London Borough of Newham (202308669)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202308669

London Borough of Newham

18 March 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 the resident’s reports of a roof leak and the associated repairs.
The Service has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident has been a leaseholder of the landlord since July 2021. The landlord is a local authority. The property is a second floor, 2 bedroom flat. The landlord is the freeholder of the building.
The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 30 May 2023. In this she said that she had reported a roof leak on 12 January 2023. While the landlord’s contractor had attended on 17 February 2023, it had taken no further action. It had told her that it needed to put up scaffold to access the roof. She had followed up about the repair on 4 May 2023. The landlord had not contacted her to tell her when it would carry out the repair.
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 1 June 2023. It upheld her complaint. It said that following contact with its repairs manager, it had passed the repair to its roofing contractor that day. It said that it would need to arrange access with a neighbour to allow it to erect the scaffolding in their garden. The landlord explained that it prioritised roof repairs based on the severity of any resulting leak. Further, it said that weather conditions could affect its ability to carry out roofing repairs. It apologised for the length of time taken and its lack of communication with her. It said that its contractors should contact her within a week. If this did not happen, she should contact it again.
The landlord’s records show that it tried to erect scaffolding on 3 June 2023, but the neighbour refused access to their garden.
The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint on 9 June 2023. She also raised her complaint with this service on the same day. She said that despite her complaint being upheld, she had received no contact about the roof repairs. The landlord had not put up the scaffold. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalated complaint on 13 June 2023. It said that it would respond by 3 July 2023. It wrote to her on 5 July 2023 to say that its reply to her complaint would be delayed as it was awaiting information. It said it would reply by 28 July 2023. The landlord sent 2 further letters to the resident informing her that its reply to her complaint would be delayed. It sent the first on 28 July 2023, which set a target of 11 August 2023. It then wrote on 18 August 2023 to say it would reply by 1 September 2023.
On 18 September 2023 the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It apologised that the resident had needed to escalate her complaint and for the delay in its investigations. It provided a summary of events, both for the repair and its complaint handling. It said that:
1. The resident had first made it aware of a roof leak on 12 January 2023.
2. On 17 February 2023 it inspected the roof leak to assess what repairs were needed. It gave this to its contractor to carry out the repair.
3. Its contractor tried to put up the required scaffolding on 13 June 2023. It was unable to do so as it needed access to a neighbouring property.
4. It put up the scaffolding on 15 June 2023.
5. The repairs to the roof began on 30 June 2023 and were completed on 3 July 2023.
6. It removed the scaffolding on 5 July 2023.
7. As there were delays in repairing the roof which had caused the resident inconvenience, it awarded her compensation of £150.
8. There had been correspondence with the resident about her complaint, but it had not replied within its published timescale. It said that this was unacceptable and offered her £100 compensation for the delay.
9. There had been a service failure in how it handled the repair issue she had raised. It offered a further £50 compensation for the inconvenience caused to get this rectified.
10. It apologised for “any distress and inconvenience caused as a result of the identified service failure”.
On 21 September 2023, the resident confirmed her acceptance of the landlord’s apology, and the compensation offered. She told the landlord that she was in contact with her insurers about the damage caused within her flat.

Events after the landlord’s complaints process

The resident contacted the landlord on 29 October 2023. She said that it had told her that it had completed the repairs to the roof. However, she had noticed that water was still leaking into her home affecting the same wall. She believed that the repairs done had been inadequate. She further contacted the Service and asked that we investigate her complaint.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 2 November 2023 to say that it had referred the matter to its roofing manager. The resident asked for an update on 12 November 2023. The landlord replied on 14 November 2023. It said that it had reviewed its records. It asked her to raise a new repair through its contact centre. It said that it had received no repair reports since its contractor had attended in June 2023.
The resident contacted the Service on 15 April 2024 to say that the landlord had failed to properly repair the roof leak. She said that water damage to her living room had continued despite the landlord’s assurances. The landlord told us that it carried out works to clear the guttering and overhaul the tanks in the loft space on 29 May 2024.

Assessment and findings

Landlord obligations, policy, and procedure

The resident’s lease sets out the rights and responsibilities of both the resident and the landlord. Section 7 of the lease shows the obligations of the landlord for repairs. It says that the landlord will maintain … “the roofs, foundations, external and internal walls …, and timbers …, window frames, chimney stacks, gutters and rainwater and soil pipes …”.
The landlord’s repairs policy confirms its responsibility for the structure, exterior and shared areas of a building. It says that it will follow its regulatory and contractual requirements. It aims, where possible, to complete repairs in a single visit. The policy provides target time for completion of repairs that fall within 4 categories:
1. Emergency – within 24 hours.
2. Urgent – 3 to 7 working days.
3. Routine – 20 working days.
4. Planned – 42 working days.
The landlord has a 2 stage complaints policy which is aligned to the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). It says that it will respond to a complaint at stage 1 of its process within 10 working days. At stage 2 it will respond within 20 working days. At each stage it says that it may extend its response time by a further 20 working days to allow for further investigation. Any extension should be explained to the resident.
It says that where things have gone wrong, it will explain what it will do to put them right. This is to include a timescale for the actions it is to carry out. It further recognises the wider opportunity within complaints to prevent similar mistakes happening.

Reports of a roof leak and the associated repairs

The landlord has provided an extract of its repair records. This lists the repairs that the resident raised about water leaking into her home. A repair request was first raised on 12 January 2023. This recorded that water was leaking into the living room of the resident’s home when it rained. It noted that this was close to the chimney. The landlord’s records reflect the timeline for the repair. It took a month for the landlord to arrange an inspection of the leak. This found that it needed scaffolding to access the roof. It further noted that the scaffolding would need to be placed in a neighbour’s rear garden. It would need access for this. There is no evidence that the landlord contacted the neighbour about the scaffolding following this inspection. It only acted when the resident raised her formal complaint. This led to a significant delay in any repairs being carried out and was a failure by the landlord.
The landlord’s records are unclear about when it appointed its roofing contractor. The notes against its repair records say that it referred the repairs to its contractor on 5 June 2023. However, internal communication shows that this was earlier, on 1 June 2023. It noted that the neighbour refused it access on 3 June 2023 to put up the scaffolding. The landlord’s repair records show that this was later, on 13 June 2023. Further, it noted that the neighbour asked for written confirmation that the contractor was acting on behalf of the landlord. The repair record shows that it successfully installed the scaffolding on 22 June 2023. This is contrary to the date given by the landlord in its stage 2 complaint response. This lack of clarity provides an unclear timeline for the repair and the steps taken by the landlord. It reflects a failure in the landlord’s record keeping.
There was a failure by the landlord to communicate with both the resident and her neighbour about the repair. This was clearly a source of frustration for the resident that led to her formal complaint. Separately, a delay in erecting the scaffolding was caused by its poor communication. It is important that a landlord has a clear process in place to ensuring that it has all the proper permissions in place where scaffolding is needed. Whether this is on a public highway or in a private garden. It found that it needed scaffolding in February 2023 and should have spoken with the neighbour at that time. This would have ensured a smoother process for arranging to install the scaffolding and avoided the delays that happened.
Its repair records show that it completed works to the roof, repointing and re–mastic around the chimney on 3 July 2023. This was almost 6 months after the resident raised the issue with the landlord. There is no evidence that the landlord followed up from the resident’s first report and its own inspection to get a contractor to attend. It only did this in response to the resident’s complaint. It further did not make the necessary arrangement to get the scaffolding erected. Over this 6 month period there is no evidence that the landlord communicated with the resident, other than through the complaint process. This was a significant failure by the landlord that amounts to maladministration.
Having initially accepted that the roof repairs were complete, the resident contacted the landlord on 29 October 2023. She said that there was a leak into her home affecting the same place in the living room and that she was concerned that the repairs had been inadequate. While it referred this to its repairs manager, there appears to have been no direct follow up with the resident other than to tell her to raise this as a new repair. The landlord’s repair records capture that it raised a works order on 7 December 2023. In response to this it has recorded that it renewed the lead flashing around the chimney. It completed this on 26 January 2024. It is not clear if this was to the same area of the roof as that repaired in July 2023.
It is accepted that roof repairs can at times be complex, often requiring a process of elimination to find the main cause of a leak. It is also not possible to determine that the leak was always from the same source. The resident raised a further report of water leaks into her flat when it rained on 23 February 2024. The landlord inspected on 25 March 2024. It recorded that it could not trace a leak at that time. It did however arrange to carry out works. These were to the water tanks in the loft space and to clear the external guttering. The landlord took over a month to attend to both the second and third reports of a leak into the property. As a result, the resident experienced an intermittent leak into her property for a period of sixteen months, from 12 January 2023 to 29 May 2024, when the landlord completed works to the guttering and tanks. This has clearly caused the resident significant inconvenience.
The Ombudsman has considered the landlord’s offer of £200 compensation, made in its stage 2 response, for the delay in the roof repair and the inconvenience caused to the resident. Given the extended time over which the resident was raising her repair concerns and the landlord’s failure to respond promptly, this offer was not proportionate. An order has been made, in line with our guidance on remedies for an additional amount of compensation to be paid to the resident in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to her. It is further ordered that the landlord should follow up with the resident to confirm that it has now completed the repairs to her satisfaction and that no further leaks have occurred.

Complaint handling

The landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s complaint at stage 1, completing its reply within its published target time. This upheld the resident’s complaint and set out the actions it would take to deal with the repair to her home. It did not however provide for follow up with the resident. It placed the responsibility onto the resident to contact it, should she not hear from its contractors. It would have been more appropriate for the landlord to have arranged to check in with her. The Code says that “outstanding actions must be tracked and actioned promptly with appropriate updates provided to the resident”. Had the landlord followed up with the resident it may have avoided an escalation of her complaint. This was a missed opportunity for it to put things right at an early stage.
Having escalated her complaint, the resident waited 14 weeks for the landlord’s reply. It is acknowledged that the landlord wrote to the resident to tell her that its response would be delayed. However, there were several extensions. The landlord’s notification of an extension to its response time were often delayed. It sent these after the deadline for its reply had passed. Further, there is no evidence that it agreed the extension in its response time with the resident. There was a lack of positive communication with the resident about the progress of her repair through this time. The Ombudsman finds that there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.
The Ombudsman has considered the landlord’s offer, made in its stage 2 response of £100 compensation in respect of the delay in its response. Given the significant delay in its response and its lack of communication this offer was not proportionate. Further it did not recognise the time and trouble caused to the resident in pursuing her complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of a roof leak and the associated repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must:
1. Apologise to the resident for the identified failings. This should be in line with our guidance on remedies.
2. Pay the resident a total of £400 compensation. This is calculated as follows:
  1. £250 for the inconvenience caused by the intermittent leak into her home.
  2. £150 for the delay in the landlord’s response at stage 2 and the time and trouble caused to the resident in pursuing her complaint.
3. This is in addition to the compensation of £300 offered by the landlord.
The landlord must contact the resident and arrange a further inspection. It should ensure that it has completed the repairs to the resident’s satisfaction. If its inspection finds that further works are needed, the landlord should provide a time specific action plan for carrying these out. A copy of this should be provided to both the resident and this service as evidence of its compliance with this order.