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

Peabody Trust (202200321)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202200321

Peabody Trust

5 August 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

  1. The complaint is about:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s repairs including damp and mould.
    2. The landlord’s complaint handling.
  2. The Ombudsman has also assessed the landlord’s record keeping.

Background

  1. The resident holds a secure tenancy. The property is a one-bedroom ground floor flat. The landlord is a housing association.
  2. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 9 May 2022. She asked it to meet with her about ongoing repairs issues which included damp and mould, peeling wallpaper and paint, and the removal of a rotting shed in the garden. When the landlord did not respond, the resident asked the Ombudsman to contact the landlord on her behalf. On 29 November 2022, the Ombudsman asked the landlord to issue a stage 1 complaint response.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 29 December 2022. It said it had replaced extractor fans in the resident’s kitchen and bathroom in August 2022. It had fixed a leak from the property upstairs. Its surveyor would contact the resident to carry out another property inspection. It was sorry for the amount of contact the resident had made when chasing the repairs. It apologised for the delay in issuing its stage 1 complaint response.
  4. The resident asked to escalate her complaint. In January 2023, the Ombudsman asked the landlord to issue its stage 2 complaint response, but the landlord failed to do so. On 10 February 2023, the Ombudsman advised the landlord again to issue its stage 2 response.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 27 February 2023. It said:
    1. Its damp contractor was meant to complete repairs in the property in October 2022. It had failed to monitor the works and did not recognise that its damp contractor had not attended. It was sorry for this.
    2. Its surveyor would come to reinspect the property on 10 March 2023. Its surveyor would then agree a schedule of works with the resident. Its complaints handler would monitor the completion of the works.
    3. It did not action the resident’s request to escalate within a reasonable timeframe. This was because its complaints procedure was not followed. It was sorry for this and had restructured its complaints team.
    4. It offered a total of £1,372.62 compensation made up of:
      1. £250 for its handling of the stage 1 complaint.
      2. £250 for time, trouble and inconvenience caused to the resident.
      3. £827.62 which was a 20% rent rebate for the loss of enjoyment of the resident’s home between August 2022 and March 2023.
  6. The landlord’s surveyor inspected the property on 10 March 2023. On 2 May 2023, the landlord raised several works orders. The orders included removing earth in the garden, adjusting the windows and doors and draught proofing. Further orders were raised to clear vents, install insulation, and hack off and reinstate plaster in the kitchen. There was also a works order to remove the shed in the garden.
  7. The resident brought her complaint to the Ombudsman on 11 May 2023. She was unhappy as the landlord did not provide her with a schedule of works. It did not provide her with timeframes for when the work would be completed. She wanted the landlord to provide this as an outcome to her complaint.
  8. The landlord’s contractor started the works in June 2023. In October 2023, the landlord told the Ombudsman that once the repairs were complete, it would offer the resident additional compensation because of the delays. The landlord’s contractor finished all works related to damp in December 2023. Remaining works to replace the windows were ongoing. This was because the windows were in the process of being made.
  9. On 12 February 2024, the Ombudsman asked the landlord if it had offered the resident additional compensation. On 16 February 2024, the landlord contacted the resident with a revised compensation offer of £2,127.62 made up of:
    1. £500 for the handling of the stage 1 complaint.
    2. £800 for time, trouble and inconvenience.
    3. £827.62 which was a 20% rent rebate for the loss of enjoyment of the resident’s home between August 2022 and March 2023.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s repairs including damp and mould.

  1. The landlord’s damp and mould policy says that its internal teams or specialist contractors diagnose damp and mould. For complex damp issues, the landlord had an internal action panel that review the progress of the work.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy says it aims to complete non urgent repairs within 28 days. It aims to complete programmed repairs such as kitchen replacements, within 60 calendar days. It aims to complete complex works within 60 days.
  3. When the resident raised her complaint, she said that repairs issues had been ongoing since December 2021. She said the landlord had not returned her calls. The landlord’s stage 1 response suggested that the resident had to chase its repairs team on several occasions. This is evidence of the landlord’s poor communication with the resident.
  4. The landlord did not supply the Ombudsman with evidence of its inspection surveys. It is unclear what the source of the damp issue was and whether the landlord thought it was a complex issue. However, the resident told the Ombudsman before the works had started in 2023, that she had not been updated by the landlord. This shows a failure in communication. The landlord should have updated the resident about the schedule of works. This would have reassured her that the works were going ahead and when they were going to be completed.
  5. After the landlord had issued its stage 2 response, the evidence shows that its complaints team regularly chased its contractor for updates on the works. Its contractor told the complaints team that it was keeping the landlord’s surveyor updated on the progress of the works. This shows a failure in communication between the landlord’s internal departments.
  6. In March 2023, the landlord reinspected the resident’s property. It took the landlord around 2 months to raise the associated works orders. This was not reasonable and caused unnecessary delays. It should have raised the works in good time.
  7. The landlord’s contractor took around 6 months in 2023 to complete the damp works in the resident’s property. The lack of evidence impeded the Ombudsman’s investigation into the reasons why the works took this long. The length of time taken goes against the landlord’s repairs policy.
  8. It is unclear if the window works were completed as the landlord has not updated the Ombudsman about this.
  9. Overall, it took the landlord between August 2022 and December 2023 to complete the damp works in the resident’s property. This is a period of around 16 months. This is not reasonable. The evidence did not show any reasons to explain why the works took so long to complete. If there were complex issues it should have followed its policy and used an internal action panel to monitor the works. It did not complete the works within the timeframes set out in its repairs policy.
  10. The landlord demonstrated maladministration in its handling of the resident’s repairs including damp and mould. This is because of its failures in communication with the resident and between its internal departments. The length of time for damp and mould repairs to be completed was unreasonable.
  11. Our remedies are never intended to be punitive or to act as a deterrent and should not be viewed as a punishment for landlord failings. Instead, they are a means by which the Ombudsman ensures that matters are put right. On this occasion, the landlord concluded that the resident should be compensated at 20% of monthly rent for the period August 2022 to December 2023. However, the resident’s use and enjoyment of the property was particularly impaired between 19 June 2023 and 20 November 2023 when the works were actually completed. As such, I do not consider that a 20% reduction in rent is proportionate to the level of disruption the resident experienced at this time.
  12. Given that the property is a one-bedroom flat, the scale of the works affecting almost every room and the landlord’s failure to consider decanting the resident, the landlord should amend the percentage to 50% for the period 19 June 2023 to 20 November 2023. When considering this percentage figure, I have also considered the disruption caused and costs incurred during the period without a kitchen and the week when the resident did not have heating or hot water and the significant cleaning she had to complete.
  13. Separately, the distress and inconvenience the resident experienced has also been assessed. It is clear that the landlord’s poor handling of the repairs had a significant impact on the resident. However, the landlord’s existing offer of £800 is proportionate to the distress and inconvenience the resident experienced.

The landlord’s complaints handling.

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy says it aims to resolve stage 1 complaints within 10 working days. It aims to resolve stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The landlord’s compensation policy says it provides compensation when a resident is unable to use part of their home. It also provides compensation when it has not met its standards of service or handled a complaint properly. It offers a maximum of £650 for time, trouble and inconvenience. It offers a maximum of £300 for poor complaint handling.
  2. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out requirements for member landlords that will allow them to respond to complaints effectively and fairly. The Code says that complaint investigations should seek reliable and sufficient information. To ensure fairness, the investigation should consider all information and evidence carefully.
  3. The landlord took around 7 months to issue its stage 1 complaint response. It also had to be prompted by the Ombudsman to do so. It apologised for the delay but did not explain why it had not responded within its own timeframes. Due to the length of the delay, it should have offered compensation at this point as per its compensation policy.
  4. The landlord did not recognise in its stage 1 complaint response in December 2022, that its damp contractor had not carried out the works which it should have done 2 months previously. This suggests that the landlord did not conduct a thorough investigation into the resident’s complaint at this stage. This goes against the Code. It could also suggest that it did not have access to the appropriate information to inform the investigation. It took until its stage 2 response for it to recognise the failure. This was 4 months after its contractor should have started works to resolve the damp. This was unreasonable and caused further delay in getting the outstanding works done.
  5. It took the landlord around 2 months to issue its stage 2 complaint response. It had to be asked twice by the Ombudsman to do so. In its stage 2 complaint response, it explained the reason for the delays and offered compensation. However, the compensation offered did not reflect the detriment caused to the resident.
  6. The Ombudsman completed a special investigation into the landlord in March 2023. The special investigation recommended that the landlord should introduce further measures to ensure delays in responding to complaints were being addressed.
  7. The landlord did not revise its compensation offer until prompted to do so by the Ombudsman in February 2024. This was 2 months after it had completed the damp works. The landlord should have revised its offer when the damp works were completed. The landlord should not have to be prompted by the Ombudsman to follow through on actions that it said it would do.
  8. In its revised offer of compensation, the landlord increased the amount it offered for the handling of the stage 1 complaint by £250. It also increased its offer for time, trouble and inconvenience by £550. The additional compensation for these points, was above the maximum amount set out in its compensation policy. This was reasonable and adequately reflected the detriment caused to the resident.
  9. The landlord’s offer for the loss of enjoyment of the property did not change. It should have considered additional compensation for the loss of enjoyment of the property up until the damp works were completed in December 2023.
  10. The landlord should follow the formula that it used to calculate the resident’s loss of enjoyment of the property in its stage 2 response. It should offer additional compensation of 20% rent rebate between April 2023 – December 2023. This is the period where the damp works were being completed.
  11. The landlord commented internally that the window works were not part of the complaint. Works orders raised in May 2023 suggest that the windows did form part of the complaint. The landlord should advise the Ombudsman and the resident if the window repairs are completed or when the window repairs are due to be completed.
  12. There was maladministration with the landlord’s complaint handling, due to the delays in issuing its complaint responses. It failed to thoroughly investigate the repairs issue at stage 1. Its revised compensation offer did not consider the full time period for loss of enjoyment of the property whilst damp works were being completed.

The landlord’s record keeping.

  1. It was not reasonable that the landlord forgot to monitor its first damp contractor in October 2022. It took 4 months for it to notice the work had not been completed. It recognised this in its stage 2 response and offered compensation for time and inconvenience. However, this indicated poor information management and record keeping.
  2. The landlord told the Ombudsman that it did not have records of its stage 1 complaint response. It did not provide records of its property inspections. The lack of evidence impeded the Ombudsman’s investigation into the complaint.
  3. The Ombudsman’s special investigation recommended that the landlord review its record keeping processes and training for staff on its systems. The landlord could continue to implement the recommendations to improve its record keeping. The landlord could also refer to the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management.
  4. The landlord demonstrated maladministration with its record keeping.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was:
    1. Maladministration with the landlord’s handling of the resident’s repairs including damp and mould.
    2. Maladministration with the landlord’s complaint handling.
    3. Maladministration with the landlord’s record keeping.

Orders

  1. Pay the resident a total of £3,912.90 in compensation (this is inclusive of the landlord’s existing offer). This was comprised of:
    1. £800 for the resident’s time, trouble and inconvenience.
    2. £827.62 for the loss of enjoyment of the resident’s home between August 2022 and March 2023.
    3. £307.40 for the loss of enjoyment of the resident’s home between April 2023 and 18 June 2023.
    4. £1,477.88 for the loss of enjoyment of the resident’s home between 19 June 2023 and 20 November 2023.
    5. £500 for its shortfalls in complaint handling.
  2. Consider reimbursing the resident’s out-of-pocket expenses for replacing the damaged curtain rail in line with its compensation policy (the resident is required to provide the landlord with proof of purchase).
  3. Contact the resident about the window replacements. If they remain outstanding, the landlord should provide the resident with an action plan with realistic timescales for completion. The landlord should also provide a clear explanation why it is not changing as many windows as originally planned.
  4. The landlord should comply with the orders above within 4 weeks of the date of this report. It should provide evidence of its compliance to the Ombudsman.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord is to continue to implement the recommendations from the Ombudsman’s special investigation around complaint delays and record keeping processes.
  2. The landlord is to refer to the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management.
  3. The landlord is to contact the resident to arrange a damp and mould inspection at the property.
  4.