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

Sovereign Network Homes (202322657)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202322657

Sovereign Network Homes (Former Network Homes)

19 May 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of leaks in the property.

Background

  1. The resident is a shared owner of a 2-bedroom second-floor flat. The landlord does not have any recorded vulnerabilities for the resident. The resident bought his share of the property as a new build in 2018.
  2. On 8 November 2022, the resident reported a new leak in the lobby outside his front door. He stated that it was getting worse each day. He said that leaks from the roof had been previously repaired in 2021. The landlord confirmed on 6 December 2023, that it had requested scaffolding quotes to evaluate and repair the roof. On 26 December 2022, the resident informed the landlord that the leak had worsened and asked for immediate action.
  3. On 5 January 2023, the landlord confirmed to the resident that the building’s roof was still under warranty, so its contractors would not complete the repairs. The developer was informed of the defect, and the landlord notified the resident on 16 January 2023 that the developer would take responsibility for the repairs and that the matter had been passed to its latent defect team. The landlord told the resident that the developer had completed a temporary repair which took place between 14 – 16 February 2023. 
  4. The resident complained on 28 February 2023. He stated that:
    1. despite seeking updates, responses were untimely
    2. in December 2022, he noticed more damp areas in the kitchen
    3. urgent repairs began later than planned on 14 February 2023
    4. he experienced stress, loss of living space, and delays
  5. The landlord’s repair records show that a roof repair was completed on 8 March 2023.
  6. The landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaints process on 15 March 2023. It acknowledged that resolving the roof took longer than its recommended timescales and apologised. It also apologised for delays in email responses and confirmed it had adjusted staffing levels to prevent future delays. The landlord said it was actively pursuing updates from the developer. It also confirmed changes to how it managed latent defects to expedite warranty-covered repairs. Recognising the delays, it offered £500 compensation for:
    1. delays in repairs from December 2022 to February 2023 (£20 x 10 weeks repairs to roof): £200 
    2. distress caused for those 10 weeks: (£20 x 10): £200 
    3. time and trouble from 8 November 2022 – 8 March 2023 (17 weeks): £85
    4. missed appointment on 28 November 2022: £10
    5. goodwill gesture of £5 to round up compensation to £500
  7. The resident made a report that the roof was still leaking on 31 March 2023. On 3 April 2023, the landlord told the developer that the leak repairs had not worked and asked for an urgent action plan. This resulted in the resident escalating his complaint on 10 April 2023. He articulated his frustration that, following the completion of roof repairs and internal decorative works by the developer, he discovered leaks in both the kitchen and the second bedroom, which had been identified as previous leak sites. He said he had to use a bucket to collect the water in the second bedroom.
  8. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 18 May 2023. It confirmed that the developer had conducted a water test on the temporary repair, which it believed would keep the building watertight until a permanent repair could be completed. The report of a new leak in the kitchen following the temporary repair was disappointing. It recognised the frustration this caused and apologised for it, as well as the delays and multiple failed repairs. It acknowledged that more comprehensive investigations and water tests should have been completed earlier. Repairs were planned to start on 5 June 2023. It increased the compensation offer to £870 due to the extended timeframe and inconvenience caused.
  9. The resident requested a breakdown of the compensation. On 22 May 2023, the landlord confirmed that after discussing its compensation offer with the resident, it would increase it to £955 to cover further distress and inconvenience for the 14-week period from 16 February 2023 to 12 June 2023, when it anticipated completing the works.

Events after the completion of the landlord’s complaints process

  1. The resident reported on 20 June 2023 that the leaks were continuing. The landlord acknowledged this on 21 June 2023 and advised it would investigate. Further inspections were subsequently arranged in early July 2023.
  2. It is evident that the resident reported a further leak into the kitchen on 23 July 2023. In September 2023, the landlord advised it would review its offer of compensation once works were completed. The landlord’s records indicate that the repairs and subsequent internal redecoration works were completed on 9 January 2024.
  3. On 10 January 2024, the landlord increased its compensation offer from £870 to £1,560 to cover a 30-week period from 13 June 2023 to 9 January 2024. The further compensation was broken down as:
    1. £300 for the delay
    2. £300 for the distress caused
    3. £90 for time and trouble
  4. In January 2024, the landlord confirmed that a claim for the latent defect would be submitted to the National House Building Council (NHBC) due to the persistent leaks.
  5. The resident reported ongoing leaks from the roof until January 2025. When we spoke to him in May 2025, he confirmed that a specialist had identified multiple holes in the roof lining during an inspection in January 2025. However, he had not received any updates from the landlord regarding the plan of action for repairs. The resident was unaware that an NHBC claim was being considered and/or pursued.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. On 1 October 2023, the landlord completed a merger (which involved 2 organisations combining to form a single entity). Following the merger, the landlord began operating as a subsidiary under a new landlord group structure. The organisational change occurred after the landlord’s complaints process was completed. However, the substantive issues remained unresolved. This did not affect the landlord’s responsibilities to the resident or the handling of the reported leaks.
  2. We have considered the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of leaks from November 2022, which led to his complaint in February 2023. We have also considered events following the landlord’s final response as the issue remains unresolved.

Landlord’s handling of the leaks

  1. The lease sets out the landlord and resident’s contractual responsibilities. These include that the resident agrees to pay rent and service charges while the landlord agrees to insure and maintain the property’s structure, including the roof.
  2. The NHBC guarantee insures properties against latent defects present from the time the property was built for a period of 10 years. The guarantee only covers faults caused by failure to new build properties in accordance with construction guidelines and does not cover faults caused by wear and tear, neglect, or damage.
  3. The landlord does not have a defects policy, but its website confirms that it is expected to proactively manage the relationship with the developer, ensuring issues under warranty are:
    1. properly diagnosed
    2. repaired to completion
    3. monitored to ensure no reoccurrence
  4. The resident reported a leak in November 2022, noting that previous roof repairs following a leak were completed in 2021. Despite the resident’s context, it took nearly a month for the landlord to confirm on 6 December 2022 that it had sought scaffolding quotes to investigate and repair the problem. The delay shows a missed opportunity to quickly recognise the situation as a potential latent defect, especially given the property’s age and repair history.
  5. The landlord confirmed on 5 January 2023, almost 2 months after the initial report on 8 November 2022, that the building’s roof was under warranty and appropriately referred the issue to the latent defect team. By 16 January 2023, the developer accepted responsibility for the roof repair. While the handover to the developer was necessary, it came after nearly 2 months of inaction, during which no repairs had been made, and the resident continued to experience the effects of the leak.
  6. Temporary repairs were completed on 16 February 2023. However, no evidence has been provided to show that they were inspected or verified at that time, through water testing or detailed diagnostic assessments. This lack of oversight proved consequential as it became clear in later months that the issue had not been resolved.
  7. On 28 February 2023, the resident made a formal complaint and highlighted the persistent delays and inadequate communication from the landlord. The landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaints process on 15 March 2023. It acknowledged that the repair process had exceeded acceptable timelines and apologised for the lack of communication. Furthermore, it said that staffing levels had been adjusted to improve response times and that it was actively engaging with the developer for updates. The landlord said that changes had been made to its management of latent defect repairs covered by warranties and appropriately recognised that the existing system had resulted in delays for the resident. The landlord’s response included an apology, outlined service improvements and offered compensation of £500. While this partially addressed the situation, the substantive issues remained unresolved.
  8. Repairs to address the internal areas of damage began on 23 March 2023. There was also a delay in ensuring that the developer fully understood the scope of the remedial work rather than just performing a superficial ‘touch-up,’ which raised concerns for the resident, and caused frustration.
  9. The situation worsened for the resident at the end of March 2023. On 3 April 2023, the landlord contacted the developer to report new leaks found in the resident’s kitchen and second bedroom. Both these areas had experienced previous leaks. This prompted the resident to escalate his complaint on 10 April 2023. We recognise that identifying and tracing leaks can pose challenges, sometimes requiring multiple investigations to pinpoint their exact source. However, the landlord has not provided any evidence or documentation to demonstrate that they actively monitored the repair processes to ensure a satisfactory resolution.
  10. On 18 April 2023, water tests were carried out at several points on the roof. The flashing along the parapet wall was also removed and water ingress was noted to be tracking down the parapet wall. It was identified that the single-ply membrane was not dressed into the brickwork and the flashing was failing. Given the ongoing immediate impact of the leaks, a temporary fix was completed the same day, which was appropriate, before completing a permanent fix.
  11. On 18 May 2023, the landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaints process. It acknowledged that more detailed investigations, such as water testing, should have been conducted earlier. The landlord accepted that the repeated leak was disappointing and frustrating for the resident. It apologised for the delays and confirmed that permanent repairs were scheduled to begin on 5 June 2023 (and completed in July 2023). The landlord acknowledged that it did not ensure the developer undertook comprehensive diagnostic testing (such as water tests) until April 2022, which, had they been carried out sooner, could have prevented repeated failures.
  12. Its compensation offer was increased to £840. This offer aligned with its compensation policy, which acknowledged the extended distress and delays, which included several months of disruption, repeated failures, and inadequate communication. However, although the landlord took steps to address the complaints during the investigation, the main issue remained unresolved after completing the landlord’s complaints process, resulting in ongoing distress and inconvenience.
  13. The landlord appropriately recognised the impact of the ongoing issues and reassured the resident it would revise its offer once works were completed. It subsequently raised its offer to £1,560 to reflect the prolonged delays and inconvenience through to 9 January 2024.
  14. While we recognise that the landlord attempted to initiate repairs through a third party, it was still responsible for supporting the resident by maintaining regular communication, managing expectations, and actively working towards a prompt resolution. Unfortunately, the landlord did not fulfil these responsibilities, and its actions were consistently delayed.
  15. However, throughout its responses until the completion of the works, the landlord appropriately recognised the impact and offered the resident an apology along with compensation, which was subject to regular review to ensure it remained fair and adequate considering the circumstances. Had the landlord failed to provide these offers and take accountability for the situation, a finding of maladministration would have been made. Given the considered responses, we have determined reasonable redress was offered in this case. 
  16. It is understood that the landlord has considered a claim with the NHBC. This course of action was necessary; however, it should have been undertaken earlier, ideally following the failure of the second repair. The delay in escalating the matter to the NHBC, coupled with the insufficient communication from the landlord to the resident, has resulted in further distress and has compromised the landlord’s obligation to resolve issues promptly. Consequently, a recommendation has been made, as detailed below.

 

 

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, reasonable redress was offered in the landlord’s handling of leaks in the property.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should:
    1. pay the resident £1,560 as offered on 10 January 2024
    2. pay this compensation directly to the resident, if not already accepted
    3. contact the resident and provide an update regarding the leak specialist’s attendance in January 2025
    4. confirm a plan of action, including timescales, to address any continuing issues
  2. We recommend the landlord carries out a review of:
    1. its latent defect process, from how it handles the initial repair report to monitoring the progress of works to remedy the issue, including engagement with NHBC
    2. this review should also establish clear points of contact within its internal teams throughout the whole process
  3. On conclusion of the works ordered above, the landlord should provide its position on any additional remedies for the time taken.
  4. The landlord should update us on its intention regarding these recommendations, also within 4 weeks.