Nottingham City Homes Limited (202313235)

A blue and grey text

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202313235

Nottingham City Homes Limited

18 June 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
1. Reports of outstanding repairs at the property.
2. Reports of damp and mould in the property.
3. Reports of issues with the utility meters.
4. Complaints.

Background

The resident signed an introductory secure tenancy agreement for a 1-bed bungalow that is owned and managed by a local authority landlord in February 2023. The resident did not take up occupation at the property during the course of the complaint. The landlord has stated that it would amend the tenancy start date in its stage 2 complaint response.
The landlord records that the resident is disabled.
In an email the resident sent to the landlord on 4 April 2023 she said that her physical and mental health had been affected by the outstanding repair matters. In an email she sent to her councillor on 17 August 2023 she said that damp in the property caused her to cough and resulted in her getting an asthma pump because she had started to wheeze. This Service is unable to look into and make a decision about the cause of, or liability for, any impact on health and wellbeing. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

Relevant policies and procedures

Under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act (1985), the landlord is obliged to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling-house. It also says it is obliged to keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling-house for the supply of water, gas, and electricity and for sanitations (including basins, sinks, baths, and sanitary conveniences, but not other fixtures, fittings, and appliances) for making use of the supply of water, gas, and electricity. It is also obliged to complete repairs within a reasonable timeframe. The tenancy agreement also says the landlord will keep the structure, installations, fixtures, and fittings of the property in good repair.
The landlord’s new home standard says a new home will be safe, secure, clean, in good condition and free from damage. All windows that are designed to open will do so easily and all glazing will be intact. All internal and external doors will be in good working order. All floors will be in a clean and safe condition. All bathroom and toilet fittings will be in full working order and a new toilet seat will be fitted. The tiled surrounds to the bath and hand-basin will be clean and the sealant will be in good condition. An Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) for the home will be provided. It aims to carry out all necessary work to a home before a resident moves in, although it may need to carry out some repairs afterwards.
The landlord’s damp policy says it will endeavour to identify possible defects at the earliest possible opportunity, and take the necessary action to rectify them, to ensure that they do not develop into a more serious issue. Its repairs and maintenance service standards say that mould caused by condensation is usually black and typically grows in bathrooms, kitchens, and bedrooms. If it approves any remedial works, these will be carried out within 3 months of receiving a report.
The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints policy which says complaints should be acknowledged within an undefined timescale and stage 1 complaints responded to within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints should be responded to within 20 working days.
The landlord’s discretionary compensation policy says it will take into account the impact of the service failure and whether this is high, medium, or low when calculating a compensation award. It will also take into account how it handled the situation and whether the customer had to spend excessive time, effort, or inconvenience in pursuing an outcome.
Paragraph 4.1 of the Housing Ombudsman complaint handling code (the ‘Code’) says a complaint should be acknowledged and logged within 5 days of receipt. Paragraph 5.6 says landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law, and good practice where appropriate. Paragraphs 5.8 and 5.16 of the Code say that landlords must confirm the decision on the complaint and any reasons for the decisions made. Paragraph 5.14 of the Code says if an extension beyond 10 working days is required to enable the landlord to respond to the complaint fully, this should be agreed by both parties.

Summary of events

The landlord prepared a specification of repair works required to the void property on 4 January 2023.
The landlord sent an email to the utility provider on 26 January 2023 which said there was a debt on the utility meter of £106.52 and that it could not clear the debt without a customer number. The utility provider confirmed that the meter was not receiving messages and that it would plan for an engineer to visit the next day.
The landlord reported a debt on the utility meter to the service provider again on 6 February 2023. The utility company agreed to visit the property on 9 February 2023 during which it replaced a meter and reported that the meters were debt free and did not require a key or a card for their use.
The landlord completed a final clean in the property on 20 February 2023 and noted that there was wear and tear in the kitchen and bathroom, floor stains would not come clean, scorch marks were present on the units and there were stains in the sink.
The resident attached a series of photos to an email she sent to the landlord on 28 February 2023. She reported outstanding repairs to the toilet seat, a missing sprinkler cap, mould on the kitchen wall and bathroom ceiling, concerns about the cleanliness of the property, smashed glass in the front door and kitchen unit repairs. The resident said that she had a disability, hoped that the landlord would empathise and grant what was due and that it was a stressful experience.
The landlord took gas and electric meter readings at the property on 28 February 2023.
The landlord and resident held an email conversation about repairs in the property on 3 March 2023 during which the resident said that the paint and plaster had not been completed properly. The landlord said that beading to the windows was on order, and that it was trying to source a sprinkler head. It also said that the resident would be given decoration vouchers.
The landlord and resident held an online conversation about window beading, gas servicing and the supply of property keys on 6 March 2023. The landlord advised that it would chase the window and gas recommission repairs which it said should have been completed the same day.
The landlord and resident held an online conversation about the solar panels on 8 March 2023 as the utility company had told the resident that the panels had not been connected and could only be registered in the owner’s name. She reported that the service provider had explained that it makes payments to the owner of the solar panels when they are connected and that some landlords take this payment off the rent. The landlord confirmed that it owned the panels and had connected them but that it would send an electrician to confirm that they were connected. The resident and landlord also discussed a debt on the utility meters and the landlord said she would need to discuss the use of the meters with the utility company.
The landlord recommissioned the boiler in the property on 9 March 2023.
The resident emailed the landlord on 20 March 2023 to say that the boiler pressure kept going and the boiler kept turning off. The landlord attended the next day to repair the boiler, a radiator leak and complete a gas safety inspection. The inspection report confirmed that the boiler and property ventilation met safety standards.
The landlord and resident held an online conversation about outstanding repairs, the tenancy start date, a guttering blockage, solar panels, utility meters and bins on 22 March 2023. The landlord said that a multi trader would arrange an appointment to visit and assess the property in the approaching week.
The landlord sent an internal email on 29 March 2023 to confirm that a joiner had adjusted the patio doors so that they were secure and weatherproof. It reported that there was still slight movement but that this was a manufacturing problem which the voids team could not deal with.
The resident sent a stage 1 complaint to the landlord on 4 April 2023 listing outstanding repairs. She referred to loose and insecure patio doors, front door and bedroom window repairs, a missing draft excluder, tree maintenance repairs, the registration of solar panels following confirmation that they were working, a doorbell repair, a missing sprinkler cap, a sewage smell from blockages, mould beneath a rotten kitchen worktop, a missing trip switch flap and a kitchen light repair. She also reported that a plumber had said the grouting in the wet room would lead to tiles falling off and that there were holes in the wet room floor. She said that she had a disability, her physical and mental health had been affected and she had been financially affected by the repairs such as by taking taxis to the property for repairs to be completed.
The landlord sent an internal email on 4 April 2023 to say that there was a 3-finger sized hole in the patio door, holes in the altro floor and grouting and tiling repairs. The void manager replied to say that a joiner had confirmed that the patio door was watertight, holes in the floor had not been spotted before and there had not been any reports of grouting or tiling repairs made previously.
The landlord held an internal email conversation on 24 May 2023 about the resident’s complaint. It said that it had visited the property when the resident had moved in and there had been various repair issues, such as leaks. It said that it had spoken to the plumber that had visited the property and there was a difference between his account of the repairs and the resident’s reports. It said that that the altro flooring was in a poor state of repair but didn’t need replacing. It arranged to visit the property to verify where it did not meet the letting standard so that it could resolve the complaint.
The landlord emailed its contractor on 31 May 2023 and 2 June 2023 asking it to program a service of the sprinkler equipment in the street and replace a missing sprinkler cover plate at the resident’s property. It advised the contractor to contact the resident to arrange access.
The landlord attached pictures of the property to an email it sent internally on 6 June 2023 and asked if it could replace the altro floor in the bathroom. It said that the flooring was no longer like it was when the property was let, and contractors had not been able to repair it as they didn’t have the skills or tools to repair altro flooring. The landlord also referred to outstanding repairs to the patio doors, a sprinkler cap, the solar panels, windows, front door beading, the kitchen light, a consumer unit cover, doorbell, and the kitchen base unit. The landlord replied the next day to confirm it had arranged an appointment to address the items on 11 June 2023.
The landlord sent an internal email with a pictures of the bathroom floor on 13 June 2023. It confirmed that it had repaired the altro flooring, replaced a consumer unit flap, repaired the kitchen light, adjusted the patio door, and replaced the locks, replaced the kitchen sink unit, replaced a drawer unit front to match the rest of the kitchen, replaced sealant in the bathroom window and eased the bedroom casement window. It also verified that the bathroom tiles were secure and did not need replacing or regrouting.
The landlord emailed its contractor on 11 July 2023 to ask if it had been able to access the property to replace the sprinkler cap. The contractor replied on 14 July 2023 to say the request had been passed to a different contractor.
The landlord sent an internal email on 12 July 2023 about window and patio door repair appointments. It said that it had asked the resident to share the date of a glazing appointment so that it could attend at the same time. The resident had replied to say that she did not know and that the landlord’s staff teams did not communicate with each other. She also said that she no longer wanted to be contacted by phone but by email only so that everything was logged.
The landlord sent a stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 18 July 2023. The landlord listed the outstanding repairs that the resident had reported and said:
1. No issues with sewage or drainage had been noticed when it had completed void works in the property.
2. She should discuss her tenancy start date with the lettings team and report gutter repairs to the repairs team.
3. It had asked for an overhanging tree to be addressed but that the matter was not urgent, but it had cut the grass on 12 June 2023.
4. Keys for the windows were the same for all windows and she would not be given a key for every window.
5. It had asked the service provider to remove a utility meter debt which it said it would complete on 9 February 2023 and it had subsequently exchanged the faulty electric meter and both meters were debt free, with no keys or cards required.
6. The gas boiler and heating system were repaired on 21 and 22 March 2023 which could not have been foreseen when it had been recommissioned.
7. It did not maintain doorbells under the tenancy agreement, but it would fit one as a gesture of goodwill.
8. A fan in the wet room was a humidity detector and would not work unless there was steam in the room but that it would inspect the fan.
9. The front door window would be fitted when the order arrived.
10. It had repaired a brick pillar which was most likely damaged by vandalism.
11. The resident would need to address the condition of the bins with the waste services team.
12. It had reviewed photographs taken of the property when it completed a final clean prior to letting and there had been no damage to the flooring present at that time, but it had repaired the flooring on 13 June 2023.
13. It had replaced the front of a consumer unit and a lightbulb, adjusted the patio doors, installed new lock barrels, replaced the kitchen sink unit carcass, returned the original drawer front so that it matched with the rest of the kitchen, refitted the sink top, checked kitchen pipework, and adjusted the bedroom window.
14. It had referred issues with a missing sprinkler cap and the condition of the bins to the relevant contractors.
15. The solar panels had been checked, were correctly connected and operational and it provided the resident with a contact to pursue their connection.
16. It had arranged an appointment on 19 July 2023 for a lock shroud to be installed but all other repairs had been completed and there was nothing to stop the resident from moving in as the floor was repaired, the heating system was functional, and the rear doors were secure.
17. It would amend the tenancy start date to 24 July 2023 and would provide an updated tenancy agreement.
18. It partially upheld the complaint as there were failures in delivering the property to the required standard and due to the conduct of a staff member.
19. It recognised that the complaint had been delayed and so it offered the resident £150 for inconvenience and upset that had been caused.
20. She could escalate the complaint to stage 2 if she remained dissatisfied.
The resident sent a stage 2 complaint to the landlord on 18 July 2023. She said:
1. A named staff member had stopped responding to her and she had to go through the repairs line for repairs more than once.
2. There had been numerous visits, and its summary of visits wasn’t fair.
3. The solar panel issues were pending, and no one had responded to her.
4. She had paid for taxis each time she visited the property and could not understand why she needed to attend again when the matter referred to had previously been assessed.
5. She had stopped calling the voids line when a named staff member had spoken rudely and because she had been told she had to call the main repairs line.
6. She had not made up a plumber’s report of tiling and grouting repairs, she had proof of his advice and that the account in the stage 1 complaint had been incorrect.
7. The contractor had not checked for damp and mould as she had expected.
8. The photographs it provided of the altro floor were not close-up and some things needed to be seen in person.
9. The kitchen unit was not the same size as the rest of the units and a worktop contained toxic, black mould.
10. The bins were filthy, she had paid to have them cleaned and questioned if this was the landlord’s standards and that there was a garden bin missing.
11. There were exposed wires on the doorbell and the bell didn’t work even with a new battery.
12. She disagreed that all the repairs had been completed as there was toxic, mould in the kitchen and a unit hadn’t been replaced.
13. She needed more than 6 days to move in as she had to provide notice to her current property and so required an extension due to the disrepair.
14. There was a debt on the gas meter that needed to be cleared and the utility provider had said that meter was not operational which she had to sort out.
15. The compensation offer did not cover the costs she had incurred for taxis, utility top-ups for contractors to complete repairs that should have been completed before the property was let and drain blockages she had paid for.
16. She had not been provided with a copy of the EPC and there were cleaning issues in the kitchen which she had paid to get cleaned.
17. She had not been issued with a new toilet seat, areas of the bathroom had not been sealed and some tiles were cracked.
18. There had been mould on the bathroom ceiling and kitchen walls when the property was let.
19. The windows required repairs.
20. The tenancy start date needed to be agreed when the repairs were complete.
The landlord emailed the resident on 3 August 2023 to say that the solar panels were the landlord’s property and were wired so that the energy she used would come from them before her utility provider. It also said that it could see that the panels had not been registered on the system it used to monitor the panels and so it would need to investigate further.
The resident sent an email to the landlord on 4 August 2023 in reply to an email it had sent to her to set up an appointment to repair the kitchen worktop, the window, and the patio door. The resident asked about a wrong-sized kitchen unit, repairs to the front door, and the removal of kitchen flooring.
The landlord sent an internal email on 7 August 2023 asking for a new bin to be ordered and delivered to the resident. It also sent a stage 2 complaint response to the resident. The landlord said:
1. While it undertakes most repairs prior to new residents signing for properties, some repairs would be completed when they move in.
2. There had been several times where it had attended to repair leaks and the heating system but not all the repairs could have been foreseen.
3. It acknowledged that the resident was inconvenienced by having to attend multiple appointments for repairs to be completed.
4. It would send a different plumber to complete any required repairs in response to the resident’s concerns about the integrity of the bathroom tiles.
5. It had fitted a standard kitchen base unit and had been unable to match the units like-for-like but had used the existing drawer and doors to maintain the visual appearance as much as possible.
6. It would replace the worktops in the kitchen.
7. It would arrange to repair water ingress under the patio doors.
8. It summarised its response to the condition of the utility meters which it said had only been found to be faulty during the recommissioning appointment.
9. Costs incurred on the meters were standing charge costs which the landlord would calculate and reimburse her for up to the date she moved in.
10. The resident would benefit from electricity generated by the solar panels which would offset the energy she used and reduce her bills. An electrician had checked that the system was functioning and correctly connected.
11. It would replace a garden bin that had been missing but it did not clean bins as part of its voids process.
12. It had previously set a tenancy start date as 24 July 2024 but as she had to give notice to her current landlord and arrange for flooring at the property it would work with her to agree a mutually convenient date for the new tenancy to commence.
13. It provided a link to a copy of the EPC which it apologised had not previously been provided.
14. It apologised for the inconvenience that had been caused to the resident by the completion of the repairs.
15. It would cover the £165 cost she had incurred in unblocking the drains and would reimburse her for costs incurred when topping up the utility meters when she returned the required compensation form.
16. It offered the resident an additional £250 in recognition of the costs she had incurred for taxi’s, the costs for the cleaning of the bin, and for inconvenience and upset that had been caused to her.
17. It considered the complaint to be fully considered and closed but did not say if it upheld the complaint.

Events that took place after completion of the complaint procedure.

The resident sent an email to her councillor on 17 August 2023 which said that the damp in the wet room was bad. She said that she could not be in there long without coughing. and was issued an asthma pump because she had started to wheeze. She also said that the landlord hadn’t completed a health and safety assessment for damp and mould in the kitchen and bathroom and that she had photos of mould on the wet room ceiling and kitchen walls that had been painted over.
The landlord completed works to aqua board the shower walls in the wet room on 16 and 17 October 2023 to address damp and mould. It arranged a subsequent repair to finish the installation on 8 November 2023, but noted on the works order that the resident refused the repair.
The resident contacted this Service on 4 April 2024 to say:
1. Repairs to the wet room, patio doors, solar panels, toilet seat, and a kitchen unit which was the wrong size were outstanding.
2. Aqua boarding that had been laid to address damp and mould had not been treated and there was black mould under a kitchen worktop.
3. A £300 debt on the gas meter had not been cleared as the landlord had indicated.
4. The resident had been given a form to claim expenses when all works had been completed which she wanted the landlord to honour in addition to its compensation offer of £250.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs at the property.

This investigation refers to a large number of property repairs and this report does not intend to address each item individually. The landlord was entitled to rely on its qualified contractors to assess the repair works and it is not for the Ombudsman to comment on the landlord’s decisions about when to complete property repairs or which repairs it considered were required. Instead, this investigation has considered the fairness of the landlord’s actions in responding to the condition of the property and the resident’s expressed concerns.
On 4 January 2023, prior to letting the property the landlord completed a specification of repairs works in the property which it sought to complete prior to inviting the resident to view the property and sign the tenancy agreement. The landlord’s lettings standard sets out that it may be required to complete some repairs, such as gates, fencing, windows, glazing, and guttering after a resident takes up occupancy. However, on this occasion the landlord had failed to complete a significant number of repairs, such a replacing the toilet seat, treating mould in the bathroom and kitchen, securing the patio doors, and repairing and cleaning flooring, which in accordance with its lettings standard should have been completed prior to classifying the property as ready to let. This caused time and trouble to the resident in pursuing the repairs and distress and inconvenience and prevented her from taking up occupation at the property.
The landlord attended the property to assess and complete repairs on numerous occasions between letting the property in February 2023 and issuing its final complaint response in August 2023. It agreed to address the repairs it was responsible for and responded to the resident’s emails with information about when and what it would complete. This was a solution focused approach for it to take to rebuild the resident’s confidence in its repairs service. However it is evident that that landlord was unable to fully rectify the outstanding repairs during this 6-month period. Further that some of the repairs remained outstanding on 4 April 2024, over a year after they had been reported. It was unreasonable for the landlord not to have completed the repairs within a reasonable time and in keeping with its lettings standards so as to ensure that the resident could take up occupation of the property.
In addition to the outstanding repairs required under the landlord’s lettings standard, the matters were compounded by the landlord’s response to the resident’s questions about the use and financial benefit of the solar panels. The landlord responded by ensuring that the solar panels were operational which was a reasonable approach for it to take in the first instance. However, it failed to ensure that they were appropriately connected to the utility provider or to explain how the energy and/or associated cost benefit would be passed to the resident which, given it owned the panels, it was responsible for. This caused significant time and trouble to the resident in pursuing a resolution via the landlord and with the utility provider which could have been avoided. It is evident that a clear resolution remains outstanding therefore an order related to this is set out below.
The landlord recognised its repair handling failings when it reviewed the resident’s complaint at stage 1 and stage 2. Consequently, the landlord agreed to amend the tenancy start date so that the resident was not expected to pay rent at the property until it met the required lettings standards and the repairs it has committed to address had been remedied. It was reasonable for the landlord to offer to amend the tenancy start date under the circumstances. However it is unclear whether an agreement of the new start date has been reached because the landlord indicated in its stage 2 response that it would agree a mutually convenient date for the tenancy to commence when the outstanding repairs were complete. An order related to this is therefore set out below.
When there are acknowledged failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress (an apology and compensation) was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The landlord offered the resident a compensation payment of £250 for the costs she had incurred for taxis and cleaning the bin, in addition to reimbursing her for the costs she had incurred for topping up utility meters for the repairs to be completed and unblocking the drains. This Service is unable to determine how much money the resident spent on taxis and cleaning the bin so as to fully determine how much compensation the landlord had awarded the resident for its repair handling failings. Notwithstanding it is the view of this Service that given the level of communication, the requirements to visit the property to provide access and the extent to which the resident was expected to engage with different repair teams, contractors, and utility providers the level of compensation offered was not proportionate to the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience that had been caused to the resident. Consequently and taking all matters into account this Service finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs at the property.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.

It is vital that landlords keep and provide clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail of actions it has taken when providing housing services. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures. While there was sufficient evidence available for this Service to determine the resident’s complaint about damp and mould in the property, the evidence provided was not as comprehensive as we would expect.
The resident reported concerns about the presence of damp and mould on the bathroom ceiling and kitchen walls on 28 February 2023. There is no evidence that the landlord undertook repairs to address the presence of damp and mould in the property. However the resident reported that the landlord had painted over the ceiling and walls to her councillor on 17 August 2023. It was inappropriate for the landlord not to have referred to the actions it had taken to address the reports of damp and mould so as to reassure the resident that it had treated the damp and mould effectively in keeping with its repair obligations.
The resident reported mould beneath a kitchen worktop to the landlord in her stage 1 complaint of 4 April 2023 and referred to it as toxic black mould in her stage 2 complaint on 18 July 2023. The landlord indicated that it would complete repairs to the kitchen worktops which was a reasonable response for it to have taken. However it failed it indicate when this would be completed which was a missed opportunity for the landlord to have regained the resident’s confidence in its repairs service and its approach to resolve damp and mould.
The landlord’s damp policy says it would endeavour to identify possible defects at the earliest possible opportunity and take the necessary action to rectify them. Therefore it was inappropriate for it not to have identified and treated the worktop that contained black mould when it completed repairs in the kitchen. It was also inappropriate for the landlord not to have remedied the presence of mould in the kitchen in response to the resident’s later reports that indicated the matter caused her distress and inconvenience and exacerbated a health complaint.
It is evident that the presence of black mould beneath the kitchen worktop remained unresolved on 4 April 2024 a year after the resident had reported the matter. This was unreasonable and not in keeping with the landlord’s damp policy and its self-assessment against this Service’s spotlight report on damp and mould management. Furthermore it continued to effect the resident’s health which the landlord had been aware of and caused time and trouble to the resident in pursuing remedial works to address the matter which was avoidable. Consequently this Service finds maladministration in the landlord response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of issues with the utility meters.

It is evident that the landlord sought to remove a debt from the gas meter prior to the property being let and that the utility provider had agreed to complete this initially on 27 January 2023. The utility provider returned to the property again on 9 February 2023 when it completed repairs to the electric meter. The landlord was not responsible for the meter and so it was appropriate for it to refer to the utility provider for any debt to be removed.
The resident raised the presence of a debt on the meter with the landlord on 8 March 2023 despite confirming that she had registered a new account with the utility provider. The landlord indicated that it did not know about the workings of the meter and advised the resident to contact the utility provider directly. It was appropriate for the landlord to have referred the resident to the utility provider as it was not responsible for the meters which were the property of the utility provider. However it failed to explain this to the resident which was a missed opportunity for the landlord to manage her expectations. Furthermore the landlord failed to address the resident’s report that the debt on the meter had not been cleared which resulted in time and trouble being caused to her in pursuing a resolution through the complaint procedure.
The landlord explained in its stage 1 response that it had arranged for any debt on the meter to be cleared by the utility provider in February 2023, prior to her signing the tenancy agreement. Further it explained that the utility provider had exchanged the meters when it had identified a fault. It was reasonable for the landlord to explain the actions it had taken to remedy the issues with the meter and the debt. However, there is no evidence that the utility provider had cleared the debt on the meter during its visits, beyond providing confirmation that it would visit the property and that it had replaced a meter. It was therefore inappropriate for the landlord to indicate that the debt had been cleared without being certain. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord indicated that it would reimburse the resident for any costs she had incurred when topping up the meters for repairs to be completed. It was reasonable for the landlord to offer to pay for the utility costs she incurred so that the landlord could complete the outstanding repairs. However, it failed to address the resident’s restated complaint that a debt had remained on the meter that had not been cleared prior to her signing the tenancy which was unreasonable.
While we acknowledge that the landlord had no reason to doubt that the utility provider would not comply with its agreed action it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have been proactive by checking the matter had been fully addressed. The landlord’s failing in this regard resulted in an uncertainty about the level of debt on the meter and has caused distress and inconvenience to the resident in seeking a resolution which as of 4 April 2024 continued to remain outstanding. Consequently, this Service finds service failure on the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of issues with the utility meters.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaints.

There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaints as the landlord:
1. Did not acknowledge the resident’s stage 1 and stage 2 complaints in line with its complaint policy by setting out the details of the complaint and a timescale for its response.
2. Did not respond to the resident’s complaint of 4 April 2023 until 18 July 2023 which was 61 working days later than the 10-day policy target timescale.
3. Did not agree an extension of time to respond to the resident’s stage 1 complaint in line with paragraph 5.14 of the Code.
4. Did not fully respond to all aspects of the resident’s complaint, for example about the debt on the meter and the process for registering the solar panels so that she could receive reduced energy costs.
5. Said that all repairs had been completed in its stage 1 complaint response when various repairs, such as mould, windows, patio doors, and kitchen unit repairs had not been resolved.
6. Did not say if it had upheld the resident’s stage 2 complaint in line with the paragraph 5.16 of the Code.
When a landlord is at fault it needs to put things right by acknowledging its mistakes and apologising for them, explaining why things went wrong and what the landlord will do to prevent the same mistake happening again. The landlord considered its handling of the resident’s complaint in its stage 1 response in which it recognised its delay in issuing a reply.
The landlord offered the resident £150 compensation for its complaint handling delays. However, this award did not consider the additional time and trouble caused to the resident in pursuing a resolution to the complaint at stage 2 and thereafter. It was therefore not proportionate to the detriment that had been caused. An additional award of compensation is therefore ordered below.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs at the property.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of issues with the utility meters.
In accordance with Paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaints.

Reasons

The landlord failed to complete a number of repairs in keeping with its lettings standards prior to letting the property to the resident. The landlord took an unreasonable amount of time to address the repairs some of which remain outstanding 8 months after the landlord’s final complaint response.
The landlord failed to comply with its damp policy by remedying black mould that had been reported beneath the kitchen worktop and which remains outstanding 8 months after the landlord’s final complaint response.
The landlord failed to remedy a debt on a utility meter that it had incurred when the property was empty within a reasonable time. It also failed to reimburse the resident for costs she had incurred topping up the meter for repairs to be completed which was outstanding 8 months after the landlord’s final complaint response.
The landlord failed to comply with its own complaints policy and the Code during its handling of the resident’s complaints. The landlord investigated its own complaint handling in its stage 1 response but failed to take into account the additional detriment that had been caused to the resident in pursuing a resolution to the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident for its failings in managing the outstanding void and damp and mould repairs and for its complaint handling failures. This is to be provided in writing within 4 weeks of the date of this report.
In addition to any previous compensation issued and within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £650 in compensation made up as follows:
1. £250 for time, trouble, and inconvenience associated with the completion of outstanding repairs at the property.
2. £250 for time, trouble, and inconvenience associated with the completion of damp and mould repairs at the property.
3. £100 for the time and trouble incurred by the resident as a result of the landlord’s response to the reported issues with the utility meters.
4. £50 for time and trouble caused to the resident related to the landlord’s complaint handling failures.

The compensation is to be paid direct to the resident and not offset against any money that the resident may owe the landlord.

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to reimburse the resident for the out-of-pocket expenses she had incurred for the drain blockage repairs and for topping up the utility meters as referred to in its final complaint response, if this has not already been addressed.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to assess the level of debt that had been left on the utility meters prior to the tenancy start date and to fully reimburse the resident for these costs if this has not already been addressed.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to inspect the property to assess if any outstanding repairs are required. If works are required the landlord should send the resident and this Service details of the works, together with a timetable for the works to be carried out within 2 weeks of inspecting the property.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to write to the resident stating the start date of her tenancy and to confirm that the amendment to the tenancy start date has been fully amended on its housing databases.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to investigate and provide confirmation to the resident in writing that the solar panels are operational, connected to a utility provider and to explain how the resident, or its residents receive a cost- or energy-saving benefit from the panels.
This Service notes that the landlord completed a self-assessment of its response to damp, mould, and condensation, on an undisclosed date prior to addressing matters in this complaint. However it is evident that the landlord said it was embarking on a transformation programme within the assessment. The landlord is therefore ordered to review and update its damp, mould, and condensation self-assessment in light of its handling of matters associated with this case. The landlord is ordered to provide the outcome of the reassessment to this Service within 8 weeks of the date of this report.
The landlord is recommended to produce a frequently asked questions leaflet about the solar panels it owns so that:
1. Information about the responsibility for the registration of how the solar panels operates is clear.
2. New or existing residents understand how the cost and energy benefits are passed on to residents.

The landlord is further recommended to publish the FAQ document on its website and issue it to new residents at tenancy sign up meetings, where relevant.