NSAH (Alliance Homes) Limited (202228891)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202228891

NSAH (Alliance Homes) Limited

15 February 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

This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for roof repairs.

Background and summary of events

Background

The property is a second-floor studio flat. The tenancy started on 26 August 2022 as an assured shorthold.
The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident on its system. Within his correspondence, the resident said he has arthritis, heart disease and back problems.

Scope of investigation

This report is limited to the complaint the resident made to the landlord in November 2022.
Records indicate in December 2022, the resident said his heating system was not adequate and he was unable to use the kitchen radiator as it was next to his fridge. He also reported mould within the property, a radiator that did not work in the bathroom, and condensation on the windows.
Paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not acted within a reasonable timescale. The above issues were not included within the resident’s initial complaint from November 2022. In the interest of fairness, the landlord must have the opportunity to investigate and respond to concerns that it has not yet considered under its internal complaint procedure. It is open for the resident to make a further complaint to the landlord.
The resident explained that the leaking roof caused him to be extremely cold, and he has arthritis, heart disease and back problems. The Ombudsman empathises with the resident. However, as this Service is an informal alternative to the courts, we are unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can we calculate or award damages. These matters are better suited for consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. Nonetheless, the Ombudsman has considered the distress and inconvenience that may have been caused to the resident.

Relevant policies, obligations, and laws

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties.
The landlord’s repairs policy sets out various timescales for responding to repairs based on priority, ranging from 2 hours to 150 days. It states certain repairs may need to be inspected to determine the nature of the work and its priority. The inspections will be carried out within 10 working days.
The landlord’s complaints policy states it will not consider a first-time customer request to be a complaint. Initial queries would seek to be resolved where possible before a formal complaint is recorded.
The landlord has a 2 stage complaints procedure. At stage 1, it aims to respond within 10 working days. At stage 2, it aims to respond within 20 working days. If the landlord requires longer at either stage, it will keep the resident informed and may take an additional 10 working days to respond.

Summary of events

The resident reported a leak in the roof to the landlord on 24 October 2022. The landlord raised a work order for a roofer to attend.
The resident made a complaint on 30 November 2022. The landlord’s records from this time said:
1. The resident was dissatisfied that the roof repair was scheduled for 11 January 2023. The resident was a roofer with 30 years’ experience and felt that January was a bad time for roofing works to take place.
2. The resident watched the landlord’s contractor complete a recent roofing repair and said the contractor used old materials.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint at stage 1 on 2 December 2022. It said to resolve the complaint, the resident wanted the workmanship to be checked on his neighbour’s roof repair, a date for his roof repair, for a person with experience to visit his property and for wiring to be investigated in his loft.
A few days later, records indicate a roofer attended the resident’s property. A copy of the inspection report has not been provided to this Service.
On 6 December 2022 a home visit took place. The landlord informed the resident that it had spoken with its contractor, and they would not be using old nails for future roofing repairs. It also noted the roofing felt and loft insulation needed to be replaced. Additionally, they reported that a full assessment of the roofs and insulation within the block was required. Records show the landlord discussed matters internally and agreed to patch repair the roof as an interim measure while the appropriate surveys were undertaken.
The landlord raised a work order on 7 December 2022 for the loft insulation to be replaced.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 7 December 2022. It summarised the complaint and said:
1. A temporary repair would take place in January 2023. A roof replacement would follow at the earliest possible time. The block had been highlighted as needing attention so that all properties with issues would be actioned depending on urgency.
2. New loft insulation had been requested and contractors would contact the resident to arrange this.
3. A job had been raised for an electrician to move wiring away from the loft hatch area. It would contact the resident to arrange this.
4. It apologised for the issues experienced by the resident and said it would work closely with its assets team over the next few weeks to formulate a plan for the block. The roofs all needed assessing to ascertain their condition, and this would be happening as soon as possible.
Internal records demonstrate the landlord had meetings about the next steps for the block.
The landlord’s contact records state the resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 on 14 December 2022 and that he said:
1. He would not waste money putting the heating on as it escaped out of the roof, causing him to be extremely cold.
2. He had arthritis, heart disease and problems with his back.
3. The option of a temporary repair in January 2023 was not good enough as he was cold and unwell. He could not wait until April 2023 for a new roof.
4. He had purchased an oil heater but was concerned about how much this would cost to run.
5. He had to sit in his car to stay warm.
On 14 December 2022, the resident reported that the radiator in his bathroom was not working. In view of the existing issues in the property, the landlord raised a work order and marked it as a high priority – to be completed within 7 days.
Records indicate on 15 December 2022, the landlord was arranging condition surveys for the new year of all the roofs within the block. It wanted to establish whether all roofs needed to be replaced and the priority for each property.
The landlord’s records show it spoke with the resident on 20 December 2022 however there are no notes on what was discussed.
The landlord recorded internally on 21 December 2022 that the resident’s roof would be replaced in January 2023. As such, it asked for the insulation to be replaced after this had been done.
A work order for a roofer to “complete repairs as required to tiles and felt for first course” was marked as completed on 21 December 2022. No evidence from the job itself has been provided to this Service.
The landlord’s records show it spoke with the resident on 10 January 2023, however there are no notes on what was discussed.
The landlord said it received a quote for replacement loft insulation on 19 January 2023.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 27 January 2023. It said:
1. It conducted a stage 2 investigation, and this was reviewed by a panel of 5 managers.
2. A roof replacement would be completed as soon as possible, along with new insulation.
3. An electrician had been requested to move wiring away from the loft hatch.
4. It updated the resident on other repair issues he had raised that were not part of the complaint.

Actions after the end of the internal complaint procedure

On 31 January 2023, the landlord was notified that the resident’s roof was watertight and complete. It noted aspects were outstanding to adjoining roofs and this would be completed during a program of roofing repairs in 2023/2024.
The landlord said its contractors revised their costing for the replacement loft insulation on 1 February 2023 and this was approved the same day.
The landlord replaced the loft insulation and arranged to repair a section of Artex, and stain block the area affected by the roof leak. The landlord’s repair record says this was completed in April 2023. Following this, the lounge ceiling was repainted.

Assessment and findings

When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution – be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this caused any detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to put things right and learn from the complaint.
Investigations into a leak or water ingress must be managed effectively and handled with a sense of urgency, to identify and resolve the problem as soon as possible. Within this case, the resident reported a suspected leak from the roof on 24 October 2022. The landlord’s records show a work order was raised for a roofer to attend within 7 days, however the Ombudsman has seen no evidence that it did so.
In this case, it is difficult to determine the exact course of events due to the lack of evidence provided. While the landlord submitted communications records and repair logs to this Service, they do not contain a full audit trail of the events which occurred. It is vital landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail of events. This helps the Ombudsman to understand the landlord’s actions and decision making at the time. If this Service investigates a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to determine that an action took place or that the landlord acted fairly and in line with its policies.
The landlord did not provide evidence that a roof inspection or survey took place within a reasonable period following the resident’s initial report of a leak. This is a failing. However, it is evident the repairs manager went into the loft on 6 December 2022 to see what the issues were. It is unclear if a roofer completed an inspection, when/if a temporary repair took place and when the roof replacement was completed. The landlord told this Service that the roof works were completed at the beginning of January 2023 and there is a system note that references roof works on 3 January 2023. However, the stage 2 response dated 27 January 2023 stated the roof replacement would be completed as soon as possible and the roofing invoice was dated 31 January 2023. The lack of evidence demonstrating the chronology of events has impacted the Ombudsman’s investigation into the substantive issue and the landlord’s communication with the resident. As such, the Ombudsman has found a service failure in the landlord’s record keeping.
As mentioned above, it is not clear if a temporary repair took place. Considering the resident was concerned about heat escaping from the property, the cost of heating his home and his health conditions, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to assess whether any interim measures could be taken early on to reduce the impact on the resident. Additionally, the Ombudsman is minded that it would have been reasonable for the landlord to compete a risk assessment. The Ombudsman recognises the landlord progressed with the roof replacement as soon as it was able to, however the limited information available indicates it missed opportunities to actively listen to the resident, understand the impact upon him and explore options whilst waiting for the permanent repair.
Roof replacements on a large scale are considered major works and not something a landlord can usually undertake on an immediate basis. Landlords usually have a specific budget each fiscal year. Having a defined annual schedule for major works allows it to use its budget effectively by identifying in advance which properties require upgrades and managing the works accordingly. In this case, records show the landlord took the roof leak very seriously and requested inspections of all the roofs within the block, so the works could be scheduled according to priority. Major roof works were anticipated around 2024 as per the landlord’s maintenance schedule, however it decided to bring this forward. This was appropriate in the circumstances.
The Ombudsman recognises that the landlord acted with a sense of urgency and its actions were customer focused. It is clear the landlord prioritised the resident’s roof replacement and arranged this as soon as it could in the circumstances. The landlord’s repair policy has a maximum timescale of 150 days for a responsive repair. A roof replacement would often fall outside of this timeframe as it is considered a major repair, however the Ombudsman notes it was replaced within 68 working days of the resident’s initial report of a leak. This demonstrates the landlord treated the matter with the seriousness it deserved.
Overall, the landlord acted with a sense of urgency to bring forward the roof replacement and prioritised this for the resident. It broadly kept the resident updated throughout. However, the Ombudsman has identified issues with the landlord’s record keeping which has impacted this investigation. As such, the Ombudsman has made a finding of service failure.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request for roof repairs.

Reasons

The landlord’s decision to replace the roof was reasonable in the circumstances. Considering the extent of the works, they were completed within a reasonable timeframe and the landlord evidenced it prioritised the repair. However, record keeping failures were identified which impeded our investigation.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Pay the resident £75 in recognition of the impact of the record keeping failures.
2. Self-assess against the recommendations within our spotlight report on knowledge and information management.
The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord contacts the resident to discuss any vulnerabilities he may have and updates its internal records accordingly, subject to any data protection requirements.