Westminster City Council (202326053)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202326053

Westminster City Council

28 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

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. A leak into the resident’s home.
   2. The formal complaint.

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord within a block of flats. The flat above the resident’s is owned by a leaseholder. The landlord owns the freehold of the block of flats. The resident lives with her children who have additional needs and vulnerabilities.
3. The resident complained to the landlord about a leak into the flat in May 2021. The landlord provided stage 1 and 2 responses, but in September 2021 the resident complained again. The landlord provided a stage 1 response to the complaint the same month.
4. On 2 February 2023, the resident raised a complaint about another leak. She said:
   1. The leak had been ongoing for 16 hours and was affecting every room in the flat.
   2. Leaks had been reoccurring since 2020, impacting redecoration works and damaging personal belongings.
   3. She wanted a solution to the root cause of the ongoing leaks, compensation for damaged belongings and emotional and physical impact, and an apology for ignoring the seriousness of the issue.
5. On 14 February 2023 the landlord issued a stage 1 response. It said it had already responded to complaints about the leak that occurred in 2021 and so the response would concentrate on the most recent leak reported on 2 February 2023. It said:
   1. A surveyor attended the property on 2 February 2023 and found the source of the leak to be in the flat above. The surveyor isolated the leak and carried out a repair to the flat above. It confirmed the leak had stopped.
   2. The surveyor spoke to the resident the next day and she confirmed no ongoing leak. The landlord then provided a dehumidifier to help with drying the property. It attended on 6 February 2023 to check the area was drying.
   3. Once the area dried it would carry out remedial works to the resident’s property. These would include to the entrance hall cupboard, the walls and ceiling in the kitchen and bathroom, and the staircase ceiling and walls.
6. In April 2023 the resident emailed the landlord chasing the stage 2 escalation. She said she had escalated the complaint on 24 February but had not received a response. The landlord responded the same day to say it had no record of the email, but that it had now escalated the request and would investigate it, providing an outcome by 18 May 2023.
7. On 18 May 2023, the resident emailed the landlord chasing the stage 2 response. She complained that:
   1. No repairs had taken place since 2 February 2023.
   2. She was awaiting a date for asbestos removal.
8. On 22 June 2023 the landlord issued the stage 2 response. It said:
   1. It was clear the resident had experienced multiple leaks into her home from the property above.
   2. It was working with the leaseholder of the property above to ensure previous repairs had been completed to the required standard. Furthermore, that the leaseholder was complying with the terms of their lease and maintaining pipework to a good standard.
   3. It would use its powers available to ensure the likelihood of further leaks was minimised.
   4. It had carried out a post inspection on 6 February 2023 to verify the leak had stopped and to assess the damaged areas requiring making good.
   5. It was currently coordinating works to make a arrangements for temporary accommodation for the resident so it could carry out the required remedial works to the resident’s property.
9. In August 2023 the resident was moved into temporary accommodation while the landlord removed asbestos from the property and carried out redecoration works, including areas which had been impacted by damp from the leaks.
10. In March 2024 the resident reported another leak. The landlord attended and in April 2024 confirmed another leak from the flat above. The landlord updated the property management company of their findings with evidence and were advised the repair would be made in the next 24 hours.
11. In June 2024 the resident told this Service the leak was still present. She expressed her distress at the length of time it had been ongoing and said she wanted more compensation for items she and her family had lost due to the leaks. She also said she wanted a permanent solution to the leaks.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

12. The Ombudsman understands that a large part of the resident’s complaint is that leaks have been occurring regularly since 2019. Paragraph 42 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (as was in place at the time) said the Ombudsman may not consider complaints that were not brought to the attention of the landlord within a reasonable period (usually 12 months). The resident raised a complaint which exhausted the landlord’s complaint process in 2021. The Scheme also says the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which were not brought to its attention normally more than 12 months after the resident exhausted the complaint procedure. In this case, the resident contacted the Ombudsman in October 2023, more than 2 years after her 2021 complaint. As such, this investigation will consider the resident’s complaint from February 2023, as this falls within the timescales set out in the Scheme. The landlord acknowledged a history of leaks, so this is still included as important context, but leaks prior to February 2023 will not be factored into the remedies ordered or the overall findings.

Handling of the leak into the resident’s home

13. The landlord’s repairs guidance available on its website says that emergency repairs will be attended within 24 hours. It also notes that leaseholder’s are responsible for the majority of repairs in their property, aside from any structural issues.
14. The Ombudsman would expect landlords to work with leaseholders to address outstanding repairs that were impacting residents’ properties, and where necessary take action to ensure repairs have been carried out appropriately.
15. Following the resident’s report of the leak on 2 February 2023, the landlord attended the same day, within the timescales in its policy. The surveyor identified the source of the leak as the flat above and gained entry to the flat to repair some pipework. The landlord said it confirmed with the resident the next day that the leak had stopped and provided a dehumidifier to aid with the drying out process. Although the landlord has not provided evidence of this, the resident did not dispute this either with the landlord or the Ombudsman.
16. The landlord acted appropriately by attending the same day of the report, and identifying the leak as coming from the leaseholder’s property. The landlord stated in its subsequent complaint response that it then undertook the repair itself, although there is no record of this (however, the resident has not contested this statement). The landlord was not obligated to repair the leak in the leasehold property. In doing so it considered the individual circumstances of the resident and responded appropriately to ensure the leak was resolved. This showed a willingness on the landlord’s part to act, even though it was not responsible for completing internal repairs in the leaseholder’s flat. There was no failing in the landlord’s handling of the leak itself.
17. In the stage 2 response of 22 June 2023 the landlord identified that the resident had suffered with multiple leaks into her home from the property above. It said its records showed that these had been from different sources and, on each occasion, repairs had been carried out. While this investigation is not examining repairs made prior to February 2023, evidence shows this was the case with this repair. The landlord offered £300 for historic leaks. This is evidence the landlord took the resident’s concerns seriously and attempted to resolve them.
18. It also stated that it in view of the repeated nature, it was working with the leaseholder to ensure that the previous repairs to the property above had been completed to the required standard, and that the leaseholder was complying with the terms of their lease and maintaining the pipework to a good standard to minimise the likelihood of further leaks. While this was a reasonable approach from the landlord and it was appropriate to try and offer reassurance to the resident, we have not seen evidence of the landlord’s contacts with the leaseholder to be able to verify this. Neither is there evidence of the 6 February 2023 post inspection it referred to in its response. Further, it would have been important to the keep to the resident updated on progress, so as to offer reassurance that any issues were being addressed. Again, the Ombudsman has not seen evidence of this occurring. Records show that several months later, during a call with the landlord, the resident noted that she had never been given reassurance that the leak issues has been resolved. Given the concerns that the resident had raised, this was a failing on the part of the landlord. 
19. Part of the resident’s complaint was that the landlord’s offer of compensation was insufficient to cover the losses of her personal belongings as a result of the leak. At stage 1, the landlord advised the resident that it did not indemnify for damage caused to personal items, furniture or flooring. It said all residents are advised to take out a Home Contents Insurance Policy to protect themselves in the event of flooding. The resident told this Service that that insurance premiums were too high for her to afford, given the history of leaks at the property.
20. The Ombudsman’s guidance on insurance, available on our website, explains that there are a number of insurance options covering leaks and flooding. Most importantly, it states that:
    1. If a landlord or leaseholder responds to an accidental leak and repairs it in accordance within its respective repairing obligations, they are unlikely to be responsible for any third-party damage. In such cases, it would be for the complainant to claim for any damage to their belongings on their own contents insurance policy and they would not have any other options for seeking redress for their damaged belongings should they not have such cover in place.
21. As the landlord had attended the leak and made repairs, it was appropriate for it to direct the resident to home contents insurance for any claim for personal belongings.
22. Overall, the evidence available shows that the landlord attended the February 2023 leak and took appropriate and timely action to resolve. However, given the nature of the resident’s concerns about the repetitive nature of the issue, it would have been important for the landlord to ensure that it took the action it said it would in its stage 2 response with regards to working with the leaseholder, and keep the resident updated. Without this reassurance the resident was likely left feeling worried and distressed. As such, a finding of service failure is made, along with orders for remedy.
23. The resident reported a new leak in April 2024, which the landlord attended to repair, and evidence shows it carried out further testing the same month. It is unclear what follow on action was taken. As the resident has stated the leak is an ongoing problem, and given the failing outlined above, it is ordered that the landlord update both the resident and this Service on what actions have/will be taken in line with its stage 2 response, and the April 2024 testing.

Complaint handling

24. The landlord’s complaints policy says it will provide a stage 2 response within 20 working days of the resident requesting it. In this case, the resident sent an email on 24 February 2023 however we can see there was a typo in the email address it was sent to, therefore it is reasonable to determine the landlord did not receive this. The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 complaint in April 2023, saying it would provide a response by 18 May 2023. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response is dated 22 June 2023. Therefore there was a delay of around 5 weeks in the landlord providing its response.
25. The stage 2 response provided a detailed overview of the resident’s complaints history and a thorough response to the complaint. However, there is no evidence the landlord contacted the resident to advise her of a delay with the response. Given the resident had attempted to escalate the complaint in February 2023, it was even more important for the landlord to keep the resident updated on the progress of the complaint. The resident had not reported any further leaks during this time so the service failure here did not affect the overall outcome, though would have been frustrating for the resident. Therefore, in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies, a £50 compensation payment is ordered for the for the inconvenience and delay.

Determination

26. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme, there was:
    1. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of a leak into the resident’s home.
    2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Orders

27. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is to pay the resident a total of £200:
    1. £150 for the impact of the failing identified in its handling of the leak
    2. £50 in recognition of the delay in complaint handling.
28. Within 6 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should review the case and report its findings to the resident and the Ombudsman. The landlord must satisfy itself that:
    1. The previous repairs to the property above had been completed to the required standard.
    2. The leaseholder is complying with the terms of their lease and maintaining the pipework to a good standard to minimise the likelihood of further leaks.
    3. The outcome of the April 2024 testing has been considered, and if necessary, followed up with the leaseholder.