A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202443598)

Back to Top

Decision

Case ID

202443598

Decision type

Investigation

Landlord

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

Landlord type

Housing Association

Occupancy

Assured Tenancy

Date

5 December 2025

Background

  1. The resident occupies a one-bedroom, ground floor flat. She has told us she has a medical condition that is exacerbated when she is cold or stressed.

What the complaint is about

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
    1. Heat loss via the windows and back door, resulting in increased energy costs.
    2. A radiator not being put back onto the wall after some works had been carried out.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

  1. We found:
    1. Severe maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of heat loss via the windows and back door, resulting in increased energy costs.
    2. Maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a radiator not being put back onto the wall after some works had been carried out.
    3. Maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

  1. The landlord failed to address the resident’s concerns about heat loss, delayed in dealing with her reports relating to the condition of the windows and back door, and did not investigate her claim for compensation in respect of increased energy costs.
  2. The landlord was partly responsible for a delay of over 15 months in reinstating 2 radiators that had fallen off the wall.
  3. The landlord’s complaint responses did not address all of the resident’s concerns. It did not use its complaints procedure as an effective tool for resolving matters.


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 its chief executive officer.
  • 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

14 January 2026

2

Compensation order

The landlord must pay the resident £1,150 made up as follows:

  • £750 for its failings in the handling of the resident’s reports of heat loss via the windows and back door.
  • £250 for its failures in its handling of reinstating the radiator.
  • £150 for its complaint handling failures.

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 made.

No later than

14 January 2026


3

Inspection order

The landlord must arrange for a suitably qualified person to inspect and produce a written report in respect of:

  1. Heat loss in the property.
  2. The condition of the windows and doors in the property.

The surveyor’s report must clearly set out:

  • Whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards.
  • The most likely cause of any heat loss affecting the property.
  • Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issues identified, together with reasons where it is not responsible.
  • A full schedule of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible).
  • The likely timescales to commence and complete the works.
  • Whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works.

By the due date, the landlord must submit to us a copy of the surveyor’s report and evidence the schedule of works has been shared with the resident.

No later than

30 January 2026

4

Starting the works

The landlord must take all steps to ensure the works noted in the schedule of works are started no later than the due date.

If the landlord cannot start the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date:

  • Why it cannot start the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will start and finish the works; or
  • The steps it has taken to start the works and provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to ensure the works were started by the due date. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot.
  • Whether suitable alternative accommodation is necessary and will be made available to the resident.

No later than

27 February 2026

5

Case review order

The landlord must carry out a review of its handling of matters in this case. It must produce a report detailing the outcome of the review and share this with us. The report should identify:

  • What went wrong, what it has learned from the resident’s experience, and what it will do differently to avoid the same happening again.
  • Any changes made to its processes and practices to ensure it deals with repairs effectively and without delay. This should include, but is not limited to, consideration of its communications with residents and contractors, appropriate oversight and monitoring of issues.
  • Any staff training needs to ensure good record keeping is embedded in everyday practice.

No later than

27 February 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations

The landlord should familiarise itself with the recommendations at pages 44 to 47 of our spotlight report on knowledge and information management, and consider training for relevant frontline staff and those working in its repairs service.


 


Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date

What happened

October 2023

The resident reported to the landlord that a radiator had fallen off a wall. She has told us that she also reported, several times, her concerns about how cold her home was because heat escaped and cold got in through gaps around windows and doors, which were in bad condition.

14 November 2024

The resident complained to the landlord that its contractor had still not reinstated the radiator, even though wall plugs had been fitted 6 months ago. Also, she said her back door and windows were rotten and not in a fit state to keep her home warm as heat escaped and the cold got in through gaps. She said her property was so cold she could see her breath when she exhaled. She said she was disabled and vulnerable, and the cold was affecting her skin condition. Further, she said the back door was flimsy and not secure.

3 December 2024

In its stage 1 response, the landlord stated its contractor had confirmed repairs to the windows and door had been completed to standard. It said its gas team had tried to contract the resident to arrange an appointment to attend to hang the radiator back on the wall but she had not been available, which was why there had been a delay. However, it agreed there had been a partial service failure in respect of its communication, for which it offered compensation of £100.

17 December 2024

The resident requested escalation of her complaint. She disputed that repairs had been carried out to the windows and back door. In addition to the issues previously raised, she noted mould around the bedroom window and said that, as a domestic violence survivor, she was concerned there was no spy hole in the front door. She sought replacement of the windows and doors as well as compensation for increased energy bills and the effects on her physical and mental health of enduring these conditions for 5 years.

24 January 2025

The landlord’s stage 2 response stated the resident had not raised any issues with her windows and doors since the contractor replaced 2 handles and eased and adjusted the doors in February 2024. It said it had tried to contact her to arrange a survey of the windows and doors on 7 January 2025, and an appointment was booked for 27 January 2025 to reinstate the radiator. It noted she had provided no evidence to support her claim for increased energy costs over the past 5 years. However, in recognition of additional failings to those identified in its stage 1 response, it increased its compensation offer from £100 to £175.

Referral to the Ombudsman

The resident told us:

  • She had lived in the property for 5 years with gaps in the windows and doors that she could put her hand through. She had first complained about this in December 2019, when she was told she had to wait for a windows campaign to start in her area before she would be considered for these to be changed.
  • She used bathroom mastic to seal the bedroom windows as they did not close fully and let in wind and rain, causing damp and mould to spread.
  • She was told she would not get new windows and doors due to budget constraints until April 2025.
  • She was in £2,000 worth of energy debt due to the increased gas usage to try and stay warm. She had proof her property used twice the expected amount of gas for its size.
  • She felt the landlord’s stage 2 investigation was inadequate. The complaint handler did not speak to her or ask her for supporting evidence.
  • She was undergoing tests for an autoimmune disorder that stopped blood flowing to her organs if she was cold or stressed, which was the case most of the time.

 

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

Heat loss via the windows and back door, resulting in increased energy costs

Finding

Severe maladministration

What we did not investigate

  1. The resident told us that the coldness in the property impacted her physical and mental health. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We have not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.

What we did investigate

  1. Our spotlight report on knowledge and information management, published in May 2023, highlights the importance of good record keeping practices. It is vital for the landlord to keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records so that it can demonstrate its actions and interventions. This helps us to understand its actions and decision-making at the time. If there are disputed facts and no supporting evidence, we may not be able to determine that an action took place or that the landlord acted fairly and in line with its policies.
  2. In this case, the landlord has not provided us with any evidence of the resident’s reports relating to heat loss via the windows and back door prior to her complaint, or its handling of those reports. This amounts to a record keeping failure and/or a failure to provide us with information for our investigation. Consequently, we cannot ascertain when she contacted it for the first time and what, if any, steps it took to investigate and address her concerns.
  3. The landlord failed to take appropriate action to investigate the resident’s concerns about the condition of the windows and back door following her complaint on 14 November 2024. It did not arrange a survey until 8 weeks later, which was an unreasonable delay.
  4. The landlord has not provided us with evidence showing the outcome of the surveyor’s inspection of the windows and doors on 7 January 2025. Its stage 2 response did not provide an update either. This points to a failure to effectively monitor the outcome of attendances and manage repairs, resulting in avoidable delay. There was also a failure to communicate to the resident if and how it intended to deal with her concerns about the windows and back door.
  5. The Decent Homes Standard requires the landlord to ensure the property offers a reasonable level of thermal comfort. That it has not demonstrated it took any steps to investigate the resident’s repeated complaints about how cold the property was is unacceptable, especially given her disclosure that this was exacerbating a medical condition.
  6. We note the landlord did not consider the resident’s repeated concerns about her increased energy usage in order to try to keep the property warm. This was a missed opportunity for it to investigate matters in a timely manner.
  7. The resident’s complaint and escalation request both noted that the landlord had told her she had to wait until the windows and back door could be replaced as part of its programme of planned works. Her email of 21 January 2025 stated that the surveyor agreed the windows and doors needed replacing but this would not be done until after April because that was when the new budget would come in. As the landlord has not disputed that it intended to replace the resident’s windows and back door as part of a planned works programme, we take the view it failed to do so within the 90-day timescale provided in its responsive repairs policy.
  8. We can see the landlord requested the resident’s agreement to another surveyor inspection on 9 May 2025. We have not been provided with any further updates since, despite opportunities when the landlord submitted evidence to us in August 2025 and when we asked it for an update in November 2025. We therefore consider it is likely that the matter has not been resolved over 10 months after the stage 2 response. In all the circumstances, it is appropriate to find severe maladministration.
  9. As we have not been provided with evidence to support the resident’s assertion that she is using twice as much energy than is typical for a property the same size, we cannot consider compensation for this element of her complaint. In line with our remedies guidance, we have awarded compensation for the landlord’s multiple failings and the cumulative, longstanding impact to the resident.

Complaint

A radiator not being put back onto the wall after some works had been carried out

Finding

Maladministration
  1. We understand the re-hanging of the radiator was not an emergency repair for the purposes of the landlord’s responsive repairs policy. Therefore, it should have been completed within the timescale for standard repairs, which was 20 working days.
  2. A contractor advised the landlord on 13 October 2023 that they had attended the resident’s property and found a radiator had fallen off the wall. They asked it to arrange for the wall to be made good so they could re–hang the radiator. Their notes indicated the wall needed reinforcement.
  3. The landlord has not provided us with evidence of communications between itself and the resident from October 2023 to October 2024. Consequently, we cannot see when the resident first contacted it about the radiator, if/when she chased the outstanding works, and any updates it provided. Therefore, we have concluded that the landlord has not demonstrated an appropriate level of communication with the resident.
  4. Records show repairs to the wall were completed on 18 October 2023 and new wall plugs and radiator brackets were fitted. However, the landlord did not follow up to re-hang the radiator until 29 January 2024, when it booked an appointment for 5 February 2024, 75 working days (over 15 weeks) later. This was excessive against the 20-working-day timescale for standard repairs and points to a failure to effectively manage outstanding repairs.
  5. While the landlord cannot be held responsible for 2 no access visits – on 5 February 2024 and 29 November 2024 – as per its stage 1 response, it should have done more to advise the resident she needed to take action following the missed appointments. Therefore, it is partly responsible for the delay from February to November 2024.
  6. The landlord’s repairs records show 2 radiators were re-affixed to walls in the hallway and living room on 27 January 2025. This was over 15 months after works were completed to make good the wall. The landlord was responsible, at least in part, for the excessive delay in completing this work.
  7. Of the £175 compensation offered by the landlord in its stage 2 response, £125 was for failings in relation to re-affixing the radiator to the wall. While this represents an attempt on the landlord’s part to put things right, the level of compensation does not proportionately reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident as a result of its delay and poor communication. Therefore, in line with our remedies guidance, we have awarded additional compensation for the adverse impact of its failings.

Complaint

The handling of the complaint

Finding

Maladministration
  1. In line with its complaints policy and our Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’), the landlord:
    1. Acknowledged the resident’s complaint and escalation request within 5 working days.
    2. Provided its stage 1 response within 9 working days, which was within the timescale of 10 working days.
    3. Issued its stage 2 response within 20 working days, which was the prescribed timescale.
  2. However, the stage 1 response failed to fairly and fully address the resident’s concerns. The landlord did not respond to her complaints about the condition of the windows and back door, that the back door was not secure, and the property was “so cold that she can see her breath when she exhales”. Nor did it explain how it reached the view repairs were “completed to standard”. It unreasonably attributed the delay in reinstating the radiator to the resident not being available when the contractor tried to arrange an appointment. It failed to acknowledge this had been outstanding since October 2023.
  3. While the landlord’s stage 1 compensation offer showed a willingness to put things right, this only related to its recognition of “a partial service failure” in respect of the contractor’s communication. It failed to propose ways forward to address the outstanding issues. Overall, the response does not reflect our Dispute Resolution Principles (be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes).
  4. The stage 2 response also failed to address all of the issues raised by the resident in her emails of 15 and 17 December 2024. The most significant of these were her concerns about the coldness in her property and the security of the back door, which were not addressed at stage 1 either. The landlord’s final response did not demonstrate it had conducted sufficiently robust investigations, for example, in relation to the recent survey of the windows and doors or her claim for increased energy costs. Further, contrary to the Code, it did not log a new complaint in respect of the mould on the bedroom window and the lack of a spy hole in the front door.
  5. In all the circumstances, despite adhering to its policy timescales, the landlord has not satisfactorily shown it took learning from the resident’s complaint, and it did not use its complaints procedure as an effective tool for resolving her concerns.
  6. In its stage 2 response, the landlord awarded compensation of £50 for its failure to address the resident’s concerns about the condition of the windows and back door as part of its stage 1 response. This does not adequately reflect the impact to the resident of its complaint handling failures. We have awarded further compensation in line with our remedies guidance.

Learning

  1. We have made an order requiring the landlord to carry out a case review so that it can identify and take learning from its failings in this case.

Knowledge and information management (record keeping)

  1. The landlord did not keep adequate records of repairs and its communications with the resident.

Communication

  1. The available evidence shows the landlord’s communication with the resident was poor.