Southern Housing (202332315)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202332315

Southern Housing

8 July 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:
    1. A bathroom heating rail installation.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, who is a housing association. The resident lives with her children at the property, which is a flat.
  2. The resident raised her complaint with the landlord on 24 August 2022. She said she was unhappy with the delays with her bathroom heated rail installation. She stated she had first requested a new radiator to the bathroom in 2019 and the landlord had authorised the work, but she had been chasing the installation since. She asked the installation to take place to satisfy her complaint.
  3. The landlord acknowledged her complaint on 30 August 2022 and provided a stage 1 response on 20 September 2022. It apologised for its delayed stage 1 response. It explained the delay in the repair was because of its internal communications as authority was required for the installation. It advised it would attend on 21 September 2022 to install the new radiator to the system. It offered the resident £50 compensation for delays in authorising the installation.
  4. The resident escalated the complaint on 15 November 2022 and said the installation had still not taken place.
  5. The landlord’s stage 2 response of 14 June 2023 upheld the resident’s complaint as it had not kept the timeframes of its stage 1 response. It advised it was awaiting approval, and it would install the heated rail. The landlord apologised for the delays in the complaint responses and the heat rail installation. It made an increased total offer of £350 compensation (£150 for complaint handling, £50 for the inconvenience and £150 for delays in its service).
  6. The resident brought her complaint to the Service on 12 December 2023 as she was unhappy the landlord had not installed the heated rail in her bathroom. She reported the contractor had come to her property, but no work had taken place as there was no approval. The landlord recently wrote to the Service stating that only an electric radiator could be installed due to the nature of the pipework.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident reported the landlord had authorised new radiator in her bathroom in 2019. While we do not doubt this statement, we have not seen evidence of this or a complaint being raised at the time. This investigation has primarily focussed on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s recent reports immediately prior to her complaint in August 2022 that were considered during the landlord’s complaint process. This is because residents are expected to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and while the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events that occurred. All historical events prior to the resident’s complaint are provided for context only.

Bathroom heated rail

  1. The resident raised her complaint with her landlord on 24 August 2022 as she had been chasing the installation of a heater in her bathroom. She reported multiple calls with the landlord, who she said had authorised the installation. Although we do not dispute this, we have seen no evidence of the calls or an authorisation for a heater to be installed prior to the complaint process.
  2. The law does not generally require landlords to provide a dedicated bathroom heater unless the tenancy agreement specifies it, which it does not here. Under the Homes Fitness for Habitation Act 2018 a landlord is responsible for ensuring the property is habitable and is capable of being heated to a reasonable temperature. The resident stated she used portable heaters in her bathroom when bathing her children. It is unclear if the landlord supplied the portable heaters to help with the cold bathroom; however, the resident reported although it was not ideal to use them in the bathroom they were heating the room.
  3. In the landlord’s stage 1 response on 20 September 2022 and stage 2 response on 24 June 2023, the landlord acknowledged that it had agreed to install a heated rail within her bathroom in 2021. It further acknowledged the delays and miscommunication between its departments which had caused delays. At stage 1, the landlord stated that it would install the rail in September 2022. However, it did not do so and as such it could not demonstrate any learning taken or attempts to put things right and follow on its response. This was not reasonable and the resident had to chase this and escalate her complaint.
  4. At stage 2 the landlord acknowledged its failures in relation to not following up on its stage 1 response and committed to complete the installation. It also offered a total of £200 compensation for the failures identified. This would have been reasonable had the landlord completed the installation. However, it did not provide any plan of works or timeframes in its response. Additionally, the landlord could not evidence that it had completed the heated rail installation to date. This was not appropriate and left the resident as such with an outstanding repair for over 3 years.
  5. On 19 July 2024 (following the end of its complaints process) the landlord’s file shows an internal email trail where it discussed the technical difficulties in installing a radiator related to the nature of the pipework. It stated that it had therefore agreed to put in an electrical heated towel rail instead. It stated this was now with its electrical department. The landlord also recently advised the Service of this. While it explained the reasons for not being able to install a radiator, it gave no explanation as to why it had failed to carry out the installation of the electrical rail.
  6. Additionally, we have not seen evidence of this being communicated to the resident. The landlord took some steps to investigate the issue to be able to instal a heat source in the bathroom and we appreciate for technical reasons it was unable to do so. In circumstances like these it would have been reasonable for the landlord to inform the resident of the difficulties it was facing and the options available. However, we have not seen evidence of an update to the resident. This was not a reasonable and customer focused approach.
  7. As the landlord could not demonstrate that it had appropriately followed up on its stage 2 response and completed the heat rail installation, the Ombudsman finds that there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the installation of the bathroom heating rail. We have ordered additional compensation and for the landlord to follow up on the commitments in its stage 2 response.

Associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s file shows it appropriately acknowledged on 30 August 2022 the resident’s complaint of 24 August 2022, and within 4 working days. This was in line with its policy which states complaints should be acknowledged within 5 working days. The landlord sent its stage 1 response 14 working days later (20 September 2022). The reply was 4 days outside of the 10 days allowed under its own complaint policy at stage 1 and the timeframes of the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code (the Code). This was an unreasonable delay; however the landlord acknowledged this, explained why it happened and appropriately apologised.
  2. The landlord’s file shows the resident escalated her complaint on 15 November 2022. The landlord failed to acknowledge this within 5 days, causing the resident to chase its response by email on 30 January 2023. The landlord’s file has a note of this email however there is no record of any timely response which was inappropriate and not in line with its own policy and the Code, of acknowledging the complaint within 5 days and providing a response within 20 days at stage 2.
  3. Although it is unclear what prompted its actions the landlord did acknowledge the resident’s escalation 6 months later on 5 May 2023. It thereafter provided its stage 2 response on 14 June 2023. While the landlord advised her of a 10-day extension, it took a total of 144 working days after the escalation had been requested which was 124 days over the 20 days allowed in its complaint policy and the Code. This was not reasonable.
  4. The landlord sought to provide redress for complaint handling failings by apologising, explaining its delay and offering £150 compensation for its delayed stage 2 response. This was in line with the landlord’s own compensation policy and our remedies’ guidance for service failure with no lasting impact. It is our view that the sum of all action the landlord had taken provided reasonable redress for the complaint handling failings identified.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of a bathroom heating rail instillation.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the associated complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident £350 compensation (including the £200 already offered during its complaints process if it has not paid already) comprising:
    1. £200 already offered during its internal process.
    2. Additional £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to install the heating rail.
  2. Within 6 weeks of the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to instal a suitable heating source to the resident’s bathroom.
  3. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to confirm compliance with the above orders within their respective timeframes.

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord contacts the resident and re-offers her £150 compensation (if not paid already) for the time and trouble caused to the resident by the landlord’s complaint handling failures.