Plus Dane Housing Limited (202340051)

Background

1. The resident reported a leak from the boiler to the landlord. The landlord attended and isolated the boiler. The resident reported another leak the next day. The landlord attended again and said it was the same leak. It told the resident the boiler needed replacing and provided a temporary heater that did not work. The landlord replaced the boiler shortly afterwards. Additional repairs were completed a few months later. The resident complained about poor communication and the landlord’s refusal to pay for damage to her personal belongings.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. A leak from the boiler and associated repairs.
   2. Damage to the resident’s personal belongings.
   3. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of a leak from the boiler and associated repairs.
4. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damage to the resident’s personal belongings.
5. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Reasons

Repairs to a boiler

6. The resident’s tenancy agreement requires the landlord to repair the installations for space and water heating. This includes the boiler. The landlord also has a responsibility under the tenancy agreement to keep the structure of the home in good repair. The landlord’s repairs policy sets a 28-calendar day timeframe to complete routine repairs. It requires the landlord to make safe out-of-hours emergency repairs within 4 hours and complete the repair in normal working hours by appointment with the resident. The landlord’s repairs policy defines an emergency repair as an immediate risk to safety or that of the property. This includes a major water leak or flooding.
7. On 27 December 2023 the resident reported that her living room had flooded because of a leak from the boiler. She could not turn off the water stop tap and called the fire service. The fire service turned off electricity and the mains water supply at the property. The landlord’s gas engineer attended, isolated the boiler, and restored the mains water supply. The engineer said the boiler would need to be replaced and raised a separate repair for an electrician to check and make safe the electrics to the property. The electrician attended and restored the electricity in the property. The resident has an electric shower which would have mitigated some of the inconvenience of not having access to hot water. The landlord attended both appointments within 4 hours, which was in line with its repairs policy.
8. The resident said the landlord’s gas engineer offered a temporary heater on 27 December 2023 and that the engineer laughed when she said the electricity was not working. We have not seen evidence of this conversation, and the resident did not raise it in the landlord’s complaint process. Because there is no supporting evidence in the complaint file, we cannot make findings or orders about the engineer’s conduct.
9. On 28 December 2023 the resident reported another leak from the boiler. The landlord’s gas engineer attended and told the resident that it was the same leak reported the day before.
10. The resident gave the landlord her new phone number on 27 December 2023, but the operative could not update her details on the landlord’s system during the Christmas closure. Although the customer service operative could not update the customers details, it could have included the resident’s number in the call note so the team leader could contact the resident on the correct number. The resident asked the landlord if it would cover the cost of running a dehumidifier it supplied to dry the carpets. The team leader on duty tried to call the resident on 28 December 2023 using her previous number. The team leader then emailed the resident and provided her with their direct phone number to discuss the request. When the team leader finished their shift, they did not pass the information onto the next team leader. The resident replied to the email on 29 December 2023, at which point the previous team leader was no longer on duty. As a result, the resident did not get a response to her query. The resident said she was therefore unable to use the dehumidifier because she could not afford to run it.
11. Between 23 December 2023 and 2 January 2024, the landlord operated an emergency only repair service. The landlord replaced the boiler on 4 January 2024. This was in line with its repairs policy, which says repair works are to be completed in normal working hours once it has attended and made safe emergency repairs within 4 hours.
12. The resident raised a complaint on 4 January 2024 and said it took a long time to get through to the out-of-hours phone line when she reported the leak. She said she had to contact the fire department as she could not access the stop tap to turn it off. She said the temporary heater the landlord provided did not work and she could not afford the cost of running the dehumidifier.
13. In the landlord’s stage 1 response it said engineers attended the repair and confirmed there had been a flood. It said the engineer made the property safe and replaced the boiler in line with the timeframe set out in its repairs policy. The landlord said it was sorry that the fan heater did not work and said in future it would ensure that engineers tested fan heaters before leaving to make sure they are in working order. The landlord also said it had arranged further repairs to the plasterwork on the living room ceiling and the stairs and that it would paint the repaired areas.
14. The landlord’s stage 1 response demonstrated learning by committing to ensure engineers test fan heaters before leaving a property in future. It also provided the resident with assurance that appropriate follow on works had been arranged. However, the response did not address the resident’s concern about the time taken to get through to its out of hours team. It also did not address the resident’s concern about the accessibility of the stop tap.
15. The resident escalated her complaint on 26 February 2024 and said she felt uncertain whether her home was habitable after the repairs. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 18 March 2024. The landlord apologised for the delay in answering calls. It said it would inspect the stop tap to see if it could be made more accessible. The landlord also apologised for the poor communication around the cost of running the dehumidifier. It said the leak was confined to the living room and the resident had use of other rooms in the property, so it did not temporarily rehouse her. It offered £250 compensation made up of £100 for failing to respond to the request for financial assistance and £150 for the poor communication over the Christmas period and after the office reopened. This was reasonable and in line with our remedies guidance.
16. The plastering repairs to the ceiling and walls were completed on 15 March and 21 March 2024. These works were outside the timescale set out in the landlord’s repairs policy. The landlord explained the delay was because the area had to be fully dry before plastering. The residents stop tap was repositioned on 20 March 2024 to make it more accessible. The landlord painted the ceilings and walls on 8 April 2024.
17. The landlord made a reasonable offer of redress for its handling of repairs to the boiler. It acknowledged that it communicated poorly over the Christmas period and completed repairs to the boiler and plasterwork in the living room and on the stairs. It offered compensation of £250 and updated its process on providing temporary heaters.

Damage to personal belongings.

18. The resident’s tenancy agreement requires the landlord to insure the property against fire and for public liability risks. However, this does not include the resident’s own possessions. The tenancy agreement states that the resident should take out insurance for any of their own possessions.
19. The resident complained about water damage to the property and said the living room and kitchen flooring needed replacing. She also said her furniture and personal belongings were damaged and that she was left in a home she considered unfit to live in.
20. The landlord’s stage 1 response said it would not compensate for damage to the resident’s belongings because it is not the landlord’s responsibility under the tenancy agreement. It offered the resident 6 months cover towards the cost of its internal contents insurance policy as a gesture of goodwill.
21. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 and asked the landlord to reconsider responsibility for the damage to her furniture and flooring. The landlord’s stage 2 response reiterated that contents were the resident’s responsibility. It extended its goodwill offer to cover 12 months of contents insurance. It was reasonable for the landlord to extend the offer of home contents insurance for 12 months, given the inconvenience caused by the flood. The landlord also signposted the resident to a charity which offered low cost furniture.
22. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s decision not to compensate for the resident’s personal belongings. The landlord’s response was in line with the terms of the tenancy agreement. Its offer to cover the cost of a period of contents insurance was a reasonable gesture of goodwill, acknowledging the inconvenience the resident experienced. It also signposted the resident to appropriate support.

The associated complaint

23. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint policy. It says it will log and acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days. And it will issue a decision in writing within 10 working days from receipt of the complaint. It will issue its stage 2 response within 20 working days from the escalation request. If an extension is required at either stage this will not exceed a further 10 working days without good reason. Its complaint policy is in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) issued in 2022.
24. The resident raised a complaint on 4 January 2024, and the landlord requested an extension on 23 January 2024 to 6 February 2024. This means that 13 working days elapsed between the resident’s complaint and the landlord’s extension request. This was not reasonable, and we would have expected the landlord to request an extension before the stage 1 response was due. The landlord emailed the resident on 6 February 2024 and said it required another day to issue its response. A total of 24 working days elapsed between receipt of complaint and the landlord’s response.
25. Whilst the landlord explained the reason for the extension in its extension request it could have let the resident know sooner. The resident was unhappy with the delays for the extension request and said this caused further inconvenience given that there had been delays in communicating during the repair process.
26. The resident escalated her complaint on 26 February 2024, and the landlord responded at stage 2 of its process on 18 March 2024, this was in line with the timeframe set out in its complaints policy.
27. The landlord delayed in providing the resident with an extension request initially. Following this it did not inform the resident until late afternoon of 6 February 2024 that it would not be able to meet its deadline to provide its stage 1 response. The landlord stated in its response that although it required an extension, it had remained within its complaint handling target. However, the evidence shows that even with an extension the landlord was 4 working days outside of its policy timeframe. The landlord did apologise for the delay, and we consider this to be appropriate and proportionate to acknowledge the service failure.

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.