Peabody Trust (202447447)

Decision
Case ID	202447447
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Peabody Trust
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Shared Ownership
Date	12 November 2025

Background

The resident’s shared ownership lease started in July 2022. The property was a newbuild flat when the resident purchased the lease.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of problems with the underflooring heating.
We will also consider the landlord’s complaint handling as part of the investigation.

Our decision (determination)

There was service failure by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s reports of problems with the underflooring heating.
There was service failure by the landlord in respect of complaint handling.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

While the landlord delayed in taking action to remedy the problems with the underfloor heating in the property, it has awarded appropriate compensation in recognition of this. However, the landlord’s inaction in response to the recommendation relating to the window in the master bedroom following the heating survey in November 2024 amounts to a service failure. As the survey identified a potential issue with the window, the landlord should either have carried out an inspection or explained to the resident why no further action would be taken.
While the landlord significantly delayed in responding to the complaint it has awarded appropriate compensation in recognition of this. However, the landlord’s failure to consider whether compensation was due for increased utility costs amounts to a service failure.

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.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 10 December 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £200 compensation made up as follows: £100 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused for not responding to the recommendation relating to the window in the master bedroom £100 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused for not considering whether compensation was due for increased utility bills. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date and is in addition to the compensation the landlord awarded itself. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 10 December 2025
3	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection of the window in the master bedroom in response to the findings of the heating survey dated November 2024. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The surveyor should provide a written report detailing the findings of the inspection. This should include: Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue with reasons where it is not responsible. A full scope of works to achieve an effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible). The likely timescales to commence and complete the work. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date.	No later than 10 December 2025
4	Action order The landlord must write to the resident and request evidence of additional costs incurred relating to the use of the underfloor heating between November 2023 and July 2024. The landlord should review the information to consider whether an offer of compensation should be made. Following the review the landlord must write to the resident providing the outcome. Where an offer of compensation is not deemed appropriate the landlord should explain why.	No later than 10 December 2025

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
13 November 2023	The resident wrote to the landlord to make a complaint in relation to the underfloor heating which he said he had started using earlier that month. In summary he said: The underfloor heating was not working properly as the property did not get warm. The rooms most affected by low temperatures were the master bedroom and the living room. He was using portable fan heaters to increase the temperature in the property. The cost of heating the property was excessive. He provided figures to demonstrate this. On the same day the landlord acknowledged the complaint confirming that a response would be provided within 10 working days.
13 May 2024	The landlord wrote to the resident, following several chasers from him, to apologise that it had not responded to the complaint. It confirmed that the stage 1 response would be provided by 27 May 2023.
24 May 2024 to 19 July 2024	The landlord wrote to the resident on at least 3 occasions to explain that its stage 1 response would be delayed. It said it required further information in order to provide a response.
22 July 2024	The landlord provided its stage 1 response. In summary it said: In November 2023 its contractor carried out a repair to the underfloor heating system. As the resident reported that this had not resolved the issue it contacted the developer to request that it investigate the primary temperature in the building’s plant room. This action had been delayed as paperwork had to be resolved with the developer first. On 3 July 2024 a contractor visited the property. During the appointment the contractor “rectified the issue”. It confirmed that the resident should test the heating and report back to it with any performance issues. On confirmation that the issue had been resolved it would consider the resident’s request for compensation in relation to increased energy usage. It explained that this would not however be a reimbursement of utility costs. It would provide advice to the resident on how to best use the underfloor heating “efficiently and effectively”. It would provide the resident with a copy of the report following the “previous” thermal survey completed once it was received from the contractor. It confirmed that it would not be instructing a new thermal survey but the resident could arrange his own. The underlay and carpet installed in the property were in line with “British standards and manufacturers recommendations”. It would like to offer the resident £640 compensation comprising: – £320 for time and trouble from November 2023 to July 2024 (£40 per month). – £240 for distress and inconvenience from November 2023 to July 2024 (£30 per month). – £80 complaint handling from November 2023 to July 2024 (£10 per month).
25 July 2024	The landlord wrote to the resident to provide information on how to best use the underfloor heating and full details of the underlay and carpet installed in the property.
26 July 2024	The resident requested to escalate the complaint. In summary he said: The landlord had not provided a sufficient response to explain why the property had experienced issues with the underfloor heating. The landlord’s decision to not undertake a new thermal survey was unfair. The previous survey had identified a cold spot which indicated possible uneven heating in the property. He was concerned that the issues with the underfloor heating may impact on the property’s value. The level of compensation was not proportionate to the length of time he had been experiencing issues with the underfloor heating. The problems began shortly after he moved into the property.
29 July 2024	The landlord confirmed that it would escalate the complaint to stage 2 of its complaint procedure. It noted that it was dealing with a backlog of complaints and the response would therefore be delayed.
4 September to October 2024	The resident contacted the landlord on multiple occasions to chase for its stage 2 response. The landlord replied setting out that the investigation was ongoing and it was dealing with a large volume of complaints which was impacting on its response times.
29 October 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. In summary it said: It was outside of its responsibility to carry out a thermal survey of the property as maintenance was a homeowner’s responsibility. The resident could arrange his own survey and it would respond to any issues found which were its responsibility. It acknowledged that “modifications” to the underfloor heating were necessary which suggested that it may not have functioned optimally in the past. However it could not assume liability for increased energy usage during this time as it was only responsible for communal repairs. Issues relating to heating performance did not usually lead to “significant depreciation” in a property’s value as it was a manageable problem. It would like to increase its offer of compensation to £710 by awarding an additional £70 for complaint handling.
5 and 8 November 2024	The resident wrote to the landlord to explain he was not happy with its stage 2 response. In summary he said: He was unhappy that the landlord’s documents, which he had obtained via a subject access request, suggested the problems with the underfloor heating were due to how he used the system rather than a repair issue. It was unfair that the landlord had refused to follow up on the cold spot identified by the thermal survey. This was contradictory to the learning it had noted within its response regarding alternative inspections for recurring issues. He noted that the master bedroom did not heat to the same level as other rooms in the property.
8 November 2024	The landlord confirmed that it would arrange a heating survey.
20 November 2024	The heating survey was completed. The report following the survey confirmed: A thermal imaging camera was used and found that the underfloor heating was working “completely fine” and was “pretty efficient”. The resident had not been using the underfloor heating in the most efficient way. Advice was given on how best to use the underfloor heating. There was significant heat loss and draft around the bay window in the master bedroom. It recommended that a surveyor inspect the windows for next steps.
21 November 2024	The landlord wrote to the resident to confirm that it would arrange for a formal complaint closure letter to be issued following the results of the heating survey.
24 February 2025	Following multiple chasers from the resident the landlord wrote to the resident. It confirmed that the complaint was closed as the issue with the underflooring heating was resolved. It awarded £50 compensation for the delay in confirming its position.
Referral to the Ombudsman	As the resident was not happy with the landlord’s response to the complaint he referred the matter to us. He said that he was unhappy with the level of compensation awarded and the landlord’s failure to investigate the cold spot in the master bedroom.

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.

Complaint	The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of problems with the underflooring heating
Finding	Service failure

Following receipt of the resident’s complaint the landlord asked the developer to inspect the underfloor heating in the property. This was appropriate as the property was within the 2 year defect period for new build homes. The record following the inspection, dated 24 November 2023, confirmed that the flow temperature was too low which was rectified. We note that the record does not document or refer to any cold spots within the property as mentioned by the resident. Following the adjustment the resident reported that the issue was not resolved.
In December 2023 the landlord’s internal emails document that it requested for the developer to attend the building to inspect the main unit in the plant room. It recorded that the request was made as it had received reports from multiple residents in the building, including the resident, raising issues with the under flooring heating in their flats. Despite the landlord’s request we cannot see that the plant room was inspected at that time by the developer or the landlord. This is unsatisfactory. As the landlord had identified that the main unit could be responsible for causing heating issues across the building it should have taken steps to ensure that the unit was inspected within a reasonable period of time.
Between March 2024 and June 2024 the landlord’s records document internal discussions about the underfloor heating issues reported within the building. This included the information needed in order to progress an inspection and/ or repairs by the developer. It is not clear why the landlord’s discussions could not be completed within a shorter timeframe. During this period the resident would have experienced uncertainty, distress and inconvenience as he was waiting for action. The landlord acknowledged the delay within its stage 1 response and offer of compensation.
On 25 June 2024 the heat interface unit for the property’s underfloor heating was serviced. The certificate following the service recorded a “pass” and documented that the operative “raised [the] thermostat” during the appointment.
On 3 July 2024 the main unit in the plant room was inspected. The report following the inspection set out that adjustments were made to the heating control value so that the system would hold a constant temperature as fluctuations were identified.
While these actions were appropriate (service and inspection) the landlord should have taken more robust action to ensure that they were completed at a much earlier time. Including better and more proactive liaison with the developer.
Following these appointments the resident requested a thermal survey to confirm that the adjustments had addressed the cold spots in the living room and master bedroom. In response the landlord declined and requested that the resident test and monitor the system. We consider it was sensible to ask the resident to use the heating and monitor performance before arranging any further investigation. The landlord also provided the resident with a user guide to ensure that he was able to operate the system optimally.
On 4 October 2024 the resident said in correspondence related to the stage 2 investigation that he had not yet tested the underfloor heating. He explained this was because the weather was not cold enough and it was going to cost money to do so.
In response to the resident’s dissatisfaction with its final response and his continued reports of cold spots the landlord commissioned a heating survey of the property. This was a reasonable course of action in order to determine if there was an issue which had not been resolved by the adjustments in summer 2024 and to help bring the matter to a close.
The outcome of the heating survey on 20 November 2024 confirmed that the underfloor heating was working “completely fine” and “pretty efficient”.
In responding to the complaint the landlord acknowledged that its response to and handling of the resident’s reports of problems with the underflooring heating had not been satisfactory due to delays and poor communication on the issue between November 2023 and July 2024. The landlord therefore apologised and awarded £560 compensation.
We consider that the compensation awarded for the specific failings identified in relation to the delay in providing a remedy to resolve issues with the underflooring heating was proportionate. It is also within the range of compensation where the Ombudsman considers there has been a failure which has adversely impacted on the resident.
The resident suggests that the landlord’s offer of compensation was not proportionate to the length of time he had been experiencing issues with the underflooring heating. While the resident’s position is noted, we also note that in raising the complaint he said that he had “only begun to use the built-in underfloor heating since the beginning of November”. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to calculate compensation from November 2023.
While the heating survey in November 2024 did not find any issue with the underfloor heating, it identified that the cold spot in the master bedroom was likely due to heat loss and draft around the window. A recommendation was therefore made to “inspect the windows in the bedroom”.
The landlord has confirmed to us that, despite the recommendation following the heat survey, there are “no updates”. As a recommendation is a proposal as to the best course of action, the landlord should either have inspected the window or explained to the resident why no further action would be taken. This is a failing including as the finding and recommendation was linked to the original complaint and issue which the resident raised. The landlord’s inaction will have resulted in uncertainty, distress and inconvenience to the resident.

Complaint	The landlord’s complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

The timeline of the complaint demonstrates that the landlord’s complaint handling was unsatisfactory. Both the landlord’s stage 1 and stage 2 responses were provided significantly outside of the 10 (stage 1) and 20 (stage 2) working days prescribed by the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. This is a failing. The Ombudsman expects a complaint to progress in a timely fashion as this provides the best opportunity for a complaint process to act in a complementary manner to a landlord’s overall service delivery, enabling potential issues to be identified and addressed. It will also have resulted in uncertainty, inconvenience and distress to the resident in addition to feeling that his concerns were not being taken seriously.
The evidence also shows that the landlord significantly delayed in providing the resident with a formal complaint closure letter following the outcome of the heating survey in November 2024. This is a failing as it was a commitment that the landlord had made.
In responding to the complaint the landlord recognised that it had not responded to the complaint appropriately due to delays. It therefore awarded a total of £200 compensation in recognition of this. We consider that the landlord’s offer of compensation was proportionate to the delays experienced and therefore the impact on the resident.
As part of the complaint the resident requested compensation for increased utility costs. At stage 1 the landlord confirmed that it would consider compensation in relation to increased energy costs on confirmation that the issue was resolved. Despite this commitment and later acknowledgement by the landlord that modifications were necessary in order for the underflooring heating in the property to function optimally, which were delayed, the landlord did not carry out this action. This is a failing. As the landlord had acknowledged a failing in respect of the repairs service it provided it would have been appropriate for it to have considered whether its shortfalls did or could have resulted in increased utility bills for the resident.

Learning

Within the landlord’s complaint response it set out the learning opportunities which had been identified as a result of the complaint. This included the need for clear communication, good complaint handling and use of alternative inspection methods for recurring issues. This is good practice and in line with the principles of the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code which requires landlords to use complaints to deliver service improvements.
The landlord should consider reviewing the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Leasehold, Shared Ownership and new builds; complexity and complaint handling. The report provides useful information and case studies relating to the defect period for new build properties and a landlord’s responsibilities.