Hyde Housing Association Limited (202306973)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202306973

Hyde Housing Association Limited

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

The complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak in the shower room.
2. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the roof and loft spaces.
3. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the exterior walls.
4. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about unsafe electrical wiring and the completion of the associated works.
5. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

The resident is a leaseholder. The property is a 2-bedroom, 1st floor flat, on the top floor of a house. The resident bought the flat from another leaseholder in September 2022. The landlord holds the freehold for the building and is a housing association. The ground floor flat is owned by a different landlord. There are no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident on the landlord’s records.
The resident made a complaint on 6 December 2022 and said the landlord had failed to maintain the property or provide information about the building which he had requested. He noted the external walls were in a poor condition and the insulation, beams and walls in the loft space were soaking wet. He also said the electrical wiring in the loft space was unsafe and he was unhappy with the landlord’s decision not to remove the cold-water tanks or cap the pipework. In addition, the resident said there was a leak in the shower room and this was due to the landlord of the downstairs flat failing to complete repairs.
The landlord confirmed on 11 January 2023 that the roof felt was ‘‘sweating’’ and resulted in the insulation becoming sodden and leaking into the resident’s flat. It also noted the condensation was soaking into the brickwork. It was recommended a breathable membrane was fitted, ventilation vents installed and the loft insulation and roof tiles were replaced.
The resident told the landlord on 17 January 2023 that there was mould in his property and said this was due to the poor condition of the exterior walls. He asked the landlord for an update following the electrical inspection that was completed on the previous day. He told the landlord on 18 January 2023 there was significant mould in the loft space and he had been prescribed blood pressure medication due to stress.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 20 December 2022 and said:
1. It was the responsibility of the previous homeowner to disclose information about the interior of the property as part of the pre-sale negotiations. The resident should contact his solicitor should he wish to progress the matter
2. The ground floor flat was owned by a different landlord and it would not get involved in any claim for damages where another leaseholder caused it. The resident would need to contact the other landlord If he wished to make a claim for damages
3. It arranged for the water tanks to be removed and the pipe work capped on 19 December 2022. The work did not go ahead as it failed to notify the resident of the appointment. A further appointment was arranged for 3 January 2023 and its maintenance team would oversee the work through to completion
4. It was sorry for the delays in completing the repairs, which should have been done sooner
5. It would offer the resident £250 compensation for the delay in acknowledging the complaint (£50), the poor communication (£100) and distress and inconvenience caused (£100)
The landlord arranged for the resident’s property to be surveyed on 24 January 2023. This identified there was damp in the shower room and this was due to condensation. Mould was also found in the kitchen, living room and side room. It was recommended that an extractor fan was fitted in the kitchen and the shower room extractor fan was upgraded. The survey also identified:
1. Spalling and defective brickwork and render, including poor and missing pointing
2. Defective rainwater goods including a cracked down pipe collar
3. Lack of ventilation in the roof space and wet insulation
The resident asked for his complaint to be escalated on 30 December 2022. He said he wanted to know when the loft space was last inspected and why 450 litres of water were left in the water tanks. He also asked the landlord why there was no ventilation in the loft space and queried why the depth of insulation did not meet building regulations. In addition, the resident noted there was damp in the loft space, the exterior walls were in a poor condition and the missing brickwork in the attic was a fire hazard. He asked the landlord to confirm who was responsible for the unsafe electrical wiring and said he wanted reimbursing the cost of insulating the loft space, which he said he had undertaken.
The landlord issued its final complaint response on 31 March 2023. It said it found no evidence of any service failures and the complaint was not upheld. It also said:
1. It provided a reactive repair service and addressed issues when they were reported
2. The loft space was not part of the resident’s property and no concerns had been raised about it since 2009
3. It did not know why the water tanks in the loft space had not been emptied
4. It had arranged for roof vents to be fitted on 31 March 2023. It was also arranging for the other roofing work to be completed and would keep the resident updated on progress
5. A fire risk assessment was completed on 31 August 2021 although the compartmentation in the loft space was not checked at the time. This was not considered essential as the building had a simultaneous evacuation strategy. It had sought a quotation for the fireproofing work and this could take up to 8 weeks to obtain
6. It was not aware there were any problems with the brick work or mortar. It was arranging for the brickwork to be pointed and would keep the resident updated on progress
7. The resident had not stipulated he wanted the electrical wiring channelled into the walls. If he wanted the work doing, he would need to arrange this himself. It would not relocate the light pendant
8. It was unable to provide the resident with a full copy of the damp inspection report but noted a recommendation was made to install an extractor fan in the kitchen and upgrade the one in the shower room to reduce condensation forming in the ‘‘cold roof void’’
9. The resident would need to make a claim on his home content insurance for any damages caused to his possessions. If he was uninsured and believed the landlord was responsible for the damage, he would need to submit a letter of claim
10. It would increase its offer of compensation to £450

Post complaint events.

The landlord sent the resident a section 20 letter regarding the replacement of the roof on 4 July 2023.
The landlord told this Service the pointing was completed on 29 February 2024 and it was awaiting a start date for the roofing work.
The resident told this Service that scaffolding was erected in December 2023, but no works had been undertaken to the roof and the walls had not been repointed. He also noted the fireproofing work in the loft space had not been done and the landlord had failed to answer his query about reimbursing him for the cost of the materials he purchased and had not check the loft insulation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation.

While it is noted that the resident has asked this Service to investigate the landlord’s actions prior to him moving into his home, this investigation focuses on the period leading up to when the resident made a complaint in December 2022 to 31 March 2023 when the landlord issued its final complaint response.
This is because the landlord cannot be held responsible for any defects in the flat prior to the resident purchasing it from another leaseholder. The passage of time also means evidence may be unavailable and personnel involved may have left an organisation, which makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out and for informed decisions to be made.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak in the shower room.

It is not disputed there was a leak in the resident’s property. The housing records confirm the resident told the landlord on 6 December 2022 that the leak in his shower room was due to the landlord of the downstairs flat failing to complete repairs. He said the owner of the flat should compensate him for the damage caused to his home.
It was appropriate for the landlord to confirm on 20 December 2022 in its stage 1 complaint response that it could not get involved in claims involving other landlords and the resident would need to make a claim on its insurance policy. This was in accordance with the landlord’s complaints and compensation policy and ensured it managed the resident’s expectations. It also said the resident may be able to make a claim on its own building insurance for any damage caused to the property. Details on how to make a claim were included in the response. This was appropriate.
The resident asked the landlord for clarification on the process for making a claim against its buildings insurance policy in his complaint escalation request on 30 December 2022. The landlord did not address this in its final complaint response that was issued on 31 March 2023. Given the resident had previously been provided with details on how to make a claim, this is a shortcoming of the landlord rather than a failure of service.
In summary, the landlord correctly advised the resident that he would need to make a claim against the other homeowner’s insurance policy for the damage caused to his possessions. It also told him he could make a claim against its own building insurance for any damage caused to the property. In this case there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak in the shower room.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the roof and loft spaces.

The resident’s lease agreement confirms the landlord is responsible for maintaining, repairing and carrying out improvements to the structure of the building. It is also responsible for pipes, tanks and ventilation systems which do not exclusively serve the resident’s home. The resident is responsible for keeping his property in good repair and must not make any alteration to the building without the agreement of the landlord.
The landlord’s asset management strategy says it takes a hybrid approach to investment in its homes. This includes adopting ‘‘demand led replacement methodology’’, whilst also carrying out planned investment programmes. It is unclear from the housing records when the landlord last inspected the loft space or roof.
The landlord’s responsive repairs procedure confirms it is responsible for repairing and maintaining roofs, external walls, brickwork and rendering. It also says the landlord is responsible for installations which supply water and repairing leaks on shared systems. In addition, the procedure confirms the landlord will take reasonable precautions to prevent and control the risk of fire in its properties.
Responsive repairs fall into the following categories:
1. Emergency repairs are made safe within 24 hours
2. Anytime repairs are completed within 20 working days, with an appointment time offered to the resident. If a pre–inspection is required, this will be arranged with a surveyor
The landlord’s complaints and compensation policy says it will offer compensation where it has failed to deliver a service or if a resident suffers a loss because of a service failure. Compensation is also awarded in recognition of any distress and inconvenience experienced by a resident.
The housing records confirm the resident told the landlord on 2 December 2022 that 1 of the redundant water tanks in the loft space was leaking. Whilst it is unclear from the housing records whether the water tanks and the associated pipework served the whole building, the landlord agreed to remove them and cap the pipe work. It arranged to do this on 19 December 2022. This demonstrated it was resolution focused and wanted to put things right for the resident.
The resident told the landlord on 6 December 2022 that the insulation, brickwork and beams in the loft space were wet. He also said he could smell damp in the attic and that whilst he had drained both water tanks, there was still residual water in the pipes and he was concerned there may be a leak. He asked the landlord for details on when the loft, chimney stack and parapet were last inspected and said a survey needed to be completed.
It was reasonable for the landlord to arrange for a surveyor to visit the resident’s home on 14 December 2022. Whilst this demonstrated it wanted to put things right for the resident, there is no evidence he was provided with an update following the visit. This demonstrates poor communication by the landlord and meant the resident was unclear on what steps were being taken to address his concerns. It was appropriate for the landlord to order a damp inspection on 18 December 2022.
The resident told the landlord on 19 December 2022 that no one turned up for the appointment scheduled for that day to drain down the water tanks and cap the pipe work. This caused the resident inconvenience. He noted he had taken time off work for the appointment and he was not notified the job had been rescheduled for 3 January 2023. Again, this demonstrates poor communication on the part of the landlord. The resident also noted that 3 roofing contractors had visited his home to inspect the roof space, but no details were provided by the landlord to this Service confirming the purpose and the outcome of the visits.
It was appropriate for the landlord to offer an apology on 20 December 2022 in its stage 1 complaint response and to note a new appointment had been booked for 3 January 2023 to remove the water tanks and cap the pipework. It also confirmed it was the responsibility of the previous owner to disclose any relevant information as part of the pre-sale negotiations. This was appropriate.
The purchase of any property is subject to the legal principle of caveat emptor. This means ‘let the buyer beware’. Essentially, sellers are not held responsible for any issues or defects with the property and buyers must take full responsibility for their own decisions prior to buying a property. In property transactions, the seller is legally obliged not to mislead the buyer, but other than that, the onus is on the buyer to satisfy themselves that the property is in the condition they want before they buy it.
The landlord did not address the resident’s concerns about the wet insulation, brick work or beams in the loft space. This was a failure. The landlord’s offer of £200 compensation was not reasonable in the circumstances.
The resident told the landlord on 30 December 2022 that there was brickwork missing in the loft space and this represented a fire hazard. He said this was raised in the survey he commissioned before purchasing the property, but it was not identified as a concern in the landlord’s fire risk assessment. He also queried why there was no ventilation in the loft space and why the depth of the insulation did not meet building regulations.
The water tanks were removed and the pipework capped on 3 January 2023.
Following the inspection in December 2022, the landlord confirmed on 11 January 2023 that there was ‘‘severe’’ water gathering on the roof felt and the insulation was soddened. It was recommended the membrane was replaced with a breathable alternative, ventilation was installed in the eaves and the insulation was replaced. It was also recommended the slate roof tiles were replaced. There is no evidence the landlord acted on these recommendations at this point or provided the resident with an update. This was a further failure.
The resident told the landlord on 18 January 2023 that there had been a significant increase in the amount of mould in the loft space. It was reasonable for the landlord to confirm on the same day that it arranged a damp survey in December 2022, although it did not tell him when the survey would be carried out. The landlord also failed to respond to the resident’s query about whether it would cover the cost he had incurred in purchasing ventilation flaps.
A damp survey was completed on 24 January 2023 and the findings shared with the landlord on 8 February 2023. The survey confirmed the soffits were in a poor condition, the brickwork on the parapet wall was defective, there was a lack of ventilation in the roof space and the rainwater pipe was cracked. While it was noted in the report that these defects were due to be inspected and rectified by the landlord, there is no evidence it acted on the report findings at this point or provided the resident with an update. This was a failure.
The resident told the landlord on 13 February 2023 that he had incurred significant cost trying to alleviate the problems in his home caused by the poor condition of the roof space. This included laying new insulation and installing roof vents. He noted it was the landlord’s responsibility to maintain the structure of the building and he had no alternative but to complete the work himself given the length of time that had passed since he first raised concerns. He asked the landlord to compensate him the £495 he had paid out for loft insulation and roof vents.
It was reasonable for the landlord to confirm on 31 March 2023 in its final complaint response that the roof vents were due to be fitted on that day. It also said it was seeking quotations for the fire safety work and this could take approximately 8 weeks. This provided clarity and ensured the landlord managed the resident’s expectations. It did not, however, confirm when the work to the roof would be completed. Neither did it respond to his request to be reimbursed the cost he had incurred or answer his query on when the roof space was last inspected and why water was left in the water tanks. This was a failure.
In summary, the landlord arranged for the loft space to be inspected and for a damp survey to be completed. It also sought quotations for the fireproofing work and roof. Its communication with the resident was, however, poor at times and it failed to address some of the concerns raised by the resident or answer his query about being reimbursed for the cost of the materials he purchased. The landlord’s increased offer of £450 was not reasonable in the circumstances.
It is evident the situation caused the resident distress and inconvenience. He told the landlord on numerous occasions he was worried about the condition of the loft space and said there was a risk of a leak. This led to him undertaking work in the attic. In this case, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about the roof and loft spaces for which it is ordered to pay £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the exterior walls.

The housing records confirm the resident told the landlord on 6 December 2022 that the exterior walls and mortar were in poor condition. He shared a copy of the survey that was commissioned prior to him purchasing the flat which highlighted concerns regarding the exterior walls. It was reasonable for the landlord to arrange for a surveyor to visit the resident’s home on 14 December 2022. This demonstrated it wanted to put things right for the resident.
The landlord did not address the resident’s concerns about the exterior walls in its stage 1 complaint response sent on 20 December 2022. This was a failure.
The resident asked the landlord on 17 January 2023 for an update and said the external walls needed to be inspected given there was evidence of mould growth in his living room, kitchen and side room, which he attributed to the poor condition of the mortar. He also noted the ‘‘soak away’’ was not draining correctly and water was soaking the walls. It was reasonable for the landlord to confirm on 18 January 2023 that it arranged a damp survey in December 2022, although it did not tell him when the survey would be carried out. This demonstrated poor communication by the landlord.
A damp survey was completed on 24 January 2023 and the findings shared with the landlord on 8 February 2023. The surveyor noted the external brickwork, rendering and rainwater goods were defective and pointing was missing. It was noted in the report that these defects were due to be inspected and rectified by the landlord. The surveyor recommended a water repellent was applied to the walls whilst remedial works were completed to ensure the masonry was watertight but not sealed. There is no evidence the landlord acted on this recommendation.
The surveyor found evidence of damp in the shower room and this was attributed to condensation. ‘‘Old mould’’ was also found in the kitchen and living room. It was recommended an extractor fan was fitted in the kitchen and the shower room extractor fan was upgraded. Again, there is no evidence the resident was provided with an update. Neither did it offer advice on removing mould or set out what were his and the landlord’s repairing responsibilities. This was a failure.
The resident told the landlord on 13 February 2023 that he spent £298 on anti-mould paint and asked to be reimbursed the costs he had incurred. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s request. This was a further failure.
The landlord confirmed on 31 March 2023 in its final complaint response that it was arranging for the walls to be repointed and it would keep the resident updated. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have shared a copy of the damp survey, as requested by the resident. This would have demonstrated it was being transparent and its actions were in accordance with the recommendations made in the report.
In summary, the landlord arranged a damp survey to be completed and for the brickwork to be repointed. It did not, however, arrange for this to be done until after it issued its final complaint response; almost 2 months after it received the survey results. Its communication with the resident was also poor at times, it failed to address his request to be reimbursed or set out what its responsibilities were regarding the resident’s reports of damp and mould. It is also unclear whether the brickwork has been repointed. In this case, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the exterior walls, for which it is ordered to pay £200 compensation.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about unsafe electrical wiring and the completion of the associated works.

The resident’s lease agreement confirms the landlord is responsible for electrical wires which do not exclusively serve the resident’s home. It is, however, unclear from the housing records who is responsible for the electrical wiring in the loft space and whether these serve the whole building or just the resident’s home.
The housing records confirm the resident told the landlord on 6 December 2022 that the electrical wiring in the loft space was unsafe. Whilst he noted the wiring had been inspected by the landlord and he was waiting for confirmation on what work would be undertaken, no record of the visit was shared by the landlord with this Service. This demonstrates poor record keeping. There is no evidence the landlord responded to the resident’s enquiry. This was a failure and meant the resident was unclear on what action was being taken by the landlord.
The resident contacted the landlord again on 19 December 2022 and asked for an update. He said he had been waiting for over 3 weeks for an update and he was concerned there would be a fire or a risk of electrocution given water was dropping on to the wires. Whilst it was reasonable for the landlord to arrange a job to check the electrics on the same day, it is unclear from the housing records if and when it attended and what the outcome of the visit was. This demonstrates poor record keeping.
Whilst the landlord confirmed on 20 December 2022 in its stage 1 complaint response that a surveyor would be overseeing all of the work scheduled to take place in the loft space, it did not address the resident’s specific concerns about the electrical wiring and whether it was safe. This was a failure.
The resident told the landlord on 30 December 2022 he was still waiting for the electrics to be checked and asked for clarification on who was responsible for the wiring and why it had not been previously checked. There is no evidence the landlord responded to the resident. This was a further failure.
The landlord arranged for the wiring to be checked on 16 January 2023. It was reasonable for the landlord to rewire the property and to install smoke and heat alarms in the resident’s home. This demonstrated it was resolution focused and wanted to put things right for the resident. There is, however, no evidence the landlord discussed the extent of the work prior to arranging for its completion. This was a failure.
The resident told the landlord on 31 January 2023 that he was not happy with the standard of the work. He said the electrician used plastic trunking to enclose the electric wires that ran through his property, rather than chasing into the wall as it had previously been done. He also said he wanted the pendant lighting returning to its original position and noted 1 of the light switches was fitted upside down and 1 replaced with a plastic fitting rather than a metal finish. In addition, the resident noted the floorboards and insulation in the loft space had not been put back in place.
The landlord told the resident on 31 March 2023 in its final complaint response that he would need to arrange for the wiring to be channelled into the walls himself and it would not arrange for the pendant to be relocated. The landlord did not provide an explanation for its decision. It also failed to address the resident’s concerns about the light switches or the replacement of the floorboards and insulation.
Whilst it unclear whether the landlord is responsible for the electrical wiring in the loft space, it accepted responsibility and agreed to complete the rewire. Once the landlord accept responsibility, without agreement to the contrary, it was responsible to return the property to the same condition.
In summary, there were delays in inspecting the electrical wires and completing the work. The landlord’s communication with the resident was also poor at times and it failed to address all of his concerns. The decision not to return the property to its original state was not appropriate. It is evident the situation caused the resident inconvenience and distress. He told the landlord on a number of occasions he was concerned about the safety of the electric wires and the risk of a fire or electrocution. In this case, there was maladministration by the landlord, for which it is ordered to pay £200 compensation. An order has also been made to return the property to the same condition it was in prior to the rewire, including casing in the wires and returning the pendant to its original position. We have not ordered the landlord to replace like for like light pendant as the landlord’s replacement is reasonable.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

The landlord has a 2 stage complaints process. It says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days and provide a response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days. Stage 2 complaints are responded to within 20 working days. Residents are contacted if the landlord is unable to provide a response by the deadline date and a new date agreed.
The housing records confirm the resident made a complaint on 6 December 2022. The complaint was acknowledged on 7 December 2022 in accordance with the landlord’s complaints policy. It said it would provide a response by 22 December 2022. The landlord did not, however, seek to understand the resident’s complaint or the outcomes he was seeking. This was not in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Complaints Handling Code (the Code). This was a failure.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 20 December 2022 in accordance with the timescale set out in its complaints policy. It was appropriate for the landlord to offer an apology. It did not, however, address all of the concerns raised by the resident. This was a further failure. The Code says landlords should address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law and good practice where appropriate.
When considering how a landlord has responded to a complaint, this Service considers not just what has gone wrong, but also what the landlord has done to put things right in response to the complaint. This includes the steps the landlord has taken to address the shortcoming and prevent a reoccurrence, as well as any compensation offered. In this case, the landlord set out the learning it took from the complaint, identified the steps it was taking to improve the service it provided and offered compensation. This was appropriate. The offer of £50 compensation for its poor complaints handling was reasonable in the circumstances.
The resident asked for his complaint to be escalated on 30 December 2022. The complaint was not acknowledged at this point and led to the resident having to ask the landlord for an update on 31 January 2023.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 9 February 2023. It was appropriate for the landlord to speak to the resident and discuss the concerns he had raised. It said it would provide a response by 10 March 2023.
There is no evidence the landlord contacted the resident to advise him there would be a delay in issuing its final complaint response and it did not agree a new deadline with him. This was not in accordance with the landlord’s complaints policy.
The landlord did not issue its final complaint response until 31 March 2023. This was not in accordance with its complaints policy. Whilst the landlord acknowledged it could have communicated more effectively with the resident and increased its overall offer of compensation, it did not uphold the complaint. This was confusing. Again, the landlord did not address all of the points raised by the resident. This was a failure. The landlord also failed to offer additional compensation for its poor complaints handling.
In summary, the landlord did not follow its complaints policy at times and there were delays in issuing its final complaints response. The landlord also failed to address all of the points raised by the resident and it did not identify any learning in its final complaint response. The increased offer of compensation did not take account of the landlord’s poor complaints handling at stage 2 and cannot be considered reasonable redress.
It is evident the situation caused the resident inconvenience and distress. He told the landlord on numerous occasions that he was concerned about the damage caused to his property and he had to chase the landlord up. In this case, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint, for which it is ordered to pay £100 compensation.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak in the shower room.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about the roof and loft spaces.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the exterior walls.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about unsafe electrical wiring and the completion of the associated works.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident for the failings set out in this report. A copy of the apology letter must be shared with this Service.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £1050 compensation. The £450 previously offered by the landlord for its poor complaints handling may be taken off this amount if already paid. This must be paid directly to the resident and made up as follows:

£100 compensation for the inconvenience and distress caused to the resident in its handling of his concerns about the condition about the roof and loft spaces.
£200 compensation for the inconvenience and distress caused to the resident in its handling of his concerns about the condition of the exterior walls
£200 compensation for the inconvenience and distress caused to the resident in its handling of his concerns about unsafe electrical wiring and the completion of the associated works
£100 compensation for the inconvenience and distress caused to the resident in its handling of his complaint
£450 compensation previously offered by the landlord, if not already paid.

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to write to the resident setting out its position regarding the roof. The letter should set out the timescales for when the work will be completed, if they have not already been completed. A copy of the letter should be provided to this Service.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to write to the resident setting out its position regarding the loft insulation and fireproofing work. The letter should set out the timescales for when each of the repairs will be completed, if they have not already been completed. A copy of the letter should be provided to this Service.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to write to the resident setting out its position regarding the pointing of the brickwork The letter should set out the timescales for when each of the repairs will be completed, if they have not already been completed. A copy of the letter should be provided to this Service.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to write to the resident to confirm the date when the electrical wiring will be chased into the walls and the light pendant repositioned back to its original position. A copy of the letter should be provided to this Service.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to write to the resident setting out its position regarding his request to be reimbursed the cost of the materials he purchased. A copy of the letter should be provided to this Service.