Notting Hill Genesis (202342834)

Background

1. The resident complained about the landlord’s handling of a heating repair. She said it delayed progressing the repair and did not arrange the mediation that we had recommended in a previous determination.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. A heating repair.
   2. The resident’s complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a heating repair.
   2. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

4. The landlord did not complete the heating repair in line with its repair timescales. It did not keep the resident updated, and the repair is still outstanding.
5. The landlord acknowledged its complaint handling failings, apologised and offered compensation in line with our compensation guidance.

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 resident historically reported repairs to the heating system from 2021. We considered the landlord’s handling of the earlier reports under case reference 202108397 which we issued on 3 August 2023. In this report, we made a recommendation for the landlord to arrange mediation between the resident and its contractor before any further repairs took place. This investigation focuses on the events from September 2023. This is to ensure the landlord had a fair opportunity to respond to the specific concerns raised during that time.
7. The landlord’s heating, gas and hot water policy says it will repair a loss of heating between 1 October and 31 March within 3 days. For any loss of heating between 1 April and 30 September, it will complete the repair within 28 days.
8. The resident told us she contacted the landlord on 25 and 27 September 2023. She said she reported a fault with the dials on her heating system. This meant that the underfloor heating in some rooms, which is her only source of heating, was not working. She also asked it to arrange mediation with its contractors. As part of our information request, we asked the landlord to provide copies of these emails. It could not provide these. However, it did not dispute that the resident had sent these emails. This is a record‑keeping failure. The landlord cannot fully evidence what the resident reported or how it responded at the time.
9. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 25 October 2023. It said it had contacted the resident on 11 October 2023 and offered appointments on 17, 19, or 20 October 2023 to inspect the heating system. However, this response came 16 days after the resident raised the issue. This was not in line with its heating policy, which says it must repair a loss of heating in October within 3 days.
10. In its response, the landlord asked the resident to confirm her availability so it could inspect the repair. However, this did not take account of our earlier recommendation that mediation should happen first, showing that it had not learned from our previous determination. In her escalation request on 26 October 2023, the resident repeated that she wanted mediation before any visit. In its stage 2 response on 13 December 2023, the landlord apologised for not arranging mediation sooner and said it had now asked the contractor for dates.
11. However, this was 3 months after the resident raised the heating repair and asked for mediation. Its policy says it must complete loss of heating repairs between October and March within 3 days and all other heating repairs within 28 days. By the time of the stage 2 response in December 2023, it had only just contacted its contractor to arrange mediation. This delay was inappropriate, especially considering it was already significantly outside its timescale for heating repairs.
12. In its stage 2 response, the landlord committed to arranging mediation between the resident and its contractor before completing the repair. Its repairs policy says that it must complete all heating repairs within 28 days. This created a reasonable expectation that it would arrange mediation and progress the repair within that timeframe. However, the resident has confirmed that the repair is still outstanding more than 2 years later. This is significantly outside its timescales for heating repairs.
13. As part of our information request, we asked the landlord to confirm the dates when it arranged mediation. We also asked it to provide details of any further action taken to address the heating repair. It said it had offered mediation appointments, but these had been cancelled. However, it did not confirm when it offered these appointments, who cancelled them, or provide any supporting evidence. Without this information, we cannot determine whether it acted in line with its policy.
14. The landlord also said that it had changed its contractor. As such, it would no longer need to arrange mediation before any repairs. However, there is no evidence that it took any further steps to progress the repair after its stage 2 response. This was inappropriate and not in line with its heating policy, which requires it to keep the resident updated throughout the repair process. This is particularly concerning because the resident had already told it that the outstanding repair was affecting the heating in her home.
15. Overall, the landlord did not respond to the resident’s heating reports within the timescales set out in its policy. It did not keep adequate records, keep the resident updated, and the repair is still outstanding over 2 years later. As a result, the resident says that she continues to experience a loss of heating in some rooms. This has caused her avoidable distress, inconvenience, and time and trouble chasing the issue. For these reasons, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the heating repair.
16. We order the landlord to pay the resident £500 compensation for the failings identified in this report. These include a prolonged delay, loss of heating in some rooms, and the time and trouble the resident spent pursuing the issue. This amount is in line with our compensation guidance for circumstances where there was a failure by the landlord that had an adverse impact on the resident.

17. The landlord had a 2-stage complaint process. It aimed to issue a formal response within 10 working days at stage 1, and within 20 working days at stage 2. Its definition of a complaint and its response timescales were compliant with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
18. The resident made a complaint on 10 October 2023. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 25 October 2023, which was 1 working day late under the Code. This delay was minimal and did not have a significant impact on the resident.
19. The landlord also did not include the complaint reference number in its stage 1 response. It appropriately acknowledged this error at stage 2 and offered £25 compensation for this failing.
20. The resident escalated the complaint on 26 October 2023. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 13 December 2023, which was 14 working days late. It was appropriate for it to acknowledge this delay in its response and to offer £100 compensation.
21. Overall, the landlord acknowledged its complaint handling failings and offered £125 compensation. This amount is in line with our compensation guidance for cases where its service failures had an adverse impact on the resident. Therefore, we have made a finding of reasonable redress.

Learning

General learning

22. This investigation highlighted the importance of progressing repairs in line with its repairs policy. Not doing so led to unnecessary delays and inconvenience for the resident. 

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

23. In this case, the landlord did not keep clear records of the actions it took and could not provide all the evidence we asked for. The landlord may benefit from reviewing our spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (May 2023), available through our website’s Centre for Learning.

Communication

24. The investigation found gaps in the landlord’s communication, particularly in keeping the resident updated. It did not consistently provide timeframes or explain delays. This created uncertainty and increased the resident’s need to chase for information.