London Borough of Lambeth (202347067)

Background

1. The resident, who has a disability, lives in the property with her 2 children. The resident raised a complaint about how the landlord handled a repair to her boiler when she reported a loss of heat and hot water.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. Handling of repairs to the resident’s boiler.
   2. Complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s boiler.
   2. No maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Handling of repairs to the resident’s boiler

4. The landlord’s handling of the repair to the resident’s boiler led to delays in this issue being resolved for the resident. Although the landlord offered some compensation, it did not offer an appropriate amount to remedy the impact on the resident.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint in line with its complaint policy.

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.

6. The landlord’s repair policy explains that certain repairs are subject to certain timescales under the Right to Repair scheme. Loss of heating or hot water between 31 October and 1 May requires a response within one working day.
7. Landlord records show that the resident reported a loss of hot water and heating on 7 November 2023 and a work order was raised. An engineer attended the same day and advised parts were required. These parts were put on order and the engineer had a temporary fix put on the system. The landlord responded in an appropriate timeframe and in line with the timescales set out in the landlord’s repairs policy.
8. The landlord’s contractor attempted to contact the resident on 8 November 2023 to book the repair appointment but was unable to do so. The contractor’s email to the landlord references an email and phone record as evidence of their attempt to contact the resident on this occasion. We have not been provided with these records and therefore are unable to comment on the contractor’s attempt to contact the resident or the information that was provided to the resident at this time.
9. The resident then contacted the landlord on 13 November 2023 to raise a complaint as her boiler was still not working. She explained that there were vulnerabilities in the household, as she had a disability and had 2 young children, including a 2 month old baby. A further works order was raised for the boiler and an engineer from the contractor attended the same day. This was appropriate and in line with the timescales in the landlord’s repairs policy. However, it is unclear what actions were taken to provide a temporary fix or what interim measures were put in place to address her reports that it was cold and making her ill.
10. The landlord’s repairs manual says that when residents contact the landlord to raise a repair, they should let the landlord know if they need extra support. It also says that it aims to look after tenants who need extra support and vulnerable tenants have their repairs prioritised for quicker action. There is no evidence that the landlord considered the vulnerabilities in the household in how it responded to the broken boiler, which was not in line with its repairs policy.
11. The engineer who attended on 13 November 2023 stated that, based on their assessment of the condition of the boiler, they recommended a survey be carried out for a new boiler. However, their supervisor advised that the engineer should restore the parts as the boiler was only 8 years old. An engineer attended on 16 November 2023 with the parts to repair the boiler. However, they were unable to repair the boiler and referred the boiler to be replaced.
12. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 22 November 2023. She raised several issues, including increased electricity costs and concerns about carbon monoxide. An internal landlord email states that in a phone conversation the resident said the increased electricity costs were due to using electric heaters. It is unclear if these heaters were provided to the resident as an interim measure, or if she had to arrange these for herself.
13. In this same telephone conversation, the resident said she had to attend hospital and she and her family were experiencing serious headaches, leading to her concerns about carbon monoxide. The landlord’s repairs manual says it has a programme to install carbon monoxide alarms in all its homes with individual gas boilers. It is unclear whether the resident’s property had such an alarm. There is no record of the landlord providing any information to the resident about what to do if she was concerned about carbon monoxide, and there is no evidence of the landlord raising any jobs specifically related to this. There is no record of the landlord addressing this issue until its stage 2 response on 22 December 2023, where it said its engineer had not detected any carbon monoxide. No further information was given.
14. Given the potentially serious nature of carbon monoxide and the fact the resident had expressed concerns, it would have been good practice for the landlord to address this issue directly and promptly. This would have helped reduce the resident’s concerns and distress, and reassured her that the landlord took these reports seriously.
15. A survey was competed on 23 November 2023 and the boiler was replaced on 27 November 2023. In its stage 2 response, the landlord stated that it was satisfied that every attempt had been made to repair the boiler on the same day it was reported.
16. An internal landlord email shows that the resident was sent a cheque for compensation of £49.28 on 26 February 2024. This was calculated as a daily rate of £3.52 multiplied by the number of days from 13 November 2023 the resident was without heating and hot water. The resident rejected this offer as she did not feel it was fair compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused.
17. The landlord’s compensation policy states that compensation in cases where the Right to Repair regulations apply is £10 for the first day the repair is not completed plus £2 for everyday thereafter, up to a total of £50. For the timeframe the landlord considered this would have totalled £38. The compensation offered to the resident was therefore reasonable as it was more than was required under the Right to Repair regulations.
18. There is no evidence that the landlord considered compensating the resident for the distress and inconvenience caused by the period her boiler was faulty. The landlord has not sufficiently evidenced how it responded to the resident’s concerns, considered the risks to the resident, or the habitability of the property. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it is guidance only and staff will need to consider the circumstances of each case, and exercise discretion where appropriate. This did not happen in this case, which was not appropriate.
19. The ordered compensation of £100 is in line with our remedies guidance for where a landlord has made an offer of compensation, but it is not quite proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation.

20. The landlord has a complaints policy which sets out a 2–stage complaints process. The policy says that stage one complaints should be acknowledged within 5 working days and a response provided to the resident within 10 working days of acknowledging the complaint. Stage 2 complaints should be acknowledged within 5 working days and a response provided within 20 working days of acknowledging the complaint. This policy is in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
21. The resident raised a stage one complaint on 13 November 2023. The landlord provided its response on 22 November 2023. Although it is unclear if the landlord acknowledged this complaint, it provided its response within 8 working days of the resident making the complaint. This was appropriate and in line with the timeframes set out in the landlord’s complaints policy and the Code.
22. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 22 November 2023. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 22 December 2023. This was 23 working days after the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2. The landlord’s complaints policy and the Code allow for 5 working days for acknowledging a complaint and 20 working days to provide a response, a total of 25 working days from when the resident escalates their complaint to stage 2. Although it is unclear whether the landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 escalation, it provided its response within the timelines set out in its policy and the Code.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

23. There were limited records available in this case, including a lack of documents from the contractor or repair records. It is important that landlords keep clear, accurate, and accessible records. This will help avoid any confusion and help the landlord to form clear timelines around when an issue has been raised and what actions have been taken to resolve them.
24. Accurate records can also be relied upon if a dispute arises. They can help the landlord to demonstrate that it has responded appropriately.

Communication

25. The resident raised concerns about carbon monoxide in her stage 2 escalation which were not addressed until the landlord provided its stage 2 response. It also provided very limited information to the resident in response to these concerns. The landlord should consider how it can be more proactive in communicating with residents to reassure residents it takes their concerns seriously and to explain what action it is taking in response.