Citizen Housing Group Limited (202451865)

Decision
Case ID	202451865
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Citizen Housing Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	10 February 2026

Background

Around October 2024, the resident told the landlord that he was struggling to keep his property warm. He suspected the issues were caused by draughty windows and the heating system not working as well as it previously did. He raised a complaint in November 2024 because he was concerned about the effect the situation was having on him.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. The resident’s concerns about the heating system and draughts from the windows.
2. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found the landlord responsible for:
1. Maladministration in its handling of heating concerns and window draughts.
2. Service failure in its complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Heating and windows

While the landlord took some action in response to the resident’s concerns, it failed to thoroughly assess whether he could reasonably maintain heat levels in his property without using temporary heaters. There were also shortcomings in how it handled the heating and window works. It did not offer a proportionate remedy to put things right during its complaints procedure.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s complaint handling was in line with the expectations of its complaints policy and the Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which sets out our expectations around landlord complaint handling practices.

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	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £200 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures in its handling of the complaint and the concerns about the heating and window draughts. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 10 March 2026.
2	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: assesses whether the property can be heated to and maintained at a reasonable temperature without the use of temporary heaters completes an updated heat‑loss survey The survey report must set out: whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards the most likely cause of the resident’s reported difficulty in keeping the property warm whether the landlord is responsible for repairing or resolving the identified issue(s), together with reasons where it is not responsible a full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) whether any improvements can be made as a result of any issue(s) identified and give consideration to those improvements the likely timescales to commence and complete the work whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary, either because of the condition of the property or during the works	No later than 10 March 2026

Order

What the landlord must do

Due date

Compensation order

The landlord must pay the resident £200 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures in its handling of the complaint and the concerns about the heating and window draughts. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.

No later than

10 March 2026.

Inspection order

The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed.

If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date.

What the inspection must achieve

The landlord must ensure that the surveyor:

assesses whether the property can be heated to and maintained at a reasonable temperature without the use of temporary heaters
completes an updated heat‑loss survey

The survey report must set out:

whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards
the most likely cause of the resident’s reported difficulty in keeping the property warm
whether the landlord is responsible for repairing or resolving the identified issue(s), together with reasons where it is not responsible
a full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible)
whether any improvements can be made as a result of any issue(s) identified and give consideration to those improvements
the likely timescales to commence and complete the work
whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary, either because of the condition of the property or during the works

No later than

10 March 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We recommend that the landlord provide advice and information to all residents living in the building who may also be affected by increased utility costs, if it has not recently done so. This should include guidance on improving energy efficiency, information about any support available, and an update on the landlord’s plans to replace the current heating system with a more efficient one.
We recommend that, if the inspection confirms that temporary heaters are necessary to adequately heat the property, the landlord consider reimbursing the resident for any increased electricity usage between October 2024 and February 2025, if the resident is able to provide evidence of the additional costs.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
12 November 2024	The resident complained about ongoing problems keeping his property warm. He said the windows were draughty and the heating system was not working as well as it had previously. He asked the landlord to take action to address the cold conditions in the property.
14 November 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said it had asked for the windows to be inspected so it could raise any required repairs.
15 November 2024	The resident told the landlord that its response did not resolve his complaint.
15 January 2025	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said a surveyor attended on 13 December 2024 and recommended replacing the window seals to reduce the draught. It confirmed that this work was booked for 16 January 2025. It also said the gas inspector had confirmed that the heating system was working as it should. However, it had been recommended that a more efficient heating system be installed in the building. The landlord explained that this was in the early planning stages and that it would contact the resident once updates were available.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate because the issue remained unresolved and he did not feel the landlord had offered an effective resolution during its complaints 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.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the heating system and draughts from the windows
Finding	Maladministration

The resident told us that the heating issues and window draughts have been ongoing for a number of years. The evidence that is available shows that the resident first reported his concerns to the landlord in October 2024. We have therefore assessed the landlord’s response from this date until the end of the complaints procedure.
Following the resident’s report, the landlord completed a heating system inspection in November 2024. This was appropriate, as landlords are required to ensure their properties are free from hazards such as cold and provide a reasonable degree of thermal comfort. The inspection confirmed that the heating system was “at capacity”, meaning an undersized bedroom radiator could not be upgraded. It also led to the landlord raising a works order for its gas contractor to investigate a report of cold air blowing through the warm air ducts.
However, the evidence provided falls short of our expectation that landlords maintain detailed and accurate records to support accountability and transparency. The landlord said in its stage 2 response that the heating system was working “as expected”, but it did not explain what this meant. While the heating system was operational, it does not necessarily mean that it was sufficiently heating the property. In line with its obligations, the landlord should have specifically and thoroughly assessed whether the property could reasonably maintain an appropriate temperature without the resident needing to use temporary heaters. There is no evidence that it did so during the November 2024 inspection. As such, it failed to thoroughly investigate and appropriately respond to the resident’s specific concerns.
It has also failed to evidence the completion of the subsequent works order it raised regarding the warm air ducts. While one record says the order was cancelled, another has recorded a no‑access outcome. The evidence does not suggest that the repairs were completed, and this was a further failing.
While it was reasonable for the landlord to explain that replacing the heating system with a more efficient one would take time, it would have been helpful for it to provide practical advice on keeping the property warm and explain what support was available in the meantime. The lack of detail in its complaint responses may have led the resident to feel that his concerns had not been fully resolved, reducing the effectiveness of the landlord’s attempts to put things right during the complaints procedure.
As part of his complaint, the resident also said the windows were draughty, which added to the difficulty in keeping his property warm. A surveyor inspected the windows on 13 December 2024 and arranged for the seals to be replaced, as this had been effective elsewhere. It was reasonable for the landlord to proceed with this repair based on specialist advice. In its stage 2 response, the landlord said the work was booked for 16 January 2025. However, it did not do enough to ensure that the necessary materials were available in advance. This avoidably inconvenienced the resident, who emailed the landlord on 21 January 2025 expressing frustration. The works were delayed and were not completed until 29 January 2025.
Our remedies guidance sets out our approach to compensation and is published on our website. It says that awards between £100 and £600 may be appropriate where failures have adversely affected a resident but have not caused any permanent impact. When deciding what would be an appropriate amount of compensation in this case, we considered the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures identified above.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The landlord has a published complaints policy that aligns with the Code. The Code requires complaints at both stages to be acknowledged within 5 working days and for landlords to issue a formal response within 10 working days at stage 1 and within 20 working days at stage 2. It also allows landlords to extend these timescales by up to a further 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2 if more time is needed.
In this case, the landlord acknowledged and responded to the resident’s complaints at both stages within reasonable timescales. It also informed the resident when it needed additional time at stage 2, as permitted under the Code.
Under the Code, landlords must address all elements of a resident’s complaint. Despite the resident disclosing in his stage 1 complaint response that he was using temporary heaters to keep the property adequately heated, the landlord did not specifically respond to this in its complaint responses. This was a failure to meet the expectations of the Code. This likely inconvenienced the resident, as he again raised on 21 January 2025 that using temporary heaters had been expensive and asked for a refund for the increased utility costs.
However, we have seen no clear evidence that the landlord did consider this or respond setting out its position. This indicates that it missed multiple opportunities to respond to the likely inconvenience reported by the resident, which was unfair. We expect that this caused the resident some frustration.
Our remedies guidance (as referenced above) suggests that awards of up to £100 may be appropriate in circumstances where there was a minor failure by the landlord that might have caused some distress and inconvenience. When deciding what would be an appropriate amount of compensation in this case, we considered the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures identified above.

Learning

Knowledge and information management (record keeping)

The landlord’s records did not always contain the level of detail we would expect as part of good record keeping. Our spotlight report on knowledge and information management highlights the importance of maintaining accurate and accessible records that provide a clear audit trail. The landlord may wish to review its record keeping practices in line with the recommendations set out in our spotlight report.

Communication

The landlord’s communication with the resident fell short of expectations for effective communication. It should have given the resident more information about the outcome of inspections and repairs to support transparency and accountability. Our spotlight report on repairs and maintenance explains that proactive and tailored communication can help reduce the impact of service failures. The landlord may wish to review its communication with residents in line with the recommendations set out in our spotlight report.

Repair oversight

The landlord did not maintain adequate oversight of the completion of repairs in line with its repair policy expectations. It may wish to review its processes to ensure it can do so consistently, which would support a more proactive approach and help improve the delivery of its repairs service to ensure fulfilment of its obligations.