Abri Group Limited (202230717)

A blue and grey text

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202230717

Abri Group Limited

31 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 reports about a leak, and subsequent low water pressure in her bathroom.
We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association, which began on 21 October 2013. The property is described as a 3-bedroom house. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
The Ombudsman notes that the resident’s reports about a possible leak date back to 26 November 2021. She reported that she and other neighbours could hear and feel water running constantly from the toilet downstairs. The landlord’s repair records noted that it attended and completed a repair on 2 December 2021. This Service has not been able to determine that further reports, about the leak, were made by the resident until August 2022.
Also, the resident did not raise a formal complaint about the matter until February 2023. This investigation therefore focuses on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports, from August 2022 onwards, that were considered during the landlord’s complaint responses. This is because 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.

Scope of investigation

The Service notes the resident’s comments regarding her health, and the impact caused by the delays during the course of her complaints. This Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impact 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.

Landlord obligations

Section 11(a) of the Landlord and Tenant act states that landlords have a duty to keep in repair the structure and exterior of its properties, including drains, gutters and external pipes.
The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will:
1. Keep the property in good repair, and proper working order installations, for the supply of water, gas, electricity, sanitation, and water heating.
2. It will ensure that it delivers an appropriate and priority service to residents who are vulnerable and need additional consideration and support. Where practical, consideration will be given to sourcing products suitable for vulnerable residents.
3. Aim to ensure residents are kept informed of the timescales, and progress of their repairs and planned maintenance work.
It will attend an emergency repair within 24 hours to make safe, or an appointment-based job system for non-emergency repairs.
The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will aim to respond to:
1. Stage 1 complaints within 10 working days.
2. Stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
The landlord’s compensation policy considers financial loss, trouble and upset (emotional impact), and inconvenience, when making offers of financial redress. The policy highlights the importance of putting the resident at the heart of what it does, and in trying to make their journey as smooth as possible. It further states that the landlord:
1. Would require evidence from a resident claiming loss of earnings.
2. May pay up to £500 or more in cases where its actions cause more significant distress.

Summary of events

The resident reported on 5 August 2022, that she could hear and feel water continuously running in her toilet downstairs. She said the flooring in the toilet was damp, and it was not easy to turn off the stop tap. She said the landlord needed to carry out further investigation as other residents were experiencing the same issues.
The landlord noted on 12 August 2022, that it would arrange for a drainage company to renew the stop tap outside the property.
The resident asked the landlord for an update on the repair on 24 October 2022. She said:
1. She was unhappy with the lack of update on the repair, as she was assured that a drainage company would attend months ago.
2. No one had attended since she reported the issue, and the water pressure had become very low.
3. The toilet floor, back door, and kitchen had become waterlogged due to the leak.
4. She would make her complaint official if no one attended that day.
The landlord responded on 24 October 2022 that the repair was being looked into by its sub-contractor, who would contact her directly to arrange an appointment. It said it was unable to give a timescale.
On 9 January 2023, the resident logged an online complaint regarding the repair. She said she could hear water hissing, and she had no water pressure. She further said the leak had caused the flooring underneath her toilet to become waterlogged causing damp. She said the pressure was so low that water trickled from the taps and shower. The leak continued to cause damage to the toilet flooring and the door (door could not close properly). The landlord noted the same day, that it needed to book a drainage company to renew the stop tap outside the property. The landlord responded that it had re-raised the repairs with its sub-contractor.
The resident contacted the landlord on 20 January 2023. She said:
1. She is disabled and diagnosed with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), so damp in the toilet and kitchen was not a conducive environment.
2. The issue had been ongoing for 12 months, and she was unable to use the shower as the pressure was really low.
On 3 February 2023, the landlord chased up the drainage company for an update on the repairs. It informed them that the resident had no water supply upstairs and asked them to prioritise the repair.
The following events occurred on 6 February 2023:
1. The sub-contractor attended the property on 6 February 2023 and renewed a 3-metre-long pipework into the rising main from the stop tap outside into the toilet at the rear of the property. It noted that this did not resolve the leak. The landlord carried out further investigations and could hear the leak at 5 other properties not owned by it.
2. The landlord advised the resident that it had raised a repair for her shower for 9 February 2023. It also asked if she would need a mould wash.
3. The resident informed the landlord that the water company attended the property on 3 February 2023 and confirmed that there was a leak. She said the sub-contractor also attended that day (6 February 2023), but they could not trace the source of the leak as it was in the pipes in the wall.
4. The resident reported that she was unhappy with the length of time the repair was taking, as the landlord had not treated the matter as a priority. She said the water company would return on 10 February 2023, to ensure the leak had been resolved as they considered it an offence to waste water.
5. She asked the landlord to cancel the appointment for the shower, as this was not needed.
The resident contacted the landlord on 20 February 2023. She said she would be seeking compensation, as she was having to take showers at her daughter’s house.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 20 February 2023. It said it would aim to respond to the complaint within 10 working days.
The resident called for an update on her complaint on 6 March 2023.
The landlord contacted the resident on 8 March 2023, and noted further concerns regarding the water pressure. It said the resident reported that:
1. The low water pressure was also affecting the toilet.
2. The water company needed access to a property in the area, but the private owner was not allowing access. She said they had served a 28 day notice to get access.
The landlord noted on 17 March 2023, that the water company had identified the leak was on the shared water main. It noted that it was located under a property not owned by it. It said it would consider a temporary decant if the resident’s property was deemed to be unhabitable. It further said in an internal discussion that the resident had been experiencing issues with her water pressure for close to a year, and that she no longer had water supply upstairs. It advised the resident that it would look into any support it could provide, whilst the issue was being investigated and advise her on 20 March 2023.
The landlord noted in its internal discussions on 22 March 2023, that the repair was the water company’s responsibility to resolve. It said a decant would not be necessary since steps were being taken to resolve the repair.
The landlord contacted the resident on 12 April 2023 to discuss her complaint.
The landlord discussed the resident’s complaint on 19 April 2023, and queried who would be responsible for the resolving the leak.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 20 April 2023 and arranged to visit the property on 21 April 2023.
The resident asked the landlord on 25 April 2023, if it had considered her request for compensation. She said it should also consider loss of earnings, as she had been away from work for a month.
The landlord noted on 2 May 2023 that it would arrange a surveyor’s visit to inspect the resident’s flooring within 6 weeks.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 5 May 2023. It said:
1. Its sub-contractor attended her reports about a leak on 6 February 2023. The water company completed the repairs on 28 April 2023.
2. The water company confirmed that the leak originated from underneath the extension at the rear of the neighbouring privately owned property.
3. There had been some confusion in establishing who was responsible for the leaking pipe, and this resulted in a long delay which could have been avoided.
4. It acknowledged that the issue would have caused the resident considerable frustration. It said although the works requested by the resident were completed within its 90-day service level agreement, the root cause of the leak was not identified until considerably later.
5. It had learned from this and would liaise with the relevant team, to ensure measures were put in place to identify and repair leaks quicker.
6. It apologised for the resident’s experience and offered £450 broken down as follows:
  1. £200 for the delay in investigating the source of the leak.
  2. £100 for the poor communication.
  3. £100 for the inconvenience due to loss of use of the shower.
  4. £50 for the time and trouble.
The resident requested the escalation of her complaint to stage 2 on 11 May 2023. She said although the repair had been completed, the compensation offered was not sufficient.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 12 May 2023. It said it would aim to respond to the complaint within 20 working days.
The resident contacted this Service on 21 May 2023. She said the landlord failed to understand her concerns or listen to her for several months, as it kept sending electricians and plumbers to try to resolve the leak and water pressure.
The resident chased up a response to her stage 2 complaint on 5 June 2023.
The landlord informed the resident on 6 June 2023, that it would require more time to respond to her stage 2 complaint. It said it would respond by 26 June 2023.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response to the resident on 26 June 2023. It said:
1. It received the resident’s complaint on 20 February 2023 regarding a persistent leak underneath the downstairs toilet.
2. It received her complaint on 11 May 2023, that she was not happy with the compensation offered by the landlord.
3. It was unable to uphold her complaint, as it was satisfied with the previous investigation and amount offered in redress.
4. It was unable to consider the resident’s request for compensation for loss of earnings, due to insufficient information.
5. In general, it would not propose a remedy of compensation to reimburse a resident for their time off work, loss of wages or loss of employment whilst repairs are carried out.

Actions following the completion of the landlord’s internal complaints process

The landlord completed all remedial works caused by the leak by 14 August 2023. It renewed the carpets in the downstairs lobby and vinyl in her bathroom.
The resident informed this Service on 24 October 2023, that the landlord’s handling of the matter had caused her severe distress. She said she had medical issues, and one of the conditions required her to bathe in medicated body wash. She said she ended up taking time off work due to stress and would like compensation for the 8 months she did not have a working bathroom.
The landlord carried out a further review of its handling of the resident’s complaint and her request for repairs on 15 January 2024. It apologised for the delay in responding to her complaints and offered £150 for the inconvenience caused. It also increased its offer for the handling of the repairs by £100, bringing the total to £700.

Assessment and findings

While this Service does not dispute the resident’s reports, that the leak initially reported to the landlord in November 2021 remained unresolved until April 2023, the evidence seen does not corroborate this. It is however clear that the resident raised the matter again with the landlord on 5 August 2022. We have seen that the landlord committed to instructing a drainage company to investigate the resident’s concerns on 12 August 2022, but it is not clear what action was taken from the evidence seen.
When the resident asked for an update on 24 October 2022, the landlord responded that it was unable to provide a timescale as the repair had been passed to a sub-contractor. This is not appropriate. The resident made it clear in her email that the issue was affecting her water pressure and causing damage to the internal areas of the property. This included the toilet floor and back door which she said was swollen. The landlord should have taken proactive steps to monitor the progress of the works requested and kept the resident updated. Failure to do this meant it did not manage her expectations, which would have caused her some distress and uncertainty.
The resident made the landlord aware on 5 August 2022, that she could hear water running forcefully continuously, and that it needed to be investigated urgently as other properties had expressed similar concerns. She said the flooring in the toilet was damp. The landlord’s actions from this date until 9 January 2023 (when the resident requested an update) are unclear from its repairs log. She reiterated that the issue remained unresolved and that the leak continued to cause damage to the internal parts of the property. The landlord’s response the same day suggested that it had either not made the referral to the drainage company, or that it failed to follow up the request for repairs. This is not appropriate.
The resident raised further concerns about her health on 20 January 2023, and said that exposure to damp could be detrimental to her wellbeing, due to her diagnosis of COPD. She reported that the water pressure in the property had become very low, and that she was unable to use her shower. The landlord appeared to learn from its error, as it contacted the drainage company and expressed the urgency of the matter, but this was approximately 6 months after the resident first reported the leak. Although the landlord’s sub-contractor visited the property on 6 February 2023, and renewed the pipework to the resident’s property, it noted that the problem persisted as it could hear the leak. We have not seen evidence of any proactive steps by the landlord, to facilitate the repairs. It was reactive and appeared only to act when the resident made contact. This would have caused the resident some distress and frustration. While the evidence indicates that the landlord sought to address the damp in the property, it should have carried out a risk assessment to determine any support that the resident may require due to her health concerns.
It is noted that the water company attended and completed the repair on 28 April 2023. However, there is very little evidence of the landlord’s efforts to communicate with the water company regarding the repairs. Based on the information seen by this Service, the landlord appeared to rely on feedback from the resident. This is noted in the supplementary information provided to this Service, that the resident informed it of the steps being taken by the water company. As the landlord, it failed to take responsibility for the investigation of this longstanding issue, even though the resident repeatedly advised that the leak was causing damage to the property. This is not in adherence with its repairs policy.
Due to the landlord’s failure to act quickly and take ownership of the resident’s concerns, she was unable to access water in her bathroom for approximately 7 months. While it is noted that the landlord considered moving the resident from the property, this was several months after she initially raised the concern about her water pressure. It failed to apply a person-centred approach in dealing with the resident’s reports. The resident complained about poor water pressure from October 2022 to March 2023, but we have not seen evidence of the landlord’s assessment of the impact this was having on the resident. In February 2023, she informed the landlord she had to visit her daughter’s property to have showers, but the landlord appeared to ignore this.
The landlord sought to put things right in its stage-1 response, as it acknowledged that it got things wrong and offered apologies to the resident. It offered £450 to the resident, in recognition of the inconvenience caused. It is the Ombudsman’s opinion, that the amount offered did not fully consider the distress and frustration, time and trouble and inconvenience that the resident had experienced from August 2022 to April 2023. It is noted that the landlord rejected the resident’s request for a review of the compensation, but it decided to offer an additional amount of £100 approximately 7 months after its complaints process had been exhausted. We have also noted that the landlord completed the repairs to the property caused from the leak in August 2023.
However, the landlord should have offered the compensation at the appropriate stage of the complaints process. Additionally, when compensation offers are made after the landlord’s complaints process is exhausted, it is harder for the landlord to demonstrate it will act fairly and consistently in all cases. The Ombudsman notes that the landlord has apologised for the inconvenience to the resident. However, the landlord failed to recognise the resident’s concerns about the impact of the delay on her health or demonstrate any learning from this. Its repairs policy states that it will aim to offer a priority service, to vulnerable residents, but it failed to do so in this case.
The landlord discussed the possibility of decanting the resident in March 2023, while the repairs were being investigated, but it failed to set out clear reasons for why the resident could not be decanted. The resident waited a further 6 weeks, (from 17 March 2023 to 28 April 2023) before the repairs were completed by the water company. In view of this, the Ombudsman finds maladministration, in the landlord’s overall handling of the resident’s reports about a leak and the subsequent low water pressure in her bathroom. An order will be made to address this.

The associated complaint

The landlord’s complaints policy and procedure defines a complaint as an expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standard of service, actions or lack of action by the organisation, its staff, or those acting on its behalf, affecting an individual customer or group of customers. The resident initially expressed dissatisfaction concerning the landlord’s handling of the leak, in her contact dated 24 October 2022. This was followed up by her complaint on 9 January 2023 and 6 February 2023. From reading her correspondence, it was quite clear that the resident was not satisfied with the landlord’s approach in dealing with the reports made. On 20 February 2023, the resident requested compensation for the inconvenience she had experienced. It is concerning that the landlord did not treat the resident’s correspondence as an official complaint, until she requested compensation. This is not in adherence with the landlord’s policy or this Service’s complaint handling code.
Despite the earlier delays in acknowledging the resident’s concerns as a formal complaint, the landlord took approximately 4 months to respond to the stage-1 complaint. This would have caused the resident some frustration, as it should have responded within 10 working days. There were further delays in responding to the stage-2 complaint, which shows that the landlord did not learn from its earlier mistake. The landlord responded to the complaint, 30 working days after the resident submitted it. It also failed to manage the resident’s expectations and only advised her of the delay when she requested an update on 5 June 2023. This is not appropriate.
The landlord refused the resident’s request for a review of the compensation offered at stage 1. Its offer failed to consider the impact on the resident of the long delays in responding to both complaints. It was only after the complaint was referred to this Service, that the landlord conducted a review of its handling of the complaint. The complaints process was exhausted on 26 June 2023 where the landlord reaffirmed that its offer of £450 was sufficient. It carried out a review around 15 January 2024, more than 6 months after it closed the case, and offered the an additional sum of 150 for the poor handling of the complaint.
While we welcome the landlord recognising the need to revisit the complaint, this was left far too late after the complaint process had been exhausted. This means that this Service does not consider it an offer of compensation made as part of the complaint. Moreover, its offer of £150, for the delayed response, does not reflect the time and trouble incurred, and the frustration to the resident. She initially expressed dissatisfaction regarding the matter in October 2022, but the landlord did not recognise it as an official complaint until February 2023. It failed to communicate effectively with the resident between October 2022 and February 2023, and it only sought to put things right when the resident requested compensation. Based on the above, there is evidence of maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint. An order will be made to address this.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about a leak, and subsequent low water pressure in her bathroom.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Reasons

The landlord failed to take proactive steps in investigating the source of the leak into the property. It did not take the resident’s concerns about the impact of the leak and subsequent low pressure seriously. The landlord did not communicate effectively with the resident, its sub-contractor and water company and this led to her expectations not being managed. The landlord demonstrated some learning as it acknowledged its errors in the stage 1 response and it apologised for the inconvenience caused to the resident. It offered compensation, but this did not put things right for her.
The landlord failed to recognise the resident’s expression of a dissatisfaction with its handling of her reports of a leak, expressed in her correspondence dated 24 October 2022, as a formal complaint. Further expressions made in January and February 2023 were also not logged as formal complaints until she requested compensation on 20 February 2023. The landlord did not realise this error or learn from it throughout the life of the case. Its responses to the stage1 and stage 2 complaints were also delayed, and it failed to offer any redress. It only offered compensation after the resident referred the complaint to this Service.

Orders

The landlord should within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
1. Pay the resident a total of £1500 broken down as:
  1. £700 previously offered to the resident, if it has not yet been paid to her.
  2. £300 for the distress and inconvenience to the resident due to its handling of the repairs.
  3. £500 for the time and trouble, distress and inconvenience to the resident for its handling of the complaint.
The landlord should within 8 weeks of the date of this report:
1. Carry out a review of this case to determine what went wrong.
2. It should develop an action plan to address any issues identified.
3. Train the relevant staff on the importance of following its policies and procedures correctly, especially when dealing with residents with health issues or those with vulnerabilities.
Ensure compensation awarded is paid directly to the resident.
Provide evidence of compliance with the above orders.