Sparrow Shared Ownership Limited (202404510)

Decision
Case ID	202404510
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Sparrow Shared Ownership Limited
Landlord type	For profit
Occupancy	Shared Ownership
Date	2 April 2026

Background

1. The resident took ownership of the property on 31 October 2023.The resident said he did not move in until January 2024due to having no heating and hot water and was unhappy about these delays. The property is fitted with a Heat Interface Unit (HIU) which the resident said was faulty and caused high energy bills.

 What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Reports of a loss of heating and hot water.
   2. Reports of high meter readings.
   3. The resident’s complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found the landlord responsible for maladministration in its handling of reports of a loss of heating and hot water.
4. We found there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of high meter readings.
5. We found the landlord responsible for maladministration in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

6. The landlord did not attend to reports of no heating and hot water within its repair policy timescales. It also failed to plan, communicate appropriately and manage its contractors.
7. The landlord attended to reports of a high meter reading due to a faulty HIU within its repair policy timescales. When the resident continued to raise concerns after contractor visits, the landlord sought further clarification from an energy expert who agreed there was no issue.
8. The landlord failed to acknowledge the complaint at both stages and its stage 1 complaint response was delayed.

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	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is provided by the appropriate head of service. The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 30 April 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,515 compensation consisting of: £100 for the time and trouble caused by its complaint handling failures. £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused in its failure to complete an emergency repair and the impact this had. £915 for the impact a loss of heating and hot water had for 59 days. This must be paid directly to the resident and documentary evidence provided by the due date. The landlord may deduct any money already paid to the resident.	No later than 30 April 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We recommend the landlord considers its repair responsibilities, especially around emergencies and ensures it has the correct infrastructure to respond within the times set in its policy.
We recommend that the landlord review its arrangements with all contractors to ensure that service levels are not affected by poor communication or mismanagement, and that residents are not negatively impacted.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
23 January 2024	The resident made a formal complaint about delays to repair the heating and hot water system. He asked the landlord to reimburse his rent, mortgage, and service charges because the boiler had not worked since he received the keys in October 2023. He explained that he could not move into the property without a working boiler, as his wife was pregnant at the time and gave birth in December 2023.
5 February 2024	An internal email asked a staff member if it was dealing with the faulty boiler as it needed the information to raise “an expression of dissatisfaction,” classifying this as an informal complaint.
18 March 2024	The resident requested an update about his complaint. The landlord sent an email to thank him for speaking to him and said he was now “escalating to stage 1 of the complaints process.” It advised him he would receive a complaint response within 10 days of the complaint recorded on 13 March 2024.
3 April 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response and set out a timeline of events. It confirmed the issue with the boiler was now fixed, after fitting a new part and repairing the district pipeline. It had investigated the resident’s complaint about high meter readings linked to the Heat Interface Unit (HIU) and found no faults. The landlord said it had also agreed to pay for an energy company specialist to assess it.   The landlord offered the resident £100 for the loss of heating and hot water, stating this was the maximum amount allowed under its remedies policy. It applied this for the period between 1 January and 6 of February 2024, as the resident had said he wasn’t moving in before then. It also offered an additional £100 for distress and inconvenience. The landlord explained that its policy does not allow rent reductions and the service charges are not refundable, as they relate only to communal areas. The landlord said it had learned from the complaint and would improve: approval for contractor attendance. monitoring when switching contractors. triage of repairs. approval and scheduling processes.
26 April 2024	The landlord escalated the resident’s complaint. The resident remained unhappy because his bills were still significantly higher than those of his neighbours.
28 April 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response and did not uphold the resident’s complaint. It explained that an energy specialist had inspected the system and found no issues affecting the meter readings. It also provided a timeline of the key events.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident escalated his complaint to us as he remained unhappy with the compensation offered, high energy bills and repair delays.

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 handling of boiler repairs
Finding	Maladministration

9. The evidence shows the landlord identified that the defect period ended in August 2022. It accepted responsibility for repairing the heating and hot water system in line with its repairs policy.
10. The resident took ownership of the property on 31 October 2023 and said he told staff that same day that the heating and hot water did not work. He said this stopped him from moving in immediately and that he had to extend his previous lease, which caused him financial hardship.
11. An email from the contractor on 6 December 2023 shows it was aware of the issue with the heating and hot water. We will use this date as the earliest point the landlord was aware. The landlord’s repairs policy says it will attend routine repairs within 20 working days and emergency repairs within 24 hours. The policy classifies loss of heating during winter as an emergency repair, so it is reasonable to assume the landlord would have treated the reported issues as an emergency. However, the contractor offered the resident an appointment on 13 December 2023 which was outside of the 24-hour response timescales and not reasonable.
12. The landlord said that its contractors told the resident they could not give weekend appointments. This meant the contractor’s set hours did not allow for adherence with the landlord’s repairs policy responsibilities.
13. The landlord said the resident agreed to set a repair appointment in the new year as the resident was unable to provide access on 13 December 2023. The resident does not dispute this. He said his wife had a baby in early December 2023 which restricted his ability for midweek appointments along with his work hours. This is likely to have contributed to the delay, although not a significant factor.
14. We would have expected the landlord to plan the repair in the new year after making this agreement. However, after receiving no repair date the resident contacted the landlord on 25 December 2023 and 2 January 2024. The contractor replied on 2 January 2024 and said it was unable to provide an appointment until it had authorisation from the landlord. This demonstrated the landlord’s failure to take steps to arrange the repair within the timeframe it had agreed with the resident.
15. The resident chased the repair again on 9 January 2024 and made a complaint on 26 January 2024 as no date had been set. The landlord sent the contractor the same day as the complaint had been made. A repair was made to the district pipework, and a part was needed for the HIU. This response was 48 days beyond the emergency response time and was not reasonable, even with the agreed wait until the new year. This meant the resident had a property they said they were unable to live in for a prolonged period. The landlord demonstrated it was able to arrange for a contractor to visit within 24 hours of the complaint being made. It is unclear why it was unable to do this at the time of the original report of the issue.
16. The landlord said it could not gain access on 13 and 15 January 2024. This gave context, but the delay was already significant by this point. Poor planning and communication from the landlord added to the delay unnecessarily. We have seen no evidence the landlord had planned the visits on 13 or 15 January 2024.
17. Our 2021 Spotlight report on heating, hot water and energy in social housing sets out good practice when a resident loses these services in winter. It sets out that the landlord must act quickly as a loss of these services in the winter months can have a serious impact. It recommends providing temporary heating and a clear timescale for repairs. It also highlights landlord’s must take account of vulnerable residents including health conditions and young children. The report suggests landlord’s should assess risk, which includes the risk to vulnerable resident’s.
18. The landlord failed to demonstrate it gave due consideration to any of the recommendations set out in the Spotlight report. If it had followed these points, it may have provided the resident with a better service and maintained a good relationship. Those actions may also have protected the resident, who had a new baby in the home.
19. The landlord’s communication from December 2023 was poor. It did not give clear replies or updates, and the resident had to chase progress. This caused distress and inconvenience for the resident and was not effective management of the situation.
20. A risk assessment could have helped the landlord understand the needs in the home. It may have shown that the property needed temporary heating while the repair was pending. No additional heating was offered because of this which had a negative impact on living conditions once the resident moved in.
21. The resident’s decision not to live in the property between 8 and 31 December 2023 is understandable, given their circumstances at the time. It was however the resident’s decision to take on the extra financial commitment of a second property. The landlord was clear in its response that its compensation policy did not allow for a refund of rent.
22. In its complaint response it was reasonable for the landlord to have rejected the resident’s claims to have his service charges refunded. Its communication was clear that the service charge was not taken in relation to the heating system.
23. In its complaint responses the landlord offered the resident £5 per day capped at £100, for delay from 1 January to 6 February 2024. This was insufficient as it did not fully reflect the impact on the resident. Our compensation guidance says, for a loss of heating and hot water where the landlord has not provided an alternative, it should compensate at £15 per day. This should be applied from the date the repair would be required to be completed in line with the landlord’s repair policy. In this case, it would have 24 hours from the date the landlord and/or contractor had been made reasonably aware of the issue. Our calculations will therefore be from 7 December 2023 to 6 February 2024, a total of 61 days.
24. The landlord’s offer of £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its delays was also insufficient as it did not cover from 8 Decemberto 31 December 2023 or consider vulnerabilities. Our compensation guidance says we may award up to £600 for maladministration where there was no permanent impact. This is where the landlord acknowledged failings and made some effort to put things right but failed to address the detriment to the resident. The resident experienced avoidable distress and inconvenience of having no heating and hot water for a prolonged period as well as the vulnerability of the child. The landlords failure to provide the household these basic needs was not a reasonable response. As such we have ordered an additional £400 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused.

Complaint	The handling of reports of high meter readings
Finding	No maladministration

25. Although the issue of high meter readings was not part of the original complaint, the landlord chose to address it within its complaint procedure. The resident raised a service request on 19 February 2024 because he believed a fault with the HIU was causing the high readings. The landlord explained in its complaint response that a HIU fault would not affect meter readings because the two systems function independently. It was positive that the landlord recognised how the resident may have misunderstood this and reassured him.
26. The landlord sent contractors to inspect the meter on 19 February and 14 March 2024. Each contractor confirmed the meter was working correctly. The landlord acted promptly and within its repairs policy, which requires attendance within 20 working days. This was a reasonable and proportionate response.
27. The resident continued to report concerns because he remained convinced the meter was faulty. Although the landlord was satisfied that the meter was operating correctly, it agreed to arrange an inspection by a specialist from the energy company. This step fell outside normal procedure and required separate authorisation for the cost, which explains the delay. The specialist inspected the meter in April 2024 and again confirmed there was no fault.
28. In its complaint responses, the landlord did not uphold this part of the resident’s complaint. It responded quickly to the resident’s concerns and went beyond its policy requirements by arranging additional inspections.
29. After completing its complaint procedure, the landlord continued to support the resident by helping him raise the issue with his energy company. It also consulted directly with the company and provided relevant data. The energy company confirmed the landlord’s findings were correct. The landlord’s handling of this issue was fair and demonstrated a willingness to address the resident’s concerns.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Maladministration

30. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint policy. This requires it to acknowledge complaints within 5 working days at both stages. The policy requires the landlord to respond at stage 1 within 10 working days and 20 working days at stage 2. These timescales and the landlord’s definition of a complaint were compliant with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) applicable at the time.
31. The landlord failed to evidence it acknowledged the complaint at both stages, and its response at stage 1 was significantly delayed. The stage 1 complaint response on 13 April 2024 was 53 working days late. It is unclear from the landlord’s records when the resident escalated the complaint, however its response at stage 2 was on time. The initial delay meant the landlord’s complaint handling did not meet the standards set by its policy or the Code.
32. The guidance from the Code says a procedure with more than 2 stages is not acceptable under any circumstances as this will make the complaint process unduly long and delay access to our service. The landlord’s complaints procedure did not include an informal stage. However, the landlord first recorded the complaint as an “informal complaint”. It later told the resident it was escalating his complaint to stage 1 which was not a reasonable response and not part of its procedure.
33. It failed to acknowledge these failures in its complaint responses and was therefore unable to show learning or offer any redress under its compensation policy.
34. In February 2024 we issued the statutory Complaint Handling Code (the Code) which sets out the requirements landlords must meet when handling complaints in policy and practice. The Code applied from 1 April 2024 and we have a duty to monitor compliance with it. We will assess landlords using our Compliance Framework and act where there is evidence that the requirements set out in the Code are not being met. As a result, no specific order is made on this case with regard to the landlord’s complaints policy being compliant with the Code.
35. Our compensation guidance says payments of up to £100 is appropriate where there were complaint handling failures which adversely affected the resident but had no permanent impact. The £100 we have ordered reflects the time and trouble caused by the landlord’s complaint handling failures.

Learning

36. It was positive to see the landlord identifying some learning within its complaint responses, namely better monitoring and triaging of repairs. It also committed to improve its approval for contractor attendance. This should help it improve its service.
37. If the landlord was to strengthen systems for monitoring repairs and complaint responses it could assist it in meeting its timescales.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

38. The use of a robust repair log system would help the landlord ensure it met its timescales set in its policies. It may also help it to manage its contractors better.

Communication

39. The landlord would improve its overall communication if it were to have a system in place that ensures updates are given at set times for repairs and complaints.