A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202322232)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202322232

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

2 July 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
1. Reports of pests (cockroaches and vermin).
2. Associated complaint.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy agreement with the landlord. The property is a flat in a purpose-built block. The resident is disabled and housebound.
In about March 2023 the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord. She said she had had infestations of vermin and cockroaches since she moved to the property in 2000. She said the landlord had refused to provide treatment and she had been paying for it but could no longer afford to do so. The resident said she could not keep the property pest–free when there were holes in the building and her neighbours were experiencing the same problems. She added she was “so distressed” by this matter. She asked the landlord to carry out pest control; close the holes in the flats; reimburse her pest control expenses and pay her additional compensation for distress. She subsequently told the landlord about 2 missed appointments by the pest contractor.
On 26 June 2023 the landlord issued a stage one complaint response under its formal complaint procedure. It apologised for the delay in doing so. The landlord said that pest control within the property was the resident’s responsibility, and it would therefore not be able to refund her for the treatments she had carried out. It said it would carry out a survey to the other properties within the block to assess what proofing works were required. It added it had arranged for the property to be treated and any proofing recommendations to be actioned by its pest contractor.
The landlord acknowledged the 2 missed appointments on 11 May and 2 June 2023. (It is not clear which infestation these appointments were in relation to.) It offered the resident £120 made up of £20 for the missed appointment; £50 for the delayed complaint response and £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused. It explained how the resident could escalate the complaint.
On the same day, the resident asked the landlord to escalate the complaint. She made several points including that she could not contain the infestations that were coming from other flats. She said there were holes in the kitchen and infestations were also coming into the property from the communal areas.
On 3 July 2023 the pest contractor treated cockroaches in the property and outside its front door. On 7 July 2023 the landlord acknowledged the complaint escalation request. On 24 July 2024 the pest contractor visited the resident and noted she had seen no further cockroaches. It closed the job.
On 1 September 2023 the pest contractor treated cockroaches in the communal area.
On 3 September 2023 the resident again asked the landlord to escalate the complaint. She said she was “agitated and depressed …. I cannot sleep. I cannot use my kitchen now as I have mice.” She said there had been a tenant meeting that day and it seemed “everyone has holes and pests in their flats”.
On 18 September 2023 the pest contractor visited the property. They left treatment for the mice in the kitchen and noted proofing was required to the service openings under the kitchen units.
On 26 September 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It recognised there had been a third missed appointment. It re-iterated that the resident was responsible for pest control treatment within the property. It said:
1. In relation to mice: while it could see proofing recommendation had been made it did not believe its failure to repair was the cause of pests in the property.
2. In relation to cockroaches: the pest contractor had been unable to find any evidence of cockroaches on the visits of 3 and 24 July 2023 and had not identified any in the communal area in September 2023. The landlord said it would continue to monitor these areas over the next couple of weeks.
3. In relation to the block: it had not yet been able to gain access to all to carry out a survey.
The landlord offered the resident compensation of £210 made up of £100 for distress and inconvenience; £60 for three missed appointments and £50 for the delay in acknowledging the stage one complaint. This replaced the offer of £120 in the stage one complaint response. It signposted the resident to the Ombudsman.
Since that time, the pest issue in the property and the block has continued. In October 2023 a group of 12 residents wrote to the landlord about the ongoing vermin and cockroach infestations. Later that month, the local MP got involved saying that the vermin had been allowed to spread between properties and this was now an environmental health concern which threatened the health and wellbeing of residents.
In a letter to residents in November 2023 the landlord said it was aware that there was a blockwide issue with rodents and set out what action it was taking including proofing works to internal communal parts to help prevent rats accessing the block.
In November 2023 the pest contractor surveyed the block and concluded mice were likely entering the property by way of airbricks and, internally, the areas around the stack pipes were not sealed properly and the mice were climbing up through the flats this way. They recommended removing the kitchens so they could gain access through the site and noted the cockroaches were coming up through the drainage areas of the properties also.
The landlord considered a further complaint from the resident and issued a final complaint response in March 2024 and acknowledged it had not started the cockroach proofing as quickly as it should have done due to delay by the pest contractor. (We understand this work took place on 10 April 2024.) It said the pest contractor would start treatment in April 2024 for the mice infestation. It offered compensation of £50 for the length of time taken to get the issue sorted and £75 for the stress and inconvenience caused.
On 30 April 2024 the landlord offered the resident a further £100 for stress and inconvenience as a result of a further complaint about the infestations. (We have not seen any complaint detail for these later complaints apart from the stage 2 responses and we have not assessed complaint handling for these complaints. We have included them so that we could assess matters up to the present time.)
When the resident approached the Ombudsman, she said things were so bad that the mice were now visible during the daytime. She said she had not been able to use the kitchen and had had to buy takeaway food for the last 2 months. She said that there were still cockroaches in the bathroom after the hole had been filled and, due her physical limitations, she could not bend down to check where they were coming from. She described how desperate she felt living with infestations when she was housebound and said she was “finding it very difficult to cope”.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The resident told us that she has experienced pest issues since she moved into the property over 20 years ago. The Ombudsman appreciates that this is a longstanding issue, and it would have been distressing for the resident to live with this. However, we cannot look at such historical matters because residents are encouraged to raise complaints with their landlord in a timely manner so that it 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. This is in line with paragraph 42.c of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.
We have therefore looked at events that led to an undated complaint being made which we believe was in March 2023 to the current time, as the matters have not yet been fully resolved. It is clear that the landlord has had the opportunity to consider this time period as part of its response to the resident’s complaints.
In the evidence, the resident mentions that her mental health has been affected by the events complained about. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments regarding their health, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim. However, we can consider any distress and inconvenience the resident may have experienced as a result of errors by the landlord as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her health.

The resident’s reports of pests

Under the tenancy agreement, the landlord says it will keep the structure, and exterior of the property in good repair including the outside walls, inside walls and the plasterwork. It also says it will take reasonable care to keep the common parts including entrances, halls, stairways, passageways and any other common parts in reasonable repair and fit for use for residents and other visitors.
In relation to vermin and pests, the tenancy agreement says the landlord will arrange for clearance of any vermin and pests in the communal area; however, residents will be responsible for arranging clearance of any vermin or pest infestations within the individual property itself.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (the HHSRS) is concerned with avoiding or, at the very least, minimizing potential hazards. Under this rating system the landlord has a responsibility to keep a property free from category one hazards, including pest infestation where poor design or layout is providing access and breeding places for pests, which are a source of infections. The HHSRS says the health effects from pest infestations can include stress (because of difficulties in keeping the home clean and from accumulations of refuse), food spoilage from insect infestation (such as cockroaches), infections (spread by insects, rats, and mice) and nuisance.
The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of pest infestations was not appropriate. While the tenancy agreement says the resident is responsible for pest control within the property the landlord did not consider if that obligation on the resident was fair and reasonable given her concerns that others in the block were affected due to holes in the fabric of the building that allowed the pests to move from one property to another. The landlord should not have initially placed the responsibility on the resident to sort out any pest problem and should have investigated the root cause before deciding who was responsible.
The pest contractor visited the property to treat the cockroaches twice in July 2023 which they noted had resolved the issue. When the resident reported them again the following month, the pest contractor visited in early September 2023 and noted another visit was needed. There is no evidence a further visit took place, but we note pest control did take action in the communal area in September 2023. The landlord did not act appropriately here. It should have followed the guidance of the expert pest contractor and followed up to ensure the infestation had been fully resolved.
There is no evidence of further action until the block survey in November 2023 which identified that the cockroaches were coming up through the drainage areas. They noted there was no insecticide suitable in this situation and that the cockroaches could only be jet washed out of the drains. We have seen no evidence that this was done, and an order has been made for the landlord to ask its pest contractor for recommendations to resolve the cockroach infestation in the block.
In April 2024 work was taken to seal the hole behind the toilet in the property where it was believed the cockroaches were entering. This action was appropriate. However, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have identified that the cockroach infestation was caused by a repair issue within 20 working days of the infestation being reported as this is the landlord’s service standard for a routine repair.
The landlord said it would carry out a survey of the block in June 2023 but did not do so until November 2023, which was about 8 months after the resident had raised this matter in March 2023. This action appears to have been prompted by the involvement of the local MP and a group report of pests from residents in the block. That delay was not reasonable. While the landlord took some proofing in the kitchen against vermin at the end of October 2023, this did not resolve the matter.
In its complaint response of September 2023, the landlord said that, while proofing works had been recommended in the property, it did not believe its failure to repair was the cause of pests. This statement was not appropriate because it was not evidence-based. The survey some 2 months later confirmed that mice were able to move between the properties due to a lack of sealing around the stack pipes.
Had the landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s reports of pest infestations in March 2023 a survey and subsequent recommendation about kitchen replacement and proofing across the block would have been made much sooner. Had the landlord decided not to replace the kitchen, it still had a repairing obligation in respect of the proofing works.
It took the landlord 7 months from the date of the block survey to arrange the kitchen replacements. It is therefore reasonable to presume that, had the survey taken place promptly (that is, within one month), the kitchen replacement work would likely have started around November 2023. The failure to address the concerns appropriately led to a delay of 7 months.
The landlord has confirmed that action is to be taken at the end of June 2024 to carry out full proofing and replace the kitchens of all flats in the block which the pest contractor believe will resolve the mice infestation. That is a welcome step to resolve this matter. However, the landlord’s failure to respond appropriately to the resident’s reports of pests meant that she has been living in a pest‑ infested property since at least early 2023. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have considered a temporary move for the resident given that she is disabled and housebound meaning the infestation had a greater impact on her. It did not do so and that was a further failing.
The landlord operates a compensation policy. The policy notes that it may offer compensation where there has been stress and inconvenience and that it will pay £20 for a missed appointment. In its complaint responses, the landlord offered the resident compensation totalling £385 for the pest issues across 3 complaints made up of £325 for distress and inconvenience and £60 for 3 missed appointments.
In relation to the failures identified, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies.
The Ombudsman recognises that some of our residents’ circumstances mean that they are more affected by landlords’ actions or inactions than others. This might be due to their particular circumstances, or as a result of a vulnerability. Consideration of any aggravating factors (such as a resident’s health condition) may justify an increased award to reflect the specific impact on the resident.
The compensation offered does not reflect the full impact on the resident who had to live for many months in a property that was infested with cockroaches and vermin, which the landlord was responsible for resolving. Financial compensation of £1,400 is appropriate for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the pest infestations. This includes the £385 previously offered by the landlord in its complaint responses.
This sum takes into account the delays in the landlord taking robust action in response to reports of pest infestations of almost 12 months for the cockroaches and 7 months for the vermin infestation and the landlord’s failure to consider a decant for the resident. This sum also takes into account the time and trouble taken by the resident in pursuing matters. The sums awarded in this report are in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website) which sets out our approach to compensation. Awards in this range include cases where there have been significant delays in investigating and remedying pest issues which had a severe impact on the resident.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s complaint policy says that it will respond to a complaint at stage one within 10 working days and at stage 2 within 20 working days.
The landlord’s complaint handling was not appropriate as there were delays at stage one and 2. The evidence suggests the resident made a formal complaint in March 2023 (when she chased it in June 2023, she said she had made the complaint over 2 months earlier). The landlord did not dispute that and offered compensation of £50 for the inconvenience caused by the delay.
The resident escalated the complaint on 26 June 2023 and the landlord responded over 13 weeks later after she submitted a further escalation request on 3 September 2023. That delay of over 9 weeks was not appropriate as it was not in line with its complaint policy and would have caused significant inconvenience to the resident.
The landlord did not offer compensation for this delay in its complaint response. Financial compensation of £150 is appropriate for the frustration caused to the resident and time and trouble taken by her in relation to the complaint. This includes the £50 previously offered by the landlord in its complaint responses.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its:
1. Response to the resident’s reports of pests.
2. Complaint handling.

Orders

The landlord shall take the following action within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
1. The Chief Executive to write to the resident with an apology for the failings outlined in this report. In doing so, they should have regard to the apologies guidance on our website.
2. Pay the resident the sum of £1,550 (minus any amounts previously paid through its complaints process), made up of:
  1. £1,400 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the pest infestations.
  2. £150 for the impact of the complaint handling failings identified in this report.
3. Ask the resident for evidence of the pest control treatment costs she has incurred from the start of March 2023 to date and reimburse her in full for that period.

These sums should be paid direct to the resident and not offset against any rent arears.

Ask its pest contractor:
1. To inspect the property to investigate the ongoing cockroach infestation and make recommendations.
2. For recommendations to resolve the cockroach infestation in the block.
3. To ensure all proofing on the exterior of the block has been completed.
4. The landlord should carry out any recommendations made by the pest contractor. If the landlord is unable to follow any of the contractor’s recommendations, it should explain why, in writing to the resident(s).
In accordance with paragraph 54.g of the Scheme, within 12 weeks of this report, the landlord is ordered to consider the failings identified in this report and complete a review at senior management level of its practices around pest control. The outcome of this review to include the introduction of a formal policy and procedure, identifying the roles and responsibilities of the landlord and residents in relation to treatment and management of pest infestations.
The landlord to provide a copy of the review to the Ombudsman with any proposals within 12 weeks of the date of this report, including timeframes for implementation and a plan for staff training.
The landlord should contact all the other residents in the block to find out the impact of the pest infestations on them. Within 12 weeks, the landlord should award these residents appropriate compensation taking into account any vulnerabilities affecting these residents.