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

Islington Council (202336503)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202336503

Islington Council

21 February 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Repairs to the building which caused water ingress to the resident’s property in 2023.
    2. Repairs to the building which caused water ingress to the resident’s property in 2024.

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder of a 1 bedroom flat on the second floor of a converted street property. The landlord is the freeholder of the property. Her lease began in October 2022.
  2. On 7 November 2022 the resident raised concerns about a leak from the roof and guttering causing water ingress through her windows. The landlord found that it needed access through her neighbour’s property to rectify the issue. The matter however remained outstanding, so the resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 17 July 2023.
  3. In her complaint she acknowledged it had repaired the roof slates at the front of the property. She however raised concerns with the landlord’s communication, and that the matter remained outstanding. She said she had received no support and explained that it erected scaffolding at the front of the property since 6 January 2023. This severely affected the light exposure in the building for over 7 months. She said she initially contacted about the gutter in November 2022 as every time it rained, her property was damaged.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 31 July 2023 and explained the history of the complaint and the actions it had taken. It apologised for the delay in resolving the repair and partially upheld the complaint. It said this was due to the delay in resolving the issue, and the inconvenience to the resident. It acknowledged its lack of communication in terms of updates on the repairs. It explained the delay was due to access issues with her neighbour, so it could not uphold the complaint fully.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint on 8 August 2023 due to dissatisfaction with the response and a lack of timeframe. She said the landlord told her that it was considering legal action months ago. She told it she had no confidence on the matter progressing as it had been 9 months since she raised her request.
  6. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 1 September 2023. It said it would partially uphold the complaint due to the inconvenience and delays. It explained the actions it had taken to try to obtain access to her neighbour’s property, but it had been unsuccessful. It said it had involved its legal team in preparation for an access injunction. In relation to the exposure of light it said it would be taking down the scaffolding within the next 7 days. It apologised for any inconvenience caused. It said it was collaborating with its legal team to take the necessary legal action for access to the neighbour’s property.
  7. The issue remained unresolved, as such the resident raised another complaint with the landlord on 2 January 2024. Operatives who attended told her they were unable to resolve the issue as its contractor did not build the scaffolding sufficiently. This meant they could not reach the necessary areas, and she found this extremely disappointing. It had replaced the entire front roof slate, and it told her it would do the same at the back. She said it did not appear to have planned for this and asked for it to inform her when it would rectify the issue.
  8. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 16 January 2024. It explained the history of the issue including its actions and the access issues. It confirmed that it upheld the complaint at stage 1 due to the inability to carry out the full repair and it did not keep her updated. It awarded her compensation of £100 which it broke down as £50 for the inconvenience caused, and £50 for the service failure.
  9. The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 17 January 2024. She told us it affected her mental health, and the matter had been a daily worry since November 2022. She said she the matter left her extremely exhausted and let down. She explained there had been damage to her property due to the landlord’s lack of action. She told us about her attempts to chase its contractors for updates. To resolve the matter, she wanted the repairs completed.
  10. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 23 January 2024. She explained it had not provided the follow up call it promised her in its response. She said it had made mistakes with dates in its response, and she wanted to correct it. She explained the outstanding repairs and said there were new issues. She also said there was damage inside her property including cracks and damp. She said the issue had affected her mental health.
  11. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 20 February 2024. It:
    1. Upheld her complaint and apologised for the delays and inconvenience caused to her. It concluded that despite making real efforts to provide the service she expected, the leaks remained outstanding for an unreasonable length of time. It also said it should have taken legal action sooner.
    2. Explained there was confusion between contractors and access issues with her neighbour.
    3. Empathised with her, tried to reassure her that it was taking the matter seriously and recognised its obligation around her home.
    4. Said it expected the matter would not begin until the end of March 2024. It acknowledged the inconvenience caused to her particularly in respect of the queries about the works and access issues.
    5. Said it would provide her with a single point of contact to ensure she would not have to chase responses. It also referred her to its insurer for the damage to property.
    6. It offered her compensation of £1,525 which it broke down as:
      1. £625 for the delay in carrying out the repair over 15 months.
      2. £300 for poor management of repairs/legal action.
      3. £300 for the time and effort to complain and make enquiries.
      4. £300 for the distress and inconvenience.

Post complaint

  1. The resident accepted the compensation offer and continued to chase updates between March 2024 and July 2024 as the matter remained outstanding. This was due to issues with the scaffolding not being the correct size. The landlord agreed that due to the delay it needed to compensate her further. On 19 July 2024, it offered further compensation after reviewing its position. The parties agreed the repairs as completed in July 2024. It offered an added £367 for the issues between March 2024 and July 2024. It broke this down as:
    1. £200 for the additional inconvenience, distress and poor management of the repairs and updates.
    2. £167 for the additional 4 month delay.
  2. On 19 November 2024 the resident wrote to the landlord and said that despite it resolving the repairs in September 2024, she had spotted an issue with one of the gutters. She asked for it to resolve this.
  3. The landlord clarified to the Ombudsman on 28 January 2025 that it completed the works in September 2024. It said it would pay the resident further compensation between August 2024 and September 2024. It also said it would pay the resident further compensation for the issues she raised in November 2024 (a total period of an additional 6 months), and this was in addition to its previous offers of compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has raised concerns about the impact of the situation on her health. The Ombudsman is unable to consider this as we are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, any impact on health. The courts must decide on personal injury claims as they can consider medical evidence and make legally binding findings. However, the Ombudsman will consider the general distress and inconvenience the situation may have caused the resident and the landlord’s response to any reported impact on her family’s health.
  2. The resident has raised concerns with the landlord in November 2024 about further issues with the repairs completed. Although linked to the first issue, the landlord would require an opportunity to address the matter as a service request. It would also require an opportunity to respond to the resident. This was also not part of the complaint brought to us, and we have seen no evidence that it has exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. As such, we will not consider this issue within this investigation.

Repairs to the building which caused water ingress to the resident’s property in 2023

  1. The landlord’s compensation policy says that when deciding if compensation is appropriate, it will consider whether it could have rectified the problem sooner. It will also consider the personal circumstances, vulnerabilities and wellbeing of the resident and their household. It says it will award between £100 to £300 for time, trouble and distress. The policy also says it will award compensation of £25 for each month of a delay. In the absence of a “service guideline”, for each month of delay after the service statutory period, it should consider the guideline award.
  2. The landlord acknowledged that there were failings in its handling of the resident’s complaint between November 2022 and June 2023. It found that there were delays in its handling of the matter and that it caused her inconvenience. It partially upheld her complaint and apologised. Whilst appropriate that it acknowledged its failings around the issue, its actions were not in line with its compensation policy and that was unreasonable.
  3. This is because it found a delay in its approach, and as such could have rectified the issue sooner. It then did not offer the necessary redress around the delays and inconvenience caused to the resident at the time. As such it did not appropriately put things rights at the first opportunity, and this was unreasonable. It did not do this until her later complaint in 2024 and this was unreasonable. Based on this, the Ombudsman finds that there was maladministration.

Repairs to the building which caused water ingress to the resident’s property in 2024

  1. The landlord acknowledged in its 2024 complaint responses that there were issues with its handling of the repairs. This was over the 15 months between November 2022 and February 2024. It acknowledged that there were issues with its communication, and with it taking necessary action at the right times. This included taking legal action against her neighbour much earlier. It has acknowledged the delays in completing the repairs, and the level of distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
  2. To put things right, in 2024, it awarded the resident compensation of £1,525 within its stage 2 response for its failings. It advised the resident that it would begin the repairs in March 2024. However, there were further delays between March 2024 and July 2024. It appropriately reviewed its position and offered an addition £367 compensation. The landlord and resident agreed that it completed works in July 2024, however the resident said the issue remained outstanding until September 2024, in an email on 19 November 2024.
  3. The landlord however created expectations in its complaint responses which it did not maintain. For example, its contractor did not contact the resident as it said they would, nor did it provide any information on what works it would complete as said in its stage 1 response. In relation to the stage 2 response, it said it would provide her with a specific point of contact to avoid her chasing for information. She had to chase this up before it provided one.
  4. Despite the failing identified in the landlord’s management of the resident’s expectations through its responses its compensation offer appears to be inline with its policy. This is in relation to the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. Its offer in relation to the delays exceeds the monthly amount of £25 in its policy, as it calculated this at £41.66 a month. Its further offer of compensation on 19 July 2024 was also until the end of July 2024, despite the parties agreeing the works had concluded.
  5. This was a positive approach by the landlord. Overall, its actions and its offer reflect the level of failing, in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s remedy’s guidance, and as such we find that there was a reasonable redress by the landlord. No further compensation is however due as we believe the amount offered is reasonable.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was:
    1. Maladministration with the landlord’s handling of repairs in 2023.
    2. Reasonable redress with the landlord’s handling of repairs in 2024.

Orders and recommendations

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Provide the resident with an apology for the failings found within this report.
    1. Pay the resident £1,892 offered across its responses.
    1. Provide proof of compliance with these orders.

Recommendation

  1. If it remains outstanding for any reason, pay the resident compensation of £250 explained in its email of 28 January 2025.
  2. The landlord should ensure it has systems in place to monitor the commitments made in its complaints process to make sure it carries out the commitments.