Yet another social housing provider has come under scrutiny for serious health and safety failings, raising concerns about the management of asbestos risks in residential properties.
A recent review by One Housing followed an investigation by the Housing Ombudsman, which uncovered more than 800 instances of incorrect asbestos risk data. These errors highlight significant gaps in the provider’s approach to safety assessments and the potential dangers posed to residents.
Asbestos was widely used in the past as a building material, commonly found in insulation for buildings, boilers, and pipes, as well as in roofing and flooring tiles. Due to its extensive use, many homes and buildings across the UK still contain asbestos. Reports suggest that up to 1.5 million properties, particularly those constructed before the late 1980s, may still have asbestos present, posing potential health risks if not managed properly.
When asbestos remains undisturbed and intact within a property, the risk to residents is minimal. However, if it is damaged or disturbed, harmful fibres can be released into the air, posing serious health risks. Exposure to these fibres has been linked to severe respiratory conditions, making proper management crucial.
Following a severe maladministration finding, the Housing Ombudsman issued a series of orders to the social landlord to address their failures. The investigation focused on poor record-keeping related to repairs and the presence of asbestos in a resident’s home.
The complaint arose after a leak caused the ceiling to collapse in the home of a resident and her child. Despite the severity of the situation, repairs took 14 months, during which the landlord failed to maintain accurate and up-to-date records on whether asbestos was present in the property.
Further concerns were raised as the landlord did not assess the condition of the asbestos following the damage. Additionally, there was no evidence to suggest that they had considered temporarily relocating the family to ensure their safety while repairs were being carried out.
Following the Housing Ombudsman’s investigation, the landlord carried out a detailed review, which uncovered serious failings in its asbestos record-keeping. The findings revealed that over 800 records contained incorrect data, raising significant concerns about the reliability of its risk assessments and overall approach to asbestos management.
One of the most alarming discoveries was that the risk scoring system had classified several properties as having no risk despite lacking any supporting data. This meant that properties where asbestos could be present were not being properly assessed, potentially putting residents at risk. On the other hand, some properties were incorrectly labelled as high-risk due to outdated information remaining in the system long after it should have been removed. These errors created confusion and undermined the effectiveness of asbestos management procedures.
The review identified several reasons behind these inconsistencies, with one key issue being the transition of external services in-house. The shift in responsibility led to gaps in knowledge and incomplete data transfers, making it difficult to track accurate asbestos records. Additionally, poor information management practices contributed to the problem, particularly when the landlord moved to a new system. Instead of integrating and updating existing records, new information was added separately, leading to duplicated or conflicting data.
In response to the Ombudsman’s findings, the landlord has since taken steps to strengthen its asbestos safety procedures. A statement from the Housing Ombudsman confirmed that improvements have been made, including a full review of the asbestos safety management plan to ensure better oversight. To enhance data accuracy and prevent similar issues in the future, the landlord has also introduced a new operational guidance document outlining best practices for asbestos record-keeping.
Furthermore, two administrative roles have been created to manage the asbestos database, ensuring records are regularly updated and maintained. This includes conducting an extensive data cleansing process to correct inaccuracies and improve overall reliability. While these measures represent progress, the case highlights the serious consequences of poor record-keeping in social housing and the need for ongoing improvements to safeguard tenant safety.
Download NOW
4 Simple Steps To Becoming Wealthy Through Property