Clarion Housing Association Limited (202327436)

A blue and grey text

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202327436

Clarion Housing Association Limited

2 September 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
1. A roof leak.
2. Lack of heating due to having no gas supply.
3. Repairs to the bathroom window.
4. The associated complaint

Background and summary of events

The resident is an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a 1 bedroom third floor flat. The tenancy started in August 2023.

Summary of events

On 21 September 2023 the resident reported that:
1. The bathroom and living room windows did not open.
2. A window handle was missing off the bathroom and the windows were painted shut.
3. There was a leak from the roof when it rains affecting electrics.
The landlord contacted the resident on 22 September 2023 to attend the property. The resident was unable to allow access as he was working.
The resident contacted the landlord on 26 September 2023 and asked that the gas meter was uncapped. The landlord’s internal records for the same day state that the resident raised a number of repair matters when he initially viewed the property. These included:
1. One of the windows in the living room and shower room did not open.
2. The window in the bedroom did not have a handle.
3. There was paint marks on the external entry stairs.
The landlord’s internal records show that its roofing contractor had visited the resident’s property twice and left calling cards. It said that the roofing contractor had spoken to the resident and booked to visit again on 5 October 2023.
On 6 October 2023 the resident contacted the landlord about his gas supply being capped. He said the heating contactor attended but could not uncap the meter. The landlord recommended that the resident contact the gas supplier and provide a copy of his tenancy agreement to uncap the meter. It also provided its email for the gas supplier to send the bill too.
The resident called the landlord on 10 October 2023. He said that his gas outside had been capped and he has no heating or hot water. The landlord’s records shows an internal email asking whether its voids team had cleared the debt to the meter prior to the resident moving in.
The resident contacted the landlord on 24 October 2023 to ask that it uncaps the gas meter. He said that he had contacted the energy supplier and was told to speak to the landlord. The landlord provided its heating contractors contact details. The resident called back after speaking to its heating contractors and was recommended to contact a supplier and provided details of it.
On 25 October 2023 the landlord’s roofer attended the resident’s property. They disconnected the bedroom light following a leak. The roofer completed works to ensure the roof was watertight. They noted that a window in the roof had rotted and may be the cause of the leak. The roofer told the resident that they would contact the landlord to arrange for a window specialist to attend.
The resident called the landlord on 26 October 2023 to say he had no gas supply in the property since moving in. He explained that he was unhappy that he was not told that the gas was capped when he moved in. The landlord’s internal records for the same day state that the gas supply in the property had been capped when it was empty. This was due to a gas leak and the gas supplier had to break into the property.
On 1 November 2023 the landlord repaired the damaged wiring to the bedroom light and reinstated the light fitting. The landlord noted that the bedroom ceiling needed to be repaired following the leak.
The landlord’s heating engineer attended on 3 November 2023 as the resident had reported no heating earlier in the day. The engineer added a leak sealer to the heating system, repressurised reset and completed tests.
On 9 November 2023 the landlord’s operative attended the resident’s property. It inspected the windows in the property. Following the inspection, it raised works to renew window ledge and renew guttering in the living room. Also, to repair gaps in the bathroom window. Additionally, to repair the wooden window frame outside.
The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 9 November 2023. The resident said:
1. He did not have any heating for 7 weeks due to no gas supply in the property. He said this had only just been resolved from when he moved in.
2. His roof was leaking.
3. His bathroom window was rotting which was present prior to moving in.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint the same day but did not provide a timescale of when it would provide a stage 1 response.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 23 November 2023. The landlord said:
1. It apologised for the delay in issuing its complaint response and explained this was due to high customer contact.
2. Following the resident’s reports of issues with the roof and window, it completed void snag repairs. The landlord confirmed that it raised 2 emergency work orders on the same day. The first work order was cancelled due to no access following the operative contacting the resident on the way. The second work order was also cancelled which it has identified as a service failure. The landlord apologised for this.
3. It raised a third emergency work order which its operative attended outside of 24 hours which was a service failure. It isolated a light fitting, which water had been coming through.
4. The resident reported the same issue with the roof in October. An operative attended but was unable to gain access after contacting the resident by telephone.
5. The resident reported an issue with the windows in his bedroom, living room, bathroom and landing room having gaps and letting in draughts. It raised a work order in which it only sealed the windows except the bathroom window. The resident reported issues with the bathroom window again but included that this window was rotten. It completed an inspection in November 2023 and a follow up appointment was made to renew the window lodge and fit a gutter. It raised an order to attend on 12 December 2023.
6. Overall, it found a service failure as when it attended the first appointment and failed to raise a follow up appointment for the bathroom window.
7. It confirmed that the resident had reported that he did not have heating or hot water on numerous occasions since August 2023. The landlord said it escalated each call to the relevant team. However, it only attended in October 2023 due to the suspected water leak. Also, in November 2023 to isolate the heating system, which restored the resident’s heating and hot water supply. However, the resident raised further reports of the heating not working. As such, it left heaters until it was resolved in November 2023 after the leaking pipe was found.
8. Overall, it found its delay in completing repairs and the resident having to contact for updates to be a service failure. It found that it should have completed more checks prior to the resident moving in such as the gas supply being in place prior to him moving in.
9. It offered compensation of £615. This consisted of:
  1. £150 to cover any inconvenience caused for the roof repair.
  2. £50 as it did not follow process in completing the window repairs.
  3. £210 due to the loss of heating.
  4. £175 to cover the loss of hot water.
  5. £30 for 2 missed appointments.
The landlord emailed the resident on 28 November 2023 to confirm it would be attending the resident’s property on 29 November 2023.
The resident emailed the landlord on 28 November 2023 to say he was refusing to accept the compensation offered. The resident said he had been through a lot and would contact the Ombudsman. The resident said his roof was still leaking so it was not resolved.
On 6 December 2023 the landlord emailed the resident regarding the leak. It asked the resident to confirm whether the leak was in the same place and whether water was coming in just when it rained. It confirmed its plumber had attended on 6 November 2023 but no follow up works had been identified.
The landlord acknowledged the residents request to progress the complaint to stage 2 on 7 December 2023. It said it aimed to provide its response by 9 January 2023.
The resident contacted the landlord on 10 December 2023. He reported that despite a roofer attending 3 times he still had a leaking roof. This was causing his bedroom floor to be soaked. Also, the floorboards were damp.
On 12 December 2023 the resident emailed the landlord. The resident said water was still leaking into his bedroom ceiling when it rains. The same day the landlord emailed the resident to confirm if the leaks happens only when it rains. The landlord attended the resident’s property but he was not available.
On 14 December 2023 the landlord emailed the resident to confirm it would attend the following day about the leak. It emailed the resident on 15 December 2023 to say it was attending that day. When the landlord arrived at the resident’s property, he was not available.
The resident contacted the landlord on 20 December 2023 and reported that the ceiling was leaking. He said that the leak was causing the bedroom light to go on and off.
The landlord contacted the resident on 22 and 28 December 2023 but did not get a response. It managed to speak to the resident on 5 January 2024 and the resident confirmed that the leak only happens when it rains. The landlord confirmed it had booked an appointment for 12 January 2024 for its roofers to attend.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 5 January 2024. The landlord said:
1. The compensation offered at stage 1 was appropriate, therefore, it was not providing further compensation.
2. The leak in the resident’s property was resolved. It contacted the resident on 11 December 2023 and he confirmed there was no ongoing leak. However, the resident contacted it on 20 December 2023 to say his roof was still leaking causing the lights to flicker.
3. It contacted the resident on 22, 28, 29 December 2023 but was unable to reach him. It spoke to him on 5 January 2024 and confirmed the leak was coming from the roof when it rained. It raised a repair to attend on 12 January 2024.
4. It was satisfied with its level of communication regarding repairs. It said it had contacted the resident on 7 and 8 November 2023 and explained works.
5. Regarding the repairs to the bathroom window, it attended on 12 December 2023 but left a card due to no access. It said it followed its process correctly after reviewing its internal customer relationship management system. It confirmed it had rescheduled works for 5 January 2024 between 8am and 11am. It sent a text to the resident to confirm the appointment. It did not feel any additional compensation for the delay in repair as the resident did not provide access.

Post complaint process

The landlord took the following action:
1. On 12 January 2024 its roofer attended the property to resolve the leak.
2. On 26 January 2024 it renewed the window ledge in the living room and new guttering.
3. On 23 March 2024 it repaired the bathroom window to remove the large gaps letting in draughts.
4. On 11 April 2024 it removed the beading on the outside window which exposed rot. Also, an ant nest. It filled in the rotten area with resin and added new draught excluders.
The resident contacted the landlord on 26 June 2024 and reported a further roof leak.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s Dispute resolution principles are to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. This Service will apply these principles when considering whether any redress is appropriate and proportionate for any maladministration or service failure identified.
The Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s concerns by adhering to relevant legislation, its policies and procedures, and any agreements with the resident, and that the landlord acted, taking account of what is fair in all the circumstances of the case.

Scope of investigation

The resident raised a concern around the handling of a leak from a radiator pipe in his complaint to the landlord. However, this did not form part of the resident’s complaint to the landlord at stage 2 or to this Service. As this issue has not exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure it has not been considered as part of this investigation. If the resident remains dissatisfied with the handling of the leak from the radiator, he can make a complaint to the landlord which can be referred to this Service in due course if required.
The resident informed the Ombudsman the landlord’s handling of the matters under review in this investigation had a negative impact on his health and wellbeing. Whilst this service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. However, we will consider any impact that resulted in distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak

The tenancy agreement required the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property in repair. This mirrored its repair obligations of section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, that a repair must be completed within a reasonable period of time.
The landlord’s repair policy sets out target times for repairs. This states that emergency repairs to be completed within 24 hours and routine repairs to be completed within 28 days.
The records show that the resident first reported a roof leak on 21 September 2023. The landlord responded within 24 hours and requested to attend the property but the resident was not available. The records go onto say that it attended the property a further 2 times but was unable to gain access. At this time, the landlord response and actions were appropriate and in line with its repair guidelines.
Despite the resident reporting that the leak was impacting on the electrics in the property, the bedroom light was only disconnected on 25 October 2023. This was over a month after the resident had reported the leak. Whilst this Service notes that the landlord did contact the resident to attend the property earlier, it should have been more proactive to gain access. This included that the landlord could have reviewed its communication methods to ensure it was using all methods available to it. Further to this, the landlord should have given the resident sufficient notice of its attendance. Additionally, the landlord has a number of powers and tools to gain access. As this did not happen, this was not reasonable and was outside of its emergency timescale of 24 hours. Additionally, it increased the risk of an electrical fire in not making the electrics safe sooner.
There are numerous jobs raised but noted as cancelled. There is some evidence that the leak was resolved in December 2023, which is 3 months after the resident reported the leak. However, shortly after, within a matter of days the resident contacted the landlord to report further water ingress when it rained. Therefore, the leak was not resolved as expected.
The records provided to this Service by the landlord point to failures in effective record keeping practices. As part of this investigation, the landlord was requested to provide relevant information that would reasonably be recorded and retained by the landlord. The documentation provided was limited and the repair logs provided did not track its actions or future plans. Due to the lack of records the landlord was unable to have oversight or appropriate measures in place to ensure the repair happened in line with its policy timeframes.
The records provided to this Service show that the resident continued to report leaks following the landlord issuing its stage 2 complaint response on 5 January 2024. The records show it completed repairs on 12 January 2024 which was 16 weeks later. This delay was not in line with the landlord’s policy and unreasonable, with no evident mitigating factors to explain the full length of time the resident was awaiting repair works. This demonstrates a failure by the landlord to comply with its repairing obligation to complete repairs within 28 days as such this could have impacted on the resident’s enjoyment of his home.
It is further implied into the tenancy by the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 that a landlord must ensure its dwelling is fit for human habitation at the beginning of, and throughout, the tenancy. The existence of any hazard as defined by the HHSRS is one of the factors that may be considered when assessing fitness.
The landlord missed multiple opportunities to attend the resident’s property to complete timely checks of the flat for water penetration. Also, to ensure his home was safe and take any appropriate mitigation measures. This left the resident to discover water entering his home, adding to both his distress and inconvenience and time and trouble having to report the matter. The landlord’s lack of identification and assessment of potential risks to the resident’s household, as well as lack of providing notice to the resident of its attendance were failures in its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak.
There was poor communication on the landlord’s behalf in updating the resident on the progress of works. This left the resident in a position of uncertainty and may have impacted the landlord and tenant relationship. This was not reasonable as it should have full oversight of the matter, contacting relevant teams on a regular basis to seek a resolution. Additionally, providing regular updates to the resident to provide reassurance that it was taking matters seriously.
The landlord acknowledged some of its failings in its complaint responses. However, it failed to apologise in its stage 2 response regarding its failure to complete repairs to the roof. Whilst it apologised in its stage 1 complaint response, it did not take appropriate steps to address the failing and put things right at stage 2. This included that it failed to offer further compensation at stage 2 despite repair works being outstanding. The landlord failed to award additional compensation to take this into account.
In its stage 1 complaint response it offered the resident £150 to cover any inconvenience caused by the roof repairs. The landlord’s compensation policy states it will award £50 to £250 when its failures did not meet its service standards but had not significant impact. However, given that there was a significant failure to complete repairs over a considerable time it would have reasonable for the landlord to offer further compensation. Its own policy states compensation should be awarded between £250 and £700.
This Service finds maladministration. The landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident and pay additional compensation to reflect the distress caused by its failings. It is also required to take steps to seek to learn from the issues identified.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports lack of heating due to having no gas supply

The resident has reported long standing issues with a lack of heating in the property since he moved in. The evidence provided by the landlord shows that the gas was capped whilst the property was empty. This followed a gas leak in the property block and the gas supplier capping the meter. Taking this into account, the landlord was aware prior to the resident moving in that there was no active gas supply into the property.
The records show that the resident only had access to hot water and heating in November 2023. The landlord’s moving in guide is clear that when resident’s move into the property the gas supply is already disconnected. Therefore, it will direct residents on how to get it reconnected.
There is no evidence that the landlord advised the resident to contact the gas supplier when he moved in. This was not reasonable and is a failing on the landlord’s behalf. Additionally, it was a missed opportunity and only sought to cause the resident further inconvenience having to contact it for an update. Also, it may have caused the resident distress as he was unable to use his heating or access hot water for 7 weeks.
In the landlord’s complaint response at stage 1 it awarded the resident £210 due to the loss of heating. Additionally, £175 to cover the loss of hot water. Its own compensation guidance states it would award £5 a day for no heating and £5 for no hot water. Its guidance states it will only award £5 per day after the initial 7 day period. Taking this into account, compensation would be awarded for 6 weeks which is a total of 42 days. That totals £210 for each of the loss of amenity.
Taking this into account, the landlord did not fully acknowledge its failings or offer sufficient redress regarding the resident having no access to hot water. Consequently, a finding of service failure has been made.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the bathroom window

The resident reported that repairs were required on his bathroom window on 21 September 2023. The resident said the window was rotting as such it had big gaps in causing draughts. The landlord raised a routine repair the same day, this was appropriate and in line with its repair obligations.
As discussed earlier, the landlord’s repair obligations state that it will complete repairs within 28 days. In this case, the records show that the landlord first inspected the window on 9 November 2023. This was 9 weeks after the resident reported an issue with the window. It is also outside of its repair obligations which is not reasonable. It this time, the landlord raised a repair to renew guttering and replace the window ledge. This was not reasonable as the landlord should have been proactive and timely. This would have reassured the resident it was taking the repairs seriously.
The next record was after the stage 2 complaint response was issued which says it completed repairs on 23 March 2024 and 11 April 2024. This was 6 months after the resident initially raised the issue. This was not reasonable and outside of the landlord’s obligations to complete repairs within 28 days. The delay in completing repairs was significant and led to the resident having to contact the landlord on a number of occasions for an update.
The landlord has not provided any reason for the delay in completing works. This Service notes that the landlord attended the resident’s property on 12 December 2023 to complete repairs but was unable to gain access. Whilst this could be mitigation to the delay in repair, this was only one case of no access. Therefore, it is unlikely that this would have had a significant contribution to the overall prolonged timeframe for the repair.
Landlords are also obligated to keep resident’s up to date on the progress of repairs. In this case, there is no evidence that the landlord provided regular updates to the resident. As such, the landlord lacked oversight to the issues the resident faced particularly, as the resident said it was causing him distress. This was not reasonable and the lack of updates and poor communication may have added to a deterioration of trust in the landlord and resident relationship.
The landlord acknowledged its failings at stage 1 but not at stage 2. The landlord should have apologised and offered further compensation as the repairs remained outstanding. Also, the landlord did not acknowledge the continued impact this was having on the resident. As such it did not take appropriate steps to put things right and this is not in line with the Complaint Handling Code.
This Service finds maladministration. The landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident and pay additional compensation to reflect the distress caused by its failings. It is also required to take steps to seek to learn from the issues identified.

The associated complaint

The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) was introduced with the aim of improving complaint handling across the housing sector. As a member of the Scheme, the landlord is obliged to establish and maintain a complaints procedure in accordance with any good practice recommended by the Ombudsman.
In accordance with its complaint’s procedure, the landlord’s response to residents’ complaints at stage 1 is required within 10 working days of the complaint and the stage 2 response in 20 working days. Where these timescales are not possible, this will be communicated to the resident.
The resident initially complained to the landlord on 9 November 2023, the landlord acknowledged the complaint the same day. The landlord provided its response 10 working days later which is in line with its own complaint procedure and the Code.
The resident requested that the landlord progress to stage 2 of its complaint process on 28 November 2023. Seven days later the landlord acknowledged the resident’s request. The landlord provided its stage 2 response 30 working days later. The landlord’s delays at stage 2 was not reasonable and not in line with the landlord’s own complaint policy or the Code.
There is no evidence that the landlord engaged with the resident about delays in issuing its complaint responses. This is not in line with its complaints policy or the Code to inform residents if there is a delay in issuing its complaint response.
The landlord failed to recognise, apologise or offer compensation for its complaint handling delays, This Service orders that the landlord pay the resident compensation to adequately reflect the avoidable inconvenience arising from its complaints handling failings and apologise to the resident for those it previously did not acknowledge.
A finding of service failure has been made in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint and an order for compensation is made in that regard.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
1. A roof leak.
2. Repairs to the bathroom window.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was a service failure in the landlord’s handling of:
1. Lack of heating due to having no gas supply.
2. The associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord is ordered to do the following within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
1. A senior manager to apologise to the resident for its handling of the repairs to the roof leak, lack of heating and repairs to the bathroom window.
2. Pay the resident £885 compensation in addition to what has already been awarded. This comprises of:
  1. £800 to reflects distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and time and trouble in its handling of the resident’s repairs to the roof and window.
  2. £35 to reflect the inconvenience to resident resulting from a lack of hot water due to the gas been capped.
  3. £50 to reflect its failings in the handling of the resident’s associated complaint.
Provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with the above orders.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord:
1. Assess its internal recording procedures surrounding repairs against the recommendations of this Service’s Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management.