London Borough of Croydon (202347151)

Background

1. The resident reported recurring problems with the boiler between 2021 and 2023. The landlord’s records confirm it considered the resident to be vulnerable due to long term illness and disability. After the landlord repaired the boiler in March 2023, the resident received a gas bill that was significantly higher than normal and asked the landlord to contribute towards the bill.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Repairs to the boiler and the resident’s request for compensation for gas usage.
   2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the boiler and the resident’s request for compensation for gas usage.
4. There was a reasonable offer of redress by the landlord before this investigation for its handling of the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

Boiler repairs and compensation request

5. The landlord completed appropriate repairs within its repairs timescales. It considered the resident’s concerns about her gas bill and provided a reasonable explanation for why it did not agree it was responsible for the increased costs she incurred. However, it did not prioritise one repair report appropriately and failed to consider the resident’s vulnerabilities. It also failed to keep full records of its actions.

Complaint handling

6. The landlord issued its stage 1 response 2 days later than it should have and did not appropriately address the resident’s concerns. It did not communicate clearly with the resident when it extended the timeframe for its stage 2 response. However, it apologised and made a reasonable offer of redress for its failings in its stage 2 response.

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.

What we did not consider

7. The landlord’s repair records show various repairs reported from November 2021 to March 2023. The resident raised a formal complaint on 19 January 2024. Our Scheme says we may not investigate complaints which were not raised with the landlord as a complaint within a reasonable time, which is normally 12 months. Therefore, our investigation has focused on the landlord’s actions from January 2023 onwards.
8. We understand that after the landlord issued its stage 2 response, there were further problems with the boiler, and the landlord replaced it in early 2026. We have no power to investigate complaints which the landlord has not had the chance to put right first. Therefore, the resident has been advised that she may wish to raise a new formal complaint with the landlord if she remains dissatisfied with its handling of issues with the boiler which happened after the stage 2 response was issued.

9. The resident’s tenancy conditions say the landlord is responsible for repairing installations for the supply of heating. Its repairs guide says it will attend reports of total or partial loss of heating during winter months (between 1 October and 30 April) within 1 day. It will complete non-urgent repairs within 15 working days.
10. On 20 January 2023 the resident reported a smell of burning from the boiler. The landlord prioritised the repair as non-urgent and attended 3 working days later which was appropriate. There are no records to confirm the landlord’s findings or any action it took during the visit. Therefore, we cannot assess whether its actions during the appointment were reasonable.
11. On 20 February 2023 the resident reported that the boiler was showing error codes, and she had no heat and hot water. The landlord attended the following day in line with its policy and raised a non-urgent repair to replace the printed circuit board (PCB). However, 4 days later, the resident told the landlord again that the boiler showed the same error codes and that she had no heating and hot water. The out of hours team attended and noted that the heating was working when it was at the property. The records do not say what date the out of hours team attended, or when the appointment to replace the PCB was originally booked for. However, the evidence shows it completed the work on 7 March 2023, despite the resident rescheduling the appointment. This was within 15 working days of the resident’s repair raised on 20 February 2023 and therefore in line with its repair timescales for a non-urgent repair.
12. The following day the resident reported that the boiler had stopped working and the property was very cold. The landlord raised a non-urgent repair and attended 4 working days later on 14 March 2023. It replaced sensors and adjusted the pump speed which resolved the issue. We have checked weather reports which say the temperature on 8 March 2023 (in the area the resident lives) was between 0 to 2 degrees Celsius and it may have been snowing. Given that the resident said the boiler was not working, her vulnerabilities, the time of year and the history of problems with the boiler, it was inappropriate to consider the repair to be non-urgent and the landlord should have attended within 1 day.
13. The resident contacted the landlord several times between 12 and 15 March 2023. She said there had been ongoing issues with the boiler since the end of 2022. She was concerned this had resulted in an unusually high gas bill and asked the landlord to contribute towards this. The resident said the property had been extremely cold and she had to use blankets and a hot water bottle to keep warm.
14. The landlord replied to the resident on 15 March 2023. It acknowledged there had been multiple recent callouts to the boiler and confirmed the most recent repairs it had carried out. The landlord said it would not contribute towards the resident’s gas bill for the following reasons:
    1. it had considered the information provided by the resident and found there was only 11 units difference in the meter readings for the period from December 2022 to March 2023 compared to the same period the previous year
    2. energy prices rose significantly during this period
    3. winter 2022 to 2023 was colder than the same period in 2021 to 2022
    4. the issues with the boiler would not have caused it to leak or otherwise use more gas than it should have.
15. The landlord said the resident may be able to claim compensation from its contractor if the boiler was broken down for more than 5 consecutive days. It also recommended she contact the energy supplier to discuss any support she may be eligible for. The landlord reiterated this position in its stage 2 response and provided information about additional support available to help with the rising cost of living.
16. We empathise with the resident and the concerns she raised about her gas bill. However, the landlord considered the information she provided, clearly explained how it came to its conclusion and signposted the resident to appropriate support. This was reasonable. We also acknowledge boiler repairs can be complex and may require a process of elimination to identify the appropriate repair. It was positive the landlord completed repairs in line with its timescales. However, the evidence shows the landlord:
    1. did not appropriately prioritise the repair reported on 8 March 2023
    2. failed to consider the resident’s vulnerabilities
    3. had poor records in relation to the boiler, which it acknowledged in its stage 2 complaint response.
17. The landlord made an offer of compensation, but it is not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation. There was therefore service failure. We have ordered an additional £100 compensation to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

18. The landlord’s complaints policy (October 2022) defines a complaint as “an expression of dissatisfaction with the Council, however expressed”. It has a 2 stage complaints process and will issue its responses within 20 working days of receipt of the complaint at both stages. If it needs more time to provide its response it will notify the resident immediately and say when it expects to provide its response by.
19. The resident raised concerns about whether the faulty boiler had contributed to increased gas costs multiple times, initially directly with the landlord and later via her MP, before raising a formal complaint. If the landlord had logged her concerns as a formal complaint at an earlier stage it would have allowed the resident to refer the matter to this Service sooner.
20. The landlord provided the resident with its stage 1 response 22 working days from the initial complaint which exceeded its policy timescale. There is no evidence to show the landlord requested an extension or told the resident the response would be delayed which was unreasonable. The landlord failed to address the issues raised by the resident in her complaint which was inappropriate, however in its stage 2 response it apologised for the inconvenience caused by this and offered compensation.
21. Two days after the landlord issued its stage 1 response, the resident’s MP contacted the landlord on her behalf. The landlord’s response said this was the third time it had responded to the MP about the same issue and confirmed its position remained unchanged. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to consider at this time whether the resident was seeking to escalate her complaint. By not doing so it missed an opportunity to identify that its stage 1 response had not addressed the relevant issues.
22. The landlord had already exceeded its 20 working day timescale by one day when it told the resident it needed more time to provide its stage 2 response. It did not tell the resident when it would provide its response by. The response was issued 15 working days later. The landlord did not appropriately manage the resident’s expectations.
23. The landlord offered a total of £50 compensation for its handling of the complaint. This is reasonable and in line with our remedies guidance for service failures which have not significantly affected the overall outcome.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

24. Accurate and complete records improve transparency and accountability and ensure the landlord, and this Service, has a good understanding of its decision making and the actions it took.

Communication

25. The landlord responded promptly to the resident’s contact about the gas bill in March 2023. Its response was clear and appropriately detailed. Its subsequent communication about the matter via the resident’s MP and at stage 2 was also clear and consistent.