Midland Heart Limited (202340412)

Background

1. The resident complained about the length of time taken to repair a leak from the boiler. She also complained about the tank flooding the property. The landlord completed repairs to the boiler and immersion heater and offered compensation. The resident said she had not received a decorating voucher, and the ceiling had not been painted.

What the complaint is about

2. The landlord’s handling of:
   1. Repairs to the heating and hot water system.
   2. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. The landlord has made a reasonable offer of redress to the resident, which resolves the complaint about its handling of the repairs to the heating and hot water system.
4. The landlord has made a reasonable offer of redress to the resident, which resolves the landlord’s complaint handling.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the repair to the heating and hot water system.

5. The resident reported leaks from the boiler and issues with the immersion heater. The landlord attended each emergency repair within 24 hours as set out in its repairs policy. It booked in and attended follow-up appointments when repairs could not be completed in the initial visit. It fixed the issues with the heating and hot water systems. The landlord offered compensation which was in line with our remedies guidance.
6. The landlord delayed both of its complaint responses, and it did not provide a copy of the resident’s escalation request. It did however accept its failings, apologise and pay reasonable compensation.

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.

What we have not looked at

7. Our Scheme rules state that we may not investigate complaints which were not referred to the landlord as a complaint within a reasonable time, which is normally 12 months. The resident said that the landlord had not painted the ceiling, however there is no mention of the landlord offering to paint the ceiling in the evidence provided or its responses. For that reason, we will not investigate the resident’s reports about the ceiling not being painted.
8. The resident told us that she has Raynaud’s syndrome, which can cause pain and tingling when exposed to the cold. She was also undergoing cancer treatment while the repairs were outstanding. It would be fairer, more reasonable, and more effective for her to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any illness or injury and how long it will last. We have not investigated this further. We can, however, decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.

      What we have looked at

9. The landlord has not provided a full copy of the resident’s tenancy terms and conditions. However, section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 inserts into all tenancies repairing obligations. The landlord is responsible for repairing and maintaining the structure of the building, including heating and hot water systems. Under its repairs policy the landlord will attend emergency repairs within 24 hours.
10. On 16 October 2023, the resident reported the boiler was leaking when the heating was switched on. The landlord’s gas contractor attended and completed repairs, leaving the boiler working on 17 October 2023. She reported that the heating and hot water was not working on 22 October 2023. The contractor attended the same day, identified a fault with the boiler, and booked a follow-up appointment for 25 October 2023. The contractor attended as agreed and left the heating and hot water working. The resident reported further problems with the heating and hot water later that day. The contractor attended on 26 October 2023, found the immersion tank switch was not working and repaired it.
11. The landlord accepted that the response did not meet its usual standard because the immersion tank switch should have been identified earlier. The landlord followed its policies and procedures and provided feedback to the gas contractor. This was reasonable given the delays experienced.
12. The resident reported the boiler leaking on several occasions between 1 November 2023 and 17 April 2024. Although the contractor attended within 24 hours unless it was completing follow-on works it took a long time to diagnose the underlying fault and replace the boiler. It fitted a pressure-reducing valve on 14 March 2024 and replaced the boiler on 17 April 2024. Given the initial reports in October 2023, it took a long time for the boiler to be replaced. The contractor continued to attend and carry out repairs during this period. The resident experienced floods in her property caused by the leaking boiler which damaged the carpets. The landlord acknowledged and accepted the delay, apologised and offered compensation in line with our remedies guidance.
13. The resident has said that the landlord offered decorating vouchers, and she has not received them. Whilst the landlord referred to decorating vouchers in its stage 2 response, it did not address the point or offer them in its response. However, When the resident asked about the voucher after the response the landlord said it would provide these as well. The landlord offered the monetary value of the voucher as they were unable to obtain them. We recommend that the landlord offer the decorating vouchers or make the payment if it has not already done so.
14. In summary, we are satisfied that the landlord has made an offer of redress that resolves the complaint about the handling of the repair to the boiler and immersion tank. Although repairs were delayed, the repairs have been completed, the landlord has apologised and offered compensation of £1,853.34 which is reasonable. We recommend the landlord pay the compensation if it has not already done so.

15. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). It says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. A stage 1 response will be provided within 10 working days of the acknowledgement, and a stage 2 response within 20 working days.
16. The resident raised her complaint on 2 January 2024. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 21 February 2024 which was outside the timeframe set out in its complaints policy by 21 working days. It apologised and offered the resident £75 compensation for its administration error and complaint handling. This was reasonable given the delays she experienced.
17. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 29 February 2024. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 31 May 2024; it apologised and offered the resident £250 for the complaint handling and poor communication. This is reasonable and in line with our remedies guidance.
18. Overall, we are satisfied that the landlord has made a reasonable offer of redress in its handling of the complaint. Although there were delays, the landlord acknowledged its failings and offered proportionate compensation.

Learning

19. The landlord had a reactive response to repairs. While it was prompt in completing repairs, it missed opportunities to find the root cause of the problem and fully rectify the problem.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

20. The landlord’s repair records are poor and do not contain necessary information. They do not give a date on which it completed each repair or provide notes following the completion. Additionally, the landlord has not provided the tenancy terms and conditions.

Communication

21. The landlord’s communication with the resident was poor. There is evidence of the resident having to chase for contact and responses. The landlord acknowledged poor communication in its final response.