Hexagon Housing Association Limited (202417914)

Background

1. The resident lives in a flat with her young child. In April 2023, she complained to the landlord that her home had no gas heating since 2022. The landlord did not fix the heating until July 2024. It did not give her any compensation as it said it could not get access to the flat to fix the issue.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the:
   1. Heating repairs.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the heating repairs.
   2. Maladministration in its complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

4. The landlord did not repair the gas heating within its repairs policy timeframe. It did not acknowledge its own failings or provide compensation within the complaint process.
5. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaint in line with its policy timeframe. It did not acknowledge the delay within its complaint responses or provide proportionate compensation to recognise the detriment caused to the resident.

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.

Recommendations

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

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.

6. The landlord’s repairs policy at the time said heating problems were a priority 2 repair with a completion target of 5 working days. The tenancy agreement said the landlord was responsible for the heating repairs. It also said the resident must let the landlord and contractors into the property for repairs. The agreement said the landlord could use the courts if a resident did not allow access.
7. The resident first reported a heating issue on 5 May 2022. The contractor attended the same day but could not inspect the unit due to lack of space. The resident said they would rebook. Between then and 8 June 2022, the landlord made 14 attempts to arrange access. It did not hear from the resident, so it closed the job. It was reasonable for it to close the repairs job at this stage. It had made repeated attempts to contact the resident and these attempts continued over a month. However, while there is no evidence the resident reported further issues during this time, it is unclear how the landlord monitored the reports of outstanding work.
8. The resident contacted the landlord on 21 November 2022 and reported further issues with her heating. It arranged an appointment for 28 November 2022 but recorded that it was unable to gain access. Evidence shows the landlord recorded attending again on 30 November 2022. It appropriately inspected the issue and provided electric fan heaters for temporary use while it arranged to fix the heating.
9. The landlord tried to access the property 3 times between 19 December 2022 and 16 January 2023. This was 13 working days after it confirmed a part was needed and outside the repairs policy timeframe.
10. The resident contacted the landlord on 24 January 2023. She said the gas heating still needed repairs and said she and her young child felt cold. The resident also said that the electric fan heaters were costly and less effective. She asked for an update, as she had not heard from the landlord. The landlord attempted to access the property 2 times between 7 February and 16 February 2023 but was unable to gain access.
11. While the landlord attempted to gain access to the property, there was no evidence of how it communicated its intentions to the resident. Nor that it booked appointments or followed up after unsuccessful visits. This was not in line with its repairs policy to keep the resident updated throughout the repair. By April 2023, the issue was still unresolved.
12. Following further contact from the resident on 13 April 2023, the landlord attended on 25 April 2023. It found the heating unit was in poor condition and that a part was needed, which was not available. Evidence shows it tried to call the resident 6 times between June and November 2023, but these attempts were unsuccessful. However, there is no evidence that it tried other methods of contact, such as letters or emails. Given that the repair had been outstanding for over a year, it would have been reasonable for it to try additional ways to reach the resident.
13. On 19 December 2023 the landlord visited the property and carried out a full survey. The survey confirmed which parts were needed to fix the heating. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have carried this out when the issue was first reported, not over a year later.
14. However, by 6 March 2024 the issue was still outstanding. The resident contacted the landlord for an update. This suggests she had not been receiving information about her heating. It then booked an appointment with another contractor for 15 March 2024. The contractor said more parts were needed. This appointment was 7 working days after the resident’s contact and was outside its repair timeframes. The landlord did not approve the repair work until 11 April 2024, over 1 month later. This delay in approving the work caused further delays to the repair.
15. The landlord sent its stage 1 response to the resident on 24 April 2024. It said the delays in completing the repair were due to difficulties gaining access and did not uphold the complaint. However, the response did not acknowledge its own service failures, including delays in ordering parts, completing a survey, or keeping the resident updated. By attributing the delays solely to access issues, the landlord did not provide a balanced or reasonable assessment of its handling of the repair.
16. The landlord sent a stage 2 response on 24 July 2024. It repeated the delays were caused by non-access to the property and said it would be in touch with the resident once the part was available. The resident later told us in a phone call that the landlord completed the work at the end of July 2024.
17. The landlord did not complete the heating repairs in line with its repairs policy. It did not keep the resident updated or provide clear explanations for delays. While there were periods when it could not gain access to the property, the landlord did not consistently pre‑book appointments, follow up after missed visits, or use alternative methods of contact such as letters. As a result, the resident was without gas heating for over 2 years. This adversely affected the household, particularly as the resident was living in the property with her young child. The prolonged loss of heating and poor communication caused avoidable distress and inconvenience and represent aggravating factors in this case. For these reasons, we find maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the heating repairs.
18. We order the landlord to pay £500 compensation for the distress, inconvenience, and prolonged disruption experienced by the resident. In deciding this amount, we have considered the length of time the heating remained unresolved, the repeated service failures, and the impact on a household with a young child. These aggravating factors justify an increased award within our remedies and compensation guidance.

19. The landlord’s complaint policy at the time of the complaint complies with the definition of the complaint in the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Code (the Code) April 2022. The timeframes in the landlord’s complaint procedure complied with the Code.
20. The resident raised a complaint on 14 April 2023. However, the landlord did not acknowledge this complaint. As a result, the resident had to raise a further complaint on 17 April 2024.
21. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 25 April 2024. This is 262 working days after the resident made her initial complaint. This did not follow the Code, which says landlords should send stage 1 responses within 10 working days. The landlord did not acknowledge the delay in responding to the complaint, which was a failure.
22. The resident escalated her complaint on 25 April 2025. The landlord issued its response on 24 July 2024, 42 working days outside of the timeframes in the Code. It did not acknowledge this delay, which was a failing.
23. Overall, the landlord did not meet the timeframes set out in the Code. It also failed to acknowledge these delays, which lasted for over a year. This was inappropriate, particularly as the repair remained unresolved throughout that period. For these reasons, we find maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.
24. We order the landlord to pay the resident £150 compensation. This is in line with our compensation guidelines when there is a failing by the landlord which adversely affected the resident.

Learning

General learning

25. The landlord may wish to review our centre for learning and the complaints handling guidance to avoid delays in responding to resident’s complaints.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

26. The landlord may wish to add to its records if attempted access to a property was a scheduled appointment, phone call, or ad hoc visits. This may help it understand the reasons why contractors are not getting access to a property.

Communication

27. The landlord should consider alternative methods of communication with residents if they are unable to contact them on the phone. It may wish to refer to our spotlight report on repairs and Centre for Learning.