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

Stonewater Limited (202321327)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202321327

Stonewater Limited

10 June 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 response to the resident’s reports of issues with the drains.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord which is a housing association. The tenancy commenced on 24 April 2006. The property is a 1 bedroom flat. The landlord’s records show that the resident has “physical and mental health issues” including diabetes, anxiety and depression.
  2. During 2022 and 2023 the resident contacted the landlord about a smell coming from the drains. He also contacted the landlord to report that his toilet had backed up on several occasions.
  3. On 24 February 2023 the resident called the landlord to complain that the issue with drainage to the toilet had been ongoing since August 2022.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 13 March 2023. It confirmed that works to the soil stack in the bathroom had begun on 2 March and it was “hopeful” this would resolve the “odour issues.”
  5. The resident called the landlord on 8 June 2023 to say he was still having issues with sewage at the property and had not heard back. He said he was “upset” and felt “forgotten about.”
  6. On 6 July 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said it would visit the property on 14 August to carry out a “full inspection” and create an action plan. It said it was “deeply sorry” for the delays and poor communication including its delayed complaint response. It offered £200 compensation comprised of £100 for inconvenience and £100 for the delay in escalating the complaint to stage 2.

Events post internal complaints process.

  1. The landlord’s file note dated 14 August 2023 set out its visit to the resident earlier that day. During the visit the resident advised the landlord that his carpet was damaged by leaking sewage. The officer noted there was no leak and no smell from the drains however, the resident did not agree.
  2. The resident called us on 20 September 2023 to report that the property was getting backed up with sewage. He did not feel that the compensation offered by the landlord was sufficient.
  3. In a telephone call to us on 2 June 2025 the resident advised he has made several verbal requests to the landlord for compensation for damage to his belongings, including carpets.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident’s stage 1 complaint set out his dissatisfaction with the delay in carrying out works to his kitchen floor in addition to issues with the drainage. The evidence shows that works were carried out on 18 April 2023. The resident’s stage 2 complaint therefore only referred to the ongoing concerns about drainage to which the landlord responded accordingly.
  2. In line with our approach set out in the Housing Ombudsman Scheme we can only investigate complaints which have exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. Therefore, this investigation has not assessed the landlord’s response to works to the kitchen floor and is focussed on its response to the issues with drainage.
  3. We are aware that the resident continued to report his dissatisfaction in relation to drainage. During 2024 the landlord issued further complaint responses on this matter. If the resident remains dissatisfied and wants us to investigate the landlord’s response he will need to raise a fresh complaint with us. This is because this investigation is concerned with the complaint that was ‘duly made’ after the landlord’s stage 2 response of 6 July 2023.
  4. The resident has advised us that he has made verbal requests to the landlord for compensation for damage to his belongings. It is acknowledged that this was discussed during the landlord’s visit on 14 August 2023. However, this took place after the internal complaints process had been completed. In accordance with our approach set out in the Housing Ombudsman Scheme we may not investigate complaints which have not exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. Therefore, if the resident wishes to pursue his request he may wish to consider raising a fresh complaint with the landlord.

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of issues with the drains.

  1. On 20 May 2022 the resident reported that his toilet was blocked. The landlord’s evidence shows that it attended the same day however there was “no access.” The landlord’s records show that the toilet was blocked again on 9 June 2022. It attended the same day and made the following note “drains blocked pump on car park broken specialist company required.”
  2. Due to the brevity of the note the exact details of the fault are unclear. It is also unclear if the toilet was left in working order following the visit. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the specialist company attended. These are record keeping failures which have hampered our assessment of the landlord’s response.
  3. The resident called the landlord on 3 August 2022 to report a “bad smell” from the drains. It raised a works order the following day to “carry out an overhaul of the pipework to the bathroom.” An operative attended on 16 August to carry out works including a self-sealing waste valve. The landlord’s response was appropriately in line with its 28 day target set out in its Responsive Repairs Policy (repairs policy).
  4. On 26 January 2023 the landlord’s drainage contractor carried out a camera drain survey. While this was positive, the reason for the survey and any conclusions drawn are unclear which is a record keeping failure.
  5. On 31 January 2023 the resident called the landlord to report that he was still concerned about smells. On 5 February 2024 the resident called again because he had not heard anything and could not use the toilet or sink. The landlord’s file note of the same date confirmed a site inspection had taken place and the issue was not caused by the pumping station. A further note says when it attended that day there were no issues with the toilet.
  6. The landlord’s records show that the resident reported ongoing issues with toilet blockages on 19 February 2023. A drainage contractor attended to clear the toilet with a plunger to restore flow. The landlord’s response was appropriately in line with its repairs policy.
  7. The resident contacted the landlord on 22 February 2023 to raise his concerns about the ongoing issue. There is no evidence that the toilet was blocked at the time of his report. An appointment was made for 7 March however, the operative did not attend. The landlord advised it was “not sure of the reason” which is a record keeping failure. The appointment was re booked for 28 March 2023 when the air admittance valve was changed on the soil stack.
  8. It was positive that the landlord took action to carry out a repair. However, there is no evidence setting out why the contractor believed this would resolve the substantive issue. This is a record keeping failure.
  9. The resident made 8 reports from May 2022 to February 2023. The landlord responded appropriately to each individual report in line with its repairs policy. However, it did not investigate the cause of the repeated issue until February which was an inappropriate delay.
  10. An internal email dated 2 June 2023 confirmed that it had received “multiple” reports about blocked drains. It was therefore considering the possibility that there may be a wider issue. It had raised an order for a camera survey of the drains. The resident’s email to the landlord of 8 June confirmed that he too continued to experience issues. Therefore, the repair to the soil stack had not resolved the problem.
  11. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response of 6 July 2023 did not reference ongoing works to investigate drainage issues which was inappropriate. It also further demonstrated a lack of openness and transparency in its communication.
  12. We would expect a landlord to keep a robust record of contacts and repairs, yet the evidence has not been comprehensive in this case. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures.
  13. The landlord offered £100 to try to put things right. However, its failure to consider the wider situation amounts to service failure and it has therefore been ordered to pay the resident an additional £50 compensation. This is line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance where the failure may not have affected the overall outcome for the resident.

The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling. 

  1. The resident’s frustration with the delayed repair was set out in his email to the landlord on 9 March 2023. He was dissatisfied that the issues which started in 2022 were only being resolved now. He requested an explanation for the delay.
  2. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) requires landlords to provide clear reasons for any decisions in plain language. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response of 13 March 2023 set out its hopes that works to the soil stack would resolve the issue. However, it failed to explain why this would be the case and the reason it had not been carried out before. In the interests of openness and transparency this would have been appropriate. It may also have helped to restore the resident’s trust in the landlord.
  3. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response of 6 July 2023 appropriately acknowledged its failure to escalate the complaint in time. It provided an explanation, apologised and offered £100 compensation to try to put things right.
  4. The Code says that an effective complaints process enables a landlord to take steps to improve the services it provides. It also enables residents to be heard and understood.
  5. The landlord failed to use the stage 2 review process to consider if it had done all it reasonably could, to resolve the substantive issue. It failed to provide a meaningful response that acknowledged the ongoing distress caused by the repeated toilet blockages and the resident’s feelings that he had been “forgotten.”
  6. The compensation offered by the landlord was proportionate to the failures identified in this report. It was also in line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance where there was no permanent impact.
  7. Therefore, this investigation considers that while the landlord’s complaint handling could reasonably have been improved, it has recognised the impact on the resident and has taken proportionate steps to put things right. As such, an offer of reasonable redress has been made in the circumstances.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of issues with the drains.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress in relation to its complaint handling which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of the determination the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Write to the resident to apologise for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £50 compensation in addition to the £100 it has already offered for the distress and inconvenience caused by its failures in its response to the resident’s reports of issues with the drains.
  2. If it has not already done so in the last 4 weeks the landlord should write to the resident to set out its current position with regards to the drains. If the issues are ongoing it should set out its action plan including associated timescales.
  3. Evidence of compliance with the above orders should be provided to the Ombudsman, also within 4 weeks.

Recommendation

  1. The reasonable redress finding is dependent on the landlord paying the resident £100 as offered in its stage 2 response if it has not already done so.