Abri Group Limited (202327210)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202327210

Abri Group Limited

23 May 2025

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

The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of drain blockages in the property.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

The resident is a leaseholder through a shared ownership scheme, they have held the lease since 2021. The property is a 3-bedroom home. When the resident moved into the property it was newly built. The landlord does not hold a record of the resident having any vulnerabilities.
On 3 separate occasions in 2021, the resident reported that wastewater drains in the property had become blocked. As the property was newly built, and still within its defect period, the landlord attended the property after each report.
On 16 February 2022 the resident reported that the drains were blocked again. The landlord said as the property’s defect period had ended the resident was now responsible for the drainage issues.
On 16 February 2023 the resident complained to the landlord. In their complaint, the resident said:
1. Since they had moved into the property, there had been repeated drainage issues. This had limited their ability to use the bath. The resident had reported these issues to the landlord on several occasions.
2. The resident felt the landlord hadn’t taken their concerns seriously.
3. Following a recent blockage, they hired a plumber who said there were issues with the drains. They wanted the landlord to pay the costs associated with the plumber.
4. The recent blockage had caused a leak. The leak had damaged the property’s living room ceiling, and the resident wanted the landlord to repair this.
In its stage 1 response dated 24 February 2023, the landlord said:
1. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint as the defect period for the property had ended in December 2021. The landlord said this meant it was now the resident’s responsibility to maintain the property’s drains.
2. As the resident had experienced plumbing issues during the defect period, it would investigate if the property’s developer was responsible for the drainage issues.
On 1 March 2023 the resident escalated their complaint as the drainage issues had not been resolved. Because of this, the resident felt the blockages would continue.
In its stage 2 response dated 6 September 2023, the landlord said:
1. It was unable to confirm if there was a fault with the drains until it had received a report from a plumber it had instructed.
2. It would send the plumber’s report to the National House Building Council (NHBC). The NHBC would determine if the developer was responsible for the drainage issues.
3. If the NHBC determined the developer was responsible for the drainage issues, it would consider the resident’s request to refund the cost of their plumber.
4. As a gesture of good will, the landlord said it would repair the damage caused to the living room ceiling.
5. The landlord also offered the resident £150 compensation in recognition of its poor communication.
On 8 November 2023 the resident brought their complaint to this Service. They said they wanted the property’s drains to be fixed as they felt it was not reasonable for a new build property to have faulty drains.
The resident has told this Service that they have continued to experience blockages, and their neighbour has also experienced similar issues.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s repairs policy says that for leaseholders, the landlord will only conduct repairs when it has a statutory responsibility to do so.
The resident’s lease specifies that it is the resident’s responsibility to keep the property in good repair and condition, and it is the landlord’s responsibility to maintain and repair the communal facilities. The lease outlines that the landlord is responsible for drainage, cisterns, and water apparatus/machinery located on or under the property, unless such facilities solely service the property.
The landlord has supplied drainage layout and maintenance plans for the estate where the property is located. The plans show:
1. The resident is responsible for maintaining water and wastewater pipes within the boundary of their property.
2. The resident’s water company is responsible for the maintenance of wastewater and water pipes which connect the resident’s property to the main sewage and water systems. This pipe services the resident’s property and its neighbouring property.
3. The main sewage and water pipes for the estate are owned and maintained by the water company.
4. The estate’s management agent is responsible for maintaining a gulley which flows off from the main water pipe in the locality of the resident’s property.
The Ombudsman has produced a spotlight report on leasehold, shared ownership, and new build properties. In this report, the Ombudsman advises that landlords should:
1. Communicate with residents and developers in a timely and affective manner.
2. Ensure that reported repairs are passed on to the developer and responded to in a timely manner.
3. Communicate with developers about defects effectively.
4. Be clear with residents about the defects process, what its role is, and what will occur when the defect period ends.
5. Provide clear information to residents on how to report issues if the matter involves a third party or management agent.
The resident reported that the property’s drains were blocked on 4 July 2021, 29 November 2021, and 1 December 2021. On these occasions, the landlord arranged for contractors to attend the property to unblock the drains. This was appropriate as the property was under a year old and still in its defect period. The property’s defect period ended on 8 December 2021.
When contractors attended the property, they conducted limited diagnostic enquiries to understand why the drains were blocking, and who was responsible for any associated issues. Following the November 2021 blockage, the developer said they couldn’t identify any faults with the property’s drains. It was suspected that the December 2021 blockage was linked to flushed wet wipes clogging wastewater pipes. The resident said they do not flush wet wipes in their property.
On 20 December 2021 the landlord sent a letter to local residents reminding them not to flush wipes. This was appropriate.
Given that the property was newly built and that there had been frequent blockages within a short space of time, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to consider an escalated response to determine if there was a larger issue within the drainage systems. As the property was still in its defect period, the landlord could have raised further inspections to diagnose the core issues which were contributing to the blockages. Considering the content of the Ombudsman’s spotlight report, it was inappropriate that the landlord did not adequately progress such action or manage communications between the resident and developer.
It was particularly important that any diagnostic work should be conducted during the defect period. If the issues the resident was experiencing stemmed from faults within the property, then the resident would have had the opportunity to rectify any defects via the property’s developer. Once the defect period ended, it was likely that the resident would have been asked to self-fund any required repairs. It was a failing that the landlord did not recognise this and act appropriately.
Following the conclusion of the defect period the resident reported additional blockages. In response, the landlord said it was the resident’s responsibility to rectify any blockages as the property’s defect period had ended.
The landlord was correct that under the terms of the lease, the resident was responsible for maintaining the pipes and drains which solely serviced their property. However, the landlord’s advice was not appropriate when considering:
1. The issues were present during the defect period but had not been rectified.
2. It was unknown if it was the property’s drainage system which was causing blockages, or if the blockages were forming due to issues outside of the resident’s control.
3. The lease specifies that any shared water infrastructure is the landlord’s responsibility. If the issue related to the point in which the property’s and the neighbouring property’s water systems split off from the pipes connecting to the main sewage system, the landlord could be responsible for the repair.
4. If any underlying issues were linked to the main sewage system this would be the responsibility of the water company. In such circumstances the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to support the resident in rectifying issues with the water company.
Considering the above factors, it was unreasonable for the landlord to solely place the responsibility to address the drainage issues on the resident without a reasonable investigation.
On 14 February 2023 the resident hired a plumber to rectify a blockage in the pipes. The plumber also conducted a CCTV inspection of the drains. The plumber said drains in the property were holding 30% wastewater and a series of bends within the pipes were causing issues.
In their complaint, the resident asked for the landlord to reimburse the cost of the plumber, rectify damage from a leak associated with the blockage, and to rectify the drainage issues.
The landlord agreed to conduct repairs to the resident’s ceiling as a gesture of good will. While it was not established that this was the landlord’s responsibility, this was an appropriate use of its discretion. It completed this repair on 18 October 2023.
In its stage 2 response dated 6 September 2023, the landlord apologised and offered £150 compensation in recognition of its poor communication. While it would not reimburse the resident’s plumbing costs, the landlord said if the NHBC determined there was a fault, it would re-consider its position on reimbursement.
On 2 August 2023 the landlord contacted the NHBC. The NHBC provides 10-year warranties and insurance policies for newbuild homes against structural defects. The landlord arranged for a plumber to conduct a CCTV inspection of the resident’s drains to assist with the NHBC’s determination as to whether there was a defect within the resident’s property. On 21 September 2023 a plumber found no faults with the internal plumbing. Because of this, the NHBC denied the landlord’s claim.
As the plumber identified no faults within the resident’s drainage systems, the landlord should have considered this might mean the issues were linked to communal wastewater systems. The Ombudsman would expect the landlord to follow up on the results of this inspection and to conduct further investigations with an aim to rectifying the issues.
The resident has told this Service that their neighbour has had similar issues with the drainage in their property. Considering this the landlord should conduct further investigations to identify any possible issues with the drainage in this area.
The resident has told this Service that they have continued to experience blockages. As the drainage issues started in 2021 the resident has experienced distress for a considerable period. The resident has told this Service they have experienced ongoing inconvenience as the blockages have affected their ability to fully use the bathroom facilities.
The Ombudsman considers the landlord’s offer of £150 for its lack of communication to be insufficient, as the resident has continued to experience issues with the drainage. In addition to improving communication, the landlord should have taken steps to identify the root cause of the issues in a timely manner. This would have enabled it, and the resident, to understand who was responsible for any required repairs. Acting in this manner might have adequately satisfied the resident’s concerns.
The Ombudsman finds maladministration occurred after considering:
1. When the resident reported the blockages, the landlord approached the issue in a reactive manner, when it would have been appropriate to take proactive steps to address any faults or defects.
2. The landlord did not manage the repair or its communications around defects in accordance with the Ombudsman’s spotlight guidance.
3. The landlord did not conduct adequate assessments of the drainage systems during the defect period despite circumstances suggesting there were underlying issues. This limited its, and the resident’s, ability to involve the developer in rectifying any potential issues.
4. The landlord placed the responsibility for the blockages on the resident when it was unclear if the blockages were occurring because of issues in the communal systems or in the resident’s property.
5. The landlord did not seek assistance from the water company to assess if there were any known issues in the systems the water company managed.
In recognition of the distress experienced by the resident the Ombudsman has made orders for the landlord to pay compensation of £600 and to arrange inspections with an aim of identifying any potential issues within the drainage system.

The landlord’s complaints handling

The landlord’s complaints policy outlines the timescales in which it will respond to a complaint. The landlord commits to acknowledging complaints within 5 working days, and to provide its stage 1 response within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. If the resident wishes for their complaint to be escalated to a stage 2 complaint, the landlord will acknowledge this request within 5 working days and provide its response within 20 working days of the acknowledgement.
If the landlord is unable to meet the above timescales it can extend its stage one and stage 2 response times by 10 additional working days. If the landlord requires an extension, it will notify the resident and explain why an extension is required. At stage 2 the landlord should take no longer than 30 working days to respond to a complaint.
The resident complained to the landlord on 16 February 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint and provided its stage 1 response in-line with its policy, this was appropriate.
The resident escalated their complaint on 1 March 2023. The landlord acknowledged the escalation request 31 working days later on 13 April 2023. This was inappropriate as the landlord’s policy allows for 5 working days to acknowledge escalation requests.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 9 May 2023 and said it required an extension. The landlord did not explain the reason behind this extension which was unreasonable. The landlord told the resident it aimed to provide its stage 2 response by 25 May 2023, this was 13 working days later. This was inappropriate as the landlord’s policy only allowed for a single 10 working day extension at stage 2.
The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 6 September 2023, this was 86 working days after it had requested an extension, and 132 working days after the resident escalated their complaint. Considering the content of the landlord’s complaints policy, its response time was unreasonable. This would have caused the resident distress and frustration.
In its stage 2 response the landlord did not acknowledge or apologise for its delays. On 24 June 2024 the landlord sent the resident a letter which it aimed to put things right. The landlord offered the resident £100 compensation for its complaints handling, and it apologised to the resident. The landlord said delays had occurred because at the time it was dealing with a high volume of complaints.
This was a positive step; however, the landlord should have made this offer of redress within its internal complaints procedure. The landlord produced this letter on the same day in which it provided evidence to this Service. When considering this, the Ombudsman is of the view that the landlord’s offer of compensation was likely prompted by the intervention of this Service. The Ombudsman expects landlords to use internal complaints procedures to recognise shortcomings, and this should occur prior to the involvement of the Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman considers the landlord’s apology and offer of compensation to be reasonable. However, it should have offered the resident this level of redress at an earlier stage. Considering the time it took for the landlord to identify its poor complaints handling, the Ombudsman considers a service failure occurred.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the drain blockages.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was a service failure in relation to the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of this determination the landlord is to pay the resident compensation of £700. The landlord may deduct the £250 previously offered if this has already been paid. The compensation is broken down as follows:
1. £600 in recognition of the distress experienced by the landlord’s response to repeated blocked drains.
2. £100 which the landlord has previously offered in recognition of its complaint’s handling.
Within 4 weeks of this determination the landlord is to arrange for a full and detailed inspection of the pipes which service the resident and their neighbour’s wastewater.
Within 4 weeks of this determination the landlord is to conduct a full CCTV diagnostic survey of the resident’s drains. If no faults are identified within the resident’s property, the landlord is required to actively support the resident in identifying if there are any faults in the drainage systems managed by the water company or the management agent.
If either survey identifies any required repairs within four weeks of the survey the landlord is to write to the resident and outline its stance on funding the repair.
The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with this order within 4 weeks of the determination date.