GreenSquareAccord Limited (202331616)

Background

1. The resident is elderly and lives alone. He has several vulnerabilities that the landlord was aware of. In 2021 he told the landlord the heating system was worsening his already dry eyes. The landlord installed a new night storage heating system (NSH) in February 2022. The resident continued to report problems and said he was unable to manage the controls. He complained in 2022, 2023, and 2024. He also sought help from his MP during this period. He wanted the landlord to replace the heating system. The landlord determined that the heating was working correctly and would not replace it.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. The resident’s request for new heaters.
   2. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s request for new heaters.
4. The landlord made a reasonable offer of redress for its handling of the associated complaint.

We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

5. The landlord took reasonable steps to demonstrate to the resident how the heating system works and provided additional advice and support.
6. The landlord delayed unreasonably when issuing its step 2 and step 3 complaint responses. However, it appropriately apologised for its complaint handling failures and its offer of compensation was in line with our Guidance on Remedies.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

7. The resident told the landlord that the previous and current heating systems contributed to his ill health. We are unable to decide if the heating system has caused damage to the resident’s health. However, we will consider the landlord’s response to these reports and any distress and inconvenience caused.
8. The records show the resident raised concerns about the previous heating system in October 2021. The landlord promptly inspected the heating system and found it in working order. It offered to provide the resident with additional portable heaters when he said he was extremely cold in December 2021. It took his reports seriously and considered means to reduce the impact on him.
9. The landlord continued visiting and speaking to the resident in December 2021 and January 2022. The resident said that his GP and dermatologist told him that the heaters were causing dry eyes and itching. The landlord reasonably asked for some medical evidence to support these reports but there was none provided. Despite the lack of evidence, the landlord appropriately upgraded the heating system in February 2022. This shows the landlord continued to take the resident’s concerns seriously and act on his reports.
10. Prior to upgrading the heating, the landlord surveyed the property. It appropriately sent a specialist heating advisor to discuss the upgrade with the resident. It took reasonable steps to ensure the heating system would work efficiently albeit there was no record to show that it consulted with any medical professional or Occupational Therapist when making this decision. It is not clear how the landlord considered any potential impact on the resident’s vulnerabilities by changing the heating system. Although it was not a requirement of the work, this was a missed opportunity at the time.
11. Shortly after installing the heating system, the resident reported problems. He frequently told the landlord throughout 2022 and 2023 that the heating either did not work, was blowing cold air, or was making him ill. The landlord’s records show that it promptly responded to the resident each time. It sent contractors, specialist heating advisors, support workers, and housing officers to meet with him and ensure the heating system was working properly. Each time, it noted that the heating was working but the resident was switching it off improperly. It gave him demonstrations, written guidance, and video recordings showing him how to use the heating system. It was supportive, proactive, and acted reasonably in the circumstances.
12. The landlord’s records also show it considered the resident’s vulnerabilities. It corresponded with, and made referrals to, specialist support services. It met with his niece, who was also supporting him at the time. It responded to the resident’s MP and gave detailed updates on its actions. There were no recommendations made by external support services for the landlord to make any change to the heating system.
13. The landlord appropriately addressed the resident’s concerns in its complaint responses. In April 2022 it confirmed that the heaters were working properly and reasonably explained why it could not reinstate the old heating system. In January 2023 it was fair to restate its position and not uphold the complaint.
14. In response to the resident’s concerns that he would be without heating in winter 2023, the landlord installed an electric fire on 19 September 2023. This was a reasonable response and showed the landlord was seeking other means to reduce the impact on the resident.
15. The landlord’s internal records show that it considered replacing the heating system. It determined that this was not a viable option. It says that it was reliant on an electric heating system and this was the most appropriate type. It was reasonable to share this finding with the resident in its stage 2 response in February 2024. The landlord also used its response to make further offers of support with rehousing and using the heating system. Its response was fair and reflected the concerns raised by the resident.
16. We found there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s requests for new heaters. It took the resident’s concerns seriously throughout the timeline. It acted promptly in replacing the original heating system and then providing him appropriate advice and support to use the new system. When the resident continued having difficulties, it made suitable referrals for support services and provided an additional heater.

17. The landlord’s complaint responses were not compliant with the Complaint Handling Code, or its complaint handling policy. The landlord used terms “step 2” and “step 3” to describe its stage 1 and 2 responses. It issued each of its responses in 2023 and 2024 considerably outside the timescales set out in those policies.
18. The failures caused the resident additional time and trouble pursuing his complaints. He also took time and trouble seeking help from his MP and us to receive a reply from the landlord at step 3.
19. However, the landlord appropriately addressed its complaint handling failures in its step 3 response in February 2024. It accepted that it had failed to comply with the appropriate timescales and apologised for the delay in its response. Its combined offer of £300 for its complaint handling failures is in line with our published Guidance on Remedies for failings which adversely affect the resident (in addition to the £150 related to its handling of MP enquiries).
20. We found that the landlord’s recognition of its failures and offer of compensation provide the resident with a reasonable offer of redress.

Learning

21. The resident raised concerns in 2021 and 2022 that the heating system was contributing to his poor health. Although it was not obliged to do so, it would have been reasonable to have consulted with an Occupational Therapist or medical professional before swapping the heating system. A clear explanation from a suitably qualified professional at the time may have assisted the resident’s decision making.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

22. The landlord kept clear and accurate records of its contact with the resident.

Communication

23. The landlord promptly replied to the resident’s concerns throughout the timeline. It took reasonable steps to manage his communication when his contact was overwhelming its service.