not be able to use her shower until the landlord attended. The landlord advised it was unable to award any compensation. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to provide some remedy when it was unable to bring forward the appointment.
  6. Throughout the resident’s communication with the landlord, she repeatedly explained the challenges she was experiencing with carrying out basic personal hygiene tasks, such as showering and washing her hair. The resident expressed how this was affecting her self-confidence and her professional life as she was having to go to work “feeling unclean and dishevelled”. She told the landlord she was embarrassed and not being able to wash properly was causing skin and scalp problems. The resident advised the landlord her mental health was being affected by “undue anxiety” which had caused a “depressive episode”. Despite the resident explaining these issues, the landlord did not expedite the repair in the way it should have.
  7. There was no evidence to suggest the landlord exhausted all options to try to bring the appointment on 31 July 2023 forward. It appears only one email was sent within the landlord. No response to this email was logged and there was no evidence to show that the landlord tried to follow up on the email it had sent. The Ombudsman would expect the landlord to take a more proactive approach in attempting to bring forward the appointment because it was the landlord that cancelled the original appointment on 7 July 2023 as it had allocated the job to the wrong operative. Due to the problem affecting the hot water supply and the resident clearly expressing how the problem was adversely affecting her, it would have been a customer-focused approach for the landlord to have tried to bring this appointment forward by exploring options such as using an in-house plumber or another contractor.
  8. When the low hot water pressure was not fixed at the appointment on 31 July 2023 the resident had to repeatedly chase the landlord afterwards to try to progress the repair. The resident described to the landlord that she felt it was sending her “around and around in circles” as she tried unsuccessfully to get resolution to the problem. The Ombudsman would expect the landlord to keep the resident updated about what action it was going to take. The resident should not have needed to chase the landlord to get updates and to get the work progressed.
  9. Another appointment on 10 August 2023 was unsuccessful at resolving the problem so the operative requested a joint visit with the landlord’s plumbing supervisor and the contractor’s plumbing supervisor. The works order shows this request was sent to the landlord’s management to authorise. The contractor contacted the landlord to arrange the joint appointment but there was no response, so the job was closed on 23 August 2023. The Ombudsman would expect the landlord to be monitoring the outcomes of appointments and taking the appropriate follow-up action in a timely manner. It was evident that there was a lack of ownership of the resident’s case which meant the contractor was not responded to. This caused the works order to be closed and further delays for the resident.
  10. The resident chased the landlord several times between 10 August and 23 August 2023, the date when the job was closed. Had the landlord ensured that it had regular contact with the resident, it would have become immediately apparent that this matter had not been resolved. It appears that the landlord did not identify the outstanding action needed to progress the repair, despite the resident’s repeated contact to highlight it. This was a missed opportunity to arrange the joint visit with the contractor and prevent the works order being closed.
  11. It was unclear from the landlord’s policy which repair priority category and timescale the resident’s repair should have been allocated. This appeared to have led to conflicting opinions between departments under what timescale the repair should be handled. The works order initially raised for the repair was categorised as urgent. When unresolved at the first appointment, the following works order was assigned under the landlord’s routine timescale of within 20 working days. However, in its review stage response issued on 16 August 2023, the landlord stated the resident’s repair was deemed an “essential repair” to be completed within 35 working days. The evidence provided to this Service shows there was not a repair priority categorised as “essential” with a timescale for completion within 35 working days. It was unclear where this timescale referenced in the review stage response came from and why it did not match the timescale on the works orders, or the timescales publicised to residents and provided to this Service.
  12. The landlord’s tenant guide defines “urgent” repairs which are due to be completed within 5 working days as “urgent repairs that are not considered an emergency but which if not completed quickly would cause significant nuisance”. Based on this definition, it is the Ombudsman’s view that it would have been reasonable to categorise the resident’s report of low hot water pressure as an urgent repair, rather than as a routine repair. However, the Ombudsman appreciates that sometimes repairs can take longer than anticipated if the repair is more complex than initially evident. When this occurs, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to clearly communicate this to the resident and manage the resident’s expectations on timescales.
  13. The error with the works order being closed was identified on 24 August 2023 as part of the stage 2 investigation. In its stage 2 response issued on 24 August 2023 the landlord offered £50 compensation for the resident’s time and trouble in bringing the complaint. It was fair for the landlord to acknowledge the time and trouble the resident had experienced in raising a complaint. However, the amount of compensation offered to the resident was below the lower range of financial remedy for time and trouble stated in the landlord’s remedies policy and procedure. The landlord should have at least made an offer that was in line with its policy, and which also recognised its failure to provide a service, the distress, and the delay in completing the repair. 
  14. In the stage 2 response the landlord said it would arrange for the repairs team to contact the resident within 5 working days. It was unclear whether the repairs team contacted the resident. However, the evidence shows the resident contacted the landlord on 29 August 2023 asking when somebody was going to attend to fix the problem. The resident was advised an appointment had been booked for 19 September 2023. This meant the resident experienced a further delay of 21 calendar days without adequate hot water supply to her property.
  15. At this point the landlord offered the resident £50 compensation for the delays she had experienced in a “review stage complaint” response issued on 29 August 2023. It was appropriate and reasonable for the landlord to offer the resident some compensation. However, the landlord used a repair timescale of 35 working days to calculate delays for the compensation, but this was not one of the landlord’s publicised timescales for a repair. This meant the delay experienced by the resident was not accurately calculated by the landlord.
  16. Dissatisfied with the further delay, on 31 August 2023 the resident contacted the landlord’s CEO. The resident explained that she had no hot water or would have a small stream of extremely hot water which was scalding. She explained that the kitchen water supply was also affected and she could not wash dishes without the risk of scalding. As a result of the resident contacting the CEO, an appointment was arranged for 4 September 2023. This was an appropriate response which acknowledged the urgency of the situation.
  17. The appointment on 4 September 2023 did not resolve the problem and resulted in further inconvenience for the resident as it caused another issue with the water supply which the resident had to report to the landlord.
  18. The repairs logs show the low hot water pressure was repaired on 18 September 2023. This was 86 calendar days after the resident initially reported the problem. The Ombudsman appreciates that sometimes repairs cannot be fixed at the first appointment and further investigations may be needed. However, this was an excessive length of time for the resident to be left without an adequate supply of hot water to her property and the delays were mainly caused by the landlord’s management of the repair. The evidence shows that this problem would have remained unresolved for a longer length of time had the resident not have persistently chased the landlord and reached out to the contractor and CEO. It was unreasonable and unfair that the resident had to make excessive contact to progress her repair. The landlord should have been driving the resolution.
  19. While repairs logs show the problem was resolved, the resident has advised this Service that she still experiences problems with the hot water pressure.
  20. In light of the above, the Ombudsman has determined there was maladministration. To reflect the level of detriment caused to the resident by the landlord’s handling of the reports of low hot water pressure, the landlord should award the resident £300 in compensation. This is in accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which indicates that the Ombudsman may require the landlord to award such an amount where there was a failure that adversely affected the resident. This Service has also ordered the landlord to contact the resident to resolve any outstanding problems with the hot water pressure at her property.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy states there are 2 internal stages to its complaints process which is in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). However, the landlord issued the resident with 2 “review stage” responses in addition to its stage 1 and stage 2 responses. This was not in line with the landlord’s policy or the Code.
  2. The second review stage response issued on 29 August 2023 which offered the resident compensation when further delays came to light may have been appropriate. However, the first review stage response which was issued on 16 August 2023 was unnecessary and inappropriate as the stage 2 investigation was underway. The content of this review stage response should have formed part of the stage 2 response rather than an additional communication. In this review stage response, there was no reference to being able to escalate the complaint and this Service’s details were provided to the resident at the end of the letter. This could have given the resident the impression this response was her stage 2 response and that she had exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure, which was not the case.
  3. The Ombudsman has concluded that the landlord unnecessarily confused the complaints process by including these extra stages, and this meant that the resident was delayed in being able to bring her complaint to this Service for investigation. The approach did not align with the landlord’s policy or the Code. As such, the Ombudsman has ordered the landlord to award £50 for its complaints handling failures. This is in accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which indicates that an award of this amount may be ordered where there was a minor failure by the landlord in service and it did not appropriately acknowledge this or fully put things right.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of low hot water pressure.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay compensation of £350. This is comprised of:
    1. £300 for delays, distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of low hot water pressure.
    2. £50 for the landlord’s complaint handling failures.
  2. This £350 is in addition to the £100 compensation the landlord has previously offered the resident resulting in a total award of £450. The compensation must be paid directly to the resident and not applied to her rent account. The landlord must provide evidence that it has complied with this order within 4 weeks of the date of this report by submitting a copy of the remittance advice, or equivalent document, to this Service.
  3. The landlord is ordered to contact the resident and to resolve any outstanding problems with the hot water pressure. The landlord must provide a report from a plumber to show that it has complied with this order within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord conducts staff training to ensure all complaints staff are awarding remedies and referencing timescales in line with the landlord’s remedies and repairs policies.