Places for People Group Limited (202218714)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202218714

Places for People Group Limited

20 November 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 handling of repairs at the resident’s property.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident holds a joint assured shorthold tenancy that started in July 2000. The property is described as a 3-bedroom end of terrace house of brick construction. The resident’s daughter has a heart condition and epilepsy.
The resident reported on 4 January 2022 that there was reoccurring mould throughout the property even though it was well-ventilated and had sufficient heating. The landlord arranged an appointment for 7 February 2022. The landlord’s records do not contain any further detail about the appointment.
On 22 February 2022, the resident requested that the landlord assess a kitchen drawer unit as it had fallen off for the fifth time. On 17 March 2022, the landlord’s records show a repair was raised for the back door and patio door to be overhauled.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 30 September 2022 at the informal stage of its complaints procedure. It said that:
1. An appointment to repair the kitchen drawer had been rescheduled for 6 October 2022.
2. An operative attended on 26 September 2022 and reported that the kitchen door was in working order.
3. A report had been sent to a trades supervisor regarding the reports of damp and mould.
4. It had been informed that further action was not required to address the mould in the property.
5. The trade supervisor would contact her within 5 working days.
6. The complaint had been closed. If the trades supervisor did not attend by 10 October 2022, the complaint would be re–opened.
This Service wrote to the landlord on 18 November 2022, advising that the resident remained dissatisfied with its response to her concerns about damp and mould, repairs to the patio door seals, the back door alignment and the kitchen drawer unit.
The landlord provided its Stage 1 response to the resident’s complaint on 7 December 2022. The landlord partially upheld the complaint and said:
1. Damp and mould
  1. An appointment had been arranged for 22 December 2022 for an air conditioning and ventilation specialist to assess the ventilation in the property. It would provide the landlord with a list of works to be carried out.
  2. A mould wash was to be undertaken throughout the property. The property was to be inspected to identify contributory factors such as blocked gutters and faulty trickle vents.
2. Patio door seals and rear door alignment
  1. It had arranged for an external door and window specialist to attend in June 2022 to address the items of disrepair.
  2. It reattended in September 2022 after it received a further report from the resident. At that visit, no issues were found.
  3. It had raised a new repair request for attendance on 22 December 2022.
3. Kitchen drawer
  1. It would undertake the repair to the kitchen drawer on 22 December 2022.
The resident expressed to the landlord on 9 January 2023 that she remained dissatisfied with its complaint response. She added that she had escalated her complaint on 9 December 2022 and not received a response. In response, the landlord advised that it had not received an escalation request from her but would escalate the complaint. Later that day, the resident checked and the escalation request was in her email sent box.
The landlord provided its Stage 2 complaint response on 14 March 2023. It upheld the resident’s complaint and apologised that the works allocated for 22 December 2022 did not take place. The works were rebooked for 16 February 2023. The landlord went on to say that:
1. A mould treatment had been completed on 16 February 2023 to the affected walls and surfaces.
2. It had repaired the kitchen unit drawer on 29 June 2022 and the double-glazed door on 13 June 2022.
3. The replacement of the kitchen drawer was planned for 15 March 2023. It stated that it would try to match as close to the existing unit as possible. However, due to the age of the kitchen, it did not believe that this was likely. It was satisfied that the kitchen unit was useable and functional.
4. The resident would be notified when the kitchen replacement programme was taking place in her area.
5. The ventilation company had surveyed her property on 27 February 2023. It would action the report once it was received.
6. The window company had advised that the patio door was secure. However, the doors had been assessed as warped and aged. Within the next 8-12 weeks, the doors would be replaced.
7. The resident had experienced 3 missed appointments.
8. An overall compensation award of £2,271 was appropriate. This was broken down as £100 for the delay and time taken to respond to the complaint and £30 for missed appointments. An award of £2,141 was made in recognition of the damage to the resident’s belongings. These were listed as: to replace the resident’s lounge, dining room and bedroom carpets, bathroom and toilet blinds, bedroom, French door and window curtains. The payment also included damage to the lounge wallpaper and to paintwork in the dining room, bedroom and toilet plus electric heater usage.
9. Its contractors would attend on 22 March 2023 – regarding the French and back doors – and on 16 March 2023 – to repair the kitchen drawer.
10. Once the report from the ventilation contractor was received, it would make contact to progress any identified repairs. It was also waiting to receive a survey of the property and consider both reports to decide on the works to be done.
On 3 July 2023, the landlord’s independent complaints panel considered the resident’s complaint. It concluded that outstanding repairs were required to the property. However, the installation to the French doors and back door had been completed and a date agreed for the installation of the extractor fans to assist with the reported damp and mould. The independent complaints panel concluded it had taken too long for the repairs to be completed and the landlord had failed to monitor, check and co–ordinate the progress of the repairs.
The independent complaints panel recommended that the outstanding work be completed in a timely manner and progress should be overseen. It listed the works that remained outstanding and said a site visit would be undertaken within 6 months. These were:
1. Refurbishment of the kitchen where the damaged units were.
2. Guttering repairs completed and checked.
3. Broken roof tiles replaced.
4. Roof, fascia and soffits checked.

Events after complaint process ended

The roof was inspected on 4 July 2023. On 24 July 2023, the landlord’s contractor attended to carry out the following works: install loft unit and extractor fan in the bathroom, replace kitchen extractor fan and install felt in roof vent.
The landlord’s contractor noted on 23 October 2023 that a mould wash had been completed in February 2023 but the mould had returned. The damp had come through from the external wall and repairs were required to the external wall before starting the internal work.
On 14 February 2024, a damp and mould survey was carried out. The survey identified that the property had a category 1 or 2 hazard and assessed the mould growth as moderate. Fungicidal mould washes were recommended for the kitchen, box and master bedrooms and bathroom. A recommendation was made for an automatic extractor fan to be fitted to the bathroom and the kitchen extractor fan overhauled.
The landlord was informed by the roofing contractor on 5 March 2024 that the brickwork was porous, causing water ingress, and the roof along the rear had perished, causing damp to trickle down the wall. The landlord was informed that the works required were: to remove and refix interlocking tiles, to renew roof cover felt and battens, to renew the tile verge and to clear cavity areas to a wall. They also recommended reviewing the airbrick and duct and applying sealant to the wall.
The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated the complaint to this Service.

Assessment and findings

Scope of complaint investigation

The resident has raised concerns to this Service about replacement of the kitchen units, leak to her kitchen sink and repairs to the boundary fences. The resident also raised a request for new double-glazed windows. As these issues did not form part of the formal complaint to the landlord under consideration, we cannot investigate them at this stage as the landlord needs to be provided with the opportunity to investigate and respond to these reports through its complaints process. The resident will need to contact the landlord and, if appropriate, raise a new complaint to get this matter resolved. She may then approach the Ombudsman if she remains dissatisfied.

Tenancy terms and landlord policies

Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, there is an implied term in the tenancy agreement that the landlord will keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property. Once the landlord has notice of a repair, they should carry out this out within a reasonable timescale.
Under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, the landlord is responsible for ensuring that the property is fit for human habitation. This is from when the tenancy is granted and for the duration of that tenancy.
This Service’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) provides recommendations for landlords, including that they should “adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions”. The report also recommends that landlords effectively deal with the causes of damp and mould in a timely manner and monitor the situation.

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of various repairs reported by the resident

Each aspect which was subject of the resident’s complaint to the landlord have been considered in turn below.

Damp and mould

The resident reported on 7 January 2022 that damp and mould returned to the property. The landlord’s repair policy says that it will attend non-emergency appointments within 28 days. Its first appointment was arranged for 7 February 2022, 21 working days later. However, with the resident’s consent the appointment was rearranged to 22 February 2022 – 32 working days later. The landlord acted in line with its repair policy which says that it will arrange appointments with its residents.
However, it is unreasonable that the landlord’s repair records lack sufficient detail. This makes it impossible to assess whether it acted in line with its obligations in the diagnosis and assessment of the work required to resolve the damp and mould in the resident’s property in February 2022.
The resident chased the landlord regarding outstanding damp and mould repairs 3 months later in June 2022. If the reasons for the damp and mould are complex, there can understandably be delays in diagnosis and multiple inspections. Nevertheless, in this case, the evidence shows a lack of oversight by the landlord in recording the work required to the resident’s property and a failure to monitor and check that any repairs raised had resolved the damp and mould. This caused delay, inconvenience and frustration to the resident.
The landlord’s information to the resident about the property condition on 30 September 2022 was inconsistent. In its informal complaint response, the landlord informed the resident that an operative found that the damp and mould in the property had been addressed. However, its repair records indicated that the repairs had not been completed. Given the landlord appeared unclear about the action taken to address the damp and mould, this suggests a failure to monitor progress and the performance of its contractor, causing inconvenience to the resident.
This Service’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (October 2021) advises landlords that they should adopt a zero-tolerance approach to remedy reports of damp and mould. The landlord did not act in accordance with this despite conducting a self-assessment against the recommendations outlined in the Spotlight Report. From September 2022 onwards, the landlord took around 4 months to January 2023 before it arranged a damp survey of the property and a further delay occurred before a roofing inspection was arranged in April 2023. It agreed that a trades supervisor would inspect the condition of the property but the inspection did not appear to take place. The landlord’s action demonstrated a lack of urgency to address the damp and mould in the property, despite being aware that this was present in the resident’s son’s bedroom.
It was reasonable that the landlord agreed on 7 December 2022 for an air conditioning and ventilation specialist to attend, for a mould and wash to be undertaken and for a property inspection be carried out. Any quality inspection of damp and mould should include an assessment of all possible causes, including checking the fabric of the building for faults.
The damp and mould survey undertaken on 24 January 2023 found high damp meter readings in the property and black mould. The survey recommended that the gutters be checked or replaced, window perimeters be sealed and plasterboard be removed and replaced to 2 bedrooms, the bathroom and the kitchen. On receiving the survey results, the landlord arranged for the works to be carried out within 4 working days on 30 January 2023. It is noted that the resident requested that the date of the work be moved to be completed within the February half term.
In its final complaint response, the landlord recognised and apologised that the appointment for the air-conditioning and ventilation survey had not been kept for 22 December 2022. While it was appropriate that it did so, a further record keeping failure occurred as its submission to this Service does not give reasons for the appointment not being kept. Also, it seemed unaware that its contractor had not attended. Without the resident bringing the missed appointment to its attention, there is no evidence that the landlord would have acted. This is not reasonable as the landlord is responsible for ensuring that any inspections it has arranged take place.
The landlord received the survey from the air conditioning and ventilation contractor on 24 March 2023. The landlord was informed that new extractor fans were required to the bathroom and kitchen, felt vents should be installed to improve air flow and a 3-stage mould treatment was required. The works to install the extractor fans were not completed until July 2023. Simply removing surface mould will not prevent damp and mould from reappearing so it was important for the landlord to identify and tackle the underlying causes of damp and mould, including remedying inadequate ventilation and condensation. However, the work took 82 working days to complete. This represented a significant delay and likely caused inconvenience and concern to the resident and her family. Despite these delays, the landlord has not demonstrated that it carried out a risk assessment despite being award of black mould and children living in the property, one of whom had a medical condition.
A mould treatment was undertaken in April 2023 and the gutters cleaned the following month in May 2023. Nevertheless, based on evidence supplied to this Service, the landlord did not take any steps to assess whether the works undertaken had resolved the damp and mould. The landlord should have carried out a post inspection of the property to satisfy itself that the damp and mould had been resolved. It is noted that this was also a recommendation made by its independent complaints panel several months later.
The landlord was informed in October 2023 that the damp to the resident’s property had returned. A new damp survey took place on 14 February 2024 which recommended another mould wash. It took a further 2 weeks before the landlord received a report from a roofing company on 5 March 2024 outlining the repairs required to remedy the defects to the roof. This recommended repairs to the brickwork to stop water ingress into the property. The landlord has not given any further information regarding its response to the information provided by its roofing contractor. This investigation has not reviewed the handling of roofing repairs as this information was provided to the landlord after the complaint exhausted its complaint procedure. It remains open to the resident if she wishes to made a new complaint to the landlord about any delay in roofing repairs. However, it is of concern that the landlord’s earlier roofing inspection in April 2023 did not find the faults that the March 2024 visit established.
The assessment of damaged items would usually be dealt with by insurers. The landlord decided as part of the complaint process to assess the damage to the resident’s belongings caused by the reported damp and mould in the property. The landlord made a compensation award of £2,126 for the damage to the resident’s belongings that it believed was due to its own negligence. It is outside the remit of this Service to assess damages or personal injury claims. Nevertheless, it was reasonable and resolution-focused for the landlord to award compensation in recognition of items that the resident said were damaged. This was likely done by the landlord in the interests of maintaining a positive landlord/tenant relationship.
In summary, the resident and her family experienced significant delays, inconvenience and time and trouble due to the landlord’s failings in addressing her reports of damp and mould. While the landlord apologised to the resident for the distress and inconvenience experienced and made an offer for damaged items, it did not award compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident for a period of well over a year. This is not reasonable as it missed an opportunity to consider the impact of its service failures on the resident and her family.

Patio door seals and back door alignment

The resident reported a defect to the back door on 17 March 2022 and a works order was raised to overhaul the back door and French door. The landlord’s records do not provide any further information about its assessment of the condition of the door except that it later said in its complaint response that it attended in June 2022. This is not reasonable as its records should explain whether it had a repairing obligation and the outcome of any appointment made.
Nevertheless, it was reasonable for the landlord to conclude that the matter was resolved as there was a gap until 18 November 2022 when the resident again raised the defect to the patio door. In response, a non-emergency repair was raised on 30 January 2023 for the kitchen door and French doors to be inspected. It is of concern that there were a couple of months of delay here, including the missed appointment in December 2022.
The repair request does not give an appointment date but it appears that the contractor attended on 16 February 2023. They assessed that the patio door was secure but warped, aged and needed replacing. The resident chased the landlord on 6 March 2023 regarding the door repair and was informed that an appointment had been arranged for 16 March 2023. The resident informed the landlord that its contractor had already attended. It is unreasonable that the landlord did not hold accurate records regarding its contractor’s attendance, its diagnosis and the work assessed to be required. This affected its ability to provide the resident with accurate and up to date information about the planned repairs.
The landlord’s records do not explain its delay in raising the order on 14 April 2023 for the supply and fitting of the French doors. The resident was aware of the potential 8 to 12-week lead time for the door to be measured and fitted. When the independent complaints panel met in July 2023, the doors had been renewed by that point. This indicates that the works were done around the time that the landlord proposed.
In summary, the resident experienced delays in getting repairs raised and inspections completed for the patio/French doors. In addition, the landlord’s records did not contain accurate information about the action it was taking which likely caused confusion to the resident.

Kitchen drawer unit

The resident said in February 2022 that a new kitchen drawer unit was required as the existing drawer had been repaired on multiple occasions. There is no evidence that the landlord acted in response to the resident’s report. This was inappropriate.
The resident reported further deterioration to the kitchen drawer unit around 6 months later in August 2022, stating that the wood panels had fallen off and the bracket had deteriorated. In its initial complaint response, the landlord advised that the drawer unit was scheduled for repair on 6 October 2022. The landlord did not acknowledge the delay experienced by the resident in its complaint response. This was not reasonable as its review should have highlighted the inconvenience already caused.
The landlord’s records show that its contractor attended to repair the drawer unit on 7 December 2022. It is not clear whether any repairs were carried out. In its final complaint response, the landlord advised it had arranged to replace the drawer on 15 March 2023. However, due to the age of the kitchen, it did not believe that an exact match would be likely. It was reasonable for the landlord to seek to manage the resident’s expectations about the likelihood of repairing or finding a replacement match for the damaged kitchen drawer unit.

Repairs – summary

Overall, the resident experienced delays in obtaining a resolution to the reported repairs, partly due to the landlord’s poor record keeping. The landlord’s repair records lack detail about the performance of its contractors when attempting repairs. The landlord is responsible for the actions of its contractors and should ensure it has proper oversight over their actions so its repairing obligations are met.
The landlord’s repair policy says that it will make non-emergency repair appointments with its residents. However, there were instances when conflicting information was given to the resident about repairs appointments which caused uncertainty and frustration to the resident. The evidence shows a lack of tracking and monitoring of appointments, resulting in the landlord being unaware what visits had been undertaken and the progress of repairs.
Through its complaint investigations, the landlord committed to carry out works to remedy the condition of the resident’s property. The Ombudsman expects such works to be completed in a reasonable period of time in line with proposals made in complaint responses. However, the landlord has not evidenced that it did so and failed to show that it has learnt from the identified failures.
Earlier this year, the Ombudsman made a wider order for the landlord to carry out a comprehensive review of its repairs management with an emphasis on record-keeping (ordered as part of case 202321572). This also included the monitoring of progress of repairs for internal and external contractors. This was made under paragraph 54(f) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. Some of the issues identified in this case are similar to the previous case. We have not made any orders or recommendations as part of this case, which would duplicate those already made to landlord as part of the wider order.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s complaint procedure says that it will respond to complaints it receives “on the spot” by putting things right within 24 hours. If it is unable to do so, it will respond at its first stage within 10 working days and at its second stage within 20 working days. If the resident remains dissatisfied with its response, the complaint can be escalated to its independent complaints panel or to this Service.
The available information does not make clear the date the resident complained to the landlord about the property condition. However, the landlord responded on 30 September 2022 giving information about the date the repairs to the kitchen drawer and kitchen door would be completed. It also said that it had been informed that no further works were required to remedy the damp. The resident was informed that if the trades supervisor did not attend on 10 October 2022 as promised, the complaint would be reopened. When the trades supervisor did not attend on 10 October 2022, the landlord did not take any action. This was not reasonable as it did not evidence that it monitored or tracked the commitments it made in its complaint response.
The landlord’s failure to monitor its complaint response promises caused inconvenience and delay to the resident. This likely led to the resident having to contact this Service to get the landlord to progress her complaint. The landlord was contacted on 18 November 2022 and advised to progress the resident’s complaint.
It was appropriate that the landlord apologised to the resident on 24 November 2022 and recognised its failure to follow its complaint procedure. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 7 December 2022, taking 13 working days. This was just outside of its complaint handling target.
It is acknowledged that the resident thought that she had escalated her complaint to the landlord’s second stage on 9 December 2022. However, she had not done so as the escalation request remained in her sent email box.
Nevertheless, the complaint was escalated on 9 January 2023 and the landlord failed to provided its final complaint response until 14 March 2023. The landlord took 46 working days to respond which was well outside of its complaint handling target.
The landlord acknowledged and apologised for its delay and made the resident a compensation award of £100 for this (plus £30 for missed appointments). As mentioned above, the landlord also offered a payment of £2,141 for damage to her belongings and energy costs. While it was encouraging that the landlord awarded £100 compensation, this was not proportionate to the failings identified in regard to the extent of delays and the failure to follow up on complaint commitments.
The complaint was heard by the landlord’s independent complaints panel on 3 July 2023. The panel acknowledged the delay experienced by the resident and length of time that the work had been outstanding. The independent panel made recommendations to the landlord regarding the outstanding work to be carried out to the property and that it should undertake a site visit in 6 months’ time. There is no evidence that the landlord has followed the advice given by its independent panel. This is unreasonable, especially given the purpose of the panel is to help with the resolution of complaints.
The landlord’s dispute resolution principles are: be fair, put things right and learn from the complaints it receives. Given the landlord has not evidenced that it has learnt from this complaint a finding of service failure has been made.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs at the resident’s property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Write to the resident to apologise for the service failures identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident £2,871 compensation (including the £2,271 awarded during the complaints process) for the delay and inconvenience experienced. This is broken down as:
  1. £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures in its handling of repairs;
  2. an additional £100 for the landlord’s complaint handling failures.
If the landlord has already paid the £2,271 it offered to the resident, it can offset this amount from the £2,871 ordered above and pay the remaining balance to the resident.
If it has not already done so, within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should arrange a mutually convenient property inspection to ensure that the causes of damp and mould have been resolved.
Within 2 weeks of that inspection, the landlord should write to the resident to:
1. Confirm the findings of the inspection, including any outstanding repairs that are needed and when it will complete these.
2. If the roofing works remain outstanding, provide a mutually convenient appointment date for them to start.
3. Provide a single point of contact who will oversee the outstanding repairs and offer regular updates until any identified works are completed.
The landlord should provide this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.