Decision

Regulatory Notice: Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited (15 December 2022)

Updated 15 December 2022

Applies to England

RSH Regulatory Notice

• Provider: Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited

• Registration number: 4607

• Publication date: 15 December 2022

• Reason for publication: Consumer Standards

• Regulatory route: Reactive Engagement

Other providers included in the judgement

None

Regulatory Findings

The regulator has concluded that:

a) Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited (RBH) has breached the Home Standard and parts of the Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard; and

b) As a consequence of this breach, there was actual and potential serious detriment to RBH’s tenants.

The regulator will work with RBH as it seeks to remedy this breach and will continue to consider what further action may need to be taken.

The issue

RBH made a self-referral to the regulator in January 2021 following the tragic death in December 2020 of Awaab Ishak, a two-year-old boy who lived with his parents on the Freehold Estate in Rochdale. RBH reported that the coroner was investigating the condition of Awaab’s home, including whether this was linked to his death. We reviewed the information available at that time and decided that we would revisit the case once the inquest had concluded in order to review any new evidence. The coroner’s inquest concluded on 15 November 2022 and found that Awaab’s death was caused by environmental mould exposure in his home.

Timeline

The coroner’s report and our investigations established that in January 2017, Awaab’s father first reported the presence of mould at the property and RBH attended to treat this. In statements provided by Awaab’s family to the inquest, they indicated that mould had returned in 2018 and 2019 but that no action was taken. It is noted that the inquest recorded that between 2017 and July 2020 there was no evidence given to RBH of recurring mould at the property.

RBH received a disrepair claim in July 2020 relating to the condition of the property.

Also in July 2020, a healthcare worker engaging with Awaab and his family sent a letter to RBH expressing concern about the mould in the house and the potential impact to Awaab’s health. However, due to numerous different IT systems in place at RBH, not everyone who had contact with the family were aware of this letter until November 2020. Awaab tragically died on 21 December 2020.

In June 2022, RBH was informed by the coroner that it was being treated as an Interested Person(s) for the inquest and was notified of the cause of death which directly linked to exposure to environmental mould.

During the summer of 2022, following media reports about conditions on the Freehold Estate, RBH began visiting all properties on the estate to assess for damp and mould. This work is ongoing, but RBH has now found that hundreds of properties on the Freehold Estate have signs of damp and mould. This includes a small number of properties with damp and mould which would constitute a category one Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) hazard, and over a hundred with damp and mould which would constitute a category two HHSRS hazard. The remaining properties have smaller areas of mould growth or condensation. RBH has also now identified that ventilation within properties on the Freehold Estate is inadequate.

During the inquest, RBH accepted that it made assumptions about the lifestyle of Awaab’s family and that this affected its decisions regarding how damp and mould were dealt with at their property.

Our investigation

As a registered provider, RBH is required to comply with our standards, including the Home Standard and the Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard.

The Home Standard requires registered providers to ensure that tenants’ homes meet the standard set out in section five of the Government’s Decent Homes Guidance^{[footnote 1]} and to provide a cost-effective repairs and maintenance service that responds to the needs of tenants.

The Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard requires that registered providers provide choice, information and communication that is appropriate to the diverse needs of their tenants, treat tenants with fairness and respect, and demonstrate that they understand the different needs of their tenants.

Although RBH’s data on its repairs performance did not suggest any material concerns, the recent findings from property visits on the Freehold Estate demonstrate a wider concern about RBH’s repairs and maintenance service that is not reflected in the data. The evidence we have obtained, including the latest information we have received from RBH, demonstrates that it does not have effective mechanisms in place to promptly identify repairs issues or concerns. We therefore do not have assurance that the issues seen in Awaab’s home, and more broadly on the Freehold Estate, are not replicated in other parts of RBH’s stock. As a consequence, we also do not have assurance that RBH is meeting the requirements of section five of the Decent Homes Guidance as part 1.1 of the Home Standard requires.

It has become clear that weaknesses in RBH’s IT systems and poor communication across the organisation meant that those responsible for repairs and maintenance at RBH were not aware of the healthcare worker’s concerns initially reported in July 2020, until four months later. Therefore, decisions RBH made about repairs to Awaab’s home at this time were made without information which may have allowed staff to make more informed decisions and identify potential risks to Awaab and his family. The regulator has concluded that RBH’s repairs and maintenance service did not respond to the needs of Awaab and his family, as well as a significant number of other tenants on the Freehold Estate. RBH has therefore breached part 1.2 of the Home Standard.

We now know that almost 80% of tenants on the Freehold Estate who have had their properties surveyed since summer 2022 have signs of damp and mould which RBH was not previously aware of. It is not clear why RBH was unaware of these problems given that they are widespread across the properties on the Freehold Estate. However, the outcomes in this case demonstrate that RBH has failed to hear from tenants about the conditions of their homes and therefore has failed to communicate in a way that is appropriate to the diverse needs of tenants in line with part 1.1 of the Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard.

RBH has now acknowledged that it made assumptions about the family’s lifestyle. This affected its decisions about how damp and mould at the property were dealt with and, as a consequence, it did not act in line with part 1.3 of the Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard which requires providers to treat tenants with fairness and respect. At this time, we lack assurance that the attitude towards, and assumptions about, Awaab’s family are not a wider issue with the potential to affect other RBH tenants.

Taking into account the seriousness of the issues, the regulator has concluded that RBH has breached the Home Standard and the Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard. Awaab and his family have suffered the most serious harm as a result of RBH’s failings. Furthermore, other families on the Freehold Estate have also experienced harm as a result of the quality of the accommodation provided by RBH, and we do not have assurance that other tenants have not been similarly put at risk as a result of these failings. It is therefore our assessment that the serious detriment test has been met in this case.

Our engagement

RBH is putting in place a programme to rectify these failures and has assured the regulator that it is taking prompt action to remedy the breach of standards and that risks to tenants are being mitigated until this work is complete. The regulator will work intensively with RBH as it continues to address the issues which have led to this situation, including ongoing monitoring of how it delivers its programme of improvements to ensure that it is able to come into compliance with the Standards. While we are not proposing to take enforcement action at this stage, we will keep this under regular review through our period of engagement with RBH.

Section 198A of the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008 (as amended) states that the regulator’s regulatory and enforcement powers may be used if a registered provider has failed to meet a consumer standard. In order to use regulatory or enforcement powers, as well as the failure to meet the standard, there should also be reasonable grounds to suspect that the failure has resulted in a serious detriment to the provider’s tenants (or potential tenants) or that there is a significant risk that, if no action is taken by the regulator, the failure will result in a serious detriment to the provider’s tenants (or potential tenants).

About our Regulatory Notices

Regulatory notices are issued in response to an event of regulatory importance (for example, a finding of a breach of the Rent Standard or of a consumer standard that has or may cause serious harm) that, in accordance with its obligation to be transparent, the regulator wishes to make public. More detail about Regulatory notices is set out in Regulating the Standards.

1. A Decent Home: Definition and Guidance for implementation (June 2006 - Update) ↩