Bromford Housing Group Limited (202220072)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202220072

Bromford Housing Group Limited

19 October 2023

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

This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. repairs to a solid fuel appliance (a log burner) in the property.
2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs within the property, including:
  1. Defective windows and doors.
  2. Defective cavity wall insulation.
  3. Damp within the property.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of an end-terraced house.
A chimney sweep inspected the log burner in the resident’s home on 17 May 2022. They reported that the chimney liner had failed declared the log burner dangerous and instructed the resident not to use it until the chimney liner had been replaced. The landlord sent an internal email on 26 May 2022 stating that it had spoken to the resident who expressed dissatisfaction that the landlord had decided to remove the log burner. It was her view that the landlord had not properly maintained it.
On 6 June 2022, the resident raised a formal complaint regarding the landlord’s maintenance of the log burner and its decision to remove it instead of replacing the chimney liner. The resident also reported defective doors and windows, poor cavity wall insulation and dampness in the property. The resident went on to state:
1. she had agreed to have a log burner professionally installed in April 2007. Since then she had paid to maintain it until the landlord took responsibility for it in 2010.
2. an engineer inspected the log burner and confirmed that it was safe and it was the chimney liner that needed to be replaced.
3. the engineer and the company which installed the log burner both stated that the chimney liner required routine maintenance to keep the chimney safe but it did not affect the log burner.
4. she believed that the landlord refused to replace the chimney liner as it was too expensive.
5. she needed the log burner to help manage her health conditions and her energy costs.
The resident told the landlord that this issue had been detrimental to her health. To resolve the complaint, the resident asked the landlord to replace the chimney liner and leave the log burner installed.
The landlord provided a stage 1 response on 10 June 2022, in which it stated:
1. It could not establish that it granted permission in 2007 to install the log burner and that it would not have granted permission.
2. It could not find the records to support that it took over maintenance of the log burner in 2010.
3. It intended to remove the log burner due to safety concerns in line with its policy which required the removal of appliances which were no longer safe.
4. The resident had suitable gas heating installed.
5. Fuel poverty had been discussed at a senior level and its usual stance was to remove log burners as they had a higher risk for the business.
6. That new doors and windows would be installed.
The resident requested to escalate the complaint to stage 2 on 14 June 2022. The landlord acknowledged this on 27 June 2022. It provided its final response on 11 July 2022. Its response can be summarised as follows:
1. It reiterated that it had no evidence to confirm it had granted permission to install the log burner or that it had assumed responsibility to maintain it.
2. It said it was required to ensure that all non-gas heating systems were maintained, kept in a safe condition, and checked annually under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. It was required to do this even though it had not granted permission to install the log burner.
3. In 2021, it implemented a new policy which no longer permitted residents to repair or install new log burners.
4. It confirmed that it would not repair or replace the log burner.
5. It said the windows and doors would be replaced in the financial year 2022-2023.
6. Finally, it said that it would arrange for a surveyor to inspect the damp and cavity wall insulation in the property.
The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman as she remained dissatisfied with the outcome of the complaint.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to a solid fuel appliance (a log burner) in the property.

The resident claimed to have obtained consent from the landlord to install the log burner in 2007. The landlord stated that it could not locate any records showing that it had given consent to the resident for this installation. It also claimed that it would not have given consent for its installation.
The evidence shows that the landlord was aware of the log burner from 2010 as it conducted annual safety checks. The landlord ought to have informed the resident to make a retrospective application or remove it much earlier than it did. That in itself is a failure by the landlord. The landlord’s contractor, however, condemned the item in May 2022.
There is also a suggestion that the landlord has maintained it at various points. There is no evidence of this. The Ombudsman would be entitled to find that the landlord had tacitly granted permission or at least acquiesced to the installation of the log burner by not acting promptly to take enforcement action. This would be on the basis that an attempt to remove or enforce the removal of the log burner because consent was never provided would be unfair after such a long time.
However, in this case, there is evidence that several alterations have been made to the property without the landlord’s consent and that those changes have increased the risks in the property. Some of the changes were described by the landlord’s surveyor as ‘DIY’ and have increased the risk of fire spreading and have contributed to the dampness and mould in the property. The inspection in September 2022 found:
1. The chimney had no cowl on it – and the surveyor was concerned that the log burner did not have a metal liner. The log burner had been condemned. The resident had opened the fireplace which was a concern for structural reasons and for fire risks.
2. The doors had been removed which would allow the spread of fire in the property.
3. Whilst the log burner was over 5Kw – there was no room wall vent when there should have been.
Section 4 of the customer home improvements and alterations policy says that the landlord will normally refuse consent if a change to the heating system would increase the risk of harm (e.g. open flued appliances such as log burners) and where works are likely to unreasonably increase the cost of future maintenance. In this case, the landlord’s surveyor has been clear that there is an increased risk based on his inspection.
Section 10 of the landlord’s customer home improvements and alterations policy states “where a customer improvement has been undertaken without permission a retrospective application must be made. Failure to do so will result in enforcement action and the customer may be charged for reinstatement works and administration costs.” The resident made this application, and the landlord has refused it because of safety concerns. The request to install a log burner would most likely meet the grounds for the landlord’s refusal. There is no evidence that the resident has arranged for her own inspection of the log burner to show that it is safe and that it would not be costly for her to maintain.
The landlord’s policy states that it will remove log burners when its properties become vacant and at ‘every other opportunity’. In this case, the log burner has been condemned and the landlord would be entitled to consider the best way to repair or replace it or recharge the cost to the resident of the repair or replacement. It was open to the landlord to either:
1. Agree to retrospective consent.
2. Agree to repair the chimney liner as suggested.
3. Agree to remove the log burner as per its policy.
4. Seek an order from the court for the resident to put back the property to the way it was.
5. Require the resident to maintain and repair it.
In this instance, if the landlord repairs the chimney liner, there are still safety concerns that there is no ventilation, there is no cowl and metal liner, and the chimney breast has been opened resulting in some structural concerns for the landlord. If the landlord were to grant retrospective permission, it would have to agree to complete these works in addition.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs within the property

The evidence shows that the resident reported dampness and mould at the property as early as 2014. The landlord inspected it then and again in January 2016. The repairs records in show that the resident reported wet walls in January 2017. The resident reported damp and mould again in 2018 and 2019. The report in 2019 suggested that the windows were not offering insulation.
The repairs records go on to show that the property was inspected on 18 June 2021 and the landlord found the windows and doors to be contributing to the dampness and mould due to draughts. The landlord agreed to replace the windows and doors but explained they would not be replaced for another two years.
The resident contacted the landlord again in respect of the windows and doors on 14 September 2021. The inspection at that time found gaps in the window frames.
On 6 June 2022, the resident raised a formal complaint regarding defective doors and windows, poor cavity wall insulation and dampness within the property. In her complaint, she alleged that the landlord had completed external works and had failed to seal holes in the exterior – which had allowed rain to penetrate.
On 11 July 2022, in its final response the landlord stated the windows and doors would be replaced in the financial year 2022-2023. It also said that it would arrange for a surveyor to inspect the damp and cavity wall insulation in the property but did not provide a timeframe for this.
The landlord arranged for a survey to be completed at the property on 6 September 2022. The findings were emailed to the landlord on 8 September 2022 and were as follows:
1. There were ‘infrequent’ drill holes for cavity wall injection in the property. Some areas of the cavity wall could be missing cavity fill and cold bridging might be occurring in the uninsulated cooler areas. The surveyor recommended a further survey with a borescope.
2. There was blown fibre ‘older material’ with several void pockets – leading to cold bridging. The material previously used had been substandard and was holding moisture. The surveyor stated they were awaiting quotes to inject uniformly.
3. A poor DIY veranda had been built at the rear of the property against the house and brick store – which was ‘very defective’. There were holes in the roof causing dampness to penetrate the property. This required removal and putting back to how it was by the resident.
4. A shed had also been built – which needed to be removed by the resident, which was also contributing to the dampness and mould.
5. Both the shed and the veranda were contributing to the dampness in the property.
6. The original back door was partly boarded over and blocked off.
7. The customer had fitted a new sink with a new pipe which ran through the veranda floor. The surveyor found this had not been fitted correctly and needed to be rectified by the resident.
8. The kitchen door had been removed by the resident – which increased the risk of fire spreading more quickly.
9. The radiators were undersized in the lounge and small bedroom. There was no radiator in the kitchen.
10. The loft was overloaded with stored items which created a risk of collapse and a fire risk. The landlord could top-up the insulation once the loft had been emptied.
Overall, the surveyor found several poor DIY works in the property that needed to be resolved. However, there were cavity wall installation issues and radiators were required in the property. The email suggests that the new windows were due to be fitted the following week.
There is no evidence that the landlord inspected the windows and doors to determine if any interim repairs were required. In any event, the current financial year is 2023-2024 – so the timescale provided by the landlord has expired.
The landlord has also not demonstrated it has completed the works it has identified to resolve the long-standing issue of mould.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of repairs to a log burner in the property. This is primarily because it ought to have identified the log burner had been installed without consent much sooner than it did and asked the resident to remove it or grant retrospective permission sooner.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs within the property.

Orders

Within 28 days of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Appoint an independent surveyor to inspect the property to ascertain what works are required to make the log burner safe – as well as whether ventilation is required in the lounge. The surveyor should be asked to set out all works required to repair the log burner and the cost of those works.
2. Alternatively, the independent surveyor must be asked to quote for reinstatement works to put the property back to its original condition.
3. Once the landlord receives the independent surveyor’s report, it should share a copy with the Ombudsman and the resident within five working days of receipt.
4. Based on the independent surveyor’s advice the landlord must, decide what works it will complete and inform the resident, within ten working days.
5. The landlord must complete the works at its own cost (only for works relating to the log burner).
6. The landlord should obtain competent legal advice on the issue of whether it acquiesced to the installation of the log burner in deciding which works to complete. It must communicate this to the resident and the Ombudsman.
7. Contact the resident to arrange mutually convenient appointments for:
  1. the insulation repairs to be completed and sealed.
  2. the appropriately sized radiators to be installed.
  3. an inspection of the windows to see what interim works can be completed whilst the resident awaits renewal.

The landlord must provide evidence to the Ombudsman that these repairs have been completed within 56 days of the date of this determination.

Write to the resident and set out when the windows will be replaced.
Pay the resident £850 compensation. The compensation is comprised of:
1. £250 for the failures identified in the handling of the log burner.
2. £600 for the failures identified in its handling of the outstanding repairs.

The compensation must be paid directly into the resident’s bank account and not offset against any rent arrears, if any.

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
1. Liaises with the resident to resolve all the improvements/alterations made without consent (excluding the log burner). This should be to offer retrospective consent where it can or assist the resident to bring the works up to a standard so that her home is safe. The landlord would be entitled to recharge for any work to make these improvements/alterations safe (excluding works relating to the log burner).
2. Creates a repairs policy which sets out the landlord’s service standards and response targets for all repairs and makes it available in clear and accessible formats for all residents.