Leicester City Council (202401431)

Background

1. The resident lives in the property with his wife, who is vulnerable and requires support and personal care. He reported that the home was cold and that he faced high energy bills, which he struggled to pay. The resident has since purchased this property.

What the complaint is about

2. The landlord’s response to the request for loft and wall insulation and the impact of poor energy efficiency on energy bills.
3. We have also considered the complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the request for loft and wall insulation and the impact of poor energy efficiency on energy bills.
5. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s response to the request for loft and wall insulation and the impact of poor energy efficiency on energy bills.

6. The landlord did not go far enough to demonstrate the property provided a reasonable level of thermal comfort. It did not support or signpost the resident for help with his increasing energy costs. The landlord’s approach was not customer focused.

Complaint handling

7. The landlord handled its responses at both stages of the complaint process appropriately and within the required timescales.

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.

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.

What we have not investigated

8. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because the landlord needs to have a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to our involvement. The resident raised additional issues with us since the final response of 12 February 2024, including that the property was let without insulation, a request for compensation for the past 3 years, and his liability claim. These issues have not exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure and we have not investigated them.

What we investigated

9. Under the tenancy agreement and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord must keep the structure and exterior in good repair. Government standards, including Building Regulations and the Decent Homes Standard, require homes to provide a reasonable level of thermal comfort. In this case, the resident asked for loft insulation and external wall insulation (EWI). These requests were not part of the landlord’s repair duties as they were energy efficiency improvements. Even so, landlords should make sure homes have effective insulation and heating.
10. Landlords must ensure their properties have a valid EPC. The EPC rates the energy efficiency of the property on a scale of ‘A’ to ‘G’, with ‘A’ being the most efficient. Landlords must ensure their properties have a minimum rating of ‘E’. 
11. The resident asked for loft and wall insulation on 24 October 2023 because of high energy costs. The landlord inspected the property on 6 November 2023, 9 working days later. We do not have a copy of the inspection report, so we cannot confirm what checks were carried out or if the landlord’s actions after the inspection met its obligations under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Decent Homes Standard. Given the resident’s concerns about cold and his wife’s known vulnerabilities, the landlord should have checked thermal efficiency or arranged a heat loss survey. There is no evidence this happened.
12. It is unclear what assessment the landlord carried out to identify the cause of heat loss or whether it offered any support to the resident. Heat loss can result from poor insulation, but other factors such as window performance or radiator size may also contribute. A qualified surveyor’s assessment would have confirmed if the property met the Decent Homes Standard and identified improvements. The absence of such an assessment was a failing by the landlord.
13. On 24 January 2024, the landlord issued its stage 1 response. It explained its position and gave reasons for refusing external wall insulation (EWI), citing budget constraints and planning restrictions. This was reasonable under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, as EWI is an improvement rather than a repair. However, the landlord did not confirm whether the property met thermal comfort standards or considered alternative measures required by the Decent Homes Standard.
14. The landlord said the loft had 250mm of insulation, although CCTV installation had disturbed it. It advised the resident to contact the installer to restore the insulation. While this advice was practical, it is not clear if the landlord checked if the insulation was reinstated or considered whether the property still met thermal comfort standards under the Decent Homes Standard.
15. The stage 2 response repeated that the property was suitably insulated and explained that EWI programmes were large-scale, costly, and on hold. It highlighted planning restrictions and stated that internal insulation would require the property to be vacant. These explanations were reasonable, and the property’s EPC rating of D met the legal minimum standard under the Energy Efficiency Regulations. The landlord reviewed some EPC data because it referred to the loft insulation depth of 250mm, which matched the EPC record. However, it did not consider the EPC’s finding that the walls were rated “poor” or its recommendation for cavity wall insulation. This was a missed opportunity to address thermal comfort under the Decent Homes Standard and to reassure the resident that all relevant information had been considered.
16. The landlord said rising energy costs were a widespread issue. While this is true, other factors within a property can also contribute to high bills. It is unclear how the landlord satisfied itself that the resident’s high bills were not linked to poor energy efficiency, given that it is not clear if it carried out an assessment. The landlord has energy advice and supports available on its website, including tips on reducing energy use and information about assistance schemes. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to refer the resident to these resources, provided practical guidance or signposted the resident to its website. Doing so would have shown that the landlord supported the resident and took steps to help manage energy costs. The absence of this signposting was a missed opportunity to demonstrate a customer-focused approach.
17. The landlord should have taken active steps to address the resident’s concerns about energy efficiency. This includes reviewing the property’s energy performance data, considering whether an updated assessment was necessary, and offering practical support or advice on available schemes to improve insulation and reduce energy costs. By failing to explore these options or provide any guidance, the landlord missed an opportunity to understand if the property met the standard for thermal comfort, and what if any actions it was required to do.
18. The Housing Act 2004 ensures landlords are responsible for assessing hazards and risks. Any assessments considered for hazards and risks should be in line with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). The HHSRS says a healthy indoor temperature is around 21˚C. Temperatures below 19˚C may cause some health problems, and below 16˚C could be dangerous for older people or those who are vulnerable. There is no evidence to show that the landlord checked for cold-related risks at the time of the complaint. It also did not consider whether the resident’s wife might be more vulnerable to the cold because of her health conditions known to the landlord.
19. Overall, the landlord did not have to provide external wall insulation because this is an improvement rather than a repair under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. However, there is no evidence that the landlord satisfied itself that the property provided a reasonable level of thermal comfort or offered practical support to help the resident manage high energy costs. This was particularly important given the household vulnerability and the resident’s reported energy debt. The lack of clear action meant the resident continued to experience cold conditions and financial strain without reassurance or assistance. These failings caused distress and inconvenience over a prolonged period.
20. The landlord’s complaint process was an opportunity to resolve the matter in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles. It should have taken ownership and acted in a customer-focused way but instead concentrated on what it claimed the resident had done rather than addressing the concerns raised. There is no evidence that the landlord explained its findings or offered practical support to help resolve the issue. This approach created uncertainty and compounded the distress already caused. Taken together, these failings amount to maladministration. We have not made an inspection order because the resident since purchased his property mid-2025. However, we have ordered the landlord to pay £250 compensation in line with our Remedies Guidance.

21. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case was the 2022 edition (April 2022).
22. The landlord has a published complaint policy which complies with the terms of the Code in respect of timescales.
23. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the same day it received it on 12 January 2024 and issued its stage 1 response on 24 January 2024, 8 working days later. In line with the Code, the landlord had 5 working days to acknowledge the complaint, and 10 working days to respond to the complaint (up to 15 working days). In line with its policy, the landlord had 10 working days to respond to the complaint from when it receives the complaint. The landlord’s response was in line with the Code and the policy.
24. The resident acknowledged the escalation the same day it received it on 24 January 2024, and issued its stage 2 response on 12 February 2024, 13 working days later. In line with the Code, landlord had 5 working days to acknowledge the complaint and 20 working days to respond to the complaint (up to 25 working days). In line with its policy, the landlord had 20 working days to respond to the complaint from when it receives the complaint. The landlord’s response was in line with the Code and the policy.

Learning

25. The landlord should consider if its policies and practices are sufficient to support resident’s with vulnerabilities.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

26. A landlord should keep good records. This enables it to effectively manage any issues raised by its residents as well as fulfilling its obligations as a landlord. Neither the landlord nor the Ombudsman can properly investigate and respond to complaints without accurate and comprehensive records and this could result in unfairness to the resident. In this case, there were a number of gaps, for example the landlord did not provide information on any related repairs or the inspection report.

Communication

27. The landlord’s responses focused on what the resident had done rather than explaining its own findings or offering practical support. A key learning is to adopt a customer-focused approach during complaint handling by clearly referencing inspection results, addressing concerns, and signposting available help. This builds trust and shows commitment to resolving issues.