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

B3 Living Limited (202320785)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202320785

B3 Living Limited

27 March 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of misuse of the bin store.

Background

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder of 2-bedroom first floor flat owned by the landlord, which is a housing association. The lease started in December 2021.
  2. The resident has reported to the landlord that her child has a disability.

Summary of events

  1. The landlord’s records show that in July 2022 the Local Authority (LA) contacted it to report that its residents had not been using the bin store correctly. This included reports that residents had been contaminating the recycling bins and instead of using all the bins they were dumping rubbish on the floor. Therefore, its crew found it impossible to empty the bins. It offered to clear the bin store however, a charge was involved. It said it could contact residents and provide a guide to what goes in what bin. Also, if rubbish was on the floor bins would not be emptied.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord on 30 July 2023 and confirmed that due to hygiene issues she and her family had moved out the property. The resident explained that the hygiene issues meant it was not medically safe for her family to stay in the property. She said that this was due to her 5 year old child being chronically ill and awaiting an organ transplant.
  3. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 10 August 2023. The resident said she was unhappy with the misuse of the bin store. She said that refuse was being disposed of in the street and in communal areas. Also, there was a rodent infestation. The resident was seeking for the landlord to replace the existing recycling bins and replace them with general waste bins and install CCTV.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 14 August 2023. The landlord said:
    1. It had visited the site and met with its cleaning operatives. Additionally, it had spoken with other residents.
    2. It apologised for the service it delivered as the bin store was not regularly maintained.
    3. It had contacted all residents regarding the proper use and disposal of household waste.
    4. It had asked its cleaning contractors to keep it updated on the bin store conditions.
    5. It had arranged for the LA to attend and clear the bin store.
    6. It had arranged for pest control to attend, and it put traps in the area.
  5. The resident requested that the landlord progress the complaint to stage 2 on 10 August 2023. The resident said the ongoing issues with the bin store had resulted in a rat infestation. The resident said she wanted the landlord to clean the bin store and replace the recycling bins with 4 household bins. Also, install CCTV at the bin store.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 7 September 2023. The landlord said:
    1. It reviewed its stage 1 complaint response, emails from the cleaning contractors, and the LA. Additionally, it reviewed photographs of the bin store, the pest control report and its emails to residents.
    2. It had attended the property and completed an inspection. It found the bin store was overflowing with waste. Also, recycling bins were contaminated and there was excessive waste on the floor.
    3. It apologised for the level of service it delivered and for the impact this had on the resident.
    4. It confirmed it had arranged for the bin store to be cleaned.
    5. It said it was unable to replace the bins as this is for the LA to decide.
    6. It was unable to install a CCTV camera due to the costs involved. It assured the resident that in cases of high level of antisocial behaviour (ASB) it can access its mobile CCTV unit. It confirmed that it may consider this in the future, however, there was a waiting list for it.
  7. In bringing the complaint to the Ombudsman the resident is wanting the landlord to install CCTV and resolve the ASB around the bins.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident informed the Ombudsman the landlord’s handling of the matters under review in this investigation had a negative impact on her child’s health and wellbeing. Whilst this service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s family’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages in the way a court will. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim where the evidence of independent medical experts may be examined. However, we will consider any impact that resulted in distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and her family.
  2. During the course of the resident’s complaint, she has raised concerns regarding the type of bins at the property. The Ombudsman recognises the resident’s request, but it is beyond the remit of this Service to consider whether the LA followed due process. It remains open to the resident to raise this with the LA initially as it is for the LA to decide what bins are allocated. The escalation of a complaint to the LA would be best placed with the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO). This is because the provision of bins is a council function. This Service will, however, consider how the landlord responded to the resident’s request for bins to be replaced.              

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of misuse of the bin store

  1. The Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s concerns by adhering to relevant legislation, its policies and procedures, and any agreements with the resident. Also, that the landlord acted, taking account of what is fair in all the circumstances of the case.
  2. Under the terms of the lease the landlord is responsible for maintaining and repairing communal areas including the bin store. The lease agreement states that residents should not use the bin store for dumping of any other items other than the usual domestic household rubbish. Also, to not allow the bin store or surrounding areas to become littered and to be kept in a clean and tidy condition at all times.
  3. The landlord does not have an estate management or cleaning policy.
  4. The landlord’s cleaning schedule states that it will complete communal cleaning on a fortnightly basis. This included checking the bin store and reporting any bulky items.
  5. In this case, the resident initially raised concerns on 30 July 2023 that due to hygiene issues at the property she and her family had moved out. The landlord responded on 4 August 2023 and confirmed it had contacted its caretaking team to establish what measures it could put in place to manage the bin store. Additionally, it had arranged for pest control to attend the property.
  6. The landlord took prompt action in contacting the LA to request it cleared and cleaned the bin store. As such, the LA attended on 10 August 2023, and it cleared the excess rubbish. The LA also cleaned and disinfected the bin store on the 9 September 2023. The landlord’s actions were an appropriate response to the concerns raised by the resident. Its approach was timely and showed it took the resident’s concerns seriously.
  7. It was also proactive in contacting pest control for it to complete an inspection. This resulted in pest control attending and completing an inspection on 8 August 2023 where it identified a fly infestation but no evidence of a rat infestation. Its inspection found that the bin store was stacked from floor to ceiling with piles of fermented food, cardboard, soiled nappies and household rubbish. Pest control stated that the bin store did not close due to the volume of rubbish. It added 4 bait boxes to the external area of the bin store as it was not viable to do this inside due to the rubbish. This was reasonable as the landlord demonstrated a solution focused approach by working in collaboration to resolve the issues with the bin store.
  8. The landlord took appropriate action in contacting all residents who lived in the building who used the bin store by letter. However, it is unknown when the letter was issued as it was not dated. The letter advised residents of the building to keep the bin store closed after use to prevent pests. It confirmed its pest control contractor had identified a fly infestation and fly casings but did not find any evidence of rats. Also, for residents to use other bins and to not add bin bags to bins that were full.  Therefore, enabling bins to be closed to minimise breeding of flies and a feeding ground for flies.
  9. Additionally, it found dog faeces outside of the bin store. The landlord also took positive steps by visiting residents of the building to educate them and obtain feedback on whether the residents still had issues with the bin store. This was reasonable as it showed the landlord’s willingness to resolve the issues with the bin store.
  10. The landlord appropriately considered the resident’s request for CCTV to be installed at the bin store. In its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses it provided clear explanations as to why this was not a measure it could take. The landlord confirmed that due to the cost of CCTV it is not routinely added to bin stores. It explained that CCTV is only situated in some of its communal blocks. Whilst understandably the resident felt this would be a solution to the misuse at the bin store, it was reasonable for the landlord to refuse this based on consideration of its resources.
  11. Whilst the landlord’s actions were mostly reasonable in response to the residents’ concerns, its cleaning schedule states its communal cleaning would be carried out fortnightly. This included checking the bin store and reporting any bulky items. The landlord has not provided this Service with any evidence to show that these checks took place. This lack of records was not an appropriate. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management (KIM) dated May 2023 highlighted the importance of accurate and robust records. Further, the report says that without accurate records it hinders the landlord’s ability to keep progress of works and also effectively respond to complaints.
  12. Given the resident’s reports and the LA’s historical reports of misuse of the bin store it would have been appropriate for the landlord to complete regular checks. As it has not evidenced it has, this was not in line with its cleaning schedule. This was not reasonable as the landlord lacked oversight over the management of the bin store. Also, it missed opportunities to ensure that the bin store remained clear. This was not reasonable and was a failing on the landlord’s behalf. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord found that its cleaning contractors had not been monitoring and reporting issues with the bin store. Therefore, it had met with its cleaning contractors who agreed to monitor and report back to it any issues were identified. This was appropriate as the landlord acknowledged that things had gone wrong and took positive steps to improve its service delivery.
  13. It would also have been appropriate for the landlord to have an estate management policy or cleaning policy. This would have provided the landlord with a framework to ensure the bin store was regularly checked. Also, what action it would take if there was misuse in the bin store. The lack of policies provided potentially affected the landlord’s ability to provide a comprehensive response to the resident’s complaint, and this investigation. This was not reasonable, and a recommendation has been made regarding this.
  14. Throughout the course of the complaint, there is limited evidence that the landlord acknowledged the resident’s concerns about her child’s health. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to do so and assess its actions taking into account the vulnerabilities in the household.
  15. Overall, the landlord took positive actions in response to the resident’s concerns about the bin store. This included that it was proactive in contacting pest control, the LA and speaking to other residents. It also took positive steps in meeting with its cleaning contractors to improve its service delivery.
  16. In the landlord stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses it apologised for the level of service it delivered. This included that it had not regularly maintained the bin store. Despite this, the landlord’s actions did not go far enough to put things right. This is due to the landlord not acknowledging the vulnerabilities in the resident’s household. As such, this amounts to a service failure and an additional remedy has been made. The landlord’s remedies guidance states that it will award up to £100 for service failures. Accordingly, compensation has been awarded to reflect this.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was a service failure in the landlord’s handling of the residents reports of misuse of the bin store.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this decision, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for failing to acknowledge the resident’s child’s health.
    2. Pay the resident £100 in compensation to reflect its failings to consider the vulnerabilities in the household.
  2. Provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with the above orders.

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord consider the findings of this report and consider introducing an estate management policy or cleaning policy.