Clarion Housing Association Limited (202348465)

Decision
Case ID	202348465
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Clarion Housing Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	30 October 2025

Background

1. The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord and lives in a flat. In 2023, she lost heating services for a period and believes the landlord did not fully compensate her for the disruption. She also asked the landlord to deal with the poor condition of her bathroom and ongoing rodent activity in the property.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Compensation for the loss of heating.
   2. Bathroom repairs.
   3. Reports of rodent activity in the property.
   4. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of compensation for the loss of heating.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of bathroom repairs.
   3. Service failure in how the landlord handled reports of rodent activity in the property.
   4. Reasonable redress for the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The handling of compensation for the loss of heating

4. The landlord recognised the initial delay in restoring heating and awarded compensation in line with its policy. However, the offer failed to reflect the further disruption the resident experienced between December 2023 and March 2024. This meant its overall redress did not fully acknowledge the extended period the resident was without reliable heating.

The handling of bathroom repairs

5. The landlord acted in line with the tenancy agreement when addressing the resident’s decoration concern, recognised the delay in replacing the shower pole and awarded compensation for this appropriately. However, it took 71 days to fit the blending valve to resolve the water temperature issue, meaning it did not fully meet its repair obligations or timescales.

How it handled reports of rodent activity in the property

6. The landlord investigated reports of rodent activity and awarded compensation after recognising it had not followed a contractor’s recommendation. However, it took too long a further 4 months to complete proofing works, which was not in line with its pest control policy commitments.

The handling of the complaint

7. The landlord’s complaint responses were issued outside the timescales set out in the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, but it acknowledged these delays and awarded compensation. This provided reasonable redress for the inconvenience caused.

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 provided by a senior staff member, such as a head of service or director.   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   27 November 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,735 made up as follows: £555 for the loss of amenity. This includes the £230 it offered during the complaints process for the loss of heating.   £350 to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused by the extended delay in fully resolving the heating and electrical issues. This includes the £200 it offered during the complaints process for the disruption to the Wi-fi and inconvenience from the loss of heating.   £30 it offered during the complaints process for the inconvenience caused by missed appointments.   £200 to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in its handling of bathroom repairs. This includes the £100 it offered during the complaints process for this issue.   £600 to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of rodent activity. This includes the £500 it offered during the complaints process for this issue.   This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than   27 November 2025
3	Inspection order    We have made an inspection order because the resident told us that she continues to hear rodents in the ceiling space. What the landlord must do    The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection of the ceiling space. The landlord must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. A suitably qualified person must complete the inspection. 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   27 November 2025
4	Update order   The landlord must write to the resident providing her with an update on what proofing works have been completed in the communal areas and what further works it intends to carry out, as it committed to in its stage 1 complaint response.	No later than   27 November 2025

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We recommend the landlord pays the resident the £150 compensation it previously offered for the inconvenience caused by delays in its complaint handling. The finding of reasonable redress is based on this payment being made to the resident.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
17 November 2023	The resident complained to the landlord, she said: The electricity tripped when the central heating was turned on. She had no heating for over 3 weeks. Parts to fix the heating would not arrive until the following month. The heating issue recurred yearly and affected all residents. Using temporary fan heaters had increased her energy costs. The electricity issue had caused Wi-Fi loss and disrupted her work. The hot water in the bathroom was too hot. The paint in the wet room was unsuitable and had started to peel. She heard mice in the walls, which had worsened in cold weather.
2 February 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said: Heating/electrical issues It had resolved the reported issues by December 2023. Delays arose because incorrect parts were ordered, and replacements were unavailable. It had installed a new safety switch and replaced parts on the hot water cylinder thermostat. Its contractor tried to attend within 24 hours of the first report but could not gain access. Bathroom issues It had inspected the bathroom and decided not to repaint it but agreed to replace the shower pole. The hot water temperature was too high, and a job was raised to install a blending valve. Rodent activity It was seeking advice from building safety on proofing works for mice around the communal areas. Previous inspections in the resident’s property had found no evidence of rodent activity. Compensation It was awarding a total of £510 compensation for the loss of heating, delays and missed appointments in November and December 2023. This also covered the inconvenience from the Wi-Fi disruption and its delayed complaint response.
2 February 2024	The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process. She said her radiators were not working.
7 May 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said: Heating/ electrical issues There was no evidence that heating issues occurred annually, the problems were limited to her flat. After clearing a strainer, flushing radiators, and rewiring the central heating in February and March 2024, the heating was fully restored. Repairs in the plant room were due to components reaching their end of life. Bathroom issues It had failed to raise a job for the shower pole replacement but had booked an appointment for the following week. It had resolved the hot water temperature by installing a blending valve. Decorative works were the resident’s responsibility, so it could not repaint the wet room. Rodent activity No recent rodent activity had been found, but it failed to follow up on the pest contractor’s request to access to the space between the ceilings and roof. It had since raised a job to complete this request. Compensation It was awarding an additional £700 compensation for delays in responding to the complaint, handling the rodent activity reports, and arranging the bathroom works. This brought the total compensation awarded to £1,210.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate because the landlord had not compensated her for the disruption caused by the heating loss up to March 2024. She also said the landlord had wrongly recorded its contractor’s first visit as ‘no access’ when she was at home. She repeated her concerns that the heating issues occurred every year.

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 handling of compensation for the loss of heating.
Finding	Maladministration

8. The landlord accepted there were delays restoring the resident’s heating between 1 November and 16 December 2023 and recognised the inconvenience caused. Under its compensation policy, discretionary payments of up to £250 may be made where service failures cause inconvenience. The policy also allows £5 per day for heating loss. The landlord awarded £200 for inconvenience and £230 for loss of amenity in line with these provisions. This showed it applied its policy correctly and acknowledged the impact of the delay.
9. However, a site report from 16 December 2023 shows the contractor left the hot water and radiators switched off to prevent the electrics from tripping and noted that parts were still required to complete a full repair. No follow-up took place until the resident chased the issue the following month, and only at the visit on 5 February 2024 did the contractor confirm all radiators were working at the same temperature. The resident reported further heating and electrical issues a month later, which were fully resolved on 18 March 2024. It was therefore incorrect to treat the repair as complete in December 2023. This was not in line with section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, which requires landlords to keep heating and hot water installations in proper working order. The failure left the resident without reliable heating for 65 additional days during winter, causing further distress and inconvenience.
10. The landlord must pay the resident an additional £325 compensation to recognise the loss of amenity, in line with its £5-per-day guidance for heating loss over 65 days. This brings the total compensation for loss of amenity to £555.
11. It must pay a further £150 to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused by the extended delay in fully restoring heating. This aligns with the Housing Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance, which suggests awards between £100 to £600 where a landlord’s failings have adversely affected the resident. This brings total compensation for distress and inconvenience for this issue to £350.
12. The resident said the landlord failed to compensate her for a missed appointment in early November 2023, following her initial report of a heating problem. The landlord said its contractor did not gain access, but there is no evidence in the repair records to verify this, such as a note confirming a card was left or a voicemail made to the resident. The lack of records means the landlord cannot demonstrate the appointment was handled appropriately.
13. It was, however, appropriate that the landlord awarded £30 compensation for 2 other missed appointments in November and December 2023, in line with its compensation policy for appointments missed without 24 hours’ notice. It must pay this to the resident now if it has not done so already. We will not order further compensation for missed appointments, as we are satisfied the overall redress for distress and inconvenience referenced above, is now proportionate. But in future, the landlord should ensure contractors clearly record any missed appointments and attempts to support its position.
14. The resident said heating issues occurred annually and affected other residents. However, repair records for her flat, dating back to 2017, show no repeat heating failures. The landlord’s conclusion that the problem was isolated to the resident’s flat was therefore reasonable, particularly as inspection records identified faults with the wiring and radiators. The landlord also reviewed communal repair records to check for any wider links. While some plant room issues arose around the same time, it said these were coincidental and unrelated to the resident’s flat. There is no evidence to suggest the landlord needed to investigate further.
15. Considering the prolonged loss of heating and the landlord’s failure to reflect this in its compensation, we find maladministration in its handling of this issue.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of bathroom repairs.
Finding	Service failure

16. The landlord agreed to replace the shower pole in February 2024. However, its stage 2 complaint response noted that 3 months had passed, and the repair was still outstanding. It was appropriate that the landlord awarded £100 compensation at this stage to recognise the delay and inconvenience, in line with its compensation policy for service failures. Records confirm the shower pole was replaced within 9 days of the stage 2 complaint response, meeting the landlord’s non-emergency repairs timescale of up to 28 days. This showed it fulfilled the commitment it had set out in its response.
17. The resident reported that the paint in the bathroom was unsuitable. It was appropriate for the landlord to explain that decorative works and general upkeep of the flat are the resident’s responsibility, as this was in line with the conditions of the tenancy.
18. The evidence shows the resident reported the hot water temperature was too high in late October 2023. The landlord’s contractor attended 25 days later, which was within its routine repair timescale. The contractor confirmed the temperature was too high but did not raise any follow-on works at the time. The blending valve to resolve the issue was not installed until 71 days later, which was significantly outside the landlord’s repair timescales. There is no evidence explaining the delay, and during this period the resident was left with excessively hot water, causing ongoing inconvenience and discomfort. This also meant the system was not in proper working order, contrary to the landlord’s duty under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to keep installations for water and heating safe and functioning correctly.
19. The landlord must pay the resident a further £100 compensation to reflect the inconvenience caused by the delay in resolving the issue. This aligns with our Remedies Guidance as referenced above. This brings the total compensation for distress and inconvenience for the handling of bathroom repairs to £200.
20. While the landlord took some appropriate steps to address the bathroom repairs, its delay in resolving the temperature issue and failure to address this during the complaint process, has led us to find service failure.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of reports of rodent activity in the property.
Finding	Service failure

21. The landlord said there was no evidence of rodent activity in the resident’s property. Repair records support this, showing that a pest control contractor attended on 6 occasions between December 2022 and January 2024. On each visit, bait was laid, and no activity was found. However, it was appropriate that the landlord identified that it had overlooked the contractor’s recommendation to create access to the ceiling space and awarded £500 compensation for not following this through. This showed it used its complaints process effectively to recognise and put right its service failure.
22. However, shortly after the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response, at the end of May 2024, records show the pest control contractor identified low-level rodent activity in the kitchen and recommended proofing works in the boiler cupboard. These were not completed until late October 2024. While the landlord’s pest control policy does not set specific timescales for completing tasks, a 4-month delay was unreasonable and inconsistent with its commitment to identify and block access points promptly.
23. The landlord must pay the resident a further £100 compensation to reflect the inconvenience caused by the delay in completing the proofing works. This amount aligns with our Remedies Guidance referenced above and brings the total compensation for distress and inconvenience in the landlord’s handling of reports of rodent activity to £600.
24. In October 2024, the landlord told us the resident no longer reported hearing rodents, so creating access to the ceiling space was no longer required. However, the resident told us recently that she continues to hear rodents in the ceiling space. The landlord must inspect the ceiling space as previously agreed to identify any ongoing rodent activity. It must also provide her with an update confirming what proofing works have been completed in the communal areas and what further works it intends to carry out, as it committed to in its stage 1 complaint response.
25. While the landlord appropriately investigated reports of rodent activity, it delayed completing the recommended proofing works. These delays have led us to find service failure in its handling of this issue.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the complaint.
Finding	Reasonable redress

26. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. Our findings are:
    1. The landlord has a published complaints policy which complies with the Code’s timescales.
    2. Both stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses were issued to the resident significantly outside the Code’s target timescales of 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2. The Code also requires landlords to agree suitable intervals with residents for keeping them informed when responses will fall outside these timescales. There is no evidence this occurred, so the landlord did not fully meet the Code’s expectations for communication during complaint delays.
    3. However, the landlord acknowledged its delays and awarded £150 compensation to reflect the inconvenience caused. This showed it recognised where its handling had fallen short and took proportionate steps to put things right, in line with the Code’s requirement to acknowledge failings and provide redress where appropriate. The landlord should pay this compensation to the resident now if it has not done so already.
27. In light of the landlord’s acknowledgment and compensation, we find reasonable redress in its handling of the complaint.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

28. The landlord’s records were detailed and showed good practice. Generally, they captured the full repair journey, including notes explaining why works were cancelled or delayed. This level of detail supports transparency. Although, as mentioned earlier in the report, it should be mindful when recording an appointment as ‘no access’ unless it can clearly evidence its attempts to support its position.

Communication

29. The landlord’s communication with the resident largely took place through the complaint responses rather than regular updates during the repair process. This approach meant the resident had to chase for progress. The landlord should ensure residents receive timely unprompted updates on ongoing repairs until completion.