Moat Homes Limited (202525161)

Decision
Case ID	202525161
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Moat Homes Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	27 February 2026

Background

The resident lives in a new-build flat. She has asthma and was pregnant during the time of the complaint, which the landlord was aware of. Her tenancy began on 4 December 2024. Soon after moving in, she told the landlord that she had no heating or hot water. She also reported low water pressure and said that part of her bedroom floor felt extremely cold.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
1. A loss of heating and hot water, and low water pressure.
2. A cold area in the bedroom.
We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

We found the landlord responsible for maladministration in its handling of reports of a loss of heating and hot water, and low water pressure.
We found the landlord responsible for service failure in its handling of reports of a cold area in the bedroom.
We found no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

A loss of heating and hot water, and low water pressure

The landlord did not act early enough to consider solutions and take steps to resolve the issues.

A cold area in the bedroom

The landlord did not act quickly after the resident first reported the problem.

Complaint handling

The landlord responded to the complaint in line with its 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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £150 to recognise the distress caused by the landlord’s handling of reports of a cold area in the bedroom. 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 27 March 2026
2	Compensation commitment The landlord must write to the resident, setting out its commitment to pay ongoing 4-weekly compensation for the loss of heating and hot water, and confirming that it will review the compensation for distress and inconvenience once the issues are resolved.	No later than 27 March 2026
3	Action plan order The landlord must provide the resident in writing, an action plan with timescales on the steps it intends to take to resolve the issue with the heating, hot water, and low water pressure.	No later than 27 March 2026
4	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: Inspects the insulation works to the balcony with a thermal imaging camera to ensure this work has been carried out successfully. It must produce a written report with photographs to the resident and this Service. If the survey identifies any remedial works, the landlord must produce an action plan with timescales on what it intends to do to resolve the issue.	No later than 27 March 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
19 February 2025	The resident made a formal complaint. She said she had faced ongoing issues with the air source heat pump since moving in, which affected the heating and caused intermittent hot water. She explained that the water pressure had dropped again and questioned why the landlord planned to install an electric shower. She said the situation was making her unwell and affecting her mental health.
4 March 2025	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It said it had provided electric heaters and planned to install an electric shower to ensure the resident had washing facilities. It confirmed it was investigating her concerns about radiator size and insulation. The landlord apologised for the number of appointments and paid £579.08 compensation: £200 for distress, £140 for heaters, and £239.08 for loss of hot water. It said it would also pay £42.36 every 4 weeks until the hot water was fixed and £2 per day for using electric heaters. It also paid a further £422, including £250 for delays and £172 for heater use between 4 December 2024 and 21 February 2025. The landlord committed to weekly updates and said it would review further compensation once the issue was resolved.
12 March 2025	The resident escalated the complaint. She said she remained unhappy and would not pay her rent until the issues were resolved.
2 April 2025	The landlord issued its final stage 2 response. It said that resolving the heating and hot water problems would require changes to the communal air source system, which it had referred to the builder as it was their responsibility. It apologised that the electric shower had not provided consistent hot water and that water pressure remained low. It said it was exploring in‑house solutions if the builders did not act within a reasonable timeframe. The landlord said the radiators were the correct size but recognised that the bedroom floor was colder near the balcony beneath. It had raised this with the builders and would update the resident once it had the next steps. It paid a further £200 for stress and inconvenience and repeated its commitment to weekly updates.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident said the heating and hot water were still not working properly and that the landlord had left her with insufficient heating and no hot water while heavily pregnant. She said that the electric shower only produced lukewarm water, and she had to boil a kettle to wash up and struggled to sterilise bottles for her baby. She said she had taken time off work for appointments and had bought temporary heaters, which did not keep the property warm and increased her electricity costs.

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	A loss of heating and hot water, and low water pressure
Finding	Maladministration

On 7 January 2025, the resident reported that she had no heating and that the hot water was unreliable. The landlord followed its emergency repair timescales and instructed the builder to attend the next day. The builder confirmed that the heating system was working but found that the hot water was intermittent and needed further investigation.
However, the resident disagreed with this and continued to report that she did not have enough heating or reliable hot water. The landlord’s records show that this was a recurring issue throughout the complaint period. By 14 January 2025, it had already identified that low water pressure was a contributing factor to the hot water problems.
For the most part, the landlord acted reasonably. It reimbursed the resident for buying electric heaters, installed an electric shower so she could bathe, and checked that the radiators were suitable. When the resident reported that the electric shower had stopped working, the landlord moved her to a hotel while it fitted a new low-pressure shower. The evidence also shows that it was in contact with the builder to try to resolve the ongoing issues.
The landlord’s compensation offers were fair and in line with both its policy and our remedies guidance, which suggests awards of over £600 where a resident has been significantly affected. In this case, the repeated appointments and the long period spent trying to resolve the issue had a significant impact on the resident, especially given her circumstances and the fact that she said the situation was affecting her health.
In its final response, the landlord explained that it believed a change was needed to the communal air‑source system and that it was preparing to present its findings to the builder. It also said that although the builder was responsible for resolving these issues, it was exploring possible solutions so it would have a plan of action if the builder failed to address the problems.
There is evidence that this did happen, and we recognise that this was a complex situation that required input from the builder and external specialists. However, given the ongoing nature of the problem and the resident’s circumstances, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to take a more proactive approach earlier when exploring potential solutions and trying to improve the reliability of the heating and hot water. While we recognise there is mitigation, the landlord did not appear to act with the appropriate urgency.
The resident told us that these issues remain unresolved, which is concerning, given the length of time this issue was first reported. She said she understands that the landlord plans to install additional pumps this month to improve performance. In its submissions to us, the landlord provided meeting notes showing the timescales for resolving the issue. However, it is unclear whether it has shared this information with the resident. It is important that the landlord keep the resident updated on its plan for resolving the problem, which is why we have ordered it to do so.
In this case, we have not made a further compensation order. This is because the landlord adequately compensated the resident for the distress caused up to its final response in April 2025. We have also seen evidence that this has been paid. The landlord is also continuing to compensate her for the loss of heating and hot water in line with its policy.
It should also review its compensation offer once it has fully resolved the issues, as it committed to in its stage 1 response. As we have not carried out any detailed assessment of the landlord’s actions after its final response, and because the issues are ongoing, it would be appropriate for the landlord to review its actions and consider any impact on the resident from April 2025 through to resolution.

Complaint	A cold area in the bedroom
Finding	Service failure

On 8 January 2025, the resident reported that the far side of her bedroom floor, above the neighbour’s balcony, was extremely cold. She was worried that the floor was not insulated and told the landlord that her asthma had worsened.
The landlord’s records show that it tried to identify the floor construction of the flats so it could instruct the correct contractor to inspect the insulation. This was a reasonable step. It also acted fairly by checking that the radiators in the property were the correct size.
However, the landlord did not identify until 26 March 2025, almost 3 months later, that it needed to check with the builder about the thickness of the insulation for the balcony to confirm the area had been built correctly. It is unclear why this was not considered sooner.
The landlord visited the property on 28 March 2025 and said it inspected the affected areas in the bedroom, but it could not progress the work because it had not received the insulation specifications from the builder. However, there is little evidence that it actively chased this information during the complaint period. Clear evidence of meaningful engagement with the builder only appears after the landlord issued its final response.
The evidence shows that from April 2025 onwards, the landlord made reasonable attempts to get the builder to resolve the issue, and the work was finally completed in November 2025. The resident told us that the insulation installed has stopped the condensation. However, she is concerned that no one has carried out a post-inspection or taken thermal images of the work. This is why we have ordered the landlord to do so, as it will give the resident reassurance that the work has been completed successfully.
Overall, the landlord should have acted more quickly to raise this issue with the builder from the start. This delay was a service failure that caused the resident distress, as she felt the landlord was not taking the situation seriously enough, especially given her circumstances.
Although it is not entirely clear how much of the compensation awarded in the landlord’s formal responses related to this issue, it is reasonable to conclude that at least some of it covered this part of the complaint. However, the landlord did not properly acknowledge its lack of prompt action or intervention, and it took 11 months to resolve the issue. Therefore, our compensation order recognises the distress this caused the resident.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	No maladministration

The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process. It aims to acknowledge complaints at both stages within 5 working days. It also commits to providing a formal response within 10 working days at stage 1 and within 20 working days at stage 2. In this case, the landlord met these commitments and issued formal responses at both stages within the timescales set out in its policy and our Complaint Handling Code.

Learning

The landlord did well by providing practical support, including reimbursing the cost of electric heaters and offering consistent, ongoing compensation to recognise the problems with the heating and hot water.
The landlord should take earlier and more proactive steps when working with third parties, especially when the resident’s circumstances increase the urgency of the issue.

Knowledge information management (record–keeping)

Overall, the landlord’s record-keeping was satisfactory.

Communication

The landlord communicated well with the resident and regularly updated her on the actions it planned to take.