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

Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV) (202318069)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202318069

Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTV)

30 June 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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of defective guttering causing rainwater to leak into the property.
    2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.

Background

  1. The resident has been a leaseholder of the property since 2013 and the property is a 2-bedroom flat on the ground floor of a block. The landlord has advised us that it is unaware of any disabilities, vulnerabilities or support requirements in relation to the resident’s household.
  2. The resident advised the landlord on 23 October 2022 that rainwater was overflowing into her garden from the guttering at the rear of the block when it rained. The landlord raised an order on 25 October 2022 to repair the guttering.
  3. The resident submitted a stage 1 complaint on 14 December 2022 and said that someone had attended on 7 December 2022 and had taken photos of the guttering. She said that water was entering her living room through the French doors when it rained due to issues with the guttering.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 13 January 2023 and confirmed that its contractor was scheduled to erect scaffolding at the property on 17 January 2023. It apologised for the delay in carrying out the repair and offered the resident £30 compensation for her time and trouble.
  5. The resident wrote to the landlord on 17 January 2023 and confirmed the scaffolding had been erected that day. She questioned why the landlord would not send her the costings and relevant worksheets for the work as she had requested. The landlord replied on 19 January 2023 and said it could not provide the worksheets as it used an external contractor to carry out the work and did not have access to the worksheets.
  6. The landlord’s contractor carried out repairs to the guttering on 20 January 2023 and removed the scaffolding on 21 February 2023. The resident contacted the landlord on 8 March 2023 and reported a problem with the guttering and the downpipe at the corner of the building. The resident’s email was logged as a stage 2 complaint and on 9 March 2023 the landlord raised an order to reconnect the downpipe to the guttering. The contractor attended on 29 March 2023 and carried out repairs. The landlord post-inspected the repair on 5 April 2023 and noted that the repair had been carried out to a good standard.
  7. The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 11 April 2023 and confirmed the following:
    1. The scaffolding had been erected on 17 January 2023 and the repair was carried out on 20 January 2023.
    2. Following this repair, there was a problem with another section of the guttering. This was repaired on 29 March 2023 and was post-inspected on 5 April 2023.
    3. The landlord did not uphold the complaint at stage 2 because it concluded that its stage 1 reply had been accurate and the further guttering work had been carried out in a timely manner.

Events after the landlord’s stage 2 reply

  1. The resident contacted the landlord on 24 April 2023 to say that the guttering at the rear of the building was leaking from every joint. The landlord therefore raised a job on the same day to repair the guttering. The contractor attended on 2 May 2023 and cleared a blockage to the rainwater pipe, which it said had been blocked with leaves. The landlord raised a follow-on order on 11 May 2023 as the contractor had recommended clearing the guttering around the whole block and jetting the downpipes. The work was completed on 21 July 2023. The notes state that the contractor attended with a ‘sky vac’ and cleared all of the guttering. It also carried out high-pressure jetting to the downpipes and associated gullies.
  2. The resident contacted us on 18 August 2023 to say she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response because:
    1. She had complained about the guttering since September 2022.
    2. During heavy rainfall, water was still cascading from the guttering onto her step outside the French doors and was entering the living room. She therefore had to put down towels to absorb the water.
    3. She believed the landlord needed to replace all of the guttering around the building, including the downpipes. She said the landlord should also clear the drains.
  3. The landlord wrote to us on 10 September 2024 to say it had reviewed its handling of the resident’s complaints and found that it had not met its service standards. It was therefore happy to offer a further £200 compensation to the resident to put things right.
  4. The resident advised us on 16 June 2025 that during heavy rainfall, there was still an issue with rainwater overflowing onto the step in her garden and entering the living room via the French doors.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. We have received information showing events that took place in relation to the property after the landlord sent its final complaint response on 11 April 2023. A key part of our role is to assess the landlord’s response to a complaint and therefore it is important that the landlord has had an opportunity to consider all the information we are investigating as part of its complaint response. In this case, it is considered fair and reasonable to only investigate matters up to the date of the final response. This means that matters such as the resident’s enquiry sent to us in August 2023 about the drainage below the downpipe has not been investigated. Information following the landlord’s final complaint response has, however, been included in this report for context.
  2. The resident advised us on 18 August 2023 that she had been complaining about the guttering since September 2022. We do not doubt the information from the resident. However, taking into account the availability and reliability of evidence, it is considered fair and reasonable for this assessment to focus on the landlord’s handling of the events from 23 October 2022 when the resident reported issues with the guttering.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of defective guttering causing rainwater to leak into the property

  1. Under the terms of the lease agreement, the landlord is responsible for keeping the common parts in a good state of repair and condition. This includes maintaining gutters, downpipes and drainage.
  2. The landlord’s guide to repair responsibilities states:
    1. That it uses the following repair priority categories:
      1. Emergency – the contractor will attend within 24 hours.
      2. Routine (appointment) – every effort will be made to complete the repair within 20 working days of the resident contacting the landlord. However, at times, a Repair Officer may need an initial appointment to assess the repair further.
      3. Non-routine – the contractor will be given a 90-day period to carry out the repair where the repair is complex or materials are needed.
    2. Roof repairs that require scaffolding or are above one storey may be categorised as ‘non-routine’ repairs priority due to considerations for the health and safety of contractors.
  3. The resident contacted the landlord on 23 October 2022 and reported that rainwater was overflowing from the guttering into her garden every time it rained. She said it was preventing her from coming out into the garden when it rained. The landlord raised an order on 25 October 2022 to carry out work to the guttering. The landlord’s records show that it assessed the job by attending on 7 December 2022 to take photos. It decided that scaffolding was needed for the job and this was erected on 17 January 2023. The gutters were then cleaned on 20 January 2023.
  4. The landlord acted appropriately by raising an order in a timely manner following the resident’s report on 23 October 2022 of issues with the guttering. The landlord inspected the guttering on 7 December 2022, which was reasonable to decide on the works that were needed. The landlord completed the work to the guttering on 20 January 2023, which was 87 calendar days after raising the order on 25 October 2022. The job involved erecting scaffolding and therefore was categorised as a non-routine (90-day) job. The landlord therefore carried out the work within the appropriate timescale.
  5. The resident wrote to the landlord on 27 January 2023 and said the scaffolding was still in place and no one had been to inspect the work carried out on 20 January 2023. The resident also said that a scaffolding pole had fallen and damaged one of the steps in her garden.
  6. We have not seen any evidence that the landlord post-inspected the work carried out to the guttering in January 2023. However, the landlord’s Responsive Repairs Policy states that it will decide which jobs to post-inspect based on the value of works. As there is no requirement in the landlord’s policy to post-inspect every completed repair, the landlord was entitled to decide whether, in its view, it needed to post-inspect the guttering work. It was therefore not unreasonable for the landlord to decide not to post-inspect the work.
  7. In terms of the scaffolding, the landlord replied to the resident on 30 January 2023 and said it would remove the scaffolding in the next 5-7 days. However, the landlord’s notes state that the scaffolding was removed on 21 February 2023. As the resident had expressed concerns about the presence of the scaffolding in her email of 27 January 2023, it was a shortcoming that it took a month to remove the scaffolding following the work on 20 January 2023.
  8. The resident contacted the landlord on 8 March 2023 and reported a problem with water leaking from the guttering at the corner of the building. The landlord raised an order on 9 March 2023 to repair the connection between the guttering and the downpipe, which it said had become detached. The target date for completing the job was 1 June 2023. However, the landlord completed the repair on 29 March 2023, which was 14 working days after raising the order on 9 March 2023. The landlord therefore raised an order and carried out the repair within a reasonable timescale as it was not an emergency repair.
  9. The resident wrote to the landlord on 27 March 2023 and said that the work previously carried out by the contractor on 20 January 2023 had caused another section of the guttering to be compromised and the leaks were worse. She said she was unable to access the garden from the French doors or the gate when it rained.
  10. Based on the evidence seen, we are unable to draw any conclusions on the standard of the work completed on 20 January 2023 and whether this caused the connection between the guttering and the downpipe to fail. Instead, we have focussed on how the landlord responded once it became aware of the problem. As stated, the evidence shows that the landlord raised an order in a timely manner and the repair was completed within a reasonable timescale.
  11. Following the completion of the repair, the landlord’s Surveyor post-inspected the work on 5 April 2023 and found it had been carried out to a good standard. As there had been previous problems with the guttering, it was reasonable that the landlord had arranged for the latest guttering repairs to be post-inspected. This allowed the landlord to check the quality of the repairs carried out. As the Surveyor had post-inspected the work, the landlord was entitled to rely on his expertise and findings.
  12. The information received by us shows that further orders were raised to carry out repairs to the guttering following the landlord’s stage 2 reply. However, as stated in the scoping paragraphs of this assessment, we have not investigated these subsequent reports of problems with the guttering.
  13. The resident advised the landlord on 27 and 30 January 2023 that one of the scaffolding poles had fallen and damaged her garden step. We have not seen any evidence that the landlord either offered to reimburse the resident for the reported damage or signposted her to submit an insurance claim. This was inappropriate because the landlord’s Compensation Policy states that if it causes loss or damage as part of any actions it has taken, it can reimburse the resident or refer the matter to its Insurance Team. We would expect similar arrangements for any reported damage caused by a contractor, namely the contractor would reimburse the resident or refer the matter to its insurer.
  14. The resident wrote to the landlord on 14 December 2022 and requested worksheets and other paperwork relating to guttering repairs. She also wrote to the landlord on 17 January 2023 and asked why she could not see the worksheets and costings relating to the works. The landlord replied on 19 January 2023 and said it could not supply the worksheets because it used external contractors and did not have access to the information.
  15. Under Section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, after obtaining a summary of service charge accounts, a leaseholder has the right to request and inspect further, more detailed information about the costs. This could include documents, invoices, receipts, and contracts. These documents should be made available to leaseholders for 2 months.
  16. In this case, the resident requested the contractor’s worksheets for the guttering work and her request was not linked to a summary of the service charge costs she had received. Therefore, the evidence indicates that the resident’s request for information was not covered by the requirements of Section 22 of the Landlord and Tenant Act. As such, we have not seen any information suggesting that the landlord was obliged to provide the contractor’s worksheets and costings. In our view, it was therefore reasonable for the landlord to explain that it could not provide the information requested by the resident.  
  17. Overall, we have found the landlord handled the resident’s reports of defective guttering reasonably between 23 October 2022 and 11 April 2023. It raised timely orders for its contractor to carry out works to the gutters and the work was carried out within the appropriate timescales. The landlord also arranged for its Surveyor to post-inspect the repair on 5 April 2023 to check the quality of the work. However, we have found there was a service failure as the landlord did not adequately address the resident’s report that her garden step had been damaged by a falling scaffolding pole. We have ordered the landlord to Take one of the following courses of action:
    1. Reimburse the resident for the damaged step, or
    2. Arrange for the step to be repaired, or
    3. Signpost the resident to the landlord/contractor’s insurer so she can submit a claim if she wishes to do so.
  18. We have also ordered the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £50 to put things right in relation to this service failure. The amount is within the range of financial redress suggested in our Remedies Guidance for service failures.
  19. Finally, although we have not investigated matters after the landlord’s final response letter on 11 April 2023, we are aware the resident continued to report issues with rainwater cascading onto her garden step and entering her living room. We have therefore recommended that the landlord investigate this matter and take steps to address the reported issue.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints

  1. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints process. It will acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days of receipt and will reply to stage one complaints within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. The landlord will acknowledge the stage 2 complaint within 5 working days and provide a full response to the complaint within 20 working days. The policy states that if the landlord cannot respond within these timescales, it will keep the resident informed and agree new response times.
  2. The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 14 December 2022 and the landlord acknowledged the complaint on 22 December 2022. The landlord had taken 6 working days to acknowledge the complaint, which was longer than its published 5-working day timescale and this was therefore a shortcoming on its part.
  3. The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 13 January 2023, which was 13 working days after it had acknowledged the complaint. It was inappropriate that the landlord had not responded within its published timescale of 10 working days. We have not seen any evidence that the landlord contacted the resident to advise her it needed more time to respond to the complaint.
  4. The resident wrote to the landlord on 17 January 2023 and said she had not been contacted to advise her that scaffolding was going up on that day. The landlord wrote to the resident on the same day to acknowledge receipt of her escalation letter. The landlord therefore acknowledged the stage 2 request within an appropriate timescale. However, its records show that it did not open the stage 2 complaint on its system until 8 March 2023.
  5. The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 11 April 2023, which was 59 working days after it acknowledged the complaint on 17 January 2023. The landlord had therefore taken significantly longer to respond to the stage 2 complaint than its published 20-working day timescale. As a result of the delay, the resident wrote to the landlord on 27 March 2023 to request an update regarding her stage 2 complaint. The landlord replied on 28 March 2023 and said it was still looking into the issues regarding the guttering and should be able to respond by 4 April 2023. However, it added that it may need to extend the timescale by a further 10 working days.
  6. The time taken for the landlord to reply to the stage 2 complaint was unreasonable. It was also unreasonable that the landlord had waited until the resident had requested an update on 27 March 2023 before it had advised her that it may need an extension of time.
  7. In summary, we have found that the landlord took longer than its published timescales to respond to the stage 1 and 2 complaints. The delay in replying to the stage 2 complaint was significantly longer than the 20-working day timescale. The landlord did not acknowledge these delays in its complaint responses and did not offer any compensation to put things right during the complaints process.
  8. The landlord wrote to us on 10 September 2024 and said it had reviewed the resident’s complaint and found that it had not formally escalated the stage 2 complaint on its system until 8 March 2023. It therefore wanted to offer the resident £200 compensation for complaints handling.
  9. It is positive that the landlord reconsidered its position and offered financial redress. However, it is unclear why it did not make this offer when considering the complaint within its own complaint procedure, rather than some 16 months after its stage 2 reply. This was a missed opportunity to acknowledge its complaints handling failings. It meant that the landlord failed to effectively put things right and missed the opportunity to learn lessons from the outcome at the time of its original investigation. As such, the landlord did not act in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles and we have therefore found maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaints handling.
  10. We have ordered the landlord to pay the £200 it offered on 10 September 2024 as we consider this to be a reasonable and proportionate offer to put things right.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of defective guttering causing rainwater to leak into the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the associated complaints.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered within 4 weeks of this report to:
    1. Write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident a total of £250 compensation, comprised of:
      1. £50 for its handling of the resident’s report of a damaged step.
      2. £200 for complaints handling if the landlord has not already paid this sum.
    3. Take one of the following courses of action:
      1. Reimburse the resident for the damaged step, or
      2. Arrange for the step to be repaired, or
      3. Signpost the resident to the landlord/contractor’s insurer so she can submit a claim if she wishes to do so.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should investigate and take appropriate action to address the resident’s report that rainwater continues to cascade onto her garden step and enters her living room.