Peabody Trust (202102479)

A picture containing logo

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202102479

Peabody Trust

10 November 2022

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 concerns:
1. The landlord’s response to reports of repairs needed relating to:
  1. A Blockage to the toilet system.
  2. An insect infestation.
  3. A leak and lack of access to kitchen facilities.
  4. Other repairs.
2. The landlord’s response to reports of a Gas leak in April 2020.
The related complaint.

Background and summary of events

The resident had a licence agreement to occupy the property. The licence began on 22 February 2016. The property was one room within a flat with shared access (with one other tenant) to a bathroom and kitchen. It was hostel accommodation (sheltered housing) provided as part of the ‘rough sleepers initiative.’
The resident moved out of the property after the landlord served him a Notice to Quit requiring him to vacate the property on 16 June 2021.
The resident has vulnerabilities and had a support worker which is noted in the landlord’s records. The resident advised the landlord and this Service that the issues experienced at the property had affected his mental health as well as his health in general. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to investigate if there was a causal link between reports of health issues experienced by the resident and the actions of the landlord. The resident may wish to seek legal advice about this, as a personal injury claim may be a more appropriate way of dealing with this aspect of the complaint. As these claims are more appropriately dealt with by a court or other procedure, this element will not be investigated.
In the resident’s formal complaint and escalation request, he said issues with the condition of the property had been ongoing for four years since 2017. He advised that a number of repairs had been outstanding since October 2019 including a period without heating in 2019. He requested compensation for the issues that had been outstanding since 2019.
As there is no evidence of the resident raising a complaint with the landlord prior to the formal complaint sent on 27 January 2021, this review will only consider events, including the resident’s reported repairs and complaints, from January 2020 as this is twelve months prior to the resident raising a formal complaint with the landlord which is within a reasonable timeframe of the matters occurring.

Summary of Events

The landlord’s repair records show that on 27 February 2020, the resident reported that the shared kitchen ceiling needed to be made good following a leak (from the upstairs flat’s boiler in 2019).
On 18 March 2020, the resident reported that: the bedroom UPVC window had been nailed shut and would not open; the extractor fan in the bathroom was not working and emergency lighting was not working throughout the property. Jobs were raised to “attend and rectify”
The resident raised a further repair on 19 March 2020 to address mould in the bathroom as a result of the leak. A job was raised to “attend and rectify”.
The landlord’s repair notes dated 24 March 2020 show that its operative attended at this time and identified that the kitchen ceiling was “sagging” due to the previous leak, recommending its removal and replacement. The operative noted at this time that the ceiling “was about to fall apart”.
The kitchen ceiling was “made safe” by the landlord in May 2021 and works to remove the ceiling, “fix the plasterboard, skimming and painting” commenced on 25 August 2020.
The landlord’s repair records show that on 24 September 2020, the resident reported that water was backing up in the toilet. The landlord’s repair records do not show the target timescale for this repair or the date of when this issue was addressed.
The landlord’s repair records show that on 3 November 2020 the resident contacted the landlord to report that he was unable to use the kitchen facilities due to a leak that had been outstanding “for some time” which had caused damage to the kitchen. The landlord’s notes show it raised a repair to “attend and rectify”. The landlord’s repair team subsequently attended to address both the reported leak and damage however the exact nature of the repairs carried out are unclear from the evidence provided to this Service.
The resident raised a further repair on 4 November 2020 to address mould in the bathroom as a result of the leak.
The resident’s advocate raised a formal complaint with the landlord on the resident’s behalf which the landlord logged on 22 February 2021. This Service notes that this complaint was dated 30 October 2020 however as the date it was sent to the landlord was unclear from the available evidence, we sought clarification from the parties in regards to the discrepancy between the two dates. The resident’s advocate provided evidence to show they emailed the complaint to the landlord on 27 January 2021.
The complaint listed a number of repairs which the advocate said were outstanding:
1. Insect infestation (slugs, snails and ants) in the hallway which spread to the bedroom, bathroom and kitchen. The impact was that the resident had been “sofa surfing”.
2. Appliances in the kitchen (fridge, cooker, microwave, kettle and washing machine) were unhygienic due to infestation of insects living in them.
3. Drainpipe was leaking outside the kitchen back door/ bedroom window which disturbs the resident and stops him from sleeping at night.
4. Bathroom: face basin sink was unusable due to limescale built up inside the sink piping. Which has resulted in the water not being able to drain out of the sink. Bathroom fans were also not working and mould growing on the bathroom ceiling.
5. Toilet System: this had been blocked meaning the resident not able to flush properly – waste took a long time to go down because of the blockage, dirty wastewater kept coming back up through the toilet, bath and sink plus dirty water was also backing up in the kitchen sink.
The complaint stated that an emergency call out from the repair team was arranged to address the issue with the toilet system drainage when reported by the resident on 24 September 2020. The landlord advised someone would come out within four hours however no one attended the appointment.
The advocate said that the presence of insects in the property had resulted in the resident being bitten and stung and has caused health problems such as diarrhoea and pains in his stomach and oesophagus. The infestations fed on natural fibres which had caused damage to the resident’s property.
The advocate also complained about the lack of heating and said other occupants had been moved out during the period of no heating.
Further, the advocate advised that the resident would like an apology from the landlord for its failure to complete all the repairs in a timely manner. The advocate requested the landlord pay compensation to the resident for the distress and inconvenience caused by the issues experienced from 2019.
On 27 April 2021, the landlord provided a stage one response to the resident’s complaint. The landlord advised it would not investigate or provide compensation for issues experienced since 2019 as this was in accordance with its complaint and compensation policies, which stated claims should be made no later than six months after the damage or loss has been incurred and that all complaints should be submitted to it within six months of when the event occurred or it becoming known to the complainant. It said it had looked at the repair history and could see that the resident reported on 3 November 2020 that he was unable to use the kitchen due to a leak. It said its contractors attended to resolve the leak and carried out extensive works to the kitchen which resulted in the resident not being able to use the kitchen until the 7 December 2020 when all the works were completed.
The landlord also acknowledged that the resident raised a repair on 24 September 2020 when he reported that water was backing up in the toilet. It said this repair had now been completed.
The landlord also advised:
1. It had raised a job to repair the fans which had now been attended to.
2. Repairs to the bedroom window were in progress; its contractors had attended and recommended a new sash window which was on order. It advised that its contractors had attended the property but could not proceed with the repair as the room was cluttered and therefore the resident was required to clear his room to facilitate the repair. An appointment had been booked for 30 April 2021.
3. The mould in the bathroom had been treated and this was done on 1 April 2021.
4. The bathroom lock had also been repaired.
The landlord said that in regard to the insects in the hallway, and the cooker and fridge not being fit for purpose, it said it had emailed the advocate to advise that the resident should call its repairs line to raise these issues.
The landlord stated it was not its aim that repairs were dragged out and residents were inconvenienced. It acknowledge that the repairs could have been completed sooner and was in “no doubt” this caused the resident some distress and inconvenience. In assessing a suitable level of compensation, it said it was guided by its compensation policy. It advised that in recognition of the resident being without cooking facilities for 35 days from 3 November 2020 to 7 December 2020, it offered £450 in compensation based on £10 per day (£350) and £100 for his time and trouble. It had checked the resident’s rent account which was in arrears by over £1000 and therefore in accordance with its compensation policy, compensation would be paid into his rent account.
On 9 May 2021, the resident asked the landlord to escalate his complaint to stage two of its complaints process. The resident said he was “dumbfounded” by its response. He was dissatisfied with its decision to only consider the previous six months as there had been “ongoing issues” with the condition of the property for four years and had had no “proper” kitchen or bathroom facilities since 2019. The resident also said that on 2 April 2020 there was a gas leak and the boiler was shut down and so he had no hot water or central heating, only electric heaters which were provided.
The resident said these issues including the insect infestation, had affected his mental health. He said nothing had been done about the insect infestation so he had to buy poison himself to put down in an attempt to get rid of the insects. The resident confirmed that various repairs had been carried out including:
1. A repair to the kitchen ceiling in October 2020.
2. The landlord’s subcontractor unblocked the toilet in October 2020.
3. In April 2021, a repair team attended and fixed both extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom, the bathroom lock and replaced the bathroom light and windows to the flat.
4. The boiler was reconnected on 9 May 2021.
The resident disputed that he was in arrears with his rent.
On 10 May 2021, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate his complaint to stage two and it provided a stage two final response on 22 June 2021. Within its response, the landlord:
1. Reiterated that its complaint and compensation policies stated it could only review issues that were raised within six months of the incident happening. In any event there was no evidence of the resident reporting that the kitchen and bathroom had been unusable since 2019.
2. Advised regarding the allegation of a gas leak on 2 April 2020, the resident “should have raised this at the time (in April 2020) and we would have addressed it”.
3. Advised it was sorry to hear the issues with the property had affected the resident’s mental health but said that in accordance with its compensation policy, it did not compensate for the affect repair delays had on a resident’s mental health. It advised said this would be a matter for its insurance provider to make an assessment and to compensate if they consider this had been caused by its negligence.
4. Advised that if the insect infestation was still a problem, the resident would need to contact its call centre. It explained if it was not informed that a repair is required, there was nothing it could do to resolve the issue.
5. Stated it was sorry if its contractors left areas in a mess after carrying out repairs, if this happened again, the resident should contact its Customer Service Team and they could get the contractors to return.
The landlord apologised for the delay in completing repairs and the service provided and said once restrictions eased after Covid, it had a backlog of repairs to complete causing further delays. It said it had been difficult to assess the extent of the repairs in the resident’s case and explained this was partly to do with it changing its repair contractors with caused some confusion. It explained that in normal circumstances it would have been project managed by a surveyor, but due to the backlog of repairs this was not possible.
The landlord said whilst its offer of £350 for the loss of cooking facilities was fair, it was increasing its offer of compensation for his time and trouble from £100 to £400 as it said the works should have been overseen by a surveyor and more coordinated and that the impact on the resident may not have been so significant if it had. It said it was willing to pay the £350 directly to the resident as this cost recognised the cost he incurred while he could not use the kitchen. It also offered £25 for delay in responding to his complaint. It stated the compensation offered totalled £850 which was fair and reasonable.
On 19 August 2021, the resident advised the Ombudsman that he was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of the repairs reported and the level of compensation offered in view of the various repairs/issues that were outstanding whilst he lived in the property and the impact this had on his health. He advised he no longer occupied the property.
In response to the Ombudsman’s request for further details about the resident’s concern regarding a lack of heating/hot water due to a gas leak in April 2020, the landlord advised that no issue with the boiler was reported at that time, nor was it raised during the Gas Safety check of the property on 2 June 2022. The landlord however said the Gas check on 22 April 2021 did show an issue with the boiler and this was disconnected and capped at that time– it said this fitted with the resident’s report in his escalation request that the boiler was reconnected on 9 May 2021.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s repair policy states it will respond differently depending on the urgency of the repair and its response times fall into the following categories: 2 to 4 hours for emergency repairs; 28 calendar days for a non-urgent repair and; 60 calendar days for a programmed repair/ specialist works. Repairs can be reported via its website (web form), via its Self-serve portal (accessible from our website) or by calling its Customer Hub. Appendix 1 of its repair policy details the types of repairs the landlord has responsibility for. This includes pest control, waste blockages and leaks.
The landlord’s compensation policy states it will normally offset any compensation payment against outstanding rent arrears or other debt the resident may have with it.

Blockage to toilet system

The landlord’s repair records show that on 24 September 2020, the resident reported that water was backing up in the toilet although it does not show the timescale given to this report or the date the repair was completed. In his formal complaint dated around five weeks later, the resident complained that its repairs team had not attended to address this issue despite being told they would visit within 4 hours. He said the visit was still outstanding. He also suggested the sewage issue had affected the washing machine causing it to smell.
In its stage one response dated 27 April 2021, the landlord stated this repair had been completed however it did not give the date of when the repair was carried out. As this concerned a potential sewage leak, it is reasonable to expect the landlord to have treated this issue as an emergency. It is clear that the landlord did not attend the property to assess this problem within the 2 to 4 hours timescale given in its repair policy for emergency repairs and told to the resident. Whilst in his escalation request the resident confirmed its drainage subcontractors had attended in (late) October 2020, as this was at least five weeks after the matter was reported, this shows that the landlord did not address this within a reasonable timeframe. Further, it did not acknowledge this in its complaints responses or offer compensation for this delay which would have been reasonable in the circumstances.

Insect infestation

In his formal complaint the resident also advised of an insect infestation at the property and said that appliances in the kitchen including fridge, cooker, microwave, kettle and washing machine, were unhygienic because of insects living in them. In its stage one response, the landlord advised that the resident should raise the insect problem and issue with the kitchen appliances via its repair line. Further, in response to the resident’s subsequent comment made in his escalation request that nothing had been done about the insect infestation and that he had to buy poison himself, the landlord reiterated to the resident that this needed to be reported via its repair line.
Whilst under its repair policy the landlord is responsible for treating insect infestations, its policy also makes clear that residents should report repairs to it either by calling its ‘Customer Hub’ or via its website (portal or web form). There is no evidence to show that the resident reported the insect infestation to the landlord either prior to his formal complaint or following the landlord’s advice provided in its response to call its repair line. Nonetheless, in the resident’s case, having received his formal complaint which described the issues in detail and impact of this on the resident, it is reasonable to expect the landlord to have taken a more proactive approach in investigating and resolving this concern. Its failure at this stage to proceed in arranging an inspection to establish the extent of the issue and identify a suitable resolution constitutes a failure in the service provided.
Regarding the issues reported with domestic appliances, a resident is usually responsible for repairing or replacing these items and this is echoed in the landlord’s repair policy. As there is nothing in the Licence agreement that indicates otherwise, the basis of the landlord’s advice given in its stage one response for the resident to report the faulty domestic appliances via its repair line is unclear. A more detailed explanation from the landlord regarding its position in relation to this complaint, would have been useful in the circumstance.

Leak and lack of access to kitchen facilities

The landlord’s repair records show its contractor attended the property on 24 March 2020 after the resident reported the kitchen ceiling needed “to be made good” on 27 February 2020 due to a previous leak (from the upstairs flat’s boiler). It was identified that the ceiling needed to be replaced due to “sagging” from this leak. The contractor noted at this time that the ceiling “was about to fall apart”. The landlord returned in May 2020 to “make safe” the ceiling and started works to remove and replace the ceiling on 25 August 2020 although it is unclear from the evidence when these works were completed.
The approximate two-month timeframe taken by the landlord to make safe the ceiling and further three months to replace the ceiling indicates a delay by the landlord in addressing this issue. In its final response the landlord explained that due to the Covid-19 pandemic, it was only addressing emergency repairs from March 2020.
This Service recognises that the landlord is not responsible for delays with completing non-urgent repairs during the first Covid-19 lockdown as this cause was outside of its control. However, based on the contractor comments made in March 2020 about the kitchen ceiling, it was reasonable to expect for this repair to be treated as an emergency. Therefore, the landlord’s failure to make safe the ceiling within 4 hours of the issue being identified as per its repair policy indicates a failure in the service provided by the landlord. The landlord did not acknowledge this failure in its complaint responses or offer the resident compensation for the associated time, trouble and inconvenience which would have been reasonable in the circumstance.
In the circumstance, it was also reasonable to expect some delays whilst the landlord worked through the back-log of non-urgent repairs after restrictions started to ease in June 2020. As such, in this case the landlord’s delay until August 2020 to complete the full repair to the kitchen ceiling, was understandable.
The landlord’s repair records however indicate that the resident reported a further leak coming through the kitchen ceiling on 3 November 2020 which meant he did not have use of the kitchen facilities. Whilst the landlord’s records show it raised a job order for its contractors to: “attend and rectify”, it is unclear from this evidence if the cause of the leak was the same as the original leak or if it related to a new issue. In its stage one response, the landlord said its contractor repaired the leak and also carried out “extensive” works to the kitchen following the resident’s November 2020 report which it advised were completed by 7 December 2020.
However, the landlord’s repair records provided to this Service do not detail the nature of the works undertaken to the kitchen at this time indicating poor record keeping on the part of the landlord. As a result we have not been able to verify these, however, by inspecting the property and identifying and carrying out works to the kitchen that it deemed were needed following the further leak reported on 3 November 2020 report, the landlord acted reasonably in this regard.
In its stage one response, the landlord offered the resident £450 in compensation for the: “loss of cooking facilities” from 3 November 2020, the date of his report, until when works were completed on 7 December 2020. Its offer was based on £10 per day for these 35 days plus £100 for his time and trouble. This is in accordance with the landlord’s compensation policy which states it will pay residents (adults) £10 per day for the cost of additional food while cooking facilities are unavailable.
It is acknowledged that in his escalation request, the resident expressed dissatisfied with its compensation offer as he said he had been without use of kitchen facilities since 2019. In its final response the landlord said it had no record of him reporting a lack of access to kitchen facilities prior to 3 November 2020. The landlord’s repair records support this as they do not indicate the resident raised this point either on 27 February 2020 or at any other time prior to 3 November 2020 therefore its response in this regard was reasonable.
In its final response, the landlord increased its offer of compensation for time and trouble from £100 to £400 as it said the works to the kitchen should have been overseen by a surveyor and more coordinated and that the impact on the resident may not have been so significant if it had. The landlord’s increased offer for the resident’s time and trouble in view of this admission, was reasonable as it is in line with its compensation policy which awards up to £400 for “extensive disruption” caused.
It is also noted that the landlord said it was only willing to pay £350 directly to the resident because he had rent arrears, therefore the balance of the compensation would be offset against his rent account. Whilst this approach is in accordance with its compensation policy, it is noted that the resident disputed the landlord’s suggestion that he had rent arrears. In light of this and as the Ombudsman’s current position is that landlords should pay compensation offered in the complaints process, directly to residents, this has been taken into account in the order below.

Other repairs

The resident raised a number of repairs to the landlord in March 2020 including: mould in the bathroom due to the leak; the bathroom extractor fan not working; an issue with the bedroom window not opening and; lighting throughout the property not working. In the formal complaint, the advocate complained these repairs were still outstanding.
In its stage one response, the landlord advised:
1. It had treated the mould in the bathroom on 1 April 2021. This was confirmed by the resident in his escalation request.
2. The bathroom fan had been fixed and the bathroom lock repaired (April 2021). This was confirmed by the resident in his escalation request when he also confirmed the kitchen fan has been fixed and the bathroom light repaired.
3. The repair to the bedroom window was in progress and a sash window had been ordered. The landlord also advised that an appointment for 30 April 2021 had been arranged with the resident.
Therefore, whilst the landlord addressed the majority of the repairs raised, it is clear there was a delay of approximately a year in providing these. Whilst the three national lockdowns that occurred during the period reviewed would have impacted the landlord’s ability to carry the repairs within the timescales stated in its policy, it did not explain this to the resident in its complaint responses. The landlord did in its final response, apologise for the delay in completing repairs and the service provided. However, it did not offer any compensation for the delay in these repairs which would have been reasonable in the circumstances.

Gas leak in April 2020 and the boiler shutting down resulting in no hot water or central heating

In the formal complaint, the advocate refers to a lack of heating but does not make clear when this relates to. In his escalation email to the landlord dated 9 May 2021, the resident refers to both a lack of heating and hot water due to a gas leak on 2 April 2020 when he said the boiler was switched off. He also suggests the gas was turned back on 9 May 2021. In its final response, the landlord only stated that the resident “should have raised this at the time (in April 2020) and we would have addressed it”.
In response to the Ombudsman’s request for further details about this complaint, the landlord said it had no evidence of any responsive repair raised about the boiler in April 2020 and it provided us with the Gas Safety record for the property dated 2 June 2020 which shows the boiler was deemed safe to use and that it passed all test. The landlord however said the subsequent Gas check on 22 April 2021 did show an issue with the boiler at the property which was disconnected and capped on this date. The landlord commented that this fitted with the resident’s report in his escalation request that the boiler was reconnected on 9 May 2021.
Therefore, there is no evidence to establish that the boiler was capped in April 2020 which resulted in the resident experiencing a loss of heating and hot water at that time as suggested in the complaint. However, as the landlord has confirmed to this Service that the resident’s boiler was disconnected and capped on 22 April 2021 and reconnected on 9 May 2021, a recommendation has been included below for the landlord to consider if further compensation is due to the resident for the loss of heating/hot water and associated time and trouble for this issue.

Complaint handling

The landlord operates a two-stage complaints procedure under which it will acknowledge a complaint within five working days and provide a response within 10 working days under stage one of its procedure. Further, the landlord will provide a final response within 20 working days at stage two of its process.
The resident’s stage one complaint was sent to the landlord on 27 January 2021, and it provided its stage one response on 27 April 2021 indicating a failure by the landlord to provide its response within the timescale stated in its policy. The landlord did not acknowledge this delay or offer redress for distress and inconvenience caused by its delay in its stage one response, which would have been reasonable.
The landlord provided a stage two response on 22 June 2021 and as the resident requested escalation of his complaint on 9 May 2021, this shows there was a further delay in providing its response at stage two. However, as the landlord acknowledged there was a delay and offered £25 in compensation, it provided reasonable redress for this delay.
The landlord did not address all the issues and repairs raised by the resident in his formal complaint for example it did not reference in its responses, the leaky drain pipe and an issue with the bedroom blind which was raised by the advocate in his stage one complaint. In accordance with the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code, the landlord is expected to respond to all aspects of the complaints raised as such by not doing so, the landlord did not adequately deal with the complaint in this regard.
Also, in its complaint responses, the landlord did not fully address the resident’s concern raised about the gas leak and resulting lack of heating and hot water. Whilst the landlord subsequently provided further information about this to the Ombudsman when requested, its brief response given during the complaints process is indicative of a further complaint handling failure.
In its final response, the landlord acknowledged it had difficulty in assessing the extent of the resident’s repairs from its repair history, partly due to it changing its repairs contractors which caused “some confusion”. This indicates a failure to keep clear and detailed records of repairs during this process which it is evident impacted on the landlord’s ability to deal with the substantive complaint about repairs in this case. This is further evidence of a complaint handling failure by the landlord.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord when responding to the resident’s reports of a blockage to the toilet system.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord when responding to reports of an insect infestation.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord when responding to reports of a leak and lack of access to the kitchen.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord when responding reports of other repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord when responding reports of a Gas leak in April 2020.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord when handling the related complaint.

Reasons

The landlord unreasonably delayed with responding to and resolving the report of a blocked toilet system and it did not acknowledge this in its complaints responses.
The landlord did not take any action to investigate or remedy the resident’s report of an insect infestation raised via the formal complaint which would have been reasonable in the circumstances.
The landlord did not promptly take steps to make safe the kitchen ceiling or treat this as an emergency after its contractor had identified it was unsafe. Further, it did not offer redress for this in its complaint responses. However, it did then carry out repairs to the ceiling and respond promptly to a further report of a leak from the ceiling and no access to kitchen facilities, although its repair records do not show what works it carried out. The landlord offered compensation for the inconvenience caused whilst it carried out works which was reasonable.
The landlord addressed a number of minor repairs reported as needed however there was a delay of up to a year for some of these. It did acknowledge and apologise for the delays in its complaints response but did not provide a clear explanation for the delay and did not offer compensation for the inconvenience.
There was no evidence to establish that the landlord failed to respond to a Gas leak reported in April 2020.
There were delays and other service failures when handling the resident’s complaint which it did not provide sufficient redress for during the complaints process.

Orders and recommendations

The Ombudsman orders that the landlord:
1. Pay the resident the compensation offered in its complaints process if not already done so (this is stated as £850 in its final response however this appears to be an error as the total of the amounts offered come to £775)
2. Pay the resident additional compensation of £600 comprised of:
  1. £100 for the delay in responding to the report of a blocked toilet system.
  2. £100 for its failure to appropriately respond to the report of an insect infestation.
  3. £100 for the unreasonable delay with making the kitchen ceiling safe.
  4. £100 for the delay in completing minor repairs.
  5. £200 for complaint handling failures.
3. Pay the compensation ordered above directly to the resident.
4. Review its record keeping procedures in respect of repair records and provide an update to the Ombudsman on how it will ensure it keeps full records of repairs reported, works carried out and the date repairs are completed. Further, to ensure it has full access to records of works/repairs carried out by its contractors.
5. Comply with the above orders within four weeks.
The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
1. Consider if further compensation is due to the resident for the loss of heating/hot water and associated time and trouble after it confirmed to us that it capped the boiler on 22 April 2021 which was reconnected on 9 May 2021.