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

Birmingham City Council (202304916)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202304916

Birmingham City Council

30 May 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 the resident’s reports of flooding in his garden and the side of the property.
  2. The landlord’s handling of the complaint has also been considered.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord living in a bungalow. The resident has COPD.
  2. On 1 August 2022 the resident reported that the drains were blocked causing the garden to flood. A contractor attended on 3 August 2022.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 2 November 2022 as he said all sides of his property had flooded. He was unable to use the garden as the ground was constantly saturated, even in periods of no rain. He had reported a blocked drain 3 times, but the landlord had not repaired it. The water was damaging the pointing work, there was condensation in the windows, and the property smelt of damp. He said the landlord previously completed extensive damp work in 2021 due to water getting under the property’s foundations when it rained.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 2 March 2023. It said it had arranged an appointment on 3 March 2023 and the contractor would feedback the findings and any recommendations. It apologised for the inconvenience for the delay in arranging the repair.
  5. The resident escalated his complaint on 14 March 2023 as the landlord had not resolved the complaint. He said both his and his neighbour’s gardens were flooded.
  6. In its stage 2 response on 8 May 2023, the landlord said the contractor found no signs of pooling or flooding during their visit. It recognised that the resident provided pictures of the flooding, but it was not a result of any actions taken by the landlord. It said it would contact the water company to establish the cause of the issues.
  7. The resident referred his complaint to the Service as the issues had not been resolved and he wanted the landlord to resolve the flooding issue. He said there was currently no visible signs of damp and mould, but there is a constant smell of damp in the property.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In his complaint to the Service, the resident stated that there were extensive issues with damp, mould, and low temperatures when he moved into the property. Although it is noted that there is a history of damp and mould, the investigation has focussed on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s recent reports from 12 months prior to his complaint. Residents are expected to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and while the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events that occurred.
  2. This is in line with paragraph 42c of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme which states we may not consider complaints that “were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising”.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of flooding in his garden and the side of the property

  1. The landlord’s repair records show the resident reported flooding in the garden on 1 August 2022. He told the Service the ground slopes towards his property, so water runs to his garden approximately 3 days after prolonged rainfall. In accordance with the landlord’s repairs policy, it is responsible for repairs to pathways, means of access, and drainage. As the resident reported he had lost use of the garden, it would be appropriate for the landlord to inspect the garden and establish the cause of the issue and any required repairs.
  2. The landlord initially acted appropriately as it promptly attended on 3 August 2022. The contractor noted that the issue required involvement from the council. It is unclear whether this was in its capacity as a landlord or a different department. Nonetheless, the landlord did not take sufficient steps to manage the resident’s expectations regarding the actions it could take or ensure the issue was resolved.
  3. The resident subsequently chased the repairs in his complaint on 2 November 2022. The landlord instructed a contractor to carry out a survey on 24 November 2022. In an internal email on 10 January 2023 the landlord internally noted that it had surveyed and repaired the drainage in 2021. It also said it appeared the garden had a high-water level due to the raised banks for the railway at the side of the property. It is unclear whether this finding was the outcome of the survey, but there is no evidence that the landlord informed the resident of its findings. The resident told the Service that he had contacted Network Rail, but they had not taken responsibility for the repair.
  4. On 10 February 2023 the landlord said it tried to arrange an appointment with the resident but had not received a response. The contractor also said they attended the property without an appointment on 14 January 2023, due to the communication issues, but could not gain access. It is understood that there may have been somewhat unavoidable delays if the resident did not respond when the landlord attempted to contact him to arrange the appointment. It may have been helpful for it to try and use a different contact method.
  5. The repair records on 14 March 2023 state the contractor told the resident he needed to contact the water company and the council to resolve the flooding issues. The contractor subsequently told the landlord the flooding appeared to be connected to the brook, which was approximately 100 metres away. It is somewhat unclear how the landlord determined the repair fell within the remit of the water company, rather than its own.
  6. The resident contacted the water company on 15 March 2023. Even though the landlord determined it was not responsible for the repair, it should have taken accountability for the issue and pursued the matter with the water company, rather than deferring responsibility to the resident. The landlord would not necessarily have been responsible if there were delays caused by the water company, but it should have liaised with them and chased the matter until the repair issue was resolved. As it failed to do so, the resident had to expend time and effort seeking to resolve this issue. The resident told the Service that the water company has not accepted responsibility for the issue or completed any remedial works. As such, the issue remains unresolved.
  7. The resident also raised concerns that the pointing was damaged, the windows would fog up, and the property smelt of damp, which he thought was related to the flooding issues. Regardless of whether the landlord was responsible for completing repairs to resolve the flooding, it was obliged to address the resident’s concerns with the condition of the property. It has failed to demonstrate that it has investigated his concerns. As it failed to do so, it did not ensure that the property was in a suitable condition, which is of particular concern as the resident told the Service it impacted his health condition.
  8. The landlord failed to resolve the flooding in the garden or investigate the resident’s concerns regarding the condition of the property. The resident told the Service he is unable to use the garden. He was unable to have a shed, so he had to store items, including his bike, in the property, which was particularly inconvenient due to limited storage area in the property. He also said the flooding had prevented access to the property several times and on one occasion he had to sleep in his car, despite informing the landlord of the issue.
  9. It is clear that the issue has caused the resident significant inconvenience, and he has not had use or enjoyment of the garden. He has also experienced time and trouble pursuing the matter, particularly as the landlord did not take accountability to pursue the repairs with the water company. In line with the Service’s remedies guidance, £400 is considered a proportionate award as the landlord failed to acknowledge its failings, nor did it attempt to put things right. An order has also been made for the landlord to address the outstanding repair issues.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint handling policy states it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 15 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The resident raised a complaint on 2 November 2022 and the landlord issued its stage 1 response on 2 March 2023. It therefore took 83 working days to issue its response, which significantly exceeded its response timeframe.
  2. The Service’s complaint handling code states “A complaint response must be provided to the resident when the answer to the complaint is known, not when the outstanding actions required to address the issue are completed.” Therefore, although the landlord made attempts to arrange an appointment, this should not have prevented it from issuing its response. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to outline the steps it had taken and advised the resident how he could schedule the repair. As it failed to do so, it prolonged the complaint process and delayed the resident’s referral rights to the Service. This also caused the resident additional inconvenience in pursuing the matter.
  3. The resident requested to escalate his complaint on 14 March 2023. Again, there was a delay in its response as the landlord did not issue its stage 2 response until 8 May 2023. This was 17 days outside of its response timeframe.
  4. The landlord did not acknowledge the delays or take any steps to redress the matter. As a result, in line with the Service’s remedies guidance, £150 is considered to be a fair award to recognise the landlord’s handling of this matter. 

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of flooding in his garden and the side of the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord must pay the resident:
    1. £400 to recognise the impact caused by its failings in handling the resident’s reports of flooding in his garden and repair issues within the property.
    2. £150 compensation due to the inconvenience caused by the delays responding to his complaint.
  2. It should provide evidence of the total payment of £550 to the Service within 4 weeks of the date of this report.
  3. Within 6 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Instruct a specialist contractor to inspect the garden to ascertain the reasons for the flooding and determine what works are required to resolve the flooding issue.
    2. Provide the resident and the Service with a copy of the inspection report and an action plan outlining how it will resolve the flooding issue.
    3. If it determines the water company is responsible for the works, it should provide clear reasons for its conclusion. It should also commit to pursuing the matter with the water company until any necessary works are completed and to provide him with regular updates on the progress. 
    4. It should inspect the resident’s property to assess the property condition and confirm what works it will complete to resolve the repointing, damp, and condensation issues.
  4. The landlord should provide evidence that it has complied with the orders to the Service within the relevant timeframes.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should review its handling of repair issues that fall outside of its responsibility to complete, to ensure it still takes accountability for pursuing the repairs with the relevant organisation.
  2. The landlord should review its complaint handling to ensure it responds to complaints within its response timeframe.