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

Southwark Council (202320847)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202320847

Southwark Council

2 April 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 level of compensation paid by the landlord for:
    1. Delays in resolving blockages to the resident’s toilet.
    2. Delays in its response to the resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord at the property, which is a 2-bedroom flat. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
  2. On 17 June 2023, the resident reported that the only toilet at her property was blocked. The resident reported the same issue on 6 more occasions between 18 June 2023 and 8 July 2023.
  3. On 8 July 2023, the resident complained to the landlord about its failure to resolve the repeated blockages.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 18 July 2023. It found that most reports had been attended within a reasonable time. The landlord apologised for the 3-week delay in arranging a CCTV inspection of the drains. The landlord offered £65 compensation for the delay.
  5. The resident continued to report blockages to her toilet following the stage 1 response. She escalated her complaint, and the landlord provided its stage 2 response on 4 September 2023. The response said:
    1. The landlord had completed the CCTV inspection on 14 August 2023 and identified that the WC pan should be replaced.
    2. The contractor told the resident it would attend on 11 September 2023 to complete the works. The contractor attended on 25 August 2023 and replaced the WC pan. The landlord apologised that the resident was not told about the change of appointment.
    3. The landlord offered £50 compensation for its delayed stage 2 response.
    4. The landlord found that it was not appropriate to offer additional compensation for the delay in investigating and resolving the issue. It said that further delays were caused by difficulty contacting the resident to arrange appointments.
    5. The landlord re-offered the £65 it had offered at stage 1.
  6. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response and referred her complaint to the Ombudsman on 9 September 2023. The resident is seeking an increase in compensation for the stress caused by the issue and the length of time it took to resolve. She also notes the time and resources she used to chase the landlord and the fact that she was inconvenienced for multiple appointments.

Assessment and findings

Blockages to toilet

  1. The landlord’s repairs guide lists a non-flushing toilet as an emergency repair if it is the only toilet in the dwelling. The emergency repair response time is 24 hours.
  2. The landlord attended most reports within 24 hours and cleared the blockages. The issue was reported 7 times between 17 June 2023 and the date of the resident’s complaint. It was not referred for CCTV investigation until 8 July 2023. It was unreasonable to wait until the issue had been reported 7 times before investigating the underlying cause.
  3. When the resident reported a blockage on 18 June 2023, the landlord referred the issue to its drainage contractor. It explained that this was because its out of hours contractor could not clear a blockage in the drains.
  4. The landlord did not attend the property until 26 June 2023 to temporarily resolve the blockage. As this was not followed up, the resident was without a working toilet for 8 calendar days. The landlord should have contacted the resident on Monday 19 June 2023 and arranged for its drainage contractor to attend.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the failure to carry out a temporary repair in its complaint responses. Its response failed to highlight the effect on the resident of being without a working toilet and the distress this caused her.
  6. The resident reported 3 more blockages after the stage 1 response. Each time, the landlord’s plumbing contractor attended within 24 hours to complete a temporary repair.
  7. The landlord noted a delay of 3 weeks in completing the CCTV inspection until the date of the stage 1 response. The landlord said that there were further delays because its contractor could not contact the resident. It apologised that the appointment for 11 September 2023 was brought forward without notice. Its stage 2 response highlighted the benefit of this to the resident, as the repairs were completed earlier. This was insensitive, as the resident had clearly been frustrated and inconvenienced by contractors attending unannounced.
  8. The landlord was in touch with the resident following the stage 1 response to arrange further temporary repairs. The landlord missed an opportunity to communicate on behalf of its contractor to arrange the CCTV inspection. It is the landlord’s responsibility to manage its contractor and to progress repairs within a reasonable timeframe. Had the landlord been more proactive, it may have been able to put things right earlier.
  9. The Ombudsman agrees with the landlord that there was service failure in its approach to resolving the repeated blockages. In the Ombudsman’s view, the £65 compensation offered at stage 1 and upheld at stage 2 was not reasonable and proportionate to reflect the effect on the resident. It did not consider that there was more it could have done to progress the inspection and permanent repair, or that the resident was inconvenienced by the changed appointment.
  10. The landlord’s compensation policy treats compensation for delay, distress and time and trouble separately. There is no evidence that the landlord considered these 3 elements in its offer of £65 compensation. It is unclear how this amount was calculated. The Ombudsman considers that an apology and further compensation of £85 to make a total of £150 compensation is fair and reasonable in all the circumstances. This is in line with our remedies guidance’s recommendation of awards of up to £100 to recognise such delays in getting matters resolved, and the new total is made up of:
    1. £50 for the length of the delay in resolving the issue.
    2. £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
    3. £50 to reflect the time and trouble the resident took to chase the repair.

Complaints Handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will acknowledge complaints and escalations within 3 working days. At stage 1, the landlord will respond within 15 working days of the acknowledgment. At stage 2, it will respond within 25 working days.
  2. The landlord’s stage 1 response was provided on 18 July 2023, within its 15 working day timeframe. On 26 July 2023, the resident emailed the landlord for an update on her escalated complaint. The landlord made internal enquiries but could not find any evidence of the escalation.
  3. The Service has not seen evidence that the complaint was escalated before 26 July 2023. The resident reported a further blockage on 19 July 2023 in an email sent to the complaints team and it may be that she intended to escalate her complaint at this time.
  4. It was reasonable that the landlord did not interpret this as an escalation request. The landlord should have forwarded the report to its repairs team. There is no evidence that it did so. It would have been helpful to clarify with the resident whether she wished to escalate her complaint.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the escalation request on 2 July 2023, 2 working days outside the timeframe in its policy. It is appreciated that the landlord was making enquiries with its complaints and repairs teams during that period. There is no evidence that the resident was adversely affected by this short delay.
  6. The resident requested an update on 30 August 2023 and the landlord responded the same day, asking her to provide information about the current situation. The resident confirmed the toilet had been replaced and the blockage resolved. The landlord acted promptly and appropriately to engage with the resident so it could address her outstanding concerns in its complaint response.
  7. At stage 2, the landlord acknowledged a delay in providing its response. The escalation was acknowledged on 2 August 2023 so, according to the landlord’s policy, the response was due by 5 September 2025. Had the complaint been acknowledged on 28 August 2023, the response would have been due by 1 September 2025.
  8. It was reasonable for the landlord to recognise the delay and the resident’s increasing frustration at the time taken to resolve the issue. It offered £50 compensation, in line with its compensation policy. The compensation policy states that £50 is the minimum amount offered to recognise the time and trouble taken by a resident to pursue their complaint, which is in line with our remedies guidance’s recommendation for this. The Ombudsman considers that the landlord provided reasonable redress for delays in its complaints handling process.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a blocked toilet at her property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to the investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the delays in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendation

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report it is ordered that the landlord:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the service failure identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £85 further compensation (in addition to the £65 paid following its complaints process) in recognition of the delays in resolving repeated blockages to her toilet.

Recommendation

  1. It is recommended that the landlord reflect on how it can better manage communication between residents and contractors where a contractor is experiencing difficulty progressing a repair.