Babergh District Council (202405744)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202405744

Babergh District Council

20 December 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 handling of the resident’s reports about the boiler, immersion, drainage system in the bathroom, damp and mould and external rendering and the condition of the kitchen flooring.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s record keeping.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord of a house, which she occupies with her 2 children. The resident’s tenancy began in April 2022. The resident told the Ombudsman that she suffers with asthma and that her 2 young children live with her in the property, one of whom is disabled.
In October 2022, the resident reported to the landlord that the wet room drainage was blocked, she had no heating or hot water and that there was damp and mould in the property.
The resident raised a complaint on 6 December 2023 about the landlord’s handling of the reported repairs. She said that there were outstanding repairs that she had reported over a year ago including damp and mould, poor drainage in the wet room and cracked render. The resident also said that the boiler frequently lost pressure and that the immersion heater had no power. The resident said that she had constantly chased the landlord regarding the repairs, some of which she said should have been easy to resolve.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 21 December 2023. It said that it had visited the resident’s property on 14 December 2023 and would carry out the following actions:
1. Add foam lagging around the cold-water mains to try to rectify the condensation issue.
2. Arrange for an electrician to attend to look at the kitchen and bathroom fans.
3. Arrange for a plumber to inspect the drainage in the wet room.

The landlord said that a contractor had attended on 25 November 2023 to repair the heating issue and that the boiler had then been re-set. It apologised for the poor service and delays the resident had ‘endured’ while waiting for the situation to be remedied.

The resident escalated her complaint on 16 January 2024, and raised the following points:
1. The immersion heater still had no power.
2. The boiler continued to lose pressure several times a week even though the expansion vessel had been replaced.
3. She had further reported the boiler issues on 3 January 2024 but had heard nothing from the landlord.
4. The drainage in the wet room was still poor even after the landlord had readjusted the pipes.
5. The contractors who had visited to inspect the damp and mould were not happy with the suggestion of fitting foam lagging and they agreed that the wrong paint had been used in the kitchen and bathroom.
6. Appointments had not been scheduled to inspect the rendering, address the damp and mould in the bedrooms and wardrobe or to repair the kitchen floor.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 16 February 2024. The landlord said that visits had since taken place to inspect the boiler and immersion heater and that any repairs identified would be undertaken in line with “normal operating procedures”. It stated that a surveyor had attended on 20 January 2024 to inspect the other issues in the property and as a result of this visit, it would take the following actions:
1. Look at insulating the gable wall in the kitchen.
2. Apply biocide paint to the kitchen walls to stop mould returning.
3. Repair the kitchen floor.
4. Further investigate the wet room drainage issues.
5. Investigate the pressure drop issue to the central heating and check that the immersion heater had been repaired.

It said that the surveyor had inspected the rendering and found this to be in a reasonable condition. The landlord upheld the complaint as the works raised at stage 1 of the complaints process had not been progressed.

The resident raised her complaint with the Ombudsman on 13 May 2024 and said that she wanted the landlord to complete the repairs and for it to acknowledge its lack of action. On 19 September 2024 the resident informed the Ombudsman that all of the issues were outstanding and that she had been required to spend time chasing these up. She said that one of her children is disabled and that this was impacting her ability to care for them. The resident also raised concerns that the mould issue would impact the health of her children and that she suffers with asthma.
On 21 October 2024, the landlord informed the Ombudsman that none of the repairs set out in the stage 2 complaint response were completed due to a failure to raise jobs for the identified works. It stated that a staff member had visited the resident on 9 October 2024 and identified works that had been assigned to contractors.
On 26 November 2024 the resident told the Ombudsman that repairs had since been carried out to the boiler, wet room drainage and kitchen floor. However, she said that the immersion heater, damp and mould and rendering repairs remained outstanding. The resident also reported that the landlord frequently scheduled repairs appointments without confirming with the resident first, which had led to her missing appointments and being required to re-raise repairs. As a resolution to her complaint, the resident said that she wanted all of the repairs to be completed.

Assessment and findings

Scope

The Ombudsman acknowledges the resident’s concerns about the effect of damp and mould on her and her children’s health and wellbeing. However, it is not possible for the Ombudsman to determine if there has been a direct link between any action or inaction by the landlord and any specific damage to health in this case. Matters of legal liability for damage to health may be better suited to a court or liability insurer to decide. The resident is advised to seek independent legal advice if she wishes to pursue a claim. The Ombudsman may consider any distress and inconvenience the resident experienced because of any errors by the landlord as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her health.

The landlord’s handling of boiler and immersion heater repairs

In October 2024, the landlord informed the Ombudsman that it did not have a repairs policy and that it was in the process of putting one in place. Consideration has therefore been given to the landlord’s repairs obligations under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, which requires landlords to make repairs to the structure and exterior of a property and keep in repair and working order the installation for the supply of gas, electricity and heating and heating water. The act states that the landlord must carry out repairs within a reasonable period of time once they have been notified of the problem.
The repair records reflect that the landlord raised several works orders in response to the resident’s reports that the boiler had lost pressure between November 2022 and January 2024, resulting in her losing heating and hot water. The landlord also raised works orders following reports of a faulty immersion heater in April and September 2023. The landlord has not explained why the property has both a boiler and an immersion heater. However, it is likely that the immersion heater can be used to heat water if the central heating fails.
The evidence indicates that, on most occasions, the landlord’s contractor attended on the same dates that the resident raised the boiler issues, and so the resident was not left without heating or hot water for significant periods of time. However, the landlord has not provided any contemporaneous notes to reflect what repairs took place during these visits and there is no clear evidence to reflect whether any repairs to the immersion heater took place.
During a call with the landlord on 22 September 2023, the resident confirmed that she had been shown how to fix the boiler when it lost pressure, but raised that this was not practical as the issue occurred regularly and she had a baby in the property. It is clear that the issue was recurring, and it would have been reasonable for the landlord to undertake further investigations to assess the cause.
In its stage 1 complaint response the landlord referred to a repairs appointment that took place on 25 November 2023, during which its contractors identified a fault with the boiler and took steps to resolve the issue, which was an appropriate action. However, the landlord has not provided notes of this visit to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on complaints about repairs states that landlords should monitor progress and have accessible records of appointments, inspection reports, work orders and completion dates for its own repairs service and for its contractor’s.
The evidence indicates that the repairs that were carried out did not sufficiently resolve the issue as the resident reported a loss of heating and hot water on 6 December 2023. A further works order was raised on 5 January 2024 following the resident’s reports that the boiler was losing pressure and that there was a possible leak. The repair records show that the 5 January 2024 works order was recorded as ‘abandoned’. It is unclear what was meant by ‘abandoned’ and there is no evidence to indicate that the landlord attended until the resident reported the same issue again on 29 January 2024. This indicates a failing by the landlord to act promptly to conduct further investigations into the issue.
The landlord raised a further works order on 29 January 2024 after the resident said that the boiler was losing pressure several times a week despite previous works taking place. The resident stated her belief that there was a leak in the system. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord said that its contractors had inspected the boiler and immersion heater. Again, the landlord has not provided records of these visits and it is unclear what repairs it identified. As a next step, the landlord said that it would investigate the pressure drop to the central heating and check that the immersion heater had been repaired. However, the landlord did not inspect the boiler until October 2024 and it has not provided any evidence that it has inspected the immersion heater.
The landlord has not provided evidence to indicate that the resident continued to report issues with the boiler between February and October 2024. While the frequent loss of boiler pressure likely caused frustration to the resident, it does not appear that she was left without hot water and heating as she was able to rectify the issue herself, which somewhat mitigates the impact of the failing identified. However, the delay in the landlord undertaking the further investigations it said it would do in its stage 2 response was a failing.
The landlord informed the Ombudsman that its contractor visited the resident’s property on 9 October 2024 and following this, it raised a works order to inspect the boiler. The resident confirmed that a repairs appointment has since taken place and that there have not been any issues with the boiler losing pressure since. While the landlord has now undertaken the repair, there was a delay of approximately 8 months in it taking steps to reach a lasting resolution to the boiler issue, which was unreasonable. It is evident that the resident incurred time and trouble in reporting this issue to the landlord.
The resident informed the Ombudsman that the immersion heater still had no power and that the landlord had not scheduled an appointment to repair this. The landlord ought to have taken steps to repair the immersion heater as a back-up in case there are further issues with the boiler. This represents a further failing by the landlord to resolve this issue which the resident reported more than a year ago.

The landlord’s handling of drainage issues in the bathroom

The landlord raised works orders on 25 and 26 October 2022 following reports from the resident that the shower drain was blocked. The repair records note that the job was completed on 31 October 2022. The landlord has not provided any related repairs notes and it is therefore unclear what repairs, if any, took place. However, there is no evidence of any drainage issues being reported by the resident between October 2022 and October 2023.
The landlord raised a further works order on 17 October 2023 after the resident reported that the shower drained slowly and requested for the pipework to be checked. The records indicate that a repairs appointment promptly took place on 19 October 2023, however, the records do not state what repairs took place.
In its December 2023 stage 1 complaint response the landlord said that a plumber would attend to inspect the drainage. Again, the landlord has not provided records of this visit and we therefore have no evidence that it took place. However, when she escalated her complaint, the resident said that the landlord had readjusted the angle of the drainage pipe but that the drainage was still poor. This indicates that some efforts were made to resolve the issue.
In its stage 2 response the landlord said that during the surveyor’s visit on 30 January 2024, it identified that there were drainage issues in the wet room and that it would schedule works to investigate this. However, there is no evidence that the landlord took action until 9 October 2024 when the landlord inspected and raised a works order for a camera drain inspection. The resident informed the Ombudsman that a repairs appointment has now taken place and the contractor removed a blockage from the outside soil stack, which has improved the drainage.
While the issue has now been rectified, there was a failing by the landlord as it did not conduct the action set out in its stage 2 response in a timely manner, and the repairs were not completed in a reasonable timeframe.
The resident also stated that the landlord had since re-charged her for the plumber’s visit because hair was blocking the drain, which it said was her responsibility. The resident confirmed that she has raised a new complaint about this matter.

The landlord’s handling of damp and mould and rendering on the external walls of the property.

The landlord raised a works order on 30 November 2022 after the resident reported that there was mould on the walls that she was unable to clean off due to being 8 months pregnant. The landlord acted appropriately by raising a works order for the mould to be cleaned and treated as a temporary measure until the source of the issue could be pinpointed. The repairs records state that an appointment was attended on 5 January 2023, and it appears the mould wash was carried out on this date. While the landlord ought to have carried this out more promptly, it was an appropriate action.
On 17 January 2023, a further works order was raised for the damp and mould issue to be passed to surveyors for an appointment to be arranged. This was reasonable so that the root cause could be identified. The resident reported the damp and mould again on 2 March 2023 and the repairs records indicate that a damp and mould survey took place on 14 June 2023. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould states that landlords should ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue. However, the survey took place approximately 7 months after the resident’s January 2023 report, which indicates a significant delay and was a failing by the landlord. Further, the landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with a copy of the surveyor’s report or any notes relating to this visit. It is therefore not known whether the surveyor identified works to address the damp and mould and no evidence has been provided to reflect that any repairs were carried out.
The resident contacted the landlord on 10 October 2023 and reported her concerns about the external rendering. She said that other properties in the street were re-rendered as part of the planned works programme, but her property was left out as the former tenant did not want the works to be done. The resident said that she wanted the rendering to be checked as she said this may have been causing damp in the property. The resident further reported damp and mould on 17 October 2023 and she suggested that repairs to the external rendering were required to resolve the issue. The landlord raised a works order in relation to the damp and mould on the same date.
The landlord has not provided any notes to reflect that the repairs set out in its stage 1 response had been carried out. However, the resident referred to them in her escalation request, indicating that inspections did take place. The resident stated that some minor remedial works were done to the fans and that the operatives told her that foam lagging would only hide the problem. The resident also said that she was still waiting to hear from the landlord regarding the mould in the bedrooms and wardrobe and that the stage 1 complaint response did not refer to this.
In its February 2024 stage 2 complaint response, the landlord said that the surveyor had attended the property and recommended that the gable wall should be insulated and the kitchen wall painted with biocide paint. It stated that the surveyor had inspected the rendering and found that it was in reasonable condition and no works would be carried out.
The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code states that the early and local resolution of issues is key to effective complaint handling. However, the landlord did not refer to the mould in the bedroom or wardrobe in its stage 1 or 2 responses, which it ought to have done in order to fully resolve the issues at an early opportunity.
Further, the evidence indicates that the landlord did not follow the February 2024 recommendations for works and therefore did not act with urgency to resolve the damp and mould issue, which was a failing.
The landlord’s contractor identified works to resolve the damp and mould during the 9 October 2024 inspection. The landlord has not provided any evidence to indicate that an inspection of the rendering was carried out during this visit, and if so, whether any identified issues could be linked to the damp and mould However, in November 2024, the resident informed the Ombudsman that the landlord had undertaken no repairs to resolve the damp and mould issue and that there were no repairs appointments currently scheduled. As such, it appears that the issue remains ongoing.

The landlord’s handling of the condition of the kitchen flooring

In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord stated that the surveyor had inspected the flooring and this would be repaired and resealed. However, there is no evidence that the landlord carried out these repairs following the final complaint response, which was a failing. The 9 October 2024 survey recommended that the floor bubbles in the kitchen should be rectified. On 26 November 2024, the resident informed the Ombudsman that these works have now taken place.
The resident informed the Ombudsman that the landlord had failed to follow the contractor’s recommendation that the whole floor should be removed as the floor is unlevel. The resident said that remedial works have been undertaken but the floor remains unlevel. The quality of the works caried out is not within the scope of this investigation as the landlord has not had the opportunity to investigate and respond to this as a complaint. The resident has the option to raise a new complaint if she wishes to pursue this matter.
In summary, the evidence indicates that the landlord undertook no action to resolve the repairs between the February 2024 stage 2 response and 9 October 2024, after the Ombudsman contacted it about the complaint. The landlord therefore failed to take proactive steps to carry out the repairs which has led to lengthy delays in the issues being resolved, some of which are ongoing. The failings identified amount to maladministration by the landlord.
Where there are failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider suitable remedies in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
The resident experienced distress and inconvenience due to the delays by the landlord to conduct the repairs, as well as time and trouble in reporting some of the issues to the landlord since 2022. The resident reported to the landlord that she has young children in the property, including a child with a disability. She also said that she has asthma. However, the landlord’s response to the repairs do not reflect that it took these vulnerabilities into account when responding to the repairs. The evidence indicates that the resident reported damp and mould approximately 2 years ago, and only limited repairs have taken place since. The delays in repairing the damp and mould will have caused significant distress to resident, as well as ongoing concerns about the impact of damp and mould on the health of her and her children.
In assessing an appropriate level of compensation, the Ombudsman takes into account a range of factors including any distress and inconvenience caused by the issues, the amount of time and effort expended on pursuing the matter with the landlord, and the level of detriment caused by the landlord’s acts and/or omissions. In the case of compensation for distress and inconvenience, we are not able to quantify a definitive loss and the intention of such an award is to recognise the overall distress and inconvenience suffered by the resident.
In order to remedy the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings identified, an order has been made below for the landlord to pay the resident £700 compensation. This amount is in accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for failings that have had a significant impact on the resident. The amount takes into account the delay of approximately 2 years in repairing the boiler, kitchen floor and the ongoing delay in resolving the damp and mould.
A further order has been made below for the landlord to compile a schedule of works to address the outstanding repairs issues, and for these repairs to be completed within a reasonable timeframe. The landlord is ordered to communicate with the resident when booking repairs to ensure that they are scheduled at a convenient time.
The landlord informed the Ombudsman that it has now implemented a CRM system to enable it to better store communication and information. This indicates that the landlord has taken steps to improve how it handles repairs, which should help to ensure that reported repairs are properly documented.

The landlord’s record keeping

The landlord is responsible for maintaining a clear audit trail of events and providing evidence of this to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management states that good records will enable a landlord to explain what has happened and ensures that decisions and actions are taken based on good quality information.
As referred to above, the landlord has not provided clear records of the repairs that took place. The absence of adequate records has therefore impacted the Ombudsman’s ability to carry out a thorough investigation. The landlord has not provided comprehensive records of repairs it undertook in relation to the repairs. It did not provide the June 2023 damp and mould survey, and it has therefore not demonstrated that it took sufficient steps to investigate the cause of the mould in the property. The repairs information would have assisted our assessment of the case and allowed us to reach a more reliable conclusion of the landlord’s handling of the repairs.
This amounts to a failing by the landlord to provide sufficient evidence. It is unclear whether records have been maintained and not provided, or whether the lack of evidence is indicative of a failure to keep clear records. An order has been made below for the landlord to improve its record keeping.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about the boiler, immersion, drainage system in the bathroom, damp and mould and external rendering and the condition of the kitchen flooring.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s record keeping.

Orders

Within 6 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
1. Pay the resident £700 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused due to its handling of the repairs. This amount should be paid directly to the resident, rather than credited to her rent account.
2. Confirm what repairs it will complete and compile a schedule of works for repairs to the damp and mould and immersion heater, and provide this to the resident and the Ombudsman. The schedule should include timeframes for the works to be completed, which the landlord must then adhere to. The landlord should arrange repairs appointments at times that are suitable for the resident. The landlord should also clarify whether it will complete any repairs to the external rendering.
3. Provide evidence of compliance with the orders to the Ombudsman within the timeframes specified.