Harlow District Council (202322940)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202322940

Harlow District Council

29 April 2025

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:
1. The resident’s reports of repairs to the gutter.
2. The resident’s complaint.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local council. This is a 3-bedroom house. There are no vulnerabilities recorded on file.
A property management company manages the landlord’s repairs service. The landlord is responsible for its repairs service. For the purposes of this report, the property management company will be referred to as “the landlord.”
The resident initially reported a leak to his gutters on 9 September 2020. The landlord carried out repair and renewal works in April 2022. It renewed the fascia boards and guttering and cleaned and cleared the gutters.
On 11 April 2022 the resident reported that the new guttering was leaking at the front and rear of the property, and that there was felt missing from the roof.
The records show that the landlord contacted its roofing contractor between 20 and 25 April 2022, but this Service has not seen the content of the emails.
On 3 May 2022 the landlord emailed its contractor to chase the works. It said it had previously raised the guttering and roofing works and noticed that this work was “still sitting with the dispatcher” and that the scaffolding request had been cancelled.
On 21 June 2022 the landlord chased its roofing contractor again. It also said that there was not an “open job” for the roof and it needed to programme the works in if scaffolding was needed. It said that the guttering was “probably a recall.” It asked its roofing contractor to reattend to fix the leaking guttering and to patch the holes in the roof.
The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 14 July 2023. He said:
1. His gutters had been replaced over a year ago as they were badly corroded and leaking. After they were replaced, the gutters had been overflowing on both the front and rear of the house. They had been overflowing onto a bedroom window at the front of the house, and at the back of the house onto the neighbour’s conservatory.
2. The gutters appeared to be angled incorrectly, and it was “a very poor job.” The replacement guttering works were “very poor” and during rainfall it looked “like a waterfall running down the front of the house.”
3. His wife had telephoned several times over a year ago to report the condition of the gutters. His neighbours had also phoned (as the leak was impacting them) and the leaking guttering was causing friction with the neighbours.
4. He wanted the guttering to be repaired or replaced and for the landlord to speak with the contractors who did the original works.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 26 July 2023. It said:
1. It was very sorry for any inconvenience to the resident.
2. It had discussed the complaint with its repairs and voids manager and conducted a full review.
3. It had completed the original guttering repairs (that the resident reported in September 2020).
4. The resident reported further problems with the guttering and roofing on 11 April 2022. The landlord raised a job for this, and it was allocated to its subcontractors on 20 July 2023. The initial works would begin on 2 August 2023.
5. This work fell under its planned works programme, which meant it had up to 9 months to attend. Bad weather had caused a backlog of repairs, and it was prioritising its most urgent repairs, so the repair had taken longer than it would have liked.
6. It upheld the complaint due to the time taken to allocate works and apologised for the delay.
The resident made a stage 2 complaint on 2 August 2023, to which he added on 7 August 2023. He said:
1. The contractor had not attended the scheduled appointment of 2 August 2023, and nobody had contacted him to cancel or reschedule.
2. His complaint was not about the time it took to complete the works. He was concerned because the job previously completed by subcontractors was of a very poor standard. The poor quality of the work and problems with the guttering had caused friction with the neighbours.
3. He wanted the landlord to use a reliable contractor to attend or let him know if they could not do so.
The landlord’s maintenance site manager visited the resident’s property on 9 August 2023. They noted that the gutters were still leaking at the front and rear of the property. They said that the gutters needed relining and that there were still holes in the roof but noted no water ingress from the roof.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 29 August 2023. It said:
1. It was very sorry that its contractors did not attend on 2 August 2023. It acknowledged the resident had received poor customer service during the repairs process.
2. Its site manager visited on 9 August 2023 and the guttering needed re-aligning. The site manager and resident had discussed the deteriorated felt on the roof and the resident confirmed it was not causing water ingress.
3. Works had been reallocated to a different contractor to complete the outstanding repairs. The contractor would contact the resident directly to arrange a mutually convenient start date.
4. It upheld the complaint.
The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 4 October 2023. He said that the guttering had not been repaired and that he had not been contacted by the landlord’s contractors to arrange a start date. He wanted a reliable contractor, better communication, and for the gutters to be repaired to a good standard. He also wanted an apology.

After the Internal Complaints Procedure

The landlord completed the guttering works on 23 January 2024.
The resident advised this Service that he has now moved properties but would like an apology and compensation for the distress and inconvenience and time and trouble in pursuing the repair works.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the gutter

The landlord’s tenancy agreement says that it will comply with its obligations under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. It is responsible for maintaining and repairing the structure of the building, including roofing, drains, gutters and outside pipes. It continues to say that it will carry out repairs in a reasonable time and that it will tell residents the target time for finishing works.
The landlord’s repairs policy says that it will attend to standard repairs within 20 working days and planned works within 9 months. Guttering and roofing repairs are classed as planned works, unless the faults are causing damage to a building or any other health and safety issues.
The landlord’s repairs policy says:
1. Residents can report a repair 24 hours a day.
2. Residents will be given a reference number for planned works and a date and time for the landlord to visit the home.
3. If a contractor is running late, they will let the resident know. If they cannot attend, they will let residents know at least one day in advance and arrange a new appointment.
4. If they miss an appointment completely without enough notice, they will pay £10 for a missed appointment.
It was reasonable that the landlord contacted its roofing contractors in April 2022 and that it chased the works in May and June 2022, but there is no evidence on file that it did anything after this date, until the resident made a stage 1 complaint. This is inappropriate and caused the resident time and trouble in pursuing the issue and stress and frustration.
The landlord did not allocate the works to its contractor until 20 July 2023, which was an unreasonable delay, and contrary to its policy, where planned works should be completed within 9 months. This caused the resident additional time and trouble in pursuing the issue.
Further, in its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord told the resident that a contractor would attend on 2 August 2023. The contractor did not attend and did not contact the resident to advise of this, nor did it contact him to rearrange an appointment. This is inappropriate and not in line with the repairs policy, which says that it will let residents know if contractors are running late or if they cannot attend. Nor was the resident offered £10 for the missed appointment, which was also not in line with the landlord’s repairs policy. This caused him frustration and time and trouble in pursuing the issue.
It was appropriate that the landlord visited the property. However, it did not visit the resident’s property until 9 August 2023, 1 year and 4 months after he reported the leaking gutters. This is an unreasonable delay. Had the landlord visited sooner, it would have had a better understanding of the repair.
The resident reported issues with his guttering on 11 April 2022 and the landlord did not complete the repair until 23 January 2024. Although we understand that planned works take time, due to cost and specialist contractors, this was an unreasonable delay. This was 1 year and 9 months and significantly outside the landlord’s 9-month timescales for repairs. This caused the resident distress and frustration and time and trouble in pursuing the repair. It also impacted on the enjoyment of his home.
Due to the issues with communication, and the delays to the guttering works being completed, a finding of maladministration is made, along with orders for redress.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord defines a complaint as “an expression of dissatisfaction however made,” about a service it provides directly or by a contractor or partner.
It says that when it responds to a complaint it will:
1. Address the issues raised and provide the outcome.
2. Say what it has done to address the matter if it is at fault.
3. Apologise if the complaint is upheld and explain what went wrong.
4. Say what it has done to put things right.
5. Where appropriate, say how it has learnt from the complaint.
It was appropriate that the landlord addressed the complaint issues in both its stage 1 and 2 responses. It also apologised and upheld the complaints, which was an appropriate response.
However, in its stage 1 response, it told the resident that it had arranged for a contractor to visit on 2 August 2023 and this did not happen. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to monitor the progress of the associated repair, particularly as it had undertaken to send a contractor on this date. This caused the resident frustration and time and trouble in pursuing the issue.
Although in its stage 2 response, it apologised for the contractor’s failure to attend on 2 August 2023, it did not give a reason for this. Also, it told the resident that the works had been allocated to a different contractor but gave no timeline for the start of the repairs. This caused the resident additional frustration and time and trouble in pursuing the substantive issue.
Due to the above, a finding of service failure is made, along with orders for redress.

Determination

In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the gutter.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of this report the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report. The apology needs to be in writing.
2. Pay the resident £550. This is to be paid directly into the resident’s bank account and not offset against any arrears (if applicable). This is comprised as follows:
  1. £500 for the distress and inconvenience and time and trouble in pursuing the guttering issues.
  2. £50 for the complaint handling failures identified in this case.
3. Review its actions in respect of its repairs policy, to ensure that planned works are carried out within its policy timescales.
The landlord should provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with the above orders.