Hammersmith and Fulham Council (202212168)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202212168
Hammersmith and Fulham Council
17 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 reported leaks and the associated repairs to the resident’s bathroom.
- This Service has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.
Background
- The resident is an assured tenant of a 2-bedroom flat on the 3rd floor of a purpose-built block. The tenancy started in December 1998.
- The resident has vulnerabilities which the landlord has recorded on its systems.
- On 24 August 2020 the landlord raised a job for works to the resident’s bathroom including replacing the extractor fan with a window ventilator, sealing the bath and treating mould.
- On 1 September 2020 the resident reported that there was a leak from the back of her toilet. While an emergency plumber attended on 2 September 2020 they were unable to fix the issue, but they raised a job to replace the pan connector.
- On 3 September 2020 the resident raised a formal complaint about the lack of repair provided to the leak on her toilet. She said the plumber had told her he would book a follow up appointment, but this had not happened.
- The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response on 20 September 2020. The landlord acknowledged the delay in repairing the toilet leak and apologised for this. It said its contractor reported that the repair was completed on 15 September 2020.
- On 28 October 2020 the resident raised a stage 2 complaint. She was dissatisfied that the repairs to her bathroom remained outstanding. She said it had missed an appointment on 22 September 2020 to install a window vent, and that she had contacted it on 6 and 27 October 2020 to chase this work without success. The resident said the service being provided by its contractor was unsatisfactory.
- In its stage 2 complaint response dated 8 September 2021, the landlord stated:
- It had been informed by its contractors that the leak coming into her bathroom ceiling had now stopped following repairs to the property above.
- Stain block and treatment to mould on her bathroom ceiling had been completed.
- The replacement window vent was now in stock, and it would attend on 14 September 2021 to install this.
- It trusted her repairs had now been resolved. It apologised for the inconvenience caused by the delays.
- On 8 and 13 September 2021 the resident told the landlord that the leak was ongoing. She also said due to condensation causing damage to the walls and ceilings, redecoration was needed to the whole bathroom.
- On 27 October 2021 the resident raised another complaint. She requested an apology, compensation from the landlord, and for it to provide details of missed appointments. This included the number of appointments she had to take time off work for, and the length of time taken to resolve the leak and her bathroom repairs.
- On 8 August 2022 the landlord replied to the resident’s 27 October 2021 complaint. It said in order to provide the information she had requested; it had treated her 27 October 2021 communication as a subject access request (SAR) rather than a complaint. Within this response the landlord offered the resident £500 in compensation in relation to its handling of her bathroom repairs.
- Following contact from the Ombudsman, the landlord provided a second stage 1 complaint response on 31 May 2023. The landlord stated:
- Its work manager visited her to scope the works to the bathroom and toilet, and they would be her point of contact for the works and would oversee all the works at her home.
- It offered £1,650 in compensation comprised of:
- £200 for failing to respond to her stage 1 and 2 complaints in line with its policy.
- £250 for time and trouble for chasing repairs.
- £1,200 for delays to work and negative impacts.
- On 16 June 2023 the resident escalated her second complaint. She confirmed the bathroom leak was resolved and stated that the final repairs and restoration of the bathroom was due be completed by 19 June 23. The resident remained dissatisfied with the level of compensation offered by the landlord and explained aspects of its service that she had been unhappy with.
- In a final complaint response on 30 August 2023 the landlord offered £4,967 compensation, acknowledged failings while handling the leak and bathroom repairs, apologised for this, and set out changes made to its repairs and complaint handling processes.
- On 15 March 2024 the resident told us she was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of her complaint.
Assessment and findings
Scope of investigation
- On 15 March 2024 the resident told us and the landlord about new mould growth on her bathroom ceiling to which the landlord responded on 25 March 2024. As this concern was raised post the landlord’s final response and has not exhausted the landlord’s complaints process, we are unable to consider this complaint in this investigation.
- If the resident is dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of this matter, she can raise a new complaint with the landlord. If at the end of the landlord’s complaints process the resident remains dissatisfied, she may bring this complaint to the Ombudsman to investigate.
The landlord’s handling of reported leaks and repairs to the resident’s bathroom
- The tenancy agreement states the landlord is responsible for maintaining and repairing the structure and exterior of the property, including the supply of water.
- The landlord’s repair policy states it will respond to repairs according to the following timescales:
- Urgent emergency responses within 4 hours.
- Emergency responses within 24 hours.
- Routine repairs within 20 working days.
- Planned repairs within 60 working days.
- The Ombudsman expects landlords to complete repairs within a reasonable time. What is reasonable will depend on the circumstances and the nature of the repair. Where there is a delay in completing repairs, the Ombudsman expects landlords to be proactive in:
- Communicating the cause of delays to residents.
- Explaining to residents what it intends to do about the delays.
- Identifying what it can do to mitigate the impact of delays on residents.
- At the time of the resident’s original 3 September 2020 complaint, there was an outstanding leak to her toilet which she reported on 1 September 2020. There were also repairs to her bathroom. It is unclear from the available evidence when these were reported by the resident, however the landlord raised a job for these repairs on 20 August 2020. This included replacing the extractor fan with a window ventilator, sealing the bath, and treating mould.
- In her formal complaint the resident was dissatisfied with the lack of any repair to her toilet, and said that she had not heard back from the landlord as promised.
- The landlord’s repair records show that it raised her 1 September 2020 report as an emergency repair. This was in accordance with its timescale for emergency repairs, therefore, it acted appropriately here. However, the plumber who attended was unable to fix the leak. Although its records indicate they raised follow on work on 2 September 2020 “to replace pan connector”, this work was not completed until 15 September 2020. This was after the resident re-raised the issue with the landlord on 4 September 2020.
- While this Service recognises it is not always possible to fix a leak on first attendance, there is no evidence to suggest the landlord made the issue safe or provided a temporary fix to the leak from the toilet during its attendance on 2 September 2020. It also failed to follow up the repair with the resident as promised or explain the delay to the resident. Therefore, the further 14 days taken by the landlord to address the leak on the toilet indicates an unreasonable delay by the landlord and was a failing.
- In her stage 2 complaint the resident complained about the landlord’s handling of its repairs to her bathroom, mentioning a missed appointment on 22 September 2020 to install the window ventilator.
- It is evident that the resident initially contacted the landlord following the missed appointment on 22 September 2020. She then contacted it on 10 October 2020 to query when the next appointment was, and again following its visit on 23 October 2020 to report no vent had been installed. While another appointment was scheduled by the landlord for 20 November 2020, the resident contacted it again at this time when no one had attended within the allocated time slot. While the evidence shows an operative subsequently attended, they were only able to disconnect the existing extractor fan because a glazier was required for work to the window glass to install the ventilator. The operative who attended did not have the appropriate expertise. This was a failing by the landlord.
- The ventilator was eventually installed approximately 5 weeks later on 27 January 2021. This was 5 months after the job was first raised and following multiple communications from the resident chasing the issue. The landlord was aware that the resident’s bathroom was prone to mould growth as it had only recently treated the mould. Therefore, the landlord’s failure to prioritise this work which may have helped alleviate the problem, was unreasonable in the circumstances. There was also insufficient communication from the landlord in relation to the delays.
- On 21 December 2020 the resident reported that the mould on the ceiling had reappeared and on 5 January 2021 she also told the landlord there may be a leak coming through her bathroom ceiling from above. As well as mould growth, this had caused a water mark to the ceiling.
- In response the landlord promptly raised a job to investigate and repair the leak. This was reasonable; however, it took the landlord a further 2 months to attend the resident’s block to investigate the cause of the leak. This was only after further contact from the resident on 10 March 2021. The landlord has an obligation to ensure its homes meet the Decent Homes Standard which requires it to ensure that its properties are free of category 1 hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). The existence of such hazards should be a trigger for remedial action. Damp and mould are listed as a potential hazard. Therefore, its delay in investigating and failure to explain the reason for the delay was inappropriate and is indicative of the landlord failing to take its obligations sufficiently seriously.
- During the landlord’s inspection of the 2 flats above, it did not find any leaks but identified the sealant to the bath and panel in 1 of the flats was damaged. It told the resident it would apply new sealant to see if this resolved the leak. While the landlord’s approach here was reasonable, it did not carry out these works for another 2 to 3 months until mid-August 2021. This indicates a further unreasonable delay. This Service is mindful that its delay in resolving the leak also impacted the timescale taken to complete repairs to the resident’s bathroom that it found were required in June 2021. These included:
- Replace the window vent with a larger one.
- Re-seal along bath edge and flooring to bath panel.
- Re-fix radiator brackets that had loosened.
- Repair the damage to the ceiling once the leak had been resolved.
- It was appropriate for the landlord to wait until the leak was resolved before completing works to the bathroom. However, its failure to prioritise addressing the leak meant the resident had to live with mould and the outstanding repairs to her bathroom for longer than should have been necessary.
- The landlord carried out the repairs to the resident’s bathroom (apart from replacing the vent) within a few days of completing the works to the flat above. However, within 2 weeks, the resident informed it that the leak was ongoing. This indicates a failure by the landlord to properly monitor the leak to check it had been resolved before repairing the damage this had caused to the bathroom ceiling.
- Following the resident’s further report, the landlord continued its investigations into the causes of the leak. This was appropriate. However, it took until mid-November 2021 for the landlord to identify the source the leak which was due to damage to the bath sealant in another property above the resident’s. Again the 8-week timeframe taken to identify the cause is further evidence of it failing to act with sufficient urgency when handling the resident’s leak reports. The resident reported that mould had reappeared in the bathroom during this timeframe. It is also clear the landlord did not attend to replace the larger vent until 5 November 2021. This delay was unreasonable as the landlord told the resident in its final response this would be fitted on 14 September 2021.
- It is noted that in addition to repairing the sealant in the above flat, the landlord’s internal records refer to a potential leak from the rainwater pipe or gully in the roof as the cause of the leak. While the landlord told the resident on 11 November 2021 that its supervisor was meeting the contractor to clear all gullies and investigate this possible leak in the roof, it is unclear from the landlord’s repair records if it did so. The lack of clear records of the outcome of its investigation into the leak represents a knowledge and information management failing by the landlord.
- However, the resident did not report any further leaks at this time indicating the repairs completed by the landlord in November 2021 addressed the leak. Nonetheless, the length of time taken (approximately 1 year) to diagnose and fix the leak far exceeded the timescales in the landlord’s repair policy. This delay was inappropriate and caused significant distress and inconvenience to the resident and her family.
- In response to the resident’s reports of further damage to the bathroom, the landlord raised another job on 15 December 2021 to complete a mould wash and decorate her bathroom. This action was appropriate. However, it is unclear from the landlord repairs records when exactly the works to her bathroom were completed, although they had been done by 4 April 2022. Bearing in mind the works raised were nearly 4 months earlier, this is a further instance of delay by the landlord in completing promised works.
- It is evident that during the bathroom works, the radiator was damaged when a decorator knocked the pipe. This is noted by the landlord on 4 April 2022; however, it did not raise a repair to address this until 13 June 2022. Although it is clear the landlord rectified the issue around 2 weeks later, the delay in raising a repair was inappropriate and would have compounded the issues.
- The resident made another leak report to the landlord in December 2022 when she said the water mark and damp on her bathroom ceiling had reoccurred. The landlord attended in early January 2023 to carry out investigations of the leak including a dye test. Its actions were appropriate here. However, this Service has not been provided with any repair records showing the details of the landlord’s subsequent investigations into the leak over the next few months. Communications between the landlord and resident however show that the source of the leak was identified and fixed by the end of May 2023. At this time a leak had been found to be coming from the rain pipe in the roof.
- This Service acknowledges that tracing the source of a leak can be difficult and can take time to investigate especially in a block where it may be necessary to access multiple properties or erect scaffolding, as in this case. However, the timeframe taken of at least 5 months to resolve this further leak , was unreasonable and is evidence of the landlord failing to handle her reports of leaks in the bathroom with appropriate urgency. Particularly as the source of the leak was found to be in a location the landlord had considered more than a year earlier. This suggests any previous investigation or repairs carried out in relation to this issue may not have been sufficiently thorough to provide a permanent resolution to the leak. However, this is unclear from the available evidence.
- It is clear however that the leak led to further damage caused to the bathroom. In its final response dated 31 May 2023 the landlord confirmed it had scoped works to both the bathroom and stated that its works manager would be the resident’s single point of contact (SPOC) until completion. Given the landlord’s extensive delays in completing repairs to her bathroom since 2020 and poor communication, a SPOC to keep the resident updated on progress, was appropriate. However, it is reasonable to also expect the landlord to have provided an estimated timescale for completion of the works to manage her expectations. The landlord did not provide a timescale in its response which was a failing. It is clear however that the works to the bathroom were fully completed by the landlord by the end of June 2023 which was reasonable.
- In summary, throughout the timeframe investigated (from August 2020 to end June 2023), the landlord failed to undertake repairs to the resident’s bathroom within reasonable timescales. This issue and its failure to prioritise locating and resolving the reported leak from the bathroom ceiling, compounded the damp in the resident’s bathroom. When the leak reoccurred at the end of 2022, it took the landlord at least another 4 months to address this which resulted in further damage to the resident’s bathroom. Although the landlord then appropriately agreed to undertake works to replace the bathroom, the series of issues meant the repairs were effectively ongoing for nearly 3 years. This is excessive.
- Also, for much of this timeframe the landlord was reactive in its response, only progressing repairs and its investigations after contact from the resident. This is evidence of poor communication by the landlord and of it failing to take its obligations sufficiently seriously. This was unacceptable and meant the resident to had to spend an excessive amount of time in communication with the landlord regarding resolving the issues. There were also multiple instances of the landlord missing appointments, or its contractors attending the resident’s property without prior notification. In addition, there were instances of poor knowledge and information management by the landlord including when recording the outcome of its leak investigation at the end of 2021.
- In its second stage 2 complaint response in August 2023 the landlord offered £4,967 in compensation. This comprised:
- £550 for time and trouble chasing the resolution of the issues.
- £1,000 for missed appointments, and negative impacts caused by the delays to works.
- £375 for additional heating costs set out as £150 per year for 2.5 years.
- £3,042 representing a 20% reduction in rent for not having full use of her bathroom and toilet for 147 weeks until the final bathroom repairs and decorations could be undertaken.
- This was in addition to the compensation previously offered by the landlord. Therefore, the landlord offered £6,917 in total compensation in respect of its failings while handling reported leaks and repairs to the resident’s bathroom.
- The landlord’s offer was reasonable. This is because the offer was consistent with this Service’s guidance on remedies where there has been a significant impact on residents. Furthermore, the compensation is slightly more than what the Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to offer.
- In its complaint response dated 30 August 2023 the landlord also set out changes it had implemented to improve its service while handling repairs. This demonstrates the landlord learned from outcomes. Therefore, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the landlord has made a reasonable offer of redress which satisfactorily resolves the resident’s complaint about its handling of reports of leaks and the associated repairs.
Complaint handling
- The landlord operates a 2- stage complaints process. At stage 1, the landlord will acknowledge complaints within 3 working days and provide a stage 1 response within 15 working days. Complaints escalated to stage 2 should also be acknowledged within 3 working days, with a response provided within 20 working days.
- It is noted that the timescale set out in the landlord’s complaints policy was not in line with this service’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) at that time. However, it is also noted that this Service’s special report on the landlord, published in February 2024, confirms that in 2023 the landlord undertook a review of its complaints policy, and in February 2024 updated its complaints policy to comply with the Code. As that is the case no further orders will be made in this report in respect of the timescales for the landlord’s stage 1 response at the time of this complaint.
- The resident escalated her first complaint on 28 October 2020. The landlord acknowledged this on 9 November 2020 which was 10 working days later. This was inappropriate because it was outside the 3 working day timescale in the landlord’s policy. The landlord provided its first stage 2 response on 8 September 2021, which was 211 working days later. This was inappropriate as it far exceeded the 20-working day timescale given in its policy.
- It is evident that on 28 February 2021 the resident had asked the landlord to keep her complaint open until it had resolved the leak. However, it was inappropriate for the landlord to keep a complaint open for an indefinite period. While the Code allows for extensions, there is no evidence of agreement with the resident regarding the length of the extension and the expected timescale for its response. Moreover, the landlord’s subsequent delay in providing its first stage 2 response was excessive and unreasonable.
- The resident raised her second complaint on 27 October 2021. The landlord told the resident on 22 August 2022 that it would not respond to this complaint within its complaint process because of the information the resident had requested. It told her it was treating her communication as a SAR, and it had responded accordingly.
- In the Ombudsman’s opinion this was not appropriate because having reviewed the resident’s complaint, we are satisfied it meets the definition of the complaint given in both the landlord’s complaint policy and our Code. As such, it was inappropriate for the landlord not to provide a complaint response. This was a significant failing by the landlord.
- Following contact from the resident and this Service, the landlord provided a second stage 1 complaint response on 31 May 2023, which was appropriate. The resident then escalated her complaint on 16 June 2023. The landlord provided its second stage 2 response on 30 August 2023 which was 53 working days later. This was inappropriate because it was inconsistent with the landlord’s policy which stated 20 working days.
- During the second complaints process, the landlord offered the resident £200 in compensation for failing to respond to her stage 1 and 2 complaints in line with its policy. It also explained changes it had made to its complaint handling process to put right previous failings. This included introduction of a quality assurance model to ensure compliance with requirements set out in the Ombudsman’s Code to ensure a better experience by residents. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, this shows the landlord had learned lessons in order to avoid the same situation recurring.
- In the circumstances, this Service is satisfied that the remedies offered by the landlord put right the failings while handling the resident’s complaints. Therefore, the landlord provided reasonable redress.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord provided reasonable redress in respect of its handling of reported leaks and repairs to the resident’s bathroom.
- In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord provided reasonable redress in respect of its handling of the associated complaint.
Recommendations
- The Ombudsman recommends that if not already done so the landlord to pay the compensation it offered during its complaints processes.