Sovereign Network Homes (202312361)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202312361

Sovereign Network Homes

30 July 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 the resident’s reports of a leak, and resulting damp and mould.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant under an agreement dated 22 August 2022. He lives in a 2 bedroom flat with his children.
On 5 November 2022 the resident contacted the landlord to report a leak coming from his roof. The landlord attended on 7 November 2022, and cleared the gutters. After this, between November 2022 and September 2023 the resident contacted the landlord numerous times by telephone and email to report that the leak was ongoing, and to get updates on repairs.
On 1 September 2023, the resident raised a complaint with the landlord via this Service. He said that an ongoing leak from the roof was causing damp and mould in his home, specifically the living room, kitchen, and children’s bedroom. To resolve the complaint he wanted the landlord to fix the leak and replace the ceilings, or move him and his family into another property. Additionally, he said that it had offered him one before, but it was not close to his children’s school, and was a “downgrade” from his current home. He also said that the landlord had previously told him that the roof needed replacing, but he had received no update since.
The landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaints process on 14 September 2023. It said:
1. Its contractor had started work on the roof on 4 September 2023, and there had been a previous misdiagnosis of the leak which said the roof was leaking when it was the guttering that was causing the problem.
2. Its contractor attended on 4 September 2023 and relined the gutters.
3. Its surveyor would meet its contractor on 20 September 2023 to ensure the leak had been fixed, and would assess any remedial work needed in the flat.
4. It would replace the kitchen, children’s bedroom, and living room ceilings, and give the resident decorating vouchers as a goodwill gesture for the time taken to resolve the leak.
The resident contacted the landlord by telephone to escalate his complaint on 20 November 2023. He also reported that the leak was still ongoing, and he did not agree with an email he received from its contractor’s on 30 October 2023 that told him it was possibly condensation causing the problem.
The landlord provided its final response on 4 December 2023. It said that it was doing all it could to investigate the leak with an aim to fix it as soon as possible. It also confirmed that it had cleared the guttering, assessed the roof, and carried out a dye test on the guttering, but had not determined the cause of the leak, for which it apologised. It explained that it would fit access hatches to the resident’s ceiling on 10 January 2024 in order to investigate his roof space during heavy rain, and inspect for condensation.
The resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. He has said that to resolve his complaint he wants the landlord to fix the leaks, or move him and his family to a new property, and pay him compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident has reported that his children’s health has been made worse by damp and mould in his home, which is very concerning. While the Ombudsman is sorry to hear of these health problems, it is beyond the expertise of this Service to determine a causal link between the landlord’s action (or lack thereof) and the impact on the resident’s children’s health.
Often, when there is a dispute over whether someone has been injured or a health condition has been made worse, the courts are able to rely on expert evidence in the form of a medico-legal report. This will give an expert opinion of the cause of any injury or deterioration of a condition. This would be a more appropriate and effective means of considering such an allegation and so should the resident wish to pursue this matter, he should do so via this route. This investigation will only consider whether the landlord acted in accordance with its policy and legal obligations, and fairly in the circumstance.
This is in accordance with paragraph 42f of the Scheme, which states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints where it is quicker, fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts or other tribunal or procedure.
The resident has also explained that he wants to be rehoused if the landlord cannot fix leaks at the property. However, this is not something that can be considered by this investigation because we do not have the authority to reallocate housing. This is in accordance with paragraph 42o of the Scheme, which states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints concerning matters where the resident is seeking an outcome that is not within our authority to provide. This investigation will however be focussed on whether more needs to be done by the landlord to fix the leaks at the property and any inconvenience and distress that may have been caused in the handling of this matter.

The landlord’s handling of a leak, and resulting damp and mould

On 5 November 2022, the resident reported water leaking into his home from the roof. The landlord was under a duty to repair this, as set out in the written tenancy agreement and the implied terms in s.11(1)(c) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, within a reasonable time.
What is a reasonable time will depend on all the circumstances of a case. Most landlords will have repair policies which set out target timescales within which they aim to complete the repairs. In this case the policy states:
1. Emergency repairs, including water leaks, water running into electrics, or a major roof leak if it is causing internal damage, will be responded to within 24 hours. Out-of-hours repairs fall into the emergency category.
2. Responsive (routine) repairs will be attended to on the first available appointment agreed with the resident.
3. Major works will be completed in line with completion targets, as agreed with the affected resident.
According to the landlord’s records, the resident first reported the leak on 5 November 2022. As this related to a water leak from a roof, and was reported out of hours, the landlord was required to attend within 24 hours as per its own policy. From the information available, the landlord’s out of hours contractor did attend within that timeframe, which was reasonable. But, they were unable to get access to the resident’s loft to resolve the problem, and told him he would need to contact the landlord. It is not clear what, if any, further action they took.
In any event, the resident did contact the landlord on 7 November 2022 to report the issue. It sent a contractor out that day, which was appropriate. The contractor cleared the gutters, and told the landlord that while it believed there was no leak at the property, there may have been an issue with some downpipe.
Following this visit, the resident contacted the landlord on 8 November 2022 to reiterate that the leak, which was affecting his kitchen and children’s bedroom, had not been fixed. Again, as per its own repairs policy, the landlord was obligated to attend within 24 hours. It attended on 9 November 2022, which was reasonable, although it is not clear what actions were taken to address the leak during the visit.
On 14 November 2022, the resident contacted the landlord twice to say that the roof was still leaking, and the landlord raised an emergency appointment. Its contractor failed to visit the property on 15 November 2022, instead attending on 16 November 2022. This meant that the landlord failed to adhere to its repairs policy on this occasion. No explanation was given to the resident for the delay, which likely caused him inconvenience and frustration while trying to manage his children’s school run.
Further, when the contractor did attend, they were unable to carry out any work as they could not gain access to the resident’s loft space. It is concerning that the contractors were not aware that this could be a problem, considering the landlord’s out of hours team had experienced the same thing at the start of November. This caused further frustration for the resident. A recommendation has therefore been made below for the landlord to review its record keeping of contractor visits. This is to ensure that all contractors are given relevant updates on any potential difficulties they might face before attending a job.
On 17 November 2022, the landlord responded to a request for an update from the resident’s local MP. It said that the resident’s entire block needed a “roof replacement” but because some of the other residents were leaseholders, a consultation period was required before it could go ahead. It also explained it was working to “push through” the roofing replacement as soon as possible, and would consider a temporary move for the resident if necessary. No information has been provided to show how the landlord determined that the roof needed replacing, but it is clear from this communication that at the time, its surveyor believed this was the case. It is unclear why none of this was communicated to the resident previously. Had the landlord done so, it might have helped to manage the resident’s expectations.
Following this, the landlord arranged a further inspection of the roof to take place on 6 December 2022, and confirmed internally that it was “pushing forward” with roof works. It is unclear what these works were. However, on 19 December 2022, the resident contacted the landlord for an update, advising that no action seemed to have been taken for the previous 5 weeks, apart from the inspection it carried out shortly after his MP’s involvement.
On 3 January 2023, the resident contacted the landlord again to say that it had not been keeping him updated on its works to stop the leak. He said he had initially been told in December 2022 that the landlord was going to put a “tin layer” on the roof, before deciding it was going to “seal it with liquid” instead, but this could not be applied while it was raining. He said that this had not been done, and the landlord had left him with a leaking roof all over the Christmas period. When the landlord asked its contractor for an update, they said they had been unable to carry out the work due to “inclement weather”, and would attend the following day “weather permitting.” The contractor then attended on 6 January 2023 to put new waterproofing liquid on the roof, and clear the gutters.
While it is understandable that sometimes repairs will be delayed due to bad weather, the landlord or its contractor did not communicate this to the resident, or manage his expectations accordingly. In addition, he was left with an ongoing potential leak over Christmas. According to the landlord’s repairs policy, this should have qualified as an emergency out of hours repair, and been attended to within 24 hours. The landlord therefore failed again to adhere to its repairs policy.
Further, the resident had to contact the landlord on 10 January 2023 to report that the leak was still ongoing. This means that the landlord had failed to carry out a lasting repair, which understandably caused further distress to the resident.
On 26 January 2023, after receiving a second letter from the resident’s MP asking for an update on the situation, the landlord confirmed the works it had carried out by that point, which included:
1. Cleaning an integral gutter.
2. Removing previous defective waterproofing.
3. Installing liquid waterproofing.
It also explained that it had attended the property again on 24 January 2023 following further reports of a leak from the resident, and needed to cut inspection holes in his kitchen ceiling to investigate the problem. It then reiterated that existing roof coverings were failing on numerous and widespread levels, and that the roof required a “complete redesign and renewal” for which it was awaiting quotations.
However, between 14 February 2023 and 12 April 2024, the resident contacted the landlord over 20 times. These communications were a combination of emails and telephone calls asking for updates on when the problem would be fixed, asking if he could be moved to a different property, and formal complaints. He also reported that he was concerned about the ceiling “caving in” and that a surveyor had managed to “put his finger straight through it” on their last visit. In May 2023 he explained the landlord had previously told him major works to the exterior of the property were due to finish by mid-March, but were still outstanding. He also reported that his children were “constantly getting ill” due to the damp, and that he had been in the property for almost a year but been unable to decorate due to the ongoing issues.
During this period, the landlord:
1. Sealed a back gutter on 20 September 2023, which failed to solve the problem.
2. Checked pipes on 25 September 2023, and found no issues with them.
3. Contacted other residents at the block, confirming that 2 had similar issues with leaks, including the resident’s neighbour. It only discovered this after being informed by the resident.
4. Explained to the resident in January 2024 that it “needed to treat the problems with the roof as a whole to include other residents.” It also explained that due to lack of access to the roof it would need access hatches fitted to all affected areas to get visual access of them. It subsequently fitted these hatches on 18 January 2024. It also confirmed that it needed to fit one in his neighbours property, but due to the neighbour “not wanting to engage”, it could only agree an appointment with them for 26 July 2024.
5. Attended the property on 18 January 2024 during rain and found a drip from the gutter over the damp patch in the resident’s children’s bedroom. A plastic container was then placed in the loft to catch these drips.
It is concerning that the landlord confirmed in January 2024 that it needed to fit a hatch in the resident’s neighbours property to investigate a potential link with the problem in his flat, but had been unable to arrange this until the end of July 2024. It is unclear why, given the repair delays the resident had already experienced by that point, the landlord did not consider forcing entry through its tenancy agreement, which would have been reasonable for an emergency repair.
The Ombudsman has also noted and is disappointed by the tone in some internal communications between the landlord and staff when it was trying to ascertain what works were required. In response to a request for updates, it was mentioned that all leaks were only “minor”, and that the plastic container had caught water drips and “stopped mould”. While this may have been the case, the leak was a point of frustration for the resident, who was clearly distressed by the effects the ongoing issues were having on his property. The use of a plastic container, while not impractical given that the water drips were identified as minor, in the resident’s ceiling was also not a suitable or lasting solution or repair.
In an update to this Service on 15 July 2024, the landlord confirmed that the problem had not been resolved. It also explained that it was waiting for quotes from 2 contractors in order to approve the works that needed doing, and that once these works were completed, they would need to monitor the situation for a further 12 months to determine their effectiveness.
This is an unreasonable delay. The works that have been proposed were first considered by the landlord on 30 May 2024, and no further action appears to have been taken until after it was contacted by this Service on 10 July 2024.
While it has taken some actions as outlined above, these do not appear to have been proportionate to the problems the resident was experiencing, and it has not managed to complete a full and lasting repair in line with its repairs policy, in almost 2 years. It also means that the resident’s enjoyment of the property has been impacted by the prolonged delays, with no clear indication for him on when the problem will be fixed.
Part of the delays seems to be confusion on the landlord’s part about what the issue is. On 2 occasions, one of its surveyors told the resident’s MP that the roof needed a full replacement. Additionally, a member of the landlord’s maintenance team inspected the roof in October 2023 and reported that there were “definitely leaks, possibly at multiple points” in what they described as a “dreadfully designed flat roof.” However, at times since, other contractors and surveyors have said that the problem is being caused either by guttering, condensation, or a combination of these issues. It has also reported there may be a link between the resident’s problem and a similar problem in the neighbouring property, which it intends to investigate. These findings by different parties have all been markedly different, with no conclusive diagnosis of the problem being made. The landlord has therefore been ordered to hire an independent contractor to attend the property, carry out a full inspection and diagnoses of the problem, and provide a report for both the landlord and the resident.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy states that it will endeavour to respond quickly to reports of damp and mould and address any structural issues. It also states that the landlord will know the condition of its properties through “regular stock condition surveys” so it knows that properties are at risk of damp and mould, and address this. Additionally, the policy states that the landlord will respond to reports of damp and mould within 10 days, provide clear timelines, and complete any repairs as soon as possible. It also states that the landlord will share all specialist reports with its customers.
On 16 November 2022, the resident told the landlord that he was “very concerned about the health of his children due to mould spores” related to black mould present in his children’s bedroom. He reported the same in May 2023, and July 2023. It is not clear what action was taken by the landlord to resolve the problem, and there is no evidence to show that it provided the resident with a clear timeline for getting the problem resolved, or to show that it repaired the issues as soon as possible, in line with its own policy. It has also confirmed that the resident was proactive in cleaning the mould himself, but this should not have stopped the landlord from inspecting the problem.
When the resident reported the problem again in December 2023, he asked the landlord if there was a “quick fix” he could do while waiting for it to resolve the problem. The landlord’s surveyor suggested painting the affected area with anti-mould paint, and confirmed that he could “drop off paint and a paint brush” for the resident if he was “happy to do it himself.” The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould (the DM report) recommends the landlord avoid taking action that solely places the onus on a resident to deal with damp and mould. It should evaluate what mitigations it can give for support when structural intervention is inappropriate and satisfy itself it is taking all reasonable steps, such as improved ventilation or other measures.
During the period covered in this investigation, most of the landlord’s handling of damp and mould in the resident’s property did not follow its damp and mould policy, or the DM report, which was inappropriate. This is because, as outlined above, it largely did not keep all of his property in repair, provide timely repairs, inspections, or mould washes, arrange damp and mould mitigation works, carry out follow-up checks, or keep suitable records in his case. This was particularly unreasonable given the resident had young children and was concerned for their health while the issues remained ongoing.
In summary:
1. Between 9 November 2022 and 12 April 2024, the resident contacted the landlord by telephone and email approximately 30 times asking it for updates on the progress of works to get the problem fixed. During that time he also reported he could hear dripping in the ceiling, paint and plaster was beginning to crack, black mould had formed in his children’s bedroom, and the landlord had not kept him updated on what works were being done to resolve the leak.
2. While it did take some actions, the landlord repeatedly failed to action repairs in line with its own tenancy agreement and repairs policy. As a result, the resident and his family have been unable to enjoy their home for over a year.
3. The landlord has not demonstrated that it took enough action to resolve the resident’s damp and mould issue in line with its own damp and mould policy, or the Ombudsman’s DM report.
As a result, while the leaks reported appear to have been relatively slow and caused minimal damage at the property, given the length of time the resident has been living with the problem, the Ombudsman finds that there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the reported leaks, which resulted in damp and mould.
The landlord has therefore been ordered below to pay the resident compensation of £1,625. This consists of £600 for distress and inconvenience, and £1,025 for his loss of enjoyment of his property for 21 months, which is 10% of his average rent during this period. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance’s for failures which had had an impact on the resident. The landlord has also been ordered to write to the resident to apologise for the delays, damp, and mould failures identified by this investigation, accept responsibility for these, and acknowledge their impact on him and his family. A number of additional orders for the landlord have been set out below.
The landlord has also been ordered below to carry out a senior management review of the resident’s case to identify exactly why its delays in handling his reports of leaks, damp and mould happened, and to outline exactly how it proposes to prevent these from occurring again in the future. It shall present the review to its senior leadership team and provide him and the Ombudsman with a copy of its review. This review should include the landlord’s staff’s and contractors’ training needs in relation to its damp and mould procedure and the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould. This is to ensure it provides timely and effective inspections, communication, works, monitoring, and escalations in every relevant structural repairs, damp, and mould case.

Complaint handling

Under the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, landlords must ensure they:
1. Acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days.
2. Respond to the complaint within 10 working days of the acknowledgment at stage 1.
3. Provide a final response within 20 working days of the date of acknowledging the escalation request.
The landlord’s policy is compliant with the provisions of the Code.
The resident raised his complaint via this Service on 1 September 2023, so the landlord had until 15 September 2023 to provide its stage 1 response. It responded on 14 September 2023, which was compliant with both its own complaints policy and the Code.
The resident raised his stage 2 complaint on 20 November 2023. This meant the landlord had until 18 December 2023 it provided its stage 2 response. It responded on 4 December 2023, which was again compliant with both its own complaints policy and the Code.
In its stage 1 response to the resident’s complaint in September 2023, the landlord offered him a £90 decorating voucher. It also later offered him £300 in compensation. This was appropriate, and in line with both its own complaints handling policy, which says it will “rarely award compensation as it is a charitable organisation”, and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for failures which have adversely affected a resident.
Therefore, the Ombudsman finds no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the landlord was responsible for maladministration in its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak, and resulting damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord must, within 28 days of the date of this determination:
1. Hire an independent contractor to attend the property, carry out a full inspection and diagnosis of the problem, and provide a report for both the landlord and the resident.
2. Pay the resident £600 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of a leak, and resulting damp and mould.
3. Pay the resident £1,025 for loss of enjoyment of his home for 21 months.
4. Contact the resident to provide him with a schedule of work once it completes a full investigation. The landlord should then undertake the necessary repairs, giving the resident regular updates on the progress of these works until their completion.
5. Review the resident’s case to identify the cause of the delays in addressing his reports of leaks, damp and mould, and how this can be prevented in the future. The landlord should present the review to its senior leadership team and provide this Service with a copy.

Recommendations

The landlord should ensure that it is keeping a full audit trail of its contractor’s visits. By doing this and sharing relevant information with contractors before site visits, operatives will be better informed of any potential obstructions and can plan around this.