London Borough of Lewisham (202340776)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202340776
Lewisham Council
12 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
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of reports of a leak and associated repairs.
- The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.
Background
- The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local authority. She occupies a 2-bedroom maisonette with her young children and moved into the property in February 2008.
- On 12 May 2023 the landlord logged a work order for a leak in the resident’s bathroom. The landlord considered scaffolding was needed and initially thought there was an issue with the loft or gutters. A further work order was raised on 31 July 2023 to make safe the light switch in the bathroom. In early August 2023 the gutters were replaced. On 13 September 2023 the landlord raised another work order to remedy the leak which it then believed originated in the roof.
- On 14 November 2023 the resident made a formal complaint. She said when it rained there was water ingress in her bathroom. She said that, despite the landlord having sent its contractor to inspect and also having installed a new bathroom, the leak persisted. She said the hallway carpets were wet and there was no light in her bathroom for months, which she felt was dangerous. She added she was 24 weeks pregnant with young children in the household and the situation was affecting their health.
- The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 5 December 2023. It apologised that the resident was affected by an intermittent roof leak and noted its roofing contractor failed to complete the works within its service level agreement. It would now raise the works with another contractor and it would contact her. It apologised for the inconvenience, lack of communication, and stress caused, and offered £70 compensation in recognition.
- The resident contacted the landlord on 7 February 2024 explaining she had not heard back from it since its stage 1 response, and the leak persisted. She chased again on 18 February 2024, explaining the matter was not resolved. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 21 March 2024. She said the roof and bathroom ceiling needed repairing. She added the bathroom had damp and mould, and the lighting needed to be reinstated. The resident also wanted further compensation and a new carpet for her hallway.
- The landlord issued its stage 2 final response on 10 June 2024. It upheld the complaint and apologised for the extensive time the resident experienced the leak. It explained the delay was a result of the issues it experienced with its contractor but also admitted the repair had not been handled appropriately by it. It said it had raised an urgent work order with another contractor and expected them to attend next week. It said that, in the event of a leak, the landlord disconnects any electrical appliances for residents’ safety but recognised the inconvenience the lack of lighting caused. It said once the leak had been rectified, a job would be raised to reinstate the electricity in the bathroom. It also apologised there was damp and mould as a result of the leak and offered a temporary mould wash. Additionally, the landlord said it would consider reimbursement for her carpet and offered a goodwill gesture of £200.
- In January 2025, the resident advised this service that the leak remained outstanding. She said the formal complaint did not progress the repair and the hallway carpet was wet from rainwater and there was no light in the bathroom. As an outcome, the resident wanted the roof repaired, the damp and mould resolved, the light reinstated, and further compensation.
Assessment and findings
The scope of the Ombudsman’s investigation
- In the resident’s formal complaint she said that for “a few years now” she had made reports of a leak through her bathroom ceiling when it rained, suggesting this issue existed historically. While this may be the case, in accordance with paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme, we may not consider complaints that were not brought to the landlord’s attention as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, normally within 12 months of the matters arising. As this case concerns the formal complaint made by the resident on 14 November 2023, the investigation will focus on the landlord’s actions in response to the resident’s initial report of the leak in May 2023 up to the landlord’s final response in June 2024, and any commitments it made.
- The Ombudsman also notes the resident’s assertion that the landlord’s handling of the leak negatively impacted the household’s health. It is beyond the expertise of the service to determine a causal link between the landlord’s actions (or lack thereof) and the impact on health. Where there is a dispute over whether someone has been injured or a health condition has been made worse, the courts are better equipped to access and assess all the relevant evidence that can provide an expert opinion of the cause of any injury or deterioration of a condition. This would be a more appropriate and effective means of considering such an allegation and so, should the resident wish to pursue this matter, she should do so via this route. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience that the situation may have caused, and this investigation will consider whether the landlord acted in accordance with its policies and legal obligations and whether it acted fairly in the circumstances.
The landlord’s handling of reports of a leak and associated repairs
- Under the tenancy agreement, the landlord has an obligation to keep in good repair the structure and exterior of the building. The landlord’s website sets out it is responsible for roof leaks. Its website also indicates that containable leaks are considered routine repairs.
- The landlord’s repairs policy confirms that it “would adopt a ‘right first-time’ approach, where we proactively manage repairs, and the resident does not have to chase works”. It added that if it needed “to carry out an inspection before ordering a repair, we will be clear that this is the reason for the visit, and will arrange any follow on works promptly. Where works cannot be completed in a single visit, we will proactively schedule appointments for follow up visits and keep the resident informed”. The policy sets out that urgent repairs, such as those that prevent damage to the property, or where there is a possible health, safety or security risk, should be carried out within 3 working days. Routine repairs should be carried out within 20 working days.
- The landlord’s damp, mould and leaks policy dated January 2024 outlines that it will treat all reports of leaks, damp, and mould seriously and will take a solution-focused, holistic approach whenever it can, which puts the resident, not just the property, at the centre of the resolution. It adds it will communicate clearly and keep residents informed of what action it will take, why it is taking it and when it will do this.
- Following the resident’s report of a leak, the landlord raised a work order on 12 May 2023 for a routine repair. The landlord’s contractor attended within 20 working days and a contractor’s note dated 7 June 2023 suggested that blocked guttering was causing the leak. There appeared to be a requirement for approval to erect scaffolding to remedy this, but despite the landlord’s contractor emailing several times for approval, the landlord did not seem to engage.
- The resident advised that the landlord had installed a new bathroom in summer 2023. However, from summer 2023 onwards, the resident advised the water ingress continued and was worse than before, noting on 31 July 2023 it came through the light switch. The landlord acted appropriately by making the bathroom light safe on 31 July 2023 the same day.
- The landlord raised another work order on 13 September 2023 to remedy the leak. It appears that the landlord was now satisfied the leak originated from the roof rather than the gutters or loft as an internal landlord note indicated that another contractor had replaced the guttering by 2 August 2023. Yet, the landlord did not properly trace the leak at the outset, only doing so some 4 months after the initial report. This delay likely caused distress and inconvenience to the household.
- The landlord’s contractor attended again in September 2023 to inspect the roof. However, scaffolding had still not been erected because approval had not been given despite the contractor’s attempts to obtain it. It appeared there was confusion on both the landlord’s and contractor’s parts, likely due to multiple contractors attending the same property. Further, this suggested inadequate record keeping and poor communication between the landlord and its contractors. This added to the delay, creating further distress. The adverse effect of the situation was exacerbated as the resident was pregnant at the time and occupied her home with young children and was concerned about the safety issue of potentially slipping while using the bathroom with no light.
- The scaffolding to the building was erected in October 2023 but appeared to be fully removed in early December 2023, with no works having taken place. This caused further distress to the resident who likely felt the landlord was not serious about resolving the issue. Even though she continued to raise concerns, the landlord did not progress the repair despite its commitment to engage with another contractor in its stage 1 response. The resident confirmed in February 2024 that the leak was not resolved, the carpet was soddened, and the household could not use the toilet without getting wet. She also stressed that she was now heavily pregnant and due to be induced.
- The landlord acted fairly in its stage 1 response of December 2023 by apologising for the inconvenience, lack of communication, and stress caused, and assuring the resident it would raise the works with another contractor. At this point, the resident was entitled to believe the landlord, now fully aware of the issue at hand and having established the root cause, would take appropriate action to resolve the roof leak and the hole in the bathroom ceiling. Indeed, it assured her that it had added the repairs to its aftercare list and would see the job through to completion.
- Despite the resident’s continued chasing and the landlord’s commitment to arrange works with another contractor, no meaningful action took place. The landlord said that any delays would be communicated by its scaffolding and roofing team. Yet, this was not the case, and the landlord failed to act in accordance with its policy. The landlord’s final response of June 2024 recognised that the repair remained outstanding and that the delay had been “extensive”. Considering the resident raised the leak as early as May 2023, this represented a timeframe of over 270 working days which is considerably outside the landlord’s policy aim for routine repairs. This delay would have caused distress and inconvenience for the resident, and it is unclear why the landlord did not now treat the matter with the necessary urgency.
- In line with its compensation policy, the landlord may offer compensation for ‘avoidable’ distress and inconvenience arising from the problem or service failure. The landlord will consider factors including the severity of the issues and the length of time the resident was affected. For high impact service failures where the resident has suffered inconvenience and/or distress because of a serious or repeat service failure, it suggests compensation awards from £251.
- While it was appropriate for the landlord to apologise for the delays, in this case the complaints process did not serve to move the leak repair forward, and therefore its apology and offer of £270 compensation did not adequately ‘put things right’. It did not go far enough considering the impact the landlord’s inaction had on the living conditions in the property and did not properly consider the time and effort spent by the resident in pursuing the matter, particularly considering the resident was heavily pregnant at the time and young children occupied the home.
- The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests compensation from £600 should be considered where there has been a failure that significantly affected the resident. The Ombudsman considers a further £530 should be awarded to the resident. This has taken into account the length of delay and impact on the family, whilst considering that the leak was intermittent and generally did not occur during summer and that the bathroom was without electricity since August 2023.
- The resident continued to report the leak but was not given clear dates and times of when suitable and lasting repairs would take place, contrary to the landlord’s policy. The resident has confirmed to this service that the repair remains outstanding almost 2 years later and the electricity has not been reinstated. She added that a landlord operative attended on 21 January 2025 to address the mould but said they were unable to do anything until the roof was fixed. As such, orders have been made below for remedy. Furthermore, it is unclear if the landlord has considered reimbursement for the carpet as it said it would do in its stage 2 response. Additionally, the resident said that the landlord’s contractor attended on 31 January 2025 but for a separate property’s job and that her details have been included in unrelated work orders on more than one occasion. In view of these points, recommendations have also been made.
The landlord’s complaint handling
- The landlord operates a two stage complaints policy. At stage 2, the landlord aims to provide a written response within 20 working days of the escalation request. Where the landlord is unable to respond fully within 20 working days, it will let residents know if more time is needed and why (usually a maximum of an additional 20 working days).
- Following the stage 1 response, the resident contacted the landlord on 7 February 2024 explaining that nothing had happened since its last contact and she had not heard back since. Having contacted the Ombudsman on 12 February 2024, the resident contacted the landlord again on 21 March 2024 asking to escalate her complaint. In this she clearly set out that the repair remained outstanding and explicitly asked to escalate the complaint to stage 2. Yet, the landlord did not respond to this request within a reasonable time. It was only when the Ombudsman contacted the landlord in June 2024 that the landlord provided its stage 2 final response, on 10 June 2024. Considering the landlord should have escalated the complaint in March 2024, there was a delay of almost 3 months in providing its final response. This was inappropriate and led to the resident contacting the Ombudsman for assistance which necessitated time and trouble on her part.
- The landlord did not effectively manage the resident’s expectations as to when she would receive its stage 2 response. Where there is a delay, landlords should endeavour to keep residents updated and inform them of the reasons for the delay and the extended timescale. However, this did not happen, nor did the landlord apologise for any of these complaint handling delays in its final response.
- Overall, the landlord failed to engage with the escalation request in a reasonable time, there were avoidable delays and inadequate communication with the resident. These failures would have likely undermined the resident’s trust in the landlord to satisfactorily resolve matters for her. As the landlord did not offer an apology nor compensation across its formal responses, an order has been made to reflect the delays and lack of communication during the complaints process.
Conclusions
- In this investigation, there were failures in the landlord’s handling of its repairs and complaint handling, similar to those identified in case 202124577. We have not, however, made any further orders for the landlord to improve this. This is because a wider order was made as part of case 202124577 with which the landlord has now complied. We expect the landlord to take forward the lessons and improvements it shared with this service following the wider order, and we will monitor its progress in doing so.
- Moreover, the Ombudsman is currently undertaking a special investigation into Lewisham Council. This is conducted under paragraph 49 of the Scheme and allows the Ombudsman to investigate beyond an individual complaint to establish whether there is evidence of systemic failings. The findings of this report will therefore contribute to the actions needed following the completion of the special investigation.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of a leak and associated repairs.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.
Orders and recommendation
Orders
- Within 28 calendar days of the date of this report, the landlord must:
- Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report.
- Ensure that a total of £900 has been paid to the resident, made up of:
- £70 offered in its stage 1 response, if it has not done so already.
- £200 gesture of goodwill offered in its stage 2 response, if it has not done so already.
- A further £530 for the failings identified in the landlord’s handling of reports of a leak and associated repairs.
- A £100 for the failings identified in the landlord’s complaint handling.
- Inspect the property and satisfy itself that it has carried out all the roof and bathroom ceiling repairs as outlined in its stage 2 response. The landlord must share the inspection report with the resident and Ombudsman including any works it identified and provide anticipated timescales to resolve these.
- Reinstate the electricity in the bathroom, if it is now safe to do so, ensuring the bathroom light works as intended, and provide an update on the status.
- Inspect the bathroom for damp and mould and provide an outcome of this inspection to both the resident and Ombudsman considering any remedial works, where appropriate.
- Assess the damage to the resident’s belongings caused by the leak, including the hallway carpet, and write to the resident explaining whether it is happy to reimburse her for any costs or, if not, its reason for declining to do so and how she can pursue a claim via an alterative means.
- The landlord shall contact the Ombudsman within 28 calendar days to confirm that it has complied with these orders.
Recommendation
- The landlord should check all resident’s jobs and ensure that her details are not incorrectly located on another profile to prevent contractors attending her property for matters that do not relate to her property.