London Borough of Hackney (202223559)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202223559

London Borough of Hackney

20 November 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:
   1. Repairs to the communal lift.
   2. The resident’s associated complaint.

Background

2. The resident is a leaseholder. The local council is the freeholder. The resident lives in a 2-bedroom flat on the 4th floor of a 4 storey building. The building contains 1 communal lift. 
3. The resident lives in the property with his partner and a young child.
4. On 26 February 2023 the resident told the landlord the communal lift was not working.
5. On 14 March 2023 the resident made a complaint to the landlord. He said the lift had been broken with no repairs for over 2 weeks. The lift had also broken down for 8 weeks between December 2022 and January 2023, and he felt the landlord was carrying out temporary fixes rather than looking at a permanent resolution.
6. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 22 March 2023. In its response it said its lift contractor identified a second fault which was causing the delay to the lift returning to service. It apologised for the inconvenience and gave details for the resident to contact the housing officer.
7. In its stage 2 complaint response dated 17 May 2023, the landlord acknowledged and apologised that it had failed to initiate its lift breakdown protocol. It said its senior managers were aware and it would ensure it did not happen again. It could not provide a timeframe for when the lift would be operational again, however, it said it could take months due to the availability of parts. It would send all residents a text message and/or a letter to inform them about the delay.
8. On 5 June 2023 the lift was repaired and was back in working order.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

9. This Service is aware the resident has made 2 complaints to the landlord about the lift repairs. This investigation has focussed on the complaint issues the resident raised in his complaint to the landlord on 14 March 2023. This investigation will consider the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of these issues from February 2023 to the end of its formal complaint’s procedure in May 2023. The resident has another complaint open with the Ombudsman under reference 202343204 that will be investigated separately.
10. During the resident’s complaint, he raised issues about the impact of the delays to the lift repair on his neighbours. As part of this investigation, this Service will only be able to consider matters which directly affected the resident and his occupation of the property.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the communal lift.

11. The landlord’s leaseholder rules and regulations guidance states that it is responsible for all communal repairs including lifts.
12. The landlord’s lift breakdown protocol states it would take the following action after receiving a report that the lift was not working:
    1. Place a notice on the lift at the earliest opportunity stating the lift is out of action and include a possible return service date.
    2. The housing officer must:
       1. inform all residents immediately of the breakdown, likely timescales for the repair, and a description of where the landlord is within the repair process.
       2. contact vulnerable residents in the block by visiting or calling.
    3. If the repair is likely to take substantially longer than a working day to repair, the landlord should keep residents informed of the timescales. It suggests the housing officer may need to do this several times depending on the estimated time for the repair to be completed.
    4. The lift contractor will keep the landlord informed on a regular basis of progress with the repair.
13. The resident reported the lift was not working on 23 February 2023. The landlord repaired the lift, and it was back in service on 5 June 2023. This left the resident and his household without access to a lift for over 3 months. The resident lived on the 4th floor, and at the time of this complaint he had a young child who he had to carry up and down the stairs. This caused him and his household significant distress and inconvenience.
14. Although this investigation has not considered the landlord’s handling of the lift repairs prior to February 2023, the landlords records show that the lift had not been in service between October 2022 and December 2022, 2 months prior to the resident’s reports. The landlord was aware that its residents had been impacted by the lift breaking down multiple times, however, it failed to show any empathy for the resident’s situation. This was not customer focused.
15. There was no evidence the landlord communicated with the resident about the lift until 24 April 2023, this was 2 months after the resident reported it was not working. The landlord acknowledged that it failed to follow its lift breakdown protocol in its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord’s records state this was due to staff absences, however, a landlord is expected to ensure its residents are not impacted by staff turnover. Members of staff should be provided with adequate training to ensure they adhere to policies, procedures and protocols. This was a significant failure which left the resident in a position where he had to chase updates and was left not knowing when the repair would be resolved or what support was available to him and his household.
16. It was reasonable for the landlord to use a specialist lift contractor to carry out the repairs. The landlord’s records state that due to the age of the lift and reoccurring repair issues, it asked its contractor to overhaul the lift. Although this caused delays, this showed the landlord wanted to resolve the issue and prevent further repairs occurring. The landlord’s records state that it received daily lift shutdown reports, and it chased the contractor for an update on 28 March 2023. However, the contractor could not provide a timescale as it was waiting for its specialist to provide a quote for the necessary works.
17. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord promised to contact the resident once the extent of the delay was known. The landlord did not provide any evidence to show that it updated the resident, provided estimated timescales for the repair, state whether a temporary repair would be carried out, or that it told the resident that the lift was in working order again. This was in breach of its lift breakdown protocol. The landlord showed no learning from the resident’s complaint and failed to put things right.
18. The Ombudsman expects landlords to maintain a robust record of contacts and repairs. This is because clear, accurate, and easily accessible records provide an audit trail and enhance landlords’ ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise. The landlord’s records did not give details of the outcome of the repair appointments or its communication with its contractors. Its repair records did not clearly log the issues with the lift, or when these were resolved and the lift was in working order again. These omissions indicated poor knowledge and information management by the landlord.
19. In summary there was a delay in the landlord carrying out the lift repairs, however, this delay was due to the extent of the works required and the availability of the specialist contractor. The landlord failed to follow its lift breakdown protocol, which left the resident in a position where he received no updates or support for over 3 months. There was evidence of poor communication and record keeping throughout the complaint. Although the landlord recognised its failings in its stage 2 complaint response, it did not offer any redress in line with its compensation guidance. It also showed no learning as it failed to adhere to the promises it made in its stage 2 response.
20. Based on the above, the Ombudsman finds maladministration for the landlord’s handling of repairs to the communal lift.

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

21. The landlord operates a two-stage complaints process which sets out that it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
22. On 14 March 2023 the resident made a complaint to the landlord. The landlord’s records show it attempted to contact the resident the same day. It acknowledged the complaint in writing and provided the resident with a timescale on when he should expect a response.
23. The resident contacted the landlord to state he had tried to contact it to discuss the complaint but could not get through to the complaints team. There was no evidence the landlord responded to the resident. This was not customer focused.
24. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 22 March 2023. This was within its 10-working day target timescale. In its response the landlord gave the wrong date the resident reported the lift, and it failed to state what action it was taking to resolve the repairs and expected timescales. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to show it had fully investigated the complaint issues and therefore resolve the complaint at the earliest opportunity.
25. The resident asked to escalate his complaint on 22 March 2023. There was no evidence the landlord acknowledged the escalation or contacted the resident to discuss his complaint before it issued its response.
26. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 17 May 2023, which was outside its 20-working day timescale. The landlord failed to contact the resident about the delay and when he should expect a response. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to communicate effectively with the resident and manage his expectations.
27. In summary, landlords must have an effective complaints process to provide a good service to their residents. An effective complaint process means landlords can fix problems quickly, learn from their mistakes and build good relationships with residents. In this case the landlord failed to fully understand and investigate the complaint at stage 1 and there was a delay in it issuing its stage 2 response. There was evidence of poor communication. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for the delay, however, it failed to offer the resident redress in line with its complaints compensation guidance.
28. Based on the above, the Ombudsman finds service failure for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Determination

29. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the communal lift.
30. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

31. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report. A senior manager must make the apology.
    2. Pay the resident a total of £350 compensation. This is broken down as:
       1. £250 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused to the resident by its handling of the lift repairs.
       2. £100 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused to the resident by its handling of his associated complaint.
    3. Write to the resident about its lift renewal programme, and whether the lift in his building will be surveyed to identify if it needs to be renewed. The landlord should provide the resident with an estimated timescale of a survey and communicate how it will keep the resident updated about the lift.
    4. Ensure its staff are fully trained in the use of the lift breakdown protocol and measures, to make sure it is activated when breakdowns are reported. 

Recommendations

32. The landlord should review its record keeping practices to ensure that all staff are accurately recording resident’s reports of communal repairs, its communication with residents and contractors, and repair logs. If it has not done so already, consider implementing a knowledge and information management strategy, in line with the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management.