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

Leeds City Council (202342553)

Back to Top

  A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202342553

Leeds City Council

16 October 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 handling of various repairs in the resident’s property.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the associated complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord of a property that he has occupied since 2016.
  2. The resident reported various repairs in the property during 2023, including a leak from the toilet, damage to the bathroom floor and a roof leak.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 13 November 2023 about the landlord’s handling of repairs in the property. He stated that a radiator in the kitchen had been on the wall for a year with no supply of gas, repairs were required to a window and door and that the toilet was resting on a piece of wood. The resident stated that he was disabled and that he had been waiting to downsize for 5 years.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 1 December 2023 in which it addressed each of the repairs issues. The landlord stated that an emergency repair was raised on 16 June 2023 to repair a window. However, access could not be gained and the job was not raised again. The landlord acknowledged that the toilet had been placed on a plank of wood since June 2023, despite a plumber previously advising what work should be carried out. In relation to the kitchen radiator, it found that operatives attended in July 2021 but could not gain access and the job was not re-booked until February 2023. However, the works could not be done on this occasion due to the number of people and a large dog present at the property. The appointment was rebooked for November 2023 however, operatives could not gain access. The landlord said that further appointments had been scheduled to inspect the window and toilet issues and for the kitchen radiator to be fixed. It apologised for delays experienced and said that the repairs should have been completed sooner.
  5. The resident escalated his complaint on 9 December 2023. He stated that contractors had attended his property but had not completed any repairs. He raised concerns about the cold temperatures in his property.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 16 January 2024. It said that a visit to the resident’s property had taken place on 12 January 2024 to address the repairs issues and the resident reported that the hand basin and toilet had not been re-fitted after the bathroom floor works were completed. The landlord stated that further appointments had been scheduled to address each of the outstanding repairs.
  7. The resident raised his complaint with the Ombudsman in March 2024. In April 2024 he informed the Ombudsman that he had been left without a working kitchen radiator for 7 years. On 31 May 2024 he said that the toilet had been installed but he had still been left with no handwashing facilities in the bathroom. He said that the bathroom floor had been levelled but that he was unhappy with the standard of the works, and prior to this, the toilet had been raised on a piece of wood for a period of 3 months. The resident also reported that his front door had been screwed shut as the landlord had been unable to fix it. The resident said that he has mental health issues, as well as mobility issues following an injury.
  8. The landlord wrote to the resident on 28 August 2024 following a meeting with him on the same date. It apologised for the delays in completing several outstanding repairs. The landlord found that, while the toilet had been fixed, the bathroom was in poor condition and needed replacing, and that a wet room would be fitted due to the resident’s health needs. It said that repairs to the kitchen radiator, bedroom window and doors had been scheduled. The landlord offered the resident £3,000 compensation in recognition of the repairs delays.
  9. On 19 September 2024 the landlord informed the Ombudsman that all outstanding repairs had been completed and the compensation had been paid to the resident.
  10. The resident informed the Ombudsman on 7 October 2024 that repairs to the kitchen radiator and bathroom had been completed and that he had received the compensation. However, he said that there were still repairs issues in relation to the front door and the outbuilding roof was still leaking. The resident also reported new issues including that contractors had broken a bed, the radiator in his bedroom had been removed and there was no hot water from the shower. In order to resolve his complaint, the resident said that the repairs should be completed and he should be further compensated.

Assessment and findings

Scope

  1. The resident informed the Ombudsman about new repairs issues in the property, as detailed above. In accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which are made prior to having exhausted a landlord’s complaints procedure. This is so that landlords have the opportunity to respond to complaints and resolve issues before the Ombudsman becomes formally involved. As such, this investigation will not consider the landlord’s handling of the most recent repairs issues. However, a recommendation has been made below for the landlord to arrange an appointment to inspect the repairs. If the resident wishes to pursue this matter further, he can complain to the landlord about its handling of these repairs. He may be able to refer his complaint to the Ombudsman once it has exhausted the landlord’s complaints process.
  2. It is also acknowledged that some of the repairs issues had been ongoing for several years. Paragraph 42(c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within 12 months of matters arising. This investigation will therefore consider events from November 2022 onwards.
  3. Generally, our assessments look at events up to the date of the final complaint response from the landlord. However in this case the landlord provided a further response in August 2024. In addition, the evidence available shows that the repair issues have been ongoing to date. As such this assessment has also included events after the final response.

The landlord’s handling of various repairs

  1. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance handbook states that the landlord will respond to emergency repairs within 24 hours, priority repairs such as plumbing and drainage faults within 3 days and general repairs such as re-hanging or easing a door within 20 working days. The handbook states that the landlord is responsible for repairs to fittings such as toilets and basins, heating and hot water installations and windowsills and frames.

Bathroom repairs

  1. The landlord’s repairs records reflect that it raised a works order on 8 February 2023 following reports of a leak from the resident’s toilet. No records have been provided to the Ombudsman to reflect what action was taken and it is unclear whether any repairs took place following this. A further works order was raised on 3 May 2023 and an appointment was attended on 12 May 2023 but access could not be gained to the property.
  2. The landlord raised further works order on 2 and 13 June 2023 following reports that the toilet was still leaking and the floor was starting to rot. The evidence suggests that repairs appointments took place on 2 and 21 June 2023 however, no notes have been provided to indicate what works took place. The landlord raised another works order on 27 June 2023 for repairs to the bathroom floor and walls following damage caused by the leak. However, there is no evidence to indicate that a repairs appointment was scheduled to carry out this repair.
  3. Within its December 2023 stage 2 response, the landlord said that the toilet had been placed on a plank of wood since June 2023 and that the flooring work was required before the toilet could be fitted safely. This indicates a clear failing by the landlord to undertake the bathroom repairs in line with the timeframes stipulated in its repairs policy. The resident was therefore left with a toilet that was not properly fitted for at least 6 months.
  4. A repairs appointment was scheduled after the resident raised his complaint. The landlord should ensure it takes proactive steps to resolve such repairs rather than taking action after complaints have been made.
  5. In its stage 2 response, the landlord stated that the floor was inspected and repairs were completed on 10 and 11 January 2023. It stated that 2 further visits were attempted to fit the toilet but no access could be gained to the property, and the appointment was rescheduled for 15 January 2024. The evidence suggests that reasonable efforts were made to contact the resident to gain access on these 2 occasions.
  6. No evidence has been provided to reflect the 15 January 2024 visit and it is unclear whether this went ahead. However, on 25 January 2024, the resident reported that the sink needed to be re-fitted, indicating that the bathroom repairs had not been fully resolved. The resident made contact with the Ombudsman on 31 May 2024 and said that he had been left without a hand basin in the bathroom and that the toilet had been installed, but he was unhappy with the installation. The evidence indicates that the resident chased the landlord regarding the bathroom repairs on 8 July 2024 and the landlord made attempts to contact the resident but was unable to get through. This therefore indicates that there were further significant delays in the repairs to the bathroom being completed.
  7. Following the landlord’s visit to the resident’s property on 28 August 2024, it wrote to the resident and said that the toilet had been fixed. However, it did not comment on whether the sink was in working order. The landlord confirmed that since this visit, a new bathroom has been installed in the resident’s property and so no further repairs are required.

Kitchen radiator

  1. The resident stated that the kitchen radiator had not been in working order since 2017. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord referred to repairs appointments that took place in July 2022 and February 2023. The landlord said that the February 2023 repair had been abandoned by operatives however, no notes have been provided in relation to this appointment.
  2. The available evidence indicates that the landlord raised a further works order for the radiator repairs on 13 November 2023, which is the same date that the resident made his complaint. While it appears reasonable that the operatives could not complete the work during the February 2023 appointment, the landlord ought to have rescheduled the repair sooner. It is unreasonable that approximately 8 months had elapsed before the repair was raised again, and the delay indicates a failing by the landlord.
  3. The evidence reflects that operatives could not gain access to the property for the radiator repairs to be completed on 30 November 2023 or 4 December 2023. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord said that this had been rescheduled for 18 January 2024 however, it is unclear whether this was attended and, if so, whether access could be gained.
  4. On 25 January 2024 the resident reported that the radiator issue was ongoing. The resident also contacted the Ombudsman in April and May 2024 to report that the radiator was still out of use. In its 28 August 2024 letter to the resident, the landlord confirmed that the radiator repairs were outstanding and stated that an engineer would attend to connect it on 29 August 2024.
  5. The evidence therefore indicates that the resident was without a working radiator in the kitchen for a significant period of time. It is evident that the landlord did attempt to schedule appointments, which does go some way to mitigate the delay. However, there is a lack of evidence to indicate it acted promptly to reschedule the February 2023 appointment or that it took any action following the stage 2 complaint response, which was a failing.

 

Roof leak

  1. The repairs records indicate that a works order was raised on 31 December 2022 to make the ceiling safe following a roof leak to an outbuilding. It is unclear what action was taken in response to this report. However, a further works order was raised on 15 January 2023 which stated that the outhouse roof was leaking. The landlord noted that access could not be gained to the property on both 31 January 2023 for a surveyor to inspect various repairs in the property, and on 15 March 2023 for an appointment specifically to repair the roof.
  2. The repairs records show that another works order for the leak was raised on 16 June 2023. No evidence has been provided to indicate that any repairs appointments took place following this, which indicates a failing. The resident’s annual tenancy check-in document dated 14 August 2023 notes that the outhouse roof was leaking. In correspondence with the Ombudsman, the landlord stated that the roof was repaired on 18 August 2023. However, no repairs records have been provided to reflect what repairs took place on this date. The landlord should ensure that it maintains clear and accurate repairs records so that an audit trail of events can be provided.
  3. In its stage 1 response the landlord stated that paint had been applied to the roof in August 2023. However, it is unclear whether any additional repairs were undertaken to make the roof watertight.
  4. The repairs records show that a works order was raised on 1 December 2023 however, the contractor could not gain access to the property. At stage 2, the landlord said that an appointment was scheduled for 17 January 2024. Again, it is unclear whether access was gained on this occasion.
  5. The landlord informed the Ombudsman that the resident reported he had lost the key to the outbuilding and could not access it, but he was concerned that the roof was still leaking. It is unclear when the resident made this report. Within the landlord’s letter to the resident on 28 August 2024, it stated that it would replace the padlock and undertake an inspection that day for signs of ongoing leaks to the roof once access had been gained to the outhouse. The landlord advised the Ombudsman on 30 August 2024 that following the inspection, there were no signs of water ingress in the outbuilding.
  6. The landlord acted appropriately by conducting the August 2024 inspection however, the resident informed the Ombudsman in October 2024 that the roof was still leaking. It is therefore possible that the leak has reoccurred since the landlord’s inspection. A recommendation has been made below for the landlord to arrange a further visit to inspect the outbuilding roof.

Window and door repairs

  1. The repairs records show that a works order was raised on 16 June 2023 to secure a rear window and change locks to both doors following a burglary. The notes indicate that no access to the property could be gained to carry out these repairs on 21 July 2023. There is no evidence that the landlord attempted to re-schedule this appointment which indicates a failing.
  2. A further works order was raised on 29 November 2023, after the resident had made his complaint. The resident reported that he had to tape the front and back doors up because they were letting in water and draughts and a back window was hanging off. In its stage 1 response, the landlord said that the doors and window would be inspected on 5 December 2023. However, the repairs records indicate that no access could be gained to the property on this date.
  3. In its stage 2 response, the landlord said that a further appointment for the doors and window repairs was scheduled for 16 January 2024. It is unclear whether this appointment went ahead. However, in an email to the landlord dated 25 January 2024 the resident said that repairs to the doors and windows remained outstanding. The resident contacted the landlord on a further 2 occasions in July 2024 and said that his front door had been screwed shut and he was waiting for this to be repaired. No evidence has been provided to indicate that action was taken in response to this, which indicates a further failing.
  4. In its 28 August 2024 letter to the resident, the landlord said that an engineer was attending that day to repair the bedroom window and inspect the lounge door, which was screwed shut. It said that a replacement front door had been ordered and would be installed within 90 working days.
  5. The resident informed the Ombudsman in October 2024 that there was an issue with the door that had been installed and that the door was still letting in draughts. As such, while it appears that works were undertaken, further repairs may be required.

Conclusion

  1. Overall, the evidence indicates that while the landlord acted appropriately by scheduling various repairs appointments, access could not be gained on several occasions which meant that the repairs could not go ahead. While this was not the fault of the landlord, it would have been reasonable for it to communicate with the resident about any adjustments that could be made when scheduling appointments that would better suit the resident.
  2. The evidence indicates that the landlord often failed to reschedule the no access appointments which resulted in significant delays in the repairs being completed, many of which were not completed until several months after the stage 2 complaint response. This indicates a failing by the landlord to ensure that the repairs were completed in line with the timeframes stipulated in its repairs policy.
  3. Where there are failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether suitable remedies have been offered in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
  4. The resident experienced distress and inconvenience due to the landlord’s handling of the repairs. Disruption was likely to have been caused due to the length of time the resident was left without a properly installed toilet, as well as the distress caused by the absence of a kitchen radiator and faulty windows and doors. The resident has incurred time and trouble contacting the landlord regarding the outstanding repairs.
  5. The landlord made efforts to put things right by offering the resident £3,000 compensation. This amount is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance. However, this amount was offered after the landlord’s final complaint response. While it is positive that the landlord reconsidered its position and made an offer of redress, it is not clear why the landlord did not make an offer of compensation when considering the complaint within its own complaint procedure, rather than some 8 months after its stage 2 reply.
  6. While the amount itself provides a suitable remedy, the Ombudsman does not consider the landlord’s offer as reasonable redress because the offer was made after the Ombudsman accepted the resident’s complaint for investigation. This is because our investigation is focused on the landlord’s handling of the complaint through its complaints process and whether it did enough to resolve the complaint through this. If the landlord failed to fully resolve the complaint through its complaints process, the Ombudsman will make a finding of service failure or maladministration depending upon the extent of the landlord’s failings and how these affected the resident.
  7. The Ombudsman has therefore found that there was service failure regarding how the landlord handled the associated complaint. However, we have not ordered additional compensation as the £3,000 already offered by the landlord is proportionate to put things right.
  8. A further order has been made for the landlord to conduct an inspection of the front door and identify and complete any required repairs. A recommendation has also been made for the landlord to consider whether additional compensation should be paid if further repairs are identified to acknowledge any ongoing distress and inconvenience caused.
  9. Finally, in its communications with us the landlord has acknowledged failings in dealing with repairs and in fully understanding the resident’s individual needs and considering these in how it delivered repairs to his home. It has explained that it has put in place several measures to ensure that repairs to the resident’s property are completed promptly and also measures to ensure a better and stronger relationship in the future. These include:
    1. a dedicated point of contact,
    2. scheduling more frequent tenancy check-ins
    3. reviewing the resident’s vulnerability needs and updating its systems
    4. setting and agreeing expectations around allowing access
  10. The landlord has also recognised that it had an opportunity to put in place interventions through the complaint process but did not take this. It has highlighted changes to its complaint handling procedures, alongside training for all complaint handling staff, to ensure that a consistent approach is taken to resolving all complaints. It has also commenced a project to develop its Vulnerability Policy and strategy.
  11. In light of the above (and while this learning should have been identified during the complaint process) we are satisfied that the landlord has taken appropriate learning from the failings in this case, and action to prevent similar failings occurring in the future.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure regarding the landlord’s handling of various repairs in the resident’s property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure regarding the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks, the landlord must conduct a further inspection of the front door to identify whether any further repairs are required and complete these within a reasonable timeframe. The landlord must inform the Ombudsman of the outcome of this inspection and of any repairs identified.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should carry out an inspection of the roof leak as well as the new repairs issues that have been reported by the resident, including that contractors broke a bed and that a radiator has been removed. The landlord should arrange for any required repairs to take place within a reasonable timeframe.
  2. The landlord should consider whether further compensation should be paid in recognition of the impact of any outstanding repairs.