Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Hammersmith and Fulham Council (202303694)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202303694

Hammersmith and Fulham Council

30 October 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Repairs to the windows in the property.
    2. The associated complaint and its communication.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local council. The property is a 3-bedroom ground floor flat. The tenancy commenced in March 2008. The resident lives at the property with her adult son, who is her representative.
  2. The landlord has recorded on its information systems that the resident has a mental health vulnerability. The resident has informed this Service she has physical vulnerabilities, and her son has a respiratory condition. For the avoidance of doubt, both the resident and her representative have been referred to as the resident in this report.
  3. The landlord’s surveyor inspected the resident’s property on 13 April 2022. It then sent a letter dated 9 May 2022 to the resident and outlined that it raised the following works regarding the windows:
    1. The landlord would rake out and re-point the window frames in bedroom 1, bedroom 3, and the lounge.
    2. The landlord was to renew the opener gasket in the kitchen, bathroom, toilet, all 3 bedrooms, and the lounge.
    3. It was also to renew the glazing bead across the windows in the kitchen, bathroom, toilet, all 3 bedrooms, and the lounge. It said the glazing was defective.
  4. The landlord’s contractors attended the property on 22 November 2022, the resident then called the landlord to complain about her experience. She then called again on 9 December 2022 and submitted her complaint to the landlord about the delays to repair the windows. She said her household was experiencing cold, draughts, also damp, condensation, and mould was returning.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 17 January 2023. It upheld the resident’s complaint, acknowledged delays, and said its communication was below what was expected of it. It offered £550 in compensation, comprised of:
    1. £500 for the delays in repairing the windows.
    2. £25 for the delays in responding to the complaint.
    3. £25 for its communication, which it said was poor.
  6. Following the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, both parties agreed to an appointment by its contractors for 27 January 2023, and 16 February 2023.
  7. The resident asked for her complaint to be escalated on 28 February 2023. The resident remained dissatisfied as not all the repairs set out in the surveyor’s letter of 9 May 2022 were to be carried out, as parts to repair the windows were not available. This was causing ongoing delays; she had also not been paid the £550 compensation she accepted at stage 1 of the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. She felt the landlord’s communication was poor, and it did not provide enough updates.
  8. The landlord sent its final response on 28 March 2023. The landlord apologised for the ongoing delay in carrying out repairs to the windows and acknowledged the resident’s household was affected. To put things right, the landlord offered a further £125 for the delays to repairs and £50 for its communication and delay paying compensation offered at stage 1. The total offered in its complaint responses was £725 at that stage. It also said the parts required (glazing beads and gaskets) could be sourced, so its contractors would contact the resident, and it committed to completing the repairs.
  9. The resident referred her complaint to this Service on 18 May 2023 as she remained dissatisfied with landlord’s response and the repairs to the windows were outstanding. Following this, the resident told the landlord on 23 May 2023 that she did not want a second surveyor’s visit, and for it to honor the repairs in the surveyor’s report of April 2022.
  10. On 15 September 2023 the landlord told the resident it had switched contractors. On 31 January 2024 the landlord’s surveyor completed another inspection of the property, it said that the windows in the property needed to be overhauled. This was completed on 11 April 2024.

Assessment and findings

  1. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its dispute resolution principles. The principles of effective dispute resolution are:
    1. Be fair, treat people fairly, and follow fair processes.
    2. Put things right.
    3. Learn from outcomes.
  2. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 confirms the landlord has a responsibility to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property. This is echoed in the tenancy agreement.
  3. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), to assess hazards and risks within its properties. Excess cold and damp are a potential hazard, therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp, cold, and draught problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
  4. Additionally, the landlord’s repairs policy says it is responsible for the structure and key components of the building, and exterior of property, including windows.
  5. The landlord sent a letter to the resident on 9 May 2022 detailing the repairs to the windows that were raised by it, as per its surveyor’s findings of 13 April 2022. Its repairs policy notes planned repairs are to be completed within 60 working days. Therefore, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to have attempted the repairs required to the window by 12 July 2022. This was 60 working days from the surveyor’s inspection, and it being on notice that repairs were required. However, it is noted the landlord did not specify any timescales to the resident at the outset. From the evidence provided the first time it booked repairs to the windows was 22 November 2022, this was inappropriate as it exceeded the timescales in its repairs policy by 94 working days.
  6. By the landlord’s final response of 28 March 2023, the repairs to the windows remained outstanding. The landlord said its contractor had to source parts after its visit of 16 February 2023, and by the time of its final response, it had sourced the parts. This was despite 3 prior visits by its contractors on 22 November 2022, 27 January 2023, and 16 February 2023. While this Service acknowledges that the landlord faced challenges sourcing the parts, this was still unfair, inappropriate, and outside the timescales set in its repairs policy.
  7. The landlord also previously mismanaged the resident’s expectations as it said all works would be completed on 16 February 2023, and if not, it would arrange follow-on works.
  8. In the landlord’s final response, to put things right, it apologised and had proportioned £625 in compensation for its delay in repairs to the windows. Further, it committed to completing the repairs required.While this was a positive step by the landlord and demonstrated it was taking some actions to put things right, there was a lack of learning identified from the internal complaints procedure. The landlord has not provided any evidence to this Service, why it had not completed repairs after it had sourced the parts.
  9. Ultimately the repairs to the windows remained outstanding until 11 April 2024. This was inappropriate as it had been 2 years since the surveyor’s inspection of the property of 13 April 2022 that identified window repairs were required. It was also in excess of 1 year since the resident had exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure.
  10. This Service would have expected to see the landlord’s clear decision making regarding the risk to the resident and those around her when it identified issues with the windows in April 2022. It should have assessed the risk of continuous living within a cold property under the parameters of HHRSH for any period of time. The risk assessment ought to have taken into account household vulnerabilities and considered interim mitigations such as:
    1. Draught excluders to windows.
    2. Supply of temporary radiators.
    3. Temporary decant.
    4. Support referrals.
  11. There is no evidence the landlord had carried out a risk assessment. By not doing so, it also missed clear escalation of risk. The resident’s complaint of 9 December 2022 included that damp, and mould was returning due to the issues with the windows. The landlord has not provided evidence that in receipt of this, it had taken any action to assess the extent of the damp and mould, despite visits to the property. Additionally, the resident had also contacted her MP in February 2023 due to the lack of action taken by the landlord. Overall, there is evidence it was aware of the household vulnerabilities during its internal complaints process, therefore it was unreasonable it had not risk assessed.
  12. It is clear from the evidence that the resident expended time, trouble, and effort in chasing the landlord regarding repairs to the windows from November 2022 until April 2024. Despite repairs being outstanding since its inspection of April 2022, the landlord wanted a second surveyor to inspect the property in June 2023, this caused further distress to the resident. She was apprehensive and maintained she wanted the repairs identified in the April 2022 report carried out.
  13. The landlord had also told the resident that it had changed contractors on 15 September 2023, and another surveyor’s inspection took place on 31 January 2024. The landlord has not justified to this Service why it wanted another surveyor’s report. The resident shared concerns and frustrations about this to the landlord throughout her communication from September 2023 to January 2024. Arranging another inspection meant there were further delays and caused detriment to the resident, which was inappropriate and not in accordance with its repairs policy.
  14. The landlord completed repairs on 11 April 2024, which from the date of its latest inspection of 31 January 2024 was within its 60-day time stated in its repairs policy. However, it was already established in April 2022 that the windows required repairs. In considering the landlord’s actions and inactions, although it made some effort to put things right, it had not followed up on the commitments it made in its final response. The resident went through a prolonged period with incomplete repairs to the windows. The impact of this increased  in the colder months, which the landlord was aware of, effectively the resident experienced 2 winters while repairs remained outstanding. The landlord could have prevented further detriment had it acted sooner. Therefore, the landlord’s handling of the repairs was inappropriate and not in line its repairs policy.
  15. Under this Service’s remedies guidance, consideration is given for distress and inconvenience caused to a resident by a particular service failure, considering the severity of the situation and the length of time involved, as well as other relevant factors, such as vulnerabilities.
  16. Overall, the landlord had multiple opportunities to resolve the issues raised but it repeatedly failed to do so. The landlord did not demonstrate any urgency in completing repairs since it was overdue from 12 July 2022, within a vulnerable household. This attributed to distress and inconvenience to the resident which could have been avoided. Despite multiple appointments, it mismanaged the resident’s expectations. The time taken to complete repairs after the internal complaint procedure, demonstrated a lack of learning from outcomes by the landlord. There was no interim provision, and it was not proactive in its communication. Cumulatively, this amounts to severe maladministration.
  17. This Service’s remedies guidance suggests payments in excess of £1,000 to remedy the detriment in circumstances where there has been long-term severe maladministration. It also suggests, considering the level of rent and loss of enjoyment of the resident’s property. As above, the repairs should have been completed by 12 July 2022, this meant 92 weeks elapsed until the issues were resolved.
  18. The landlord’s compensation policy allows for payments in excess of £700 for cases involving an extended amount of time to complete actions, and failure to follow procedure. Taking this and the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies into account, orders have been made with consideration to the distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble experienced by the resident, as well as the delays.

Handling of the associated complaint and its communication

  1. The landlord operates a 2-stage internal complaints procedure. At stage 1, it aims to respond in 10 working days, it can agree a further 10-day extension. At stage 2 it aims to respond in 20 working days.
  2. There is evidence the resident complained to the landlord on 22 November 2022 by phone about the lack of repairs to the windows. However, this was not progressed. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) states complaints must be acknowledged, defined, and logged at stage 1 of the complaints procedure within 5 working days of the complaint being received. Therefore, the landlord not progressing the complaint to stage 1 was inappropriate.
  3. The resident then complained on 9 December 2022 by phone to the landlord. This was acknowledged by the landlord on 12 December 2022, and it committed to providing a response by 9 January 2023. It issued its stage 1 complaint response on 17 January 2023 which was 23 working days since acknowledgement. The resident chased the landlord on 11 January 2023, expending time and trouble. This complaint response was 13 working days in excess of the timescales stated in its policy and the Code, which was inappropriate.
  4. At stage 1 the landlord offered a total amount of compensation of £550. Of this £25 was proportioned for the delays in its complaint handling, and £25 was proportioned for its communication. There is evidence the resident requested to be paid this amount on 18 January 2023, then chased the landlord again on 13 February 2023, to which unreasonably no response was provided by it.
  5. The resident asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 of the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 28 February 2023. Part of the resident’s escalation request said that she had accepted the compensation at stage 1 but was not paid. On the same day compensation of £550 offered at stage 1 was processed by the landlord to the resident, which was reasonable, albeit there were delays.
  6. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 9 March 2023, this was 2 working days outside the timescales set out in the Code, which was inappropriate. Its stage 2 complaint response was within the timescales set in its policy and the Code, which was appropriate. On the same day, the resident told the landlord she had received payment of £550 awarded at its stage 1 complaint response.
  7. In the landlord’s final response, it awarded a further £175 in compensation (total of £725 was offered). This consisted of £50 at stage 2 for the ongoing lack of communication and delay in paying compensation offered at stage 1. It also apologised for the delay and its communication.
  8. The Code sets out that positive complaint handling culture is integral to the effectiveness with which landlords resolve disputes. Landlords must use complaints as a source of intelligence to identify issues and introduce positive changes in service delivery.
  9. The resident accepted the compensation promptly on 29 March 2023. Then on 4 April 2023 she told the landlord that she received an email detailing she would be receiving £725 in compensation, and not £175 as expected. She asked the landlord to address this, the landlord replied on the same day asking whether £550 was paid. This was inappropriate, as the landlord referenced in its stage 2 complaint response that payment of £550 was processed on 28 March 2023 and the resident told it on 9 March 2023 she was paid.
  10. On 5 April 2024 the landlord told the resident it would initiate the refund process. It is clear the resident experienced further inconvenience because of the landlord’s error by processing the incorrect amount in compensation. It is also clear she tried to mitigate any inconvenience this error would cause, due to her vulnerabilities.
  11. Ultimately, a landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records. Good record keeping is vital to evidence the action a landlord has taken and failure to keep adequate records indicates that the landlord’s processes are not operating effectively. Had the landlord kept accurate records, and cross referenced its complaint references, it would have known how much payment in compensation was due to the resident.
  12. Despite the landlord acknowledging some errors, it has not acknowledged all its failures. It has not been able to demonstrate it learned from outcomes either. Therefore, the £75 proportioned for complaint handling and communication offered by the landlord through its complaint responses does not reflect the failings identified. As such, the Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint and its communication.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the windows in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint and its communication.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. A senior member of the landlord’s staff to apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay directly to the resident’s bank account, total compensation of £2,019.92 comprised of:
      1. £1,219.92 for the loss of enjoyment of the resident’s home. This is based on 10% of the weekly rent level, calculated to be £13.26. It is then multiplied by 92 weeks of loss of enjoyment from 12 July 2022 until 11 April 2024 when the repair was completed.
      2. £700 for the delays in repairs, for the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident, as well as the time, and trouble expended.
      3. £100 for the inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures and its communication.
      4. This total includes the £725 previously paid by the landlord from its stage 2 complaint response of 28 March 2023. As such, £725 can be deducted from the total of £2,019.92. For the avoidance of doubt, this would amount to a total of £1,294.92.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54.g. of the Scheme, within 8 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must conduct a case review and detail why the delays to repair the resident’s windows happened, as well as assess the communication between it, the resident, its contractor, and its subcontractors. It is to explain its findings with a view for there to be no repeat occurrences. It is to provide a copy of the case review to this Service.
  3. The landlord is to provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to this Service.