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

Harlow District Council (202408330)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202408330

Harlow District Council

20 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a leaking roof and damp and mould.
  2. We have also considered its handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has a secure tenancy agreement with the landlord. The property is a 4–bedroom end of terrace house. The resident has 5 children aged between 6 and 19. The landlord is a local authority. The landlord uses a repairs management company. This company is a local authority trading company, which is owned by the local authority. For the purposes of this report, we will refer to this organisation as the repairs management company.
  2. On 28 December 2022 the resident reported a leak into the front bedroom.
  3. In early February 2023 the repairs management company visited the property with a roofing contractor. They noted that a new roof was possibly needed. However, we understand the landlord rejected this proposal at that time.
  4. At the end of March 2023, a surveyor inspected the property. They identified that mould and staining was visible to the ceilings and on the partition wall to the neighbouring bedroom. They found very high moisture levels in those mould patches and noted a container on the floor was collecting water. The surveyor concluded there was a waterproofing failure to the guttering system installed directly beneath the roof structures. They recommended the landlord carry out remedial works and apply an anti-fungal treatment to the affected walls and ceilings. The repairs log noted in mid-June 2023 that there was still a leak from the roof.
  5. Some 6 months later, in mid-December 2023, the resident again reported a leak into the front bedroom. The landlord spoke to the resident at the start of January 2024. It noted that she had had issues with a leaking roof for the past 4 years which had caused damage to the property. She also said the floor had flooded in the 2 front bedrooms and they could not be used as the floor had lifted; she said the beds had also been ruined. The resident added that there was mould in those bedrooms which had been painted over but it kept coming back.
  6. At the start of February 2024, the repairs management company inspected the roof. They identified various repairs including renewal of the lead flashing; repairing leadwork in the valley; and refixing the cast iron outlet of the gutter.
  7. On 15 February 2024 the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord about the leaks, damp and mould. She said this had caused so much damage to the property and her personal belongings, which she had to throw away.
  8. At the end of February 2024, the resident contacted the local authority’s environmental health team. She said that water continued to leak into a bedroom. The repairs management company subsequently engaged a roofing contractor to erect scaffolding and carry out the roofing repairs. We understand some repairs were carried out at that time.
  9. On 29 February 2024 the repairs management company issued a stage one complaint response to the resident. It said the contractor had carried out extensive work to the roof and it was sorry that had not resolved matters. It said the contractor had completed further work on 28 February 2024 and they had left the scaffolding up to ensure that, following rainfall, the water ingress had been resolved. The repairs management company added the resident should contact the repairs team once the property was dry for further, internal repairs.
  10. On 11 March 2024 the resident asked the landlord to escalate the complaint. She said the leak was ongoing and continuing to spread. She said they were sharing 2 bedrooms between 6 people. The resident advised this had massively impacted her and her family’s mental, as well as their physical health, and they were constantly ill with coughs.
  11. On 27 March 2024 the landlord told the repairs management company that the recent roofing work had not resolved matters. It asked them to visit again with a surveyor to agree a plan of action. On the next day the contractor replaced some verge tiles and guttering.
  12. On 3 April 2024 the repairs management company issued a stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It apologised that the repairs undertaken at the end of February 2024 had not resolved the water ingress. It said a surveyor had inspected the property on 2 April 2024 and they were awaiting their report. It said it would contact the resident with further information by 12 April 2024.
  13. On 10 June 2024 the repairs management company and a surveyor inspected the roof and agreed part of it required replacement. The evidence suggests this work was completed in mid-August 2024. We have seen that the landlord subsequently agreed to undertake replastering, and redecoration works at the property.
  14. When we spoke to the resident recently, she confirmed the roof had now been fixed and the internal repairs completed. She said 2 of the bedrooms had been uninhabitable and she had had to share a bedroom with 3 of her children while the leaks were ongoing. She added that personal items had also been damaged by the leaks, which the landlord had not responded to.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident told us that she had experienced leaks from the roof since 2020. Paragraph 42.c of the Scheme says that we may not consider complaints which were not brought to the landlord’s attention within a reasonable period of time, normally within 12 months of the matters arising. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord in February 2024; however, we can see that she reported a leak in December 2022 which formed part of the events that led to the formal complaint. Therefore, we have focussed on events since December 2022.
  2. The resident mentions that her physical and mental health and that of her family were affected by the leaks into the property. The Ombudsman acknowledges the resident’s comments regarding their health, and we understand this has been a difficult time for the family. However, this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim. However, we can consider any distress and inconvenience the resident may have experienced as a result of errors by the landlord as well as the way it responded to her concerns about her health.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a leaking roof and damp and mould

  1. The landlord’s repair policy says that it is responsible for, among other things, the roof and guttering of a property. This reflects its obligations under section 11 of the Tenant and Landlord Act 1985. It says such repairs should be treated as ‘urgent’ which the landlord should attend within 3 working days. It adds that, where the property is not watertight, temporary works may be required with full roof replacements on a planned programme (within 9 months).
  2. In relation to damp, the landlord’s website says that when residents report damp and mould, it will arrange for a building surveyor to visit and inspect the problem. It adds they will schedule any repairs or improvements necessary, work with a contractor to arrange a start date and provide information on the duration of the repairs.
  3. When the resident reported a leak in December 2022 the landlord should have attended within 3 working days to assess the extent of the problem and arranged for repairs to take place in line with its repair policy. There is no evidence that it took any action until February 2023 over a month later and that was a failing.
  4. The landlord rejected a proposal for a new roof which arose from that inspection. We would expect the landlord to rely on appropriately qualified contractors when making decisions about repairs/replacements. If the landlord disagreed with the decision that the roof should be replaced, it would have been reasonable for it to have obtained a second, independent opinion. In this case, it did not act on the expert advice it received nor seek a second opinion.
  5. We understand that some repairs were carried in February 2023; however, the resident reported a further leak 4 months later. The repair log does not evidence any action taken at that time relating to the roof repairs. We note the repair records provided were limited and the nature of the works completed was not always fully detailed. There were also undated job attendance reports by the repairs management company which meant it was difficult to piece together the events in this case. This was a failing. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. The landlord and its contractors should keep comprehensive records of residents’ reports of disrepair and their responses, including details of appointments, any pre and post-inspections, surveyors’ reports, work carried out and completion dates.
  6. The landlord responded to the resident’s reports of a leak in December 2023 by speaking to her and then inspecting the roof. However, the time taken was not appropriate as it took over 7 weeks before the inspection took place; this was not in line with an urgent repair of 3 working days as set out in its repairs policy. While this inspection identified repairs, the repairs management company took no action to initiate the roof repairs until the intervention of the local authority’s environmental health team. That was not reasonable. It also raised concerns about whether the landlord has sufficient oversight of the repairs management company to ensure repairs are carried out within the appropriate timescales.
  7. The repairs that took place in February 2024 did not resolve matters and further repairs took place the following month. We acknowledge it can take multiple attempts to resolve repair issues as different approaches may be needed to find the cause of the problem. However, in this case the landlord’s handling of the roof repairs was not appropriate as there were significant delays and periods of inactivity by the landlord. We note matters were finally resolved when the roof was replaced.
  8. When there is a complex repair matter, such as this one, it is important for the landlord to provide clear and effective communication to the resident giving regular updates and setting out its expectations. In this case, the landlord’s communication with the resident was not reasonable; there were few updates, and she had to regularly chase for information. When the resident told the landlord 2 (out of the 4) bedrooms were out of use, there is no evidence it considered if a temporary move for the family might be appropriate. It would have been reasonable for it to have considered this in line with its management move policy which allows it to move residents on a temporary or permanent basis where extensive repairs are required.
  9. When the resident reported that household items had been damaged by the leaks in January 2024, it would have been appropriate for it to have signposted her to make a claim on its public liability insurance. The liability insurance company is a separate organisation from the landlord and the landlord is not responsible for the insurer’s decision or the claims process, aside from passing on the details of how to claim to the resident. While we can see that the landlord gave information about this in its letter to the resident’s MP dated 1 March 2024, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have given this information to the resident directly. We have made an order for the landlord to provide this information to the resident. Please be aware that we cannot guarantee any success in any liability or insurance claim the resident may submit.
  10. In relation to the damp and mould, a surveyor inspected the property and identified remedial repairs to the inside of the property including a mould wash. The repairs log demonstrates that a stain block was applied to the kitchen; however, it is not clear if that was applied to other parts of the property. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have treated the mould to control it and stop it spreading even if it had to repeat the treatment again once it had repaired the leak. It would also have been reasonable for it to have undertaken temporary repairs such as filling in the hole in the ceiling of the bedroom. There is little evidence of the landlord taking steps to treat the mould and that was not appropriate.
  11. The Ombudsman’s role is to provide fair and proportionate remedies where maladministration or service failure by the landlord has been identified. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies.
  12. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, financial compensation of £750 is appropriate for the evident distress, inconvenience and frustration caused to the resident and her family by the landlord’s delays in resolving the leaks and its poor communication. This sum takes into account the time and trouble taken by the resident in pursuing matters. The sums awarded in this report are in line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance (published on our website) which sets out our approach to compensation. Awards in this range include cases where there have been long delays in carrying out repairs which had a significant effect on the household.
  13. The evidence shows the resident and her family were unable to use 2 of the bedrooms due to the leaks. We have therefore ordered the landlord to pay the resident compensation based on rent of £1,355. This is made up of compensation equal to 20% of rent of approximately £121 a week for 28 weeks from the start of February to mid-August 2024 for each bedroom. 
  14. We are aware that the landlord has taken various action in relation to issues that we have highlighted in this report including:
    1. Made changes to its roof replacement referral process which should mitigate against similar failures in the future.
    2. All call centre and repairs team members had received additional guidance and training and had been reminded of the requirement to record all case notes with dates and times so any updates can be retrieved as required.
    3. Additionally, all operatives will be required to update “action taken” on their handheld devices so a repair trail is produced and kept.
  15. Given this learning, this report has made no individual orders in respect of the wider issues identified with the landlord’s communication and processes in relation to repairs.

The associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy in effect at the time of the resident’s formal complaint says that the landlord will pass the complaint to the senior manager of the service that complainants originally dealt with. It says it would issue a stage one response within 10 working days and within 15 working days at stage 2.
  2. The repairs management company’s handling of the complaint was not appropriate. In her complaint, the resident raised an issue about a move which it said it could not deal with. The resident had brought up this matter, so she had a right to expect a response to it. If the repairs management company could not address this issue, it would have been appropriate for it to have asked the landlord to do so. By not investigating these concerns, the landlord missed a chance to identify and potentially resolve matters at an earlier stage. We have made an order for the landlord to contact the resident to see if she wishes the landlord to investigate her complaint about a request for a move. Should she wish it to do so, the landlord should respond in line with its formal complaint procedure.
  3. There is also an issue of oversight. It would have been reasonable for the repairs management company to have worked closely with the landlord after receiving the complaint. This would have given the landlord an opportunity to consider its actions, and it might also have considered replacing the roof earlier. The landlord denied itself the opportunity to put things right by the use of its complaints procedure by passing sole responsibility for the complaint to the repairs management company. We note that the landlord has subsequently issued a new complaints procedure which says it will work closely with the repairs management company to fully monitor and review their complaint responses at all levels. We welcome that increased oversight. 
  4. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance as referenced above, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £150 for the evident inconvenience and frustration caused by these complaint handling failures.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s:
    1. Reports of a leaking roof and damp and mould.
    2. Associated complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord should take the following action within 5 weeks of the date of this report and provide evidence of compliance with these orders to the Ombudsman:
    1. A senior manager to apologise in writing to the resident for the failings identified in this report. In doing so, the landlord should have regard to the apologies guidance on our website.
    2. Pay the resident the sum of £2,255 made up of:
      1. £750 for the impact of the delay in completing the roof repairs and replacing the roof.
      2. £1,355 in rent-related compensation for the loss of 2 bedrooms.
      3. £150 for the impact of the complaint handling failures.

These sums should be paid direct to the resident and not credited to her rent or service charge account.

  1. Write to the resident with details of how to make a claim on its public liability insurance.
  2. Contact the resident to see if she wishes the landlord to investigate her complaint about a request for a move. Should she wish it to do so, the landlord should respond in line with its formal complaint procedure.