Southwark Council (202330730)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202330730

Southwark Council

25 July 2025

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a leak from the flat above.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident has been a leaseholder of the landlord, a local authority, since 2016. The property is a 2-bedroom, first–floor flat. There are no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident.
Between December 2022 and May 2023 the resident twice reported a leak in her bathroom from the upstairs flat. Both times, the landlord undertook repairs to stop the leak. The resident made 2 successful insurance claims to the landlord’s insurer for electrical and redecoration works to her flat following these leaks.
On 25 August 2023 the resident reported a recurrence of the leak. She said water was coming through her bathroom light fitting. The landlord attended over the following days to try to remedy the situation. On 6 September 2023 the resident raised a complaint, she said:
1. this was the third time she had experienced the same leak in 2023, despite assurances from the landlord that it had been fixed.
2. each time the leak had caused inconvenience and damage. She wanted confirmation it had been permanently repaired.
3. the electrician sent by the landlord to ‘make safe’ the light fitting in August 2025 had pulled the light from her ceiling leaving exposed wires over the shower. This was dangerous.
4. the resident had contacted the landlord 2 weeks previously and it had not responded.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 19 September 2023. It said:
1. it would investigate the resident’s report that the ‘make safe’ electrician left wires exposed and damaged her light.
2. on 29 August 2023 it had successfully completed repairs to the flat upstairs and the resident confirmed there had been no recurrence of the leak.
3. as the resident was a leaseholder, it could not carry out redecoration repairs. It provided the resident with advice about making a claim to its insurer.
The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 22 September 2023. She said:
1. the landlord’s plumbers kept resealing the bathroom upstairs without getting to the root cause of the leak. The leak had started again and needed to be resolved immediately.
2. the situation was having a detrimental impact on her quality of life, ability to work and enjoyment of her home.
3. the landlord’s electrician had left her with unsafe wiring. The landlord had not provided her with any explanation for this, assurances it would not happen again or attempted to make things right.
On 9 November 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 response. It:
1. partially upheld the complaint. It said that generally it had followed procedure, but it apologised the resident felt she was not kept up to date with repairs.
2. confirmed the status of the resident’s insurance claims.
3. advised the resident that if she had issues with her upstairs neighbour not cooperating with repairs, she should contact her resident services officer.
4. said it usually allows 3 weeks for the repair team to investigate and resolve any issues. It acknowledged there was a 6-week delay in completing the repair.
5. apologised if the electrician that disconnected the bathroom light did so in a less than safe manner.
6. said it may be able to offer compensation but only if the delays and issues were the result of service failure by the landlord.
On 10 November 2023 the resident told the landlord that there were several unexplained delays in its response to the repair. On 19 November 2023 the landlord told the resident:
1. it had photographic evidence that the wires above the shower were not exposed when its operative left her property. Accordingly, it would not be offering compensation.
2. her final insurance claim had been settled.
3. it had agreed to offer her £30 compensation for the 6-week delay in completing repairs.
The resident told this Service in 2025 that there had been no more leaks since the repair in November. She said the landlord’s actions caused her inconvenience and distress throughout 2023. To resolve the complaint, she is seeking higher compensation and for the landlord to evidence that it will change its approach in future.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a leak from the flat above

The landlord’s repairs guide says it will:
1. attend to make safe an emergency repair, for example an unsafe power or light socket or electrical fitting, within 24 hours.
2. complete an urgent repair, for example partial loss of an electrical supply, within 3 working days.
3. complete a non-urgent repair, for example minor leaks that are not causing serious damage or a safety risk, within 20 working days.
The landlord’s guide for leaseholders says that if a leaseholder experiences a leak from above, they should try speaking to their upstairs neighbour immediately. The landlord had a specialised ‘leaks from above’ team who will make an appointment for a plumber to visit the complainant and the flat from above. It says leaseholders may need to make insurance claims and that they will need to have photographic evidence of damage.
The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on repairs outlines good practice. It says that landlords should agree actions and timescales for responding in line with their policies and obligations and confirm these in writing. Landlords should inform residents of any delays and explain why these are necessary.
The resident reported a containable leak into her bathroom from the above flat on 22 December 2022 and on 4 January 2023. The landlord raised a works order on 4 January but did not issue the resident with a date for repair. The resident had to chase the landlord for an update on 11 January 2023. The landlord undertook repairs to the flat above, refitting the basin taps and re-sealing the bath, on 27 January 2023. This was narrowly outside the timescales in the landlord’s repairs policy for a non-urgent repair. The landlord did not acknowledge this or communicate a reason for the delay to the resident, which was unreasonable.
On 12 May 2023 the resident reported that a leak was coming through her bathroom ceiling again. The landlord attended the same day and found a broken pipe. The landlord undertook repairs, including sending an electrician to the resident’s property to make safe the electrics. This was an appropriate response in line with its repairs policy.
On both occasions, the resident had to arrange re-decoration and follow-on electrical works to address damage caused by the leak. The landlord provided the resident with details of its insurer, which was reasonable, as the resident is a leaseholder.
On 25 August 2022 the resident reported a leak from the flat above dripping into her bathroom, through the electric light fitting. The landlord attended on the same date and an electrician undertook temporary remedial works to ensure the electrics were safe to use. It was appropriate that the landlord undertook emergency works within 24 hours.
After the electrician attended, the resident emailed the landlord with photos of the light in her bathroom. She was concerned that the leak was not fixed as this was the third incident in 8 months. She asked for insurance claim details. She also reported that the landlord’s electrician ripped the light out of her ceiling, left the wire exposed and disconnected her fan.
There is no evidence the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns either to ask whether she wanted to make a complaint about the work completed, undertake another inspection, or confirm its position on the repair. This was unreasonable. A landlord is obligated to ensure any repairs completed are safe.
On 29 August 2023 the landlord gained access to both flats to assess the leak. This was appropriate and in time with policy timescales. It tightened a loose basin tap and re-sealed the bath panel in the flat above to prevent further leaks. It was reasonable for the landlord to inspect and complete repairs.
On 6 September 2023 the resident raised a stage 1 complaint. She said she had hired an electrician who attended in the days following the leak. He found “bare conductors hanging out of the ceiling in a potentially dangerous situation”. The resident said she was frustrated she hadn’t heard from the landlord in response to her concerns about electrical safety. She also said the leak caused damage and inconvenience each time.
In the stage 1 response, the landlord said that it apologised for any inconvenience caused by issues with exposed wires and said it would pass the information onto the relevant department to evaluate the risk. The landlord did not acknowledge that it ignored the resident’s initial concern. Given the resident’s frustration about the issue, the landlord could have gone further to try to put things right, for example by agreeing to feedback learning on the issue or considering compensation.
The resident expressed concern that the repair had not addressed the root cause of the leak. The landlord, in the stage 1 response, confirmed that the leak was repaired on 29 August 2023. It is reasonable for a landlord to close a repair following a seemingly successful intervention, and landlords can only be expected to complete repairs to issues it has knowledge of. However, this was the third occurrence in 2023. It would have been good practice for the landlord to have considered whether further investigation, for example, a full survey or a specialist inspection, was required to try to make an effective and lasting repair to put things right for the resident at this stage.
The landlord provided its insurers details in response to the resident’s request, which was appropriate.
On 22 September 2023 the resident reported the leak again and escalated her complaint. She reiterated that she had received no explanation for the unsafe wiring, assurances it would not happen again or an attempt to make it right from the landlord. On the same day, the landlord booked an appointment to inspect both flats on 28 September 2023 and communicated this to the resident. This was reasonable and in line with its repairs policy.
On 28 September 2023 the landlord inspected and found a corroded steel pipe, and issues with bath and waste overflow. It sent an internal referral to the ‘leaks from above’ team. There is an unexplained 2-week delay in progress to repairs after this inspection, which was a failing.
On 13 October and 20 October 2023 the landlord contacted the resident’s upstairs neighbour to progress repairs, but the neighbour refused the proposed works. The delay caused by access issues with the flat above cannot be attributed to the landlord.
The landlord did not explain the reason for the delay to the resident, who reported the leak again on 20 October 2023. She said the landlord told her the leak would be fixed on 13 October and 20 October 2023 and neither had happened. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have kept her informed of any changes or delays to the progress of the repair.
The resident chased repair updates on at least 3 occasions between 20 October 2023 and 31 October 2023. She continued to send the landlord photographs of her ceiling and express concern about the leak. It was unreasonable that the resident had to contact the landlord for updates.
In the stage 2 response the landlord said the repair was completed on 21 October 2023 because water had stopped coming into the resident’s flat. The resident continued to chase the landlord for proof final repairs had been completed. The operative’s repair notes show that the landlord undertook final repairs to the bathroom upstairs to address the root cause of the leak on 3 November 2023. This was 71 days working days after the resident reported the leak. This was outside the timescales in the repairs policy, which was unreasonable.
The landlord partially upheld the complaint on the basis that the repair was completed outside timescale targets and that the resident felt she was not kept up to date with the progress of repairs. That the landlord acknowledged some shortcomings and apologised to the resident was reasonable.
On 19 November 2023 the landlord confirmed its final position. It sent the resident a photograph taken by the electrician on 25 August 2023. It said that wires were not exposed when the operative left the property and so it did not take responsibility for this aspect. It urged her to continue liaising with its insurers in respect of the redecoration. It offered her £30 compensation for a 6-week delay in completing the repair.
The landlord’s response to the resident regarding the electrical work was not reasonable. She raised concerns within hours of the appointment in August 2023. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have inspected to ensure the works were safe within 24 hours. It took until 19 November 2023, after the resident raised it several times, for the landlord to confirm its position on the issue. This likely led to frustration for the resident.
Overall, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak because:
1. there were delays in repairing the leak in January 2023 and between August and November 2023. Not all of these were the fault of the landlord, but they were not communicated to the resident, who had to chase.
2. the landlord’s response to the resident’s concern about the emergency electrical works was inappropriate.
3. the compensation offered by the landlord was not proportionate to the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident in 2023.
The resident told this Service that the landlord’s response to the leak caused her significant distress. In consideration of our remedies guidance, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £300 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings identified. We have also ordered the landlord to apologise to the resident.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord’s complaints policy states that the time limit for a full stage 1 complaint response is 15 working days, including the time allotted for its acknowledgement of the complaint. It is 25 working days at stage 2 including the time allotted for acknowledgement. This is compliant with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
The resident raised her complaint on 6 September 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the following day and issued a stage 1 complaint response on 19 September 2023. This was appropriate.
The Code states that at each stage the landlord must confirm its decision on the complaint. Although the landlord responded to each aspect of the resident’s complaint, it is unclear in the stage 1 complaint response whether the landlord upheld the resident’s complaint or not. This was a failing.
The resident escalated her complaint on 22 September 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on the 26 September 2023 and provided a deadline of 20 October 2023 by which it said it would respond. It did not issue the stage 2 complaint response until 9 November 2023, 49 working days after the escalation request. Additionally, the landlord only finalised its compensation offer and confirmed its position on 19 November 2023. This was inappropriate and outside the timescales outlined in the complaints policy.
The landlord did not agree an extension of the stage 2 response with the resident. It also failed to acknowledge or provide reasons for the delay to the resident. By doing this, it delayed the resident from bringing the matter to the Ombudsman for an independent investigation. This was not reasonable.
We have therefore found maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling. We have ordered compensation of £150 in recognition of the likely distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident for the failings identified.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a leak from the flat above.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the complaint.

Orders

Within 28 days of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
1. provide a written apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report
2. pay the resident compensation of £450 in replacement of the offer made during the complaint procedure. This is comprised of:
  1. £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak from the flat above.
  2. £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the complaint.
  3. The landlord may deduct the £30 offered in its complaint responses from the total amount if this has already been paid.
3. The landlord should provide written evidence of the above to this Service within 28 days.