North Kesteven District Council (202329232)

Background

1. The resident has been a tenant of the landlord since 23 February 1998. She lives alone, in a 3-bedroom, semi-detached spooner house, the house was constructed in 1954. The resident advised in her complaint she was a pensioner and was registered disabled, she receives high-rate attendance allowance and is on pension credit. The landlord advised it had no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
2. The landlord upgraded the heating system at the property from coal fired heating to an air source heat pump on 11 September 2022.

What the complaint is about

3. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for solar panels.
4. We have also considered the complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

5. We found no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
   1. The resident’s request for solar panels.
   2. The resident’s complaint.

We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

6. The landlord has demonstrated that it considered the resident’s complaint, it took practical steps to support the resident and has provided a reasonable response as to why it would not install solar panels at the time.
7. The landlord’s complaint responses were timely and in line with its complaint policy response times.

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.

8. The landlord’s Business Plan, published in July 2022, says it will replace all heating systems with an Air Source Heat Pump (ASHP) when required, subject to it being technically viable.
9. It is understandable that the resident had concerns about the cost of her energy bills. The landlord acted appropriately in acknowledging this and in offering the resident advice in relation to her bills through its different support avenues. As part of its complaint response on 20 November 2023 the landlord said it would arrange a visit to ensure the heat pump was working effectively for the resident.
10. The landlord explained in its complaint response, the type of heating system it would replace an old system with was not an option tenants could decide. This was reasonable, as in accordance with the tenancy the landlord is responsible for maintaining the heating at the property.
11. The landlord acknowledged in its complaint response that it held no records of the resident having discussions about the replacement of the heating system. It acknowledged there was a need for it to improve its record keeping following the outcome of the resident’s complaint. In its stage 2 response, it said it was now developing a checklist that contractors go through with residents which detail what is discussed throughout the survey and installation process. It was good the landlord identified a failing and advised of its actions to improve its future service, this was in line with the in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
12. Ultimately there is no obligation on the landlord to install solar panels on its properties as this would be an improvement and the landlord is not required to carry out improvements; it is only required to maintain its properties. The landlord has demonstrated that it considered the resident’s complaint, took practical steps to support the resident and has provided a reasonable response as to why it would not install solar panels at the time. As a result, there has been no maladministration by the landlord.

13. Under the Complaint Handling Code (the Code), landlords must issue stage 1 responses within 10 working days of acknowledging a complaint, with a possible 10-day extension. Stage 2 responses are due within 20 working days, extendable by another 20. Landlords should not exceed these timeframes without good reason. The timescales within the landlord’s complaint policy are in line with the Code.
14. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s formal complaint of 2 October 2023, within its 5-day acknowledgement response time frame on 5 October 2023.  It provided its stage 1 complaint response on 18 October 2023, which allowing for its 5 working day acknowledgement response period was within the 10-working day timeframe of its complaints policy.
15. The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint on 19 October 2023 which it acknowledged on 23 October 2023, within its 5-day acknowledgement time period. It provided its stage 2 complaint response on 20 November 2023 which was within its 20- working day timeframe for a stage 2 complaint response.
16. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint at both stages and responded within its policy timescales, there was therefore no maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Learning

17. The landlord noted relevant learning from the outcome of the resident’s complaint. It recognised the need for more robust records of discussions around heating installations to ensure it could satisfy itself it communicated effectively with its customers.

Communication

18. The landlord’s overall communication with the resident was satisfactory within this case.