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

Lambeth Council (202100617)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202100617

Lambeth Council

30 September 2022


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 response to the resident’s report regarding repairs to a leak and the boiler pipework in the property.
  2. The complaint is about the management of the complaint.

Background and summary of events

  1. The tenancy agreement lists one of the residents as its tenant. The resident and her partner have brought the complaint together to the Ombudsman. The landlord is also the local authority and engages the services of several different contractors which each oversee various responsibilities across the borough.
  2. The landlord is responsible for keeping in proper working order any fittings for the supply of water, gas or electricity, and water heating inside of the property. The landlord is expected to resolve repairs within a reasonable timeframe. As per its repair manual, routine repairs should be fixed between 7 – 28 days (depending on nature of repair) and emergency or urgent works should be fixed sooner and within their set timescales, which vary according to the priority. An example repair timescale as given in the repair manual is 1 – 3 days for a sink repair.
  3. The landlord operates a tracking system whereby tenants can track repairs on the estate by logging into their tenant account (from October 2021).
  4. The landlord presently operates a two stage complaint process as per its complaint policy published online. Presently, its policy sets out a timescale of 20 working days for stage one complaints and 25 working days for stage two complaints.
  5. The Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code states that complaints must be acknowledged or logged within 5 working days and responded to within a further 10 working days (total 15) at stage one. If escalated to stage two, the landlord is expected to provide its stage two complaint response within 20 working days.

Summary of events

  1. On 19 November 2020 the contractor attended for the boiler and identified a leak in the sink/drains behind the kitchen unit. It advised the resident to contact the landlord so that it could arrange for the relevant contractor (plumber) to attend, as it was not the relevant contractor for this repair.
  2. The landlord’s various contractors subsequently attended the property several more times on 25 November 2020, 30 November 2020, and 1 December 2020. There was a pipe repair identified and the contractor advised that it needed to be allocated to the relevant contractor, so the resident was advised to refer back to the landlord so that it could arrange this. The contractors identified access issues to the location of the repairs needed (beneath the boiler/behind the kitchen unit). The repair was referred to in subsequent records as a boiler pipe leak.
  3. The resident told the Ombudsman that during this timeframe, it had been passed back and forth between the differing contractors/agents and the resident said that they contacted the landlord multiple times to report the ongoing repair, although the landlord had not identified this in its complaint investigation. The resident also believed at one stage that the repairs which had been carried out had resolved the issue, but soon found that there was a smell of mould and damp and water in the kitchen, so they reported this to the landlord.
  4. On 12 March 2021 and 31 March 2021 the contractor attended and repeated the findings of previous visits (pipe leak and potential access issue to repair). The repair was marked as being ‘in progress’. The resident told the Ombudsman that the contractor spent the whole day attempting the repair but did not complete this, and he was left without heating or hot water in late March 2021.
  5. On 9 April 2021 the resident filled in a complaint form to the landlord about being left without heating or hot water for over 10 days from ‘29 April’.  The resident said that (she) was disappointed at how they were treated and this caused the family ‘lots of distress especially during the Easter break which should have been a moment of peace and relax’. The complaint said that there had been miscommunication between the parties and delays which resulted in the issue not being fixed. In addition to raising a formal complaint, on the same day, the resident called the landlord to chase the repair to the ‘boiler leak’. The landlord raised a work order for the plumber to remove the sink and cabinets and remedy the leak.
  6. On 12 April 2021 the contractor attended and recorded a loss of heating and hot water. A temporary fix was provided followed by completed repairs on 15 April 2021.
  7. The resident contacted the Ombudsman around the same time and reported that the landlord took 16 days to fix the heating and hot water and did not offer compensation. The Ombudsman highlighted the resident’s complaint to the landlord (4 May 2021). On 7 May 2021 the landlord issued a stage one response that said:
    1. The complaint did not contain details about the full nature of the repair issues which were/were not carried out.
    2. The resident reported loss of services on 9 April 2021 and the contractor booked an appointment for 12 April 2021. The contractor said that there was a leaking joint in the sink that required a plumber. A temporary fix was carried out to fix the heating and hot water followed by full repair works completed on 15 April 2021.
    3. The contractor records showed the repair duration as 9 April 2021 – 15 April 2021 and were unaware of the resident’s report of lack of heating and hot water for ten days.
    4. The resident’s complaint said that he wanted the pipes under the boiler changed due to their leaking for the last 3 months. The floor had to be replaced due to the continuous leak. The resident could raise these issues with the repair team or log them online.
    5. The resident could request to have the complaint reviewed; the landlord provided the steps which the resident could take to do this.
  8. On 10 May 2021 the resident contacted the Ombudsman and said that the landlord was pretending to be unaware of the situation despite evidence on their system such as calls he made to the repair centre, and it claimed that no one knew that the resident was left without heating or hot water for 16 days. The resident sought compensation for rent and no services and distress during the Easter holidays.
  9. On 23 May 2021 the resident emailed the landlord and iterated his dissatisfaction; he asked how the landlord did not know of the situation which the resident had raised three times a day by calling the repair centre. He explained that he wanted to escalate the complaint and sought a refund for the rent paid living in those conditions and compensation for distress caused to his family. The resident also requested to see the reports which the contractors had written from when they visited the property, especially one of 31 March when they left the resident with no heating or hot water and the resident directed the landlord to check all the reference numbers which were raised from 29 March – 16 May to see the evidence.
  10. Subsequently, on 1 July 2021, the landlord issued a final response.
    1. On 31 March 2021 the contractor attended and found leaks on all pipework beneath the boiler. This needed new pipework and fittings but there was limited space to access the repair. The landlord could not establish what happened and took on the resident’s timeline in which he stated that he was then without heating or hot water for 10 days at the point of complaining on 9 April 2021. The works were then completed within 4 working days after that. It offered £75 compensation in recognition of the delay experienced.
    2. The landlord attended on 24 June 2021 to inspect the reports about the floors and found that areas of the hallway and living room floor showed signs of warping. The landlord would arrange new flooring in the hallway and living room and it would contact the resident about this.
    3. It attached documents for the resident’s reference, such as the contractors records from 31 March 2021 – 15 April 2021.
    4. It signposted the resident to the Ombudsman and MP.
  11. The MP referred the complaint to the Ombudsman on 9 September 2021. The resident was dissatisfied with the complaint handling, such as whether this was raised correctly on the landlord’s system, and was also dissatisfied with the delay in the repairs.
  12. The resident told the Ombudsman that around April-June 2021 the surveyor visited the property for the warped floorboards (following the leak) and said that they would refer back to the resident. They have yet to repair this (September 2022).
  13. The resident explained to the Ombudsman that this situation caused a lot of stress, time and trouble, due to having to go back and forth in contacting the landlord. The records evidence the contractor’s advice to the resident to refer to the landlord when they came out to visit the property from November 2020, and the resident was caught between the differing agencies in respect of the repairs (ie the boiler/gas engineer, the landlord, and the landlord’s further contractors).
  14. The records in respect of the escalations and contact have not been seen in their entirety; the resident expressed dissatisfaction with the landlord’s reportedly limited access to its records of his multiple calls and contact throughout the process.

 

Assessment and findings

  1. It has not been disputed that the boiler pipe leak was reported in November 2020 and fixed in April 2021. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s reports within a reasonable timescale; the boiler pipe leak was outstanding for six months. This was not reasonable; the resident experienced time and trouble in reporting the concerns and escalating through the landlord to the differing contractors.
  2. The landlord did not consider the full scope of the boiler leak repairs as it considered that it did not have the full details, however, the repair records evidence that the issue had been reported in November 2020. Therefore, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to assess the impact of the leak from the appropriate timescale, rather than the limited timeframe which it went onto assess under the complaint investigation.
  3. The resident was also without heating and hot water, from the end of March (29/31 March 2021) until 12 April 2021. The landlord failed to fairly assess the impact of this additional repair on the resident who explained that he had to arrange alternative heating at a cost (£100) and this delay and loss of water and heating affected the Easter bank holiday period for the family. This was unreasonable.
  4. The landlord’s offer of redress (£75) was not proportional to the overall detriment which the resident experienced.
  5. The resident has also experienced delays in the landlord’s communication about the secondary repairs which it had agreed to do. The resident and landlord did not dispute that there were works needed to the floor inside of the property due to the impact of the leak over the period that this was outstanding. The resident explained that the landlord inspected this in April/June 2021 but this had yet to be completed as of September 2022. The landlord did not proactively arrange this work, and this was unreasonable.
  6. In respect of the complaint handling, the resident raised a complaint on 9 April 2021 and the landlord issued the stage one response on 7 May 2021. This was 20 working days which was within its own policy timescales. Following the resident’s escalation on 23 May 2021 the landlord issued a final response on 1 July 2021 which was three days over its complaint policy timescale (this is 25 days). There was therefore service failure in the complaint handling.
  7. The Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code states that stage one complaints should be logged within 5 working days and responded to within a further 10 working days; stage two investigations should be responded to within 20 working days. It is understood that the landlord is currently reviewing its complaint policy to be in line with the Code.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s report regarding repairs to a leak and the boiler pipework in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the management of the complaint.

Reasons

  1. There has been an unreasonable delay in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about the leak and boiler repair due to the lack of ownership from the start over the repairs and the passing of the repair works between the different contractors. The resident was also left without heating and hot water for an unreasonable duration. The landlord did not evidence a comprehensive assessment of the overall impact of the repair works and it failed to offer reasonable redress. There has been an additional failure in the landlord’s communication about proposed repairs to the floor, these works were proposed and agreed to in April/June 2021 and remain outstanding as of September 2022, which is not reasonable..
  2. The landlord did not issue the complaint responses in line with the appropriate timescales as set out in its own policy.

Orders and recommendations

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident an additional amount of compensation totalling £375 comprised of:
    1. £225 for distress and inconvenience for the repairs.
    2. £100 for the heating costs.
    3. £50 for the time and trouble for the complaint handling.
  2. Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to update the resident about its action plan in respect of the floor repairs.