Haringey London Borough Council (202220681)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220681

Haringey London Borough Council

30 August 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.
   2. Repairs to the boiler.

Background

2. The resident has been a secure tenant with the landlord at the property since 12 May 2008. The property is a two-bedroom flat. The resident has arthritis and her adult daughter has breathing problems. The landlord advised this Service that its records show that the resident has a disability but that it had no detail about this and did not know what date it was documented.
3. Information has been provided regarding activity that happened after the stage 2 complaint response was issued. Any reference to these events is for reference purposes and context only and has not otherwise been considered
4. On 28 September 2021 the resident told the landlord that water was leaking through her kitchen ceiling from the flat above (which was also owned by the landlord). The neighbour that lived in the flat above also reported the issue on 29 and 30 September 2021. The resident reported it again on 10 October 2021. The landlord logged repairs jobs on each occasion.
5. On 21 January 2022 the resident reported that she had no heating or hot water. A gas contractor attended on the same day but told her that an electrician was needed. The resident called the landlord again later that day because an electrician had not attended.
6. On 24 and 25 January 2022 the landlord logged 2 further repairs jobs against the property for a leak coming from the flat above that had caused the heating not to work. 2 further repairs jobs were also logged against the flat above on 26 January 2022. The contractor could not gain access to the flat above on 26 January 2022 but gained access on 27 January 2022.
7. A contractor attended the property on 26 January 2022 to mend the boiler but could not because water was still leaking onto it from the flat above.
8. On 7 February 2022 the landlord logged another repairs job. It said that the resident had not had heating for 2 weeks because the boiler had been disconnected due to a leak. It noted that there was a vulnerable disabled resident in the property and provided 2 temporary heaters.
9. On 3 March 2022 a contractor attended the property to fit parts to the boiler but found that the leak had not been rectified so the boiler only ran for 5 minutes before the fuse tripped.
10. On 16 March 2022 the resident called the landlord to tell it that she had had no heating or hot water for the last month due to the leak onto the boiler.
11. On 28 March 2022 the contractor asked for a multi trader to attend to fix the leak because a wall needed to be broken down over the bath to change the copper waste pipe.
12. The resident called the landlord for updates on 5, 21 and 25 April 2022. She asked for a manager to call her back.
13. On 19 May 2022 the resident complained to the landlord. She said that she had not had hot water or heating for several months due to a leak from the flat above. She said that the leak had caused “extreme mould and fungus in our boiler cupboard which is emitting a bad and pungent odour”. She said that an electrician had turned off the boiler. She said that whenever she contacted the repairs line “they send an incorrect worker who walks away”. She said that she also had mould on her bathroom walls and ceiling and provided photographs of this.
14. On 24 May 2022 the landlord logged a repairs job to inspect the kitchen and bathroom for damp.
15. On 6 June 2022 a contractor attended the flat above the resident’s property. It removed the bath panel to carry out an investigation into the defective waste. It reported that it was “unable to get to fault, copper waste is running through block wall to stack and access is restricted. Block wall at tap end of bath and tiles will need breaking out to enable access”. It said it would provide a quotation for the work.
16. On 7 June 2022 the landlord provided a stage 1 complaint response. It upheld the resident’s complaint. It said that the resident reported a leak through the ceiling in November 2021. It said that “while work was carried out to address leaks in the property above the leaks persisted” and that the resident informed it in January 2022 that the boiler was being affected. It said that the electrical supply to the boiler had to be disconnected because the water was penetrating the electrics.
17. It said that it had experienced some issues in accessing the property above and had now determined that extensive work was required to mend the leaking pipe. It said that it had arranged an inspection by a surveyor to assess the damp and mould in the property the next day. The landlord accepted that there had been poor management of the works and sincerely apologised. It said that it would use this complaint as an “opportunity to learn and improve our service to prevent such delays occurring again.” It said that it would award compensation for the lack of heating and hot water once the boiler was reconnected.
18. On 8 June 2022 a contractor conducted a damp survey on the property. The report said that the relative humidity was high and a significant leak was observed with water penetration apparent in the bathroom, partition wall and tank cupboard. It said that the ongoing water penetration would temporarily exacerbate the usual levels of humidity within the property but would not be the sole factor in the humidity and vapour reading. It recommended that the landlord enquire about the condition and status of the industrial fans in the block and that it upgrade the kitchen extractor fan.
19. On 8 August 2022 the resident asked the landlord to escalate the complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process because the repairs were still outstanding.
20. On 15 September 2022 the landlord provided a stage 2 complaint response. It said that it had instructed a contractor to rectify the leak but they had not been able to access the flat above before their contract expired. However, another contractor was now booked to attend on 19 September 2022. It apologised for the delay and inconvenience caused. It said that once the repair was completed it would carry out a mould wash treatment and provide a decoration pack. It apologised for the distress caused and awarded compensation of £1,152. This was broken down as £20 per week for a lack of heating and hot water for 34 weeks and £2 per day for extra electricity usage for 236 days.
21. The appointment to repair the leak on 19 September 2022 was cancelled due to the Queen’s funeral. It is unclear when it was re-arranged for.
22. The resident emailed the landlord on 13 October 2022. She said that the repair was still outstanding and that the compensation was not reflective of the amount of time she had been without heating or hot water. She told the landlord that she suffered from painful arthritis and that her daughter had breathing problems.
23. This Service spoke to the resident on 30 July 2024. She told us that she could not remember when the heating had been restored. However, she was unaware that the leak had been repaired until the neighbour above told her after which she contacted the landlord to ask it to repair the heating.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of a leak.

24. The tenancy handbook provided by the landlord confirms that it must keep in repair and order its installations for space heating, water heating, drainage and sanitation and that residents have the right to have repairs done within a reasonable timeframe.
25. There is evidence that the leak was first reported in September 2021. The landlord has provided a list of repairs jobs that were logged for both properties and a date that they were completed but has not provided any detail on the work that was carried out on each occasion. This record keeping failure has prevented this Service from carrying out a more thorough investigation into the reason why the leak was not resolved sooner.
26. The landlord should have monitored the work its contractors were carrying out so that it was aware of any issues which were causing delays. However, this did not happen. There is evidence that the leak continued until at least October 2022, though the lack of landlord records has meant that it has not been possible to confirm the exact date of resolution. The repair was therefore not completed within a reasonable timeframe and not in accordance with policy. This caused the resident and her family considerable distress and inconvenience. It also had a significant impact on the boiler repair as the continuing leak meant that boiler works could not progress.
27. The landlord told the resident that the contractor had problems accessing the property above but this Service has seen no evidence that this was the case. If there were problems with access the landlord should also have been able to evidence the efforts that it made to enter, identify and resolve the issue upstairs. However, there is no evidence of these efforts, indicating a further concern from a record keeping perspective. Given the impact on the resident’s property, the landlord should also have been able to evidence having taken legal steps to gain access to the above property if the tenant was not acting in accordance with their occupancy agreement by refusing access. 
28. The resident reported the issue on numerous occasions. She also called the landlord on at least 4 occasions for an update and asked for a manager to call her back. This Service has seen no evidence that these calls were returned. These communications failures cost the resident considerable time and trouble. It also caused her further distress and inconvenience because she felt that the landlord was not listening to her or responding to her concerns.
29. As set out in our Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management, recording vulnerabilities is the first step in providing a sensitive and responsive service. Information on vulnerabilities must also be kept up to date, be accessible, and be shared and used appropriately
30. The leak caused damp and mould in the boiler cupboard. The landlord arranged for a damp survey to be carried out which was an appropriate action to take. However, the long delay in repairing the leak contributed to an increased level of humidity in the property and made the damp issues worse. One of the household members had breathing difficulties and the resident told the landlord that the mould in the boiler cupboard was “emitting a bad and pungent odour”. Because the landlord’s records did not record any details about the vulnerabilities within the household it did not know that anyone may have been more adversely affected by this. This failing therefore could have had an adverse effect on a member of the household’s health.
31. The landlord’s compensation policy includes provision for non-statutory compensation and gives methodology for the calculation of this. A high impact is described as “a persistent failure over a long period, or an unacceptable number of attempts to resolve and address the complaint”. The compensation range for this is £350-£500 although there is scope for this to be increased at the landlord’s discretion. The landlord did not offer any compensation for the leak issue during its complaint process however. Its failure to offer this meant that the resident felt that it did not fully appreciate the distress and inconvenience suffered by the household due to the on-going leak. It also did not take into account the time and trouble taken by the resident to report the issues..
32. There is evidence that the landlord did not rectify the leak for at least 11 months. This caused the resident severe distress and meant that the household were living in unsatisfactory conditions. The landlord’s communication and record keeping impacted on its response to the issue which exacerbated the problem for a vulnerable household. The landlord also failed to offer any compensation for this aspect of the complaint, despite these multiple failures. Therefore, there has been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of a leak. A compensation order of £500 has been included below to reflect the impact this issue had on the resident. This figure is at the top end of the scale for such payments of compensation according to the landlord’s compensation policy; this is considered appropriate given the extent of the failures identified here. The landlord has also been ordered to provide the resident with a written apology. In calculating this figure of compensation, this Service has been mindful to distinguish the landlord’s failures in respect of the leak issue from the boiler issues that are assessed below. This is to ensure that the landlord is not effectively penalised twice for the same failures.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the boiler.

33. The landlord responded to the initial report that the boiler was working on the same day (21 January 2022), however, the fault could not be rectified. This was because the leak was affecting the electricity supply to the boiler.
34. There is evidence that engineers and electricians attended the property on numerous occasions thereafter but could not fix the boiler because water was still leaking on it. This Service has seen no evidence that this was then escalated to a senior member of staff to make sure that the reasons for the delay in fixing the leak were investigated. This meant that the situation continued for longer than it should have and numerous repairs appointments were wasted. This caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident and her family and cost her time and trouble as she had to be present for the appointments.
35. There is evidence that the heating stopped working in January 2022, however it is unclear when the boiler was repaired. There is evidence, however, that the work was not complete on 9 November 2022 because the landlord replaced the temporary heaters on this date.
36. Therefore, the resident had no heating or hot water for at least 10 months. A considerable proportion of this time was over the coldest months of the year. This was unacceptable, especially taking into consideration the vulnerabilities within the household and it would have caused considerable distress and inconvenience. It also had a financial impact because the resident used extra electricity.
37. The landlord offered £20 per week compensation for the lack of heating and hot water for 34 weeks. This covered the period from January 2022 until the date the leak was due to be repaired. However, the appointment to repair the leak was cancelled. Also, the landlord did not arrange for the boiler to be repaired straight away after the leak had been repaired. Instead, it relied on the resident contacting it again after her neighbour told her that the leak had been repaired 3 weeks previously.
38. The landlord identified that there had been service failure and tried to resolve the complaint by offering compensation. However, the compensation offered did not provide sufficient redress for the delays and the distress and inconvenience experienced by this vulnerable household. The landlord’s records do not clarify when the issue was fully resolved so it has not been possible to assess how long the landlord’s compensation offer should have been for. The weekly calculation offered (£20) was also low given the Ombudsman’s understanding of similar cases involving a loss of heating and hot water. In addition, it is not clear that the landlord’s offer recognised the considerable distress and inconvenience experienced by the vulnerable household due to these issues.
39. By consequence of these factors, a determination of severe maladministration has been reached here. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident an additional £1,300 compensation for this aspect of the complaint. This factors in the additional failures listed above and is in accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for cases involving significant and protracted failures which have a considerable impact on a household. This figure is in addition to the compensation awarded by the landlord during its complaint process. In addition, this sum also incorporates an amount reflecting the additional utility costs the resident said she incurred during the period that she was without heating and hot water. As some time has elapsed since the issues under investigation and as utility costs are variable, it is difficult to see how such costs could be evidenced. A further £300 has therefore been included in the above sum to reflect this aspect of the complaint.

Determination

40. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a leak.
41. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the boiler.

Orders and recommendations

42. Within 28 days of the date of this report the landlord must:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident directly a total of £2,952 in compensation. A breakdown of this is below. As directed, any compensation already paid should be deducted from this amount.
       1. Its original offer of £1,152.00, if not already paid.
       2. £500 for distress and inconvenience and time and trouble caused by the unresolved leak.
       3. £1,300 additional compensation for the further failures identified with the landlord’s response to the boiler issue, including the distress and inconvenience experienced by the household. This figure also includes a sum to reflect additional utility costs incurred by the resident during the period under investigation.

3. Contact the resident to check the current vulnerabilities in the household. Ensure that these are accurately recorded on all relevant systems and that it considers any reasonable adjustments that are necessary. The landlord to confirm to this Service that this has been actioned, including any updates to its system casefiles that result.

43. Ensure that the recommendations made in the damp report are complete. These were to enquire about the condition and status of the industrial fans in the block and that to upgrade the kitchen extractor fan. Evidence should be supplied to show that these are complete within 3 months of the date of this report.
44. Ensure that other repairs, recently identified, that are required due to the damp caused by the leak are completed. Evidence should be supplied to show that these are complete within 3 months of the date of this report.
45. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with these orders by the above deadlines.