Hyde Housing Association Limited (202348499)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202348499

Hyde Housing Association Limited

30 January 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 response to the resident’s:
1. Reports of a pest infestation.
2. Reports of a roof leak and the associated repairs.
3. Requests for window repairs.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of a 1-bedroom flat owned by the landlord. The landlord has recorded that the resident has mental health vulnerabilities.
The resident is represented by his mother in bringing the complaint to the landlord and this Service. For convenience, this report will refer to both the son and his representative as “the resident”.
The landlord’s records show that the resident initially reported pests in the property, and roof leaks on 6 September 2022. He made further reports of a pest infestation in the property on 17 January 2023 and 14 March 2023. On 6 June 2023, he raised a formal complaint about pests in the property.
In its stage 1 response on 9 June 2023, the landlord stated the resident had not made any new pest reports since its last visit of 14 March 2023, before his complaint. It scheduled pest control to attend on 27 June 2023.
The resident made another formal complaint in August 2023, although the exact date is unclear from the landlord’s records. He complained about pest infestation, ongoing roof leak, damaged and exposed electrical wires, and improperly sealed windows.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 21 August 2023, acknowledging the delays in completing the required works. It offered the resident £600 in compensation: £100 for customer effort, £250 for delays, and £250 for distress and inconvenience. It said the pest control team would contact him to schedule the removal and replacement of the loft insulation. It also provided 6 dates in September 2023 for various repairs.
The resident requested to escalate his complaint on 20 September 2023. He expressed dissatisfaction with the landlord’s failure to complete all the repairs, noting that it had only finished the windows repair.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 29 September 2023It stated that it sealed the windows on 9 September 2023 and completed roof repairs on 28 September 2023. It also noted that it attended all scheduled appointments, but there was no access at the designated times for the other works. It stated its pest control team would contact him to arrange an appointment. It scheduled internal and electrical repairs for 20 October 2023.It maintained its stage 1 offer of £600 in compensation.
The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and brought his complaint to this Service. He reported that it had not completed the pest control work or the internal repairs related to the damage caused by the roof leak.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

In his correspondence with this Service, the resident has raised other matters concerning damp and mould and requests for door repairs that have not yet been through the landlord’s complaint process.
Paragraph 42.a. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme says the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints which have not completed the landlord’s internal complaints process. This report has considered matters which completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 29 September 2023. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions before the involvement of this Service.
The resident stated that he reported pest infestation and roof leaks in the property since September 2022. Under Paragraph 42.c of the Scheme, we may not consider complaints that were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period. For complaints for which the landlord issued its final response before 1 April 2024, the Scheme referred to the ‘reasonable period’ as being within 6 months. Therefore, whilst the historical incidents provide contextual background to the current complaint, this assessment focuses on events from January 2023.
The resident told the landlord and the Ombudsman that the landlord’s actions and omissions has had a negative effect on his health. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. This is largely because independent medical experts are appointed to give evidence. They have a duty to the court to provide unbiased insights on the diagnosis, prognosis, and cause of any illness or injury. When disputes arise over the cause of an injury, oral testimony can be examined in court. Therefore, this element of the resident’s complaint is better dealt with via the court.

Reports of a pest infestation

The landlord is responsible for addressing pest issues within the property. In accordance with its repairs policy, reports of pest infestations are categorised as ‘anytime repairs,’ which stipulates a response time of 20 working days.
The landlord’s pest policy requires its specialist contractor to perform pre-inspections and provide a report on the infestation’s cause. A surveyor will review the report and give instructions for necessary pest control actions. After treatment, the landlord must contact the resident within 7 working days to confirm completion. If treatment is successful, it will close the case; otherwise, it will reassign the case to the improvement team for further consultation.
The landlord’s records show that the resident first reported a pest infestation in the property on 6 September 2022. Although pest control attended, the issue persisted. He reported the problem again on 17 January 2023, and although the landlord visited on 14 March 2023, the issue remained unresolved. He informed the landlord that the pests had damaged his personal items including clothing and carpets. The visit on 14 March 2023 was nearly 2 months after he made the report in January 2023. This was a long delay and not in line with its pest repair timescale.
The landlord has not provided this Service with a copy of the resident’s complaint of 6 June 2023. In its response on 9 June 2023, it stated that its last visit to the property occurred on 14 March 2023 and noted that there had been no further reports of pest infestation from him since then. It told him that its pest control team would attend the property on 27 June 2023. It informed him he could escalate his complaint to stage 2 of its process if he were unhappy with its response. There is no evidence to show the resident requested the escalation of his complaint.
The resident reported that the pest control team visited several times but did not resolve the issue. The landlord’s records do not include visit dates, confirmation of a survey conducted, or any communication regarding findings and treatment plans provided to the resident. Thus, it does not appear that it followed its pest control procedures. Also, there is no record confirming that it attended the property on 27 June 2023, as promised in its stage 1 response, nor any record of actions taken if it did.
Neither party has provided us with the date of the resident’s second complaint about pest infestation in August 2023. In internal correspondence to the pest control team on 8 August 2023, the landlord noted that access had not been recorded on 2 occasions and requested the team to schedule an appointment with the resident to inspect the property. The team confirmed that it had booked an appointment for 11 August 2023.
There is no documentation indicating the specific dates of the 2 ‘no access’ attempts. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the landlord communicated with the resident regarding these visits or confirmed the repair dates with him prior to their attendance. This represents a failure and is inconsistent with the information provided on the landlord’s website, which clearly states that its contractors will confirm attendance with residents before each visit.
As highlighted in the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management, this Service would expect a landlord to keep a robust record of contacts and repairs, yet the evidence in this case has not been comprehensive in this case. It has provided limited information in relation to the resident’s repair requests. This has impacted our ability to effectively assess the timeline of events and all the actions it completed with regards to the repairs. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures.
The landlord’s second stage 1 response of 21 August 2023 stated that it had inspected the resident’s home on 11 August 2023. During the visit, the pest control team left bait trays, but the rats did not eat the bait. It stated that rats had destroyed the loft insulation. It confirmed plans to remove and replace the loft insulation and stated that the pest control team would directly contact the resident to schedule a suitable date. It apologised and acknowledged that it should have completed the repairs sooner. It offered £600 compensation in total divided as £100 for customer effort, £250 for the delays and £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, this Service will consider whether the redress offered by it (including an apology and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, this Service considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
It was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge and apologise for the delay in completing works in its second stage 1 response. It also offered £600 total compensation. It did not provide a breakdown of the £600 which it offered with respect to the specific complaints. It is good practice for landlords to be explicit in their compensation awards, in terms of highlighting the specific amount of compensation it has awarded to each element of the complaint. The landlord should consider this learning in its future complaint responses.
This Service has allocated the compensation as follows £300 towards the pest infestation element of the complaint, and £300 towards the roof leak and the associated repairs element of the complaint. The landlord took some steps towards putting things right, however these were not sufficient when the level of inconvenience to the resident is considered
The compensation the landlord offered may have been adequate for approximately 2 months of delays to works from its first stage 1 response on 9 June 2023. However, it did not fully consider its shortcomings. For instance, there is no record of the pest control team contacting the resident between the stage 1 response of 21 August 2023 and the resident’s escalation request of 20 September 2023.
The landlord’s stated in its stage 2 response that the pest control team would contact the resident to make an appointment. This implies that it had not yet started any pest control works to resolve the pest infestation. This was a further delay of over 3 months from his first stage 1 complaint and over 8 months from his report on 17 January 2023. It is concerning that the landlord did not acknowledge this significant delay in its stage 2 response.
Furthermore, considering the landlord was aware of the resident’s health vulnerabilities, it should have been more proactive in ensuring that the pest control team completed the necessary works in a timely manner and considered prioritising these works. Additionally, it did not provide any information on the source of the infestation and what proofing works it would complete to eliminate the pests. This was a failing and not in line with its pest policy.
Also, the landlord failed to address the resident’s concerns about damaged personal items in its complaint response. Its compensation policy states that when a resident alleges financial loss, damage to property, or personal injury, the landlord will refer them to its insurance policy. Therefore, it should have appropriately referred the resident to its insurance policy in this case.
In summary, the landlord’s offers do not constitute reasonable redress. It did not acknowledge the delays in completing the pest control works, it did not provide relevant insurance information and the amount of compensation it offered was not proportionate to the failings identified in this report. Therefore, this Service has made orders for it to pay increased compensation and complete specific actions to resolve the issues.

Reports of a roof leak and the associated repairs.

The landlord’s repairs policy outlines its responsibility for maintaining and repairing the structure and exterior of the building, including repairing roof leaks and electrical infrastructure. Its website states stopping a leak from the roof can be difficult to do as an emergency as it involves working at height and often requires special equipment. This Service would expect the landlord to complete roof leak repairs in a timely manner. In this case within its 20 working days ‘anytime repair’ timeframe.
The landlord’s records show the resident reported roof leaks on 6 September 2022. There is no evidence of the landlord’s actions with regards to this report. Also, it is unclear if he raised this issue as part of his initial stage 1 complaint on 6 June 2023.
As earlier stated, it is best practice for landlords to appropriately record information including any reports of repairs, agreed actions or further issues raised by the resident. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management states that the failure to accurately create and record information can lead to landlords not taking appropriate and timely action. This oversight may result in missed opportunities to recognise errors in actions taken and contribute to inadequate communication and redress.
In its acknowledgment on 8 August 2023, the landlord confirmed that it had spoken to the resident. It noted his report of an ongoing roof leak which damaged his personal belongings and some electrical sockets. It also noted he reported exposed, and damaged electrical wiring in the basement.
The landlord’s stage 1 response of 21 August 2023 confirmed it had scheduled appointments for 6 September 2023 to erect scaffolding, followed by roof repairs to address the leak on 7 September 2023. It made a subsequent appointment for 12 September 2023, to begin internal repairs in areas affected by the leak. It made a separate appointment on the same day to inspect and make safe the wiring in the property. Additionally, it arranged an appointment for 15 September 2023 to inspect the damaged electrical outlets, including lights and sockets.
In its stage 2 response of 29 September 2023, the landlord said its contractors confirmed they attended the appointments it arranged at stage 1 as scheduled. However, they stated there was no access at these times. It arranged new appointments on 20 October 2023 to commence with internal repairs, inspect, repair electrical outlets, and inspect electrical wiring in the basement. It said it completed roof repairs on 28 September 2023. It found no failings.
This Service notes that the landlord made some attempts to put things right at stage 1. It apologised and offered compensation, which this Service allocated at £300 to this element of the complaint. However, its actions did not resolve the issues.
The landlord has not provided this Service with evidence that the resident confirmed his availability for the proposed attendance dates mentioned in stage 1. It was aware of the resident’s vulnerability and that his mother was supporting him with the repairs, making it necessary to confirm their availability before scheduling visits. Additionally, there is no evidence that the landlord attended on the relevant dates.
The landlord’s record-keeping has impacted this Service’s ability to conduct a thorough investigation, as highlighted at various points throughout this report. This was poor practice which likely contributed to the other failures identified in this report.
The landlord acknowledged that the resident raised concerns about a roof leak in his formal complaint submitted in August 2023. It would have been reasonable for it to proactively address the roof leak issue, particularly given that the duration of the leak was uncertain. However, it did not complete the necessary repairs until 28 September 2023. This was more than 2 weeks beyond the time limit specified for ‘anytime repairs.’ This delay likely caused the resident unnecessary distress and inconvenience.
The landlord’s records show it completed the electrical repairs on 30 October 2023. This was more than 2 months from when the resident complained about the issue. This timescale was not in line with its repairs policy.
In its stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses, the landlord committed to completing internal works to repair the damage caused by the roof leak. These works included painting and decorating the affected areas. Its record show it attended on 20 October and 30 November 2023. This was more than 3 months after its commitment in its stage 1 response. It started painting and decorating the bedroom and bathroom. However, it noted the need for follow-on works. Its records do not indicate if or when it completed these works.
In conclusion, the landlord’s offers do not constitute reasonable redress. It did not acknowledge the delays in completing the roof leak and associated repairs, it did not provide relevant insurance information and the amount of compensation it offered was not proportionate to the failings identified in this report. Therefore, this Service has made orders for it to pay increased compensation and complete specific actions to resolve the issues.

Window repairs

The landlord’s repairs policy states it is responsible for completing window repairs.
The resident informed the landlord in his formal complaint that there were issues with the seals on the windows, he stated it had not fitted the windows properly. In its stage 1 response on 21 August 2023, the landlord stated that it would complete the window repairs on 9 September 2023. Although this Service has not seen evidence confirming the completion of this repair, the landlord stated in its stage 2 response that it completed the repairs on that date. Additionally, the resident confirmed in his escalation request that it had completed the window repairs.
The landlord completed the repair within its repairs policy time limit. Despite its poor record-keeping and communication with the resident, its actions satisfactorily resolved the issue. However, it would have been appropriate to conduct a post-inspection check after the completion of the window seal repairs. The resident informed this Service that the windows have begun to leak again. As a result, this Service will recommend that the landlord inspects the window seals.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme:
1. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of pest infestation.
2. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak and the associated repairs.
3. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests for window repairs.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
2. Arrange an inspection of the property and produce an inspection report, which must:
  1. Confirm if there are any outstanding works in relation to resolving the pest infestation issue.
  2. Confirm if there are any outstanding works in relation to the internal repair works.
  3. Provide a schedule of required repairs and include a timeline for the completion of these works.
3. Pay the resident total compensation of £1,000 broken down as follows:
  1. £600 it previously offered in its stage 1 response (if not already paid).
  2. An additional £200 for the failures in respect of its handling of the pest infestation reports.
  3. An additional £200 for the failures in respect of its handling of the roof leak and the associated repairs.
  4. These payments must be paid directly to the resident and not to his rent account.
4. Provide the Ombudsman with documentary evidence of compliance with these orders.

Recommendations

The landlord should consider:
1. Inspecting the resident’s window seals to confirm that there are no leaks.
2. Providing its insurance information to the resident with respect to his assertions that his personal items were damaged.