East Riding of Yorkshire Council (202320710)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202320710

East Riding of Yorkshire Council

26 June 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 concerning:
1. Antisocial behaviour (ASB) by a neighbour.
2. Damp and mould.
3. The standard of communal cleaning.
4. Leaking gutters.
5. The Maintenance of trees and pigeons.
The Service has also considered the landlord’s:
1. Complaint handling.
2. Record keeping.

Background and summary of events

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. his property is a one bedroom first floor flat, and the tenancy commenced on 4 October 2021. There are 6 flats in the block. The landlord states the resident has no known vulnerabilities. The rent at the time of the complaint was £88.92 per week.
The tenants in the resident’s block of flats are responsible for communal cleaning. The landlord carries out inspections on a quarterly basis.
The landlord’s ASB Policy states “The primary responsibility for the management of Council housing and the enforcement of tenancy conditions rests with the Housing Services section of the Authority, as landlord. Where complaints regarding anti-social behaviour are received they will be investigated promptly. Where tenancy conditions are found to be breached, appropriate enforcement action will be taken. Early intervention tools, such as warning letters and/or Acceptable Behaviour Contracts will be used before possession is sought, except in serious breaches of tenancy. Where the alleged perpetrator lives in Council owned property, Housing Services will take the lead role and liaise with other agencies as appropriate.”
The landlord’s Repair Policy states that it has 4 repair categories. Category A repairs should be completed in 24 hours, Category B repairs should be completed in 3 days, Category C repairs should be completed in 14 days and Category D repairs should be completed within 56 days.
The landlord’s Damp Policy states that “The Council will investigate causes of condensation, damp, and mould within 12 days from the date reported by conducting a property inspection. Following the inspection any remedial works will be categorised and dealt with on a case-by-case basis dependant on the level of damp, ensuring the diagnosis is accurate by use of an evidence-based approach.” It further states “The policy will assist service delivery to ensure:
1. effective investigations are undertaken, and all reasonable remedial repair solutions and improvements are implemented to eradicate condensation, damp, and mould.
2. frontline staff are trained to identify all hazards included within the HHSRS, and specifically for this policy, to enable them to spot potential causes of condensation, damp, and mould, so they can advise tenants, diagnose problems, and provide solutions. Training will be ongoing follow up inspections are completed to confirm the issues are rectified.”
The landlord has advised the Service that its pest control team “does undertake some bird proofing works for businesses including Council buildings. The team provides advice and treatments to the Council Housing team upon request where a pest problem affects tenants and is felt to arise from a defect in the estate, but this would not be to cull pigeons naturally occurring in the area.” The council’s website states that the council’s pest control team only treats feral pigeons (at commercial properties only).

Summary of Events

The landlord has provided details of reports made by the resident to the pest control team in Augst 2017. The pest control team noted that the resident has reported noise from pigeons, fouling, dropping feathers and them flying freely. It could not deal with these matters as it did not exterminate pigeons.
On 13 October 2022, the landlord raised a job to check the gutter on the resident’s balcony and carry out repairs. The landlord has advised the Service that works were completed on 22 November 2023 although this is not reflected in its repair records.
The landlord carried out a communal area management inspection on 14 June 2023 which focussed on fire safety and an assessment of external communal areas.
On 27 July 2023, the resident reported damp and mould, and stated he had no extractor fans. On 31 July 2023, the landlord raised a damp and mould inspection. Its repair records noted that the inspection was completed however, there no evidence that it completed a report. Following the inspection the landlord raised an order to carry out a fungal wash and paint over affected areas. It also ordered the insulation in the eaves to be topped up to the correct depth. The landlord has stated that all works were completed by 24 October 2023.
On 29 August 2023, the resident reported a neighbour, Mr X, constantly hammering, sawing and making noise under his window. The neighbour had also pruned a tree in the communal garden. The resident stated that Mr X was belligerent and rude. The resident also telephoned the landlord on 31 August 2023.
Also, on 29 August 2023 the resident raised a formal complaint stating that he had no response to issues that he had raised. He advised:
1. There were incidents of ASB in particular one neighbour who he believed to be a danger to himself and others.
2. The property was damp due to no extractor fans.
3. Carpets and walls in the lobby were dirty and stained.
4. There were overgrown trees which housed feral pigeons who left excrement and feathers and made noise.
On 31 August 2023, the resident emailed and phoned stating again he was disturbed by his neighbour.
The landlord’s internal correspondence dated 6 September 2023 noted that Mr X would prune a tree in the communal front garden and carried out wood carving projects during the day. It noted that it had previously advised the resident that it could not restrict Mr X as he did the majority of his works outside and cleaned up after himself. The landlord also noted that overhanging trees had been inspected and no works were required, although the date of the inspection was not mentioned.
On 20 September 2023, the resident called stating that he had several issues concerning his neighbours and his flat and the landlord had not got back to him.
On 25 September 2023, the resident emailed stating “I have raised several housing issues with your so-called housing team. No acknowledgement, let alone any action has been emails over several months. Issues range from damp, rubbish, overhanging trees, mess, noise, disruptive, antisocial and criminal behaviour.” After receiving this email, the landlord noted that it had overlooked the resident’s original complaint of 29 August 2023
On 13 October 2022, the landlord raised a job to check the gutter on balcony and complete repairs. The repairs were completed on 22 November 2023.
On 27 September 2023, the landlord raised an order to fit extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom. An appointment was made for 24 October 2023. On 20 October 2023, the landlord raised an order for a roofer to install roof vent tiles to the kitchen extractor fan.
On 4 October 2023, the landlord carried out a communal area management inspection focussing on fire safety.
On 10 October 2023, the landlord sent the Stage 1 response to the complaint:
1. Maintenance officers had visited the resident’s home in late July and August 2023. Contractors would be attending his home on 24 October 2023 to fit extractors to both the kitchen and bathroom and also to clean down an area of plasterwork affected by mould with anti-fungicidal treatment. It would also look to top up insulation levels to prevent cold bridging which it believed would assist in eradicating any further problems of this type.
2. Officers had carried out a number of spot checks in the communal areas during September and found them to be clean and tidy and free from odour. However, it would be arranging for the areas to be cleaned and repainted before the end of the financial year.
3. It had spoken to others in the block to ask if they were witnessing problems both internally and externally and all provided no negative feedback. It had also spoken the police who had confirmed it rarely had cause to visit the resident’s block for ASB/noise issues or indeed over criminal matters. It was aware that one resident carried out some woodwork and gardening in the external communal area but was reassured this was not excessively noisy and that the resident tidied up the area on completion of any work.
4. It appreciated and empathised with the resident’s circumstances following the loss of his father last December and how this had affected him. It noted how he had expressed a desire to move to a quieter area and how this anxiety may be heightened by his loss and the grieving process. However, anxiety due to bereavement was not directly linked to the resident’s housing conditions so it could not award additional priority for the resident’s housing application.
On 15 October 2023, the landlord carried out another communal area management inspection focussing on fire safety issues and an assessment of internal communal areas, including the condition of floors and walls.
On 17 October 2023, the resident requested that his complaint be escalated.
On 18, 19 and 22 October 2023 the resident emailed the landlord asking it to view evidence of ASB from his phone, as the files were too large to send.
The landlord’s internal emails confirm that on 24 October 2023 the resident spoke to the council’s safe communities team about noise caused by Mr X from woodworking projects. The resident stated that Mr X had mental health issues and no longer received home care support. From the call the landlord carried out a risk assessment. It found that there was low risk to the resident.
On 30 October 2023, the landlord wrote to the resident asking him to record noise on the Noise App 2.0 and to complete diary sheets to be returned by 30 November 2023. It advised it would be writing to Mr X to advise him of the complaints about him.
It is not evident that the resident returned diary sheets. However, on 16 November 2023 he emailed stating that there was noise from Mr X carrying out woodwork in his flat. Also, at a home visit on 22 November 2023, the resident advised that Mr X was constantly sawing and hammering throughout the day. He showed staff pictures and videos of him sawing wood and branches. He gave permission for the landlord to speak Mr X. On 23 November 2023, the resident emailed to report Mr X sawing a wardrobe in his room and leaving a mess as he carried bits of wood down the stairs.
On 28 November 2023, the Service wrote to the landlord having considered email correspondence forwarded by the resident. We understood that the resident was complaining about the handling of:
1. reports of ASB from neighbours.
2. reports of damp in the property.
3. reports of poor communal cleaning.
4. reports of overhanging trees.
5. reports of leaking gutters.
6. report of pest control issues relating to pigeons.
On 6 December 2023, the landlord sent the Stage 2 response to the complaint stating that it would also address issues raised by the Service. It advised:
1. The stage 1 complaint response had listed actions it had taken in respect of the nuisance in the block, in particular from Mr X. It was aware of a recent medical incident reported by the resident and his wider concerns about Mr X carrying out woodwork and gardening outside. Senior staff had written to the resident to confirm it was supporting the neighbour, but it was limited in what it could provide. The landlord also noted that it had moved the resident into Band 2 following the visit of 22 November 2023.
2. Regarding damp, since the stage 1 response:
  1. It had insulated the loft, carried out an anti-fungal wash and applied anti-mould paint on 24 October 2023.
  2. It had repaired the kitchen and bathroom extractor fans and installed vent tiles on 6 November 2023.
  3. It had wired up the kitchen and bathroom extractor fans on 5 December 2023 as a “second fix”.
  4. It would check in 6 months to see if these works would resolve the mould.
3. The landlord repeated that it had carried out spot checks of communal areas and confirmed that they would be cleaned and repainted before the end of financial year 2023-24.
4. The Grounds Maintenance team would visit and trim the trees over the winter months as necessary as part of planned programme.
5. The resident had reported the leaking gutter on 25 July 2023 and the works were completed on 18 October 2023, within the defined timescale.
6. The action the resident wanted to control the pigeons was not something that it could consider.
7. The resident had acknowledged on 29 November 2023 that he was more satisfied with the action the landlord was taking. However, in respect of the delays in responding to the complaint it would offer £50.
On 14 December 2023, the resident confirmed that he wanted this Service to investigate his complaints as the landlord’s Stage 2 response was not “reflective of reality”. He advised he was particularly unhappy with the action taken in respect of Mr X, who he believed had full capability over his behaviour. He wanted either Mr X or him to be transferred.
On 15 December 2023, the landlord raised an order to reconnect the extractor fan up to the vent tile. An appointment was made for 22 December 2023.
On 5 January 2024, the landlord raised an order to install a vent tile for the bathroom extractor fan.
On 12 January 2024, the landlord replaced radiators and pipework to address issues of damp and mould.
On 2 March 2024, the resident again reported feral pigeons in an overhanging tree.
On 13 March 2023, the landlord carried out a communal area management inspection focussing on fire safety and an assessment of external and internal areas.
The landlord has advised the Service that the inspection by the Council’s Grounds Maintenance team is outstanding and that it is awaiting an inspection date. It will advise the resident of the inspection date and update him after the inspection. Mr X is currently away from the property.

Assessment and findings

ASB by a neighbour

It is not for this Service to determine if ASB occurred, as that was a judgement which fell to the landlord to determine. The landlord, however, has a responsibility to ensure that it takes appropriate and proportionate action to address and seek to resolve reported ASB, and that it has adequate and effective procedures in place for doing so.
Upon receiving reports of alleged ASB the landlord first needs to gather evidence to establish whether the behaviour reported occurred, is unreasonable and constitutes ASB. Its procedures must also ensure that it remains impartial and does not seek to apportion responsibility for behaviour until it has established the facts.
The landlord should risk assess and ensure that steps are taken as soon as possible to support and safeguard vulnerable residents. Landlords should consider whether a multi-agency response is needed. Following investigation landlords should formulate an action plan and share this with the resident who has reported the ASB. Ideally the action plan should be agreed with the resident. An incremental approach to action should be taken, starting with providing advice and warnings. Mediation between neighbours (either formal or informal) should be offered at an early stage to stop matters escalating. The Ombudsman expects to see regular communication with the complainant and alleged perpetrator, monitoring of the situation, evolving risk assessments and action plans and reliable record-keeping.
The resident’s concerns about ASB focussed on Mr X against who he reported specific incidents. Following the resident’s reports of 29 and 31 August 2023 there is no evidence that the landlord took any action in response. Its internal correspondence indicates that it relied on its previous assessment whereby it did not consider Mr X to be causing a nuisance. This was inappropriate as the landlord had a responsibility to investigate new reports promptly, establish whether there have been any changes in circumstances and explore solutions. For instance, the landlord could have explored whether a form of mediation, which can help the parties understand lifestyle differences and the point of view of each other, was feasible.
The landlord’s stage 1 response referred to investigations the landlord had carried out, in particular speaking to other residents and speaking to the police. It also stated that it had determined Mr X was not excessively noisy or messy. However, the landlord has not provided records to confirm that it carried out these investigations and how it did so. In fact, it is not clear when it had carried out these investigations therefore it is not clear that it could still rely on the findings. Again, accurate and timely ASB records ensure that the landlord has a good understanding of the details of reports and the impact. This in turn will inform its decision on what further action to take.
It was not until October 2023 that the landlord took any action in respect of the resident’s further reports. It carried out a risk assessment. It referred the resident to the Noise App and provided diary sheets which would enable it to ascertain the nature, duration, frequency and impact of reported. While these actions were appropriate, they should have done in response to the resident’s earlier report.
The resident continued to make further reports. However, there is no evidence that the landlord considered them and reviewed its position on his ASB case. While it was reasonable that the landlord could not disclose details of support being provided to Mr X for reasons of confidentiality, the landlord did not make clear whether it would take any other action or whether it considered Mr X’s behaviour acceptable in order to manage the resident’s expectations. This lack of clarity contributed to the resident’s perception that it was ignoring his reports.
In summary, the landlord delayed in acknowledging and investigating the resident’s further reports about Mr X. It then did not make clear whether it would take further action or whether it considered Mr X’s behaviour acceptable. Also, it did not keep records to corroborate the action it stated it took on the case.

Damp and mould.

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
Section 9a of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 implies an obligation into the tenancy agreement that the landlord must ensure the property is ‘fit for human habitation’ in relation to, by virtue of Section 10 of the same act, ventilation.
The Ombudsman published a Spotlight report on Damp and Mould in October 2021 which stated that landlord should “adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould”. The report said landlords should take “proactive interventions” in its approach to diagnosing damp and mould issues in its properties.
Following the resident’s report of 27 July 2023 the landlord raised an inspection. This was appropriate as inspections by appropriately qualified staff are crucial to ascertaining the extent of damp and mould and to diagnose the cause. Its correspondence also confirm that it identified works at the inspection. However, the landlord has not provided a contemporaneous record of the inspection or even details when it took place. It is therefore not evident that the landlord carried out a full, specialist damp survey with the use of instruments or photos or that it looked at all areas of the property. It therefore cannot be concluded that the landlord met its policy requirement to carry out an effective investigation and make an accurate diagnosis “by use of an evidence-based approach”.
The works identified by the landlord included insulating the eaves further, carrying out a fungal wash and applying anti-mould paint. The stage 1 response stated that the works were carried out on 24 October 2023; however, this is not reflected in the landlord’s repair records. This is a further record keeping failure. Clear record keeping and management is a core function of a repairs service, as this assists the landlord in fulfilling its repair obligations. Accurate and complete records ensure that the landlord has a good understanding of the age and condition of the structure and its fittings within the property, enable outstanding repairs to be monitored and managed, and enable the landlord to provide accurate information to residents and other third parties. In any event, these works were not completed within the category D repairs timeframe, 56 days from the resident’s report of mould, therefore they were not completed in a reasonable timeframe. There is no good reason why the mould wash could not have been completed earlier to alleviate the impact of mould to the resident, pending other works.
The resident attributed the damp and mould in his property to the lack of working extractor fans. Effective ventilation can help prevent the formation of mould therefore it was appropriate that the landlord raised an order to install fans in the bathroom and kitchen. However, it did not raise the order until 27 September 2023, 2 months after the resident’s report, which was an unreasonable delay. Moreover, the kitchen and extractor fans were not operative until January 2024. This was over 5 months after the resident’s report, which was an unreasonable length of time given that the landlord dealt with the works as a responsive repair. Whilst the works required both an electrician and a roofer, better co-ordination and planning may have mitigated the delay.
In awarding compensation, the Service has considered that the resident’s enjoyment of his property, the bathroom and kitchen in particular, were curtailed from damp and mould. Therefore, the Service has ordered compensation that reflects the loss of enjoyment of amenity taking into account the delays in the works that the landlord carried out. An additional order has been made for the landlord to pay the resident compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its failings, taking into account the individual circumstances of the case and the Service’s remedies guidance.

The standard of communal cleaning

The landlord is not responsible for the cleaning of communal areas at the resident’s block. However, it has a procedure whereby it inspects the areas on a quarterly basis to ensure that that the condition of the areas is satisfactory. The inspection forms provided to the Service confirms that it has carried out inspections.
The resident complained that the carpets and walls in communal internal areas were dirty. Prior to the resident’s complaint it did not specifically check the condition of internal areas, which was the subject of the resident’s complaint. However, since then it amended the inspection form to ensure the internal areas are marked as satisfactory or not, and it has carried out inspections.
The landlord also committed to clean and repaint the internal areas before the next financial year. These works were discretionary, outside its obligation to carry out responsive repairs. The redecoration of communal areas is usually carried out as a planned programme of works to be prioritised in line with maintenance budgets and the condition of other properties. By inspecting the internal communal areas and committing to clean and repaint the area, the landlord took reasonable action to resolve the resident’s concern about communal cleaning.

Leaking gutters.

The landlord’s repair records show that on 22 October 2022 it raised a job to check the condition of the gutter and carry out necessary repairs. Its records do not state when the repairs were carried out which is a record keeping failure as the timescale for completion should be clear. The landlord has advised the Service that the works were carried out in November 2023 which is over a year later. This is a significant delay, considerably over the category D repair timeframe of 56 days, for which no good reason has been put forward.
In responding to the resident’s complaint at Stage 2, the landlord stated that he had reported a leaking gutter in July 2023 and works were completed in October 2023. Neither the resident’s report nor the completion of works is reflected in the repair records. The basis of the landlord’s response is therefore unclear which represents a further failing in the landlord’s record keeping. The landlord’s response that it completed the repair within the defined timescale is also unclear given that works took longer than the category D repair timeframe of 56 days.
In conclusion, failures in the landlord’s record keeping have meant it is not possible to draw a fully corroborated timeline of events relating to gutter repairs. However, from the information provided the landlord has delayed in carrying out repairs.

Maintenance of trees and pigeons

The resident’s complaint of 29 August 2023 indicates that his complaint about nuisance from pigeons and overhanging trees were related. This is because he thought the pigeons were perching and congregating in the trees. The landlord did not address the resident’s concern until stating in the stage 2 response that the tree should be pruned in the winter months. This was 4 months later which was an unreasonable delay.
The landlord also sought to manage the resident’s expectations by making clear it would not take other action to prevent any nuisance from pigeons. The landlord has advised the Service it understood that the resident wanted the pigeons exterminated which was not its pest control procedure. Moreover, the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 protects wild birds, their eggs and nest and makes it illegal to intentionally kill, injure or take any wild bird. It should have said this explicitly in the complaint response to prevent any misunderstanding between the parties.
The landlord advised the resident the Grounds Maintenance team would trim the trees over the winter months. However, its information provided to this Service suggests that this did not happen, and in fact the Grounds Maintenance team did not even inspect. Furthermore, the resident did not receive an update. Therefore, having assured the resident that it would be taking steps to resolve his concerns about overhanging trees and by extension, nuisance from pigeons, it failed to take the necessary action. It also failed to provide updates to the resident.

Complaint Handling

The landlord’s complaint and feedback policy is a two-stage process, which requires it to respond to stage 1 and stage 2 complaints within 10 or 20 working days. As per the Ombudsman’s complaint handling code in effect at the time, landlords are required to provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days of the date of the complaint acknowledgement, and a stage 2 complaint within 20 working days.
In this case the landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaint of 29 August 2023 within the required timeframe. In fact, it only responded after 30 working days and when the resident pursued a response. Furthermore, the stage 1 response did not address the resident’s complaint about overhanging trees and pigeons. This was not in accordance with the code which states “Landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law and good practice where appropriate.”
The landlord’s records indicate that the resident escalated his complaint on 17 October 2023; however, there are no details of the escalation request. It therefore did not follow the code which states “On receipt of the escalation request, landlords must set out their understanding of issues outstanding and the outcomes the resident is seeking. If any aspect of the complaint is unclear, the resident must be asked for clarification and the full definition agreed between both parties.”
The landlord did not respond to the complaint and the resident spent further time and trouble pursuing his complaint by contacting the Service. When the landlord responded it again did not meet the required timeframe, this time responding after 37 working days.
The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance recommends compensation from £50 for failures in the service the landlord provided and did not fully put right, including time, trouble, and delays in getting matters resolved. It was appropriate that in the stage 2 response the landlord recognised the delay in its correspondence and its offer of compensation was in line with remedies guidance. Nonetheless, the apology was not explicit, and the landlord is reminded to consider the Service’s guidance on apologies when complying with the order to apologise for the other service failures identified in this investigation.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports concerning ASB by a neighbour.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports concerning damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports concerning the standard of communal cleaning.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports concerning leaking gutters.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports concerning the maintenance of trees and pigeons.
In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered the resident reasonable redress for the failings in its complaint handling.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its record keeping.

Reasons

The landlord delayed in acknowledging and investigating the resident’s further reports about Mr X. It then did not make clear whether it would take further action or whether it considered Mr X’s behaviour acceptable.
While the landlord carried out works to resolve the resident’s report of damp and mould, it delayed in doing so.
By inspecting the internal communal areas and committing to clean and repaint the area, the landlord took reasonable action to resolve the resident’s concern about communal cleaning.
From the information provided the landlord has delayed in carrying out repairs to the gutter.
Having assured the resident that it would be taking steps to resolve his concerns about overhanging trees and by extension, nuisance from pigeons, it failed to take the necessary action. It also failed to provide updates to the resident.
While there were delays in the landlord’s complaint handling, in the stage 2 response the landlord recognised this and its offer of compensation was reasonable, in line with remedies guidance.
The landlord has not maintained full records of the actions it stated it took in relation to both repair and ASB issues.

Orders

Within the next four weeks the landlord is ordered to:
1. arrange for a senior member of staff to send an apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report, taking into account the Service’s Remedies guidance.
2. pay the resident compensation of £797.37 comprising:
  1. £75 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings in its handling of his reports of ASB.
  2. £422.37 for failings in its handling of his reports of damp and mould. This is calculated as 20% of the resident’s rent from 27 July 2023 when he reported damp and mould and no extractor fans to 6 December 2023 when he completed the complaints procedure. (25% of 19 weeks x £88.92). The Service awards a further £100 in respect of the distress and inconvenience experienced by him in respect of the landlord’s failings in its handling of his reports of damp and mould.
  3. £75 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings in its handling of his reports of leaking gutters.
  4. £75 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings in its handling of his reports concerning the maintenance of trees and pigeons.
  5. The £50 that was offered within the complaints procedure if this has not already been paid.
3. carry out the promised 6 month check of the effectiveness of the damp works if this has not already been carried out.
4. advise the resident when the grounds maintenance team will be inspecting the trees. It must also advise the resident of the outcome within two weeks of the inspection.
In accordance with paragraph 54(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, within the next 12 weeks the landlord must carry out a review of its practice in relation to its system for managing and responding to repair issues. The review should include as a minimum (but is not limited to):
1. its record-keeping practices and responses to the repairs.
2. its practices for keeping residents updated.
3. if it has not done so already, consider implementing a knowledge and information management strategy, in line with the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Knowledge and Information Management.
In accordance with paragraph 54(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, within the next 12 weeks the landlord must carry out a review of its practice in relation to its system for managing and responding to complaints. The review should include as a minimum (but is not limited to):
1. consideration why the landlord delayed in providing responses to the complaint and how similar failings can be prevented in the future.
2. a review of its oversight processes of complaints through to satisfactory completion.
3. a review of the published statutory Complaint Handling Code (effective from 1 April 2024) alongside its current approach to complaints to ensure that any changes are implemented within its complaints policy and procedure.