Summary: the Council delayed resolving a mice infestation in Miss B’s temporary accommodation. An apology, payment to Miss B, visit to establish any further works required and procedural changes are satisfactory remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss B, complained the Council failed to take effective action to resolve a problem with mice infestation in her temporary accommodation.
2. Miss B says the Council’s failure to take action has resulted in a significant impact on her mental health and an impact on her children’s health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Miss B's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
6. Miss B and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

7. The service level agreement between Opendoor Homes and Barnet Homes has a section on repairs. This says the service provider, which is Barnet Homes, is responsible for the repairs service. It says part of the service provider’s responsibility is to ensure appropriate arrangements are in place to enable tenants to easily report repairs. It says the service provider will carry out post repair inspections to ensure quality assurance.

What happened

8. The Council housed Miss B in temporary accommodation in 2020 when it accepted her as homeless. The accommodation is provided by Opendoor Homes.
9. In November 2021 Miss B reported mice in her property. The Council raised a work order to carry out pest control treatment with three visits noted as required. Later in November a contractor visited and found evidence of mice and holes in the bathroom and kitchen which may have provided access. The contractor recommended proofing.
10. The Council raised in order to carry out work to fill the holes in the kitchen and around the washing machine. The contractor completed that work in March 2022.
11. Miss B contacted the Council again in April and May 2022 to say she still had mice in her property. The contractor visited on 6 May and identified light mouse droppings in the kitchen. The contractor noted food debris on the floor and a bin bag in the kitchen with rubbish in. The contractor gave Miss B some advice around the importance of removing food as it would attract mice and could potentially stop mice taking the bait. No further works were recommended.
12. Miss B continued to report problems with mice in May 2022. On 27 May the repairs surveyor for Barnet Homes visited the property. He made some recommendations. The Council then raised an order to have the base unit removed in the kitchen to provide sealing to the ducting area, which is one of the areas where the surveyor had made recommendations. When a contractor visited to carry out those works Miss B raised concerns with the Council because the works undertaken were not the same as those the surveyor had recommended. The Council accepts the contractor did not visit again and the job was closed due to a miscommunication.
13. Miss B raised concerns about mice in November 2022. Miss B said the holes in the wall had not been properly filled. The Council’s contractor visited on 2 December and filled the holes in the kitchen, removed the washing machine, cooker and sink and filled the gaps with wire wool and silicone. The contractor also filled the holes in the bathroom near the tank with wire wool and silicone.
14. The Council spoke to Miss B on 12 December. Miss B said the holes had not been filled and she still had mice. The Council responded to that as a complaint and apologised for the delays. The Council said it would ask the contractor to re-attend and fill all the access points behind the kitchen units. The Council said that would take place the following day. I have no evidence of a further visit.
15. The Council raised another work order on 10 January 2023 to eradicate mice from the bathroom and kitchen. Miss B contacted the Council later in January to say nobody had visited and she still had mice.
16. Miss B contacted the Council again in March 2023 to ask for the outstanding repair works to be completed. Miss B also asked the Council to replace the carpet or re house her.
17. The Council responded to Miss B’s concerns under its complaints procedure and upheld the complaint. The Council apologised for the service Miss B had received. The Council said it had raised a repair to fill in the holes in the kitchen, bathroom and door frames to prevent the mice gaining access and to replace the carpet throughout the property.
18. I have no evidence of further visits to Miss B’s property, although the Council says visits have taken place. I spoke to Miss B on 27 October and she said she had received two telephone calls from pest control to arrange another visit but had told them there was no point doing that until the work in the kitchen had been completed.
19. In its response to my enquiries the Council said it had completed the final works to the property, although it did not provide any evidence of when those works were allegedly completed. The Council said the only work outstanding was for the contractor to return to ensure mice activity had been abated. The Council said if that visit identified further works it would carry those out. The Council said it had raised a new order for a carpet for the property and offered Miss B £1,000 to reflect the delays resolving the issue.

Analysis

20. Miss B says the Council failed to take effective action to deal with mice infestation in her temporary accommodation. The Council accepts resolving the issues with mice has taken longer than it should. The Council said though as of October 2023 it had resolved the issue of mice in Miss B’s property. The Council said the only task remaining was to visit the property to confirm the problem was abated and lay a new carpet. That, however, is not Miss B’s view. As of the end of October 2023 Miss B said the Council had not completed the works to the kitchen to prevent mice access.
21. Having considered the documentary records I am satisfied Miss B first raised the issue of mice infestation in her property in November 2021. I am satisfied the Council dealt with that report appropriately by sending out pest control contractors to deal with the issue. It is clear from the documentary records three visits were planned to address mice in Miss B’s property and those three visits took place. I therefore have no grounds to criticise the Council for its actions before May 2022.
22. I have some concerns though with how the Council has dealt with the matter since May 2022. It is clear from the documentary records by the end of May 2022 the Council accepted its contractor needed to visit Miss B again to remove cupboards and provide proofing. Despite that there is no evidence a visit took place until the beginning of December 2022. That is a delay of six months and is fault.
23. I am also concerned although the Council raised a work order in January 2023 and agreed to carry out some additional proofing works in March 2023 there is no evidence a contractor visited until October 2023. That is a further delay of nine months and is fault. During that period Miss B had to put up with mice in her property which has clearly impacted on her mental health as well as causing medical issues for her children. The Council has offered £1,000 to reflect the impact on Miss B and her family. I consider a more appropriate remedy would be for the Council to pay £100 for each month delay that has taken place since May 2022. As I have identified in the previous two paragraphs, there is a period of 15 months delay based on the documentary evidence I have seen and I therefore recommended the Council pay Miss B £1,500. The amount recommended takes into account the evidence suggesting there were occasions when Miss B refused a visit and that part of the problem was the availability of additional food sources in the property which the contractor had advised Miss B about. The Council has agreed to my recommendation.
24. It is clearly the Council’s view the problem has now been resolved. However, that is not Miss B’s view. In addition, although the Council says its contractors have visited twice since March 2023 it has not provided any evidence of those visits. I therefore recommended as part of the remedy for this complaint the Council visit and inspect Miss B’s property to identify whether the problem has been abated and whether any further action is required. The Council should then carry out any identified actions required. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.
25. Given there have been significant delays in this case I also recommended the Council put in place a process to ensure oversight of the repairs process so when a resident continues to report problems with accommodation the Council ensures those issues are followed up on. The Council should also ensure once the issues with mice have been eradicated it arranges to lay a new carpet in Miss B’s property, as it has agreed to do. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.

Back to top

Agreed action

26. Within one month of my decision the Council should:
• apologise to Miss B for the distress and upset she and her family have experienced due to the faults identified in this decision. The Council may want to refer to the Ombudsman’s updated guidance on remedies, which sets out the standards we expect apologies to meet;
• pay Miss B £1,500;
• arrange a further visit to Miss B’s property to inspect to identify any outstanding works and then arrange for those works to be completed, if there are any;
• ensure when repair works are identified for a property there is a process in place to ensure those works are overseen to prevent delay.
27. Once the Council has carried out any outstanding works and verified the problem with mice infestation has been resolved it should arrange to lay a new carpet in Miss B’s property.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I have completed my investigation and uphold the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman