A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202419585)

Back to Top

 

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202419585

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

5 September 2025

 

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
    1. concerns about the unit cost of heating and hot water.
    2. request for further information about an increase in heating and hot water charges.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the associated complaint handling.

Jurisdiction

  1. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.

The resident’s concerns about the unit cost of heating and hot water.

  1. The resident complained about the increase in the cost of heating and hot water and expressed concerns about heating her home. Paragraph 42(d) of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion concern the level of rent or service charge or the amount of the rent or service charge increase. This means the Ombudsman is unable to investigate the resident’s concerns about the unit cost of heating and hot water. The resident may wish to consider seeking advice regarding any ongoing concerns about the level of charges for these costs from the Energy Ombudsman.

Background

  1. The resident is a shared ownership leaseholder of the property. The resident’s home is connected to a heat network, which delivers heating from a central source. A managing agent operates and maintains the heat network and charges the landlord for the supply of energy. The lease states that the leaseholder is required to pay the landlord for the cost of service charges, which includes the expenditure reasonably incurred by the landlord in connection with the provision of services for the building.
  2. The landlord wrote to the resident on 23 January 2024 and advised that the new heating and hot water charge of 0.345p would be applied from 1 March 2024. It said the tariff would become active the next time the resident topped up the meter. The landlord stated that the daily standing charge was £0.93.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 19 March 2024 about the hot water and heating charges. She said:
    1. the unit cost had increased from 5p to 34p and the standing charge from 83p to 93p.
    2. she wanted to know the reason for the increase in cost, who the supplier was and whether the landlord had previously applied for a government discount scheme.
    3. she was concerned about how she would afford to heat her home during winter.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 10 April 2024, in which it said:
    1. the managing agent operated and maintained the heat network that delivered energy for heating and hot water to the resident’s property.
    2. last year, the managing agent notified the landlord of large increases in the cost to supply heat and hot water to the block and the main reason for the increase was high wholesale gas costs.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint on 21 April 2024, in which she said:
    1. the landlord’s response did not answer the question she had asked and she wanted a proper explanation of the rise in costs.
    2. she wanted to know answers to several questions including:
      1. whether the managing agent signed up to the government scheme in which savings were passed on to customers.
      2. what losses the managing agent wanted to recuperate.
      3. why residents did not pay individually per flat, which would be fairer.
      4. why some flats were charged the new rate at different times, meaning that some households were paying more than others.
      5. how much and who the managing agent were paying for gas.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 26 June 2024, in which it said:
    1. heating and hot water charges are set by the operator (the managing agent) and charged to the landlord.
    2. the landlord did not add any fees or costs and it only seeks to recover the charges as received from the heat network operator.
    3. the significant increase in heating and hot water costs were influenced by increases in wholesale utility markets.
    4. it was notified of the increase in September 2023 and sought to mitigate the impact of this by delaying the increase until after the heating season.
  7. The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman on 25 August 2024. She said that the landlord was unable to provide any explanation for the inflated heating and hot water charges.
  8. On 31 October 2024, the resident said:
    1. the managing agent incurred losses that it was trying to recover by passing this on to residents.
    2. the landlord should bill residents individually for their own usage.
    3. in its complaint responses, the landlord sent generic advice and did not respond to her specific questions.
    4. the landlord did not give proof that the managing agent had joined the compulsory government scheme to ensure that high costs were not passed onto customers.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for further information about an increase in heating and hot water charges.

  1. In its complaint responses, the landlord acknowledged that there was a significant increase in heating and hot water charges. The landlord notified the resident of the increased charges in January 2024. In its complaint response, the landlord said the increase was due to high gas costs.
  2. After the resident escalated her complaint, the landlord wrote to her on 23 May 2024 and said the managing agent set the tariff on a cost recovery basis so that there was no under or over recovery of the cost for them to supply the energy. The landlord said it engages with the managing agent to ensure they charge fairly for the supply of heat and hot water. It also said it charges residents based on their individual personal consumption measured using a smart meter. The landlord said the resident could speak to its Energy Manager to discuss the points she had raised, which was a reasonable offer. It is unclear whether the resident pursued this option.
  3. The evidence indicates that the landlord made efforts to respond to some of the resident’s concerns regarding the heating and hot water charges. However, it did not provide clear responses to all of the queries. The resident asked questions including how much the managing agent was paying for gas, what it charged for the supply of gas, who it paid for gas and what losses it was trying to recuperate. She also asked whether the managing agent had signed up to the government discount scheme and, if so, how it passed these savings onto residents. The landlord advised the resident that the managing agent was in receipt of the Energy Bill Relief Scheme. However, it did not provide any further details to the resident about how the discount was applied. Given her concerns about the significant increase in charges, the resident’s questions were reasonable and it therefore would have been appropriate for the landlord to make attempts to answer these and provide a clear explanation of how the charges were calculated.
  4. The landlord has not provided us with any evidence of communication with the managing agent about the points raised by the resident. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on landlord’s engagement with private freeholders and managing agents states that landlords should ensure that they are proactive in pursuing managing agents and/or freeholders for meaningful account information in relation to service charges to ensure it is provided in a timely manner. However, the landlord has not evidenced that it liaised with the managing agent to try to obtain the information requested by the resident. We would expect to see such communication between the 2 parties. The absence of this evidence means that it is not clear that meaningful liaison took place between the landlord and the managing agent and also means that there is no evidence to support the landlord’s responses. The resident is seeking reassurance that she was treated reasonably and fairly and the landlord has not been able to provide her with this reassurance.
  5. This indicates a failing by the landlord to respond to the resident’s requests for further information about the charges. Where there are failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider suitable remedies in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
  6. The resident experienced distress and inconvenience due to the landlord’s response to her concerns about the energy costs, and incurred time and trouble in requesting this information from the landlord. We have made an order below for the landlord to pay the resident £150 compensation, which is sufficient to remedy the impact of the failing. We have also made an order for the landlord to review its handling of the information request and consider whether it provided reasonable responses to the resident’s questions. It should assess whether it sought advice from the managing agent regarding the resident’s queries including about what the managing agent paid and charged for the supply of gas, who they paid for gas, whether it was trying to recuperate a loss and how any discount was applied via the Energy Bill Relief Scheme.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states it will acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days and provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days. The landlord will acknowledge escalation requests within 5 working days and respond at stage 2 within a further 20 working days.
  2. The resident raised her complaint on 19 March 2024 and the landlord acknowledged it on 20 March 2024. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 10 April 2024. In it stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged that there was a 1-week delay in providing the stage 1 outcome and offered £25 compensation. This was reasonable to remedy the inconvenience caused due to the delay.
  3. The resident escalated her complaint on 21 April 2024. She chased the landlord on 15 May 2024 and said it had not responded to her escalation request. On 21 May 2024, the landlord apologised for the delay and said it had forwarded the resident’s queries to the energy team to provide a response. The resident further contacted the landlord on 3 June 2024 and again said she wanted the complaint to be escalated to stage 2. The landlord confirmed it had escalated the complaint on 7 June 2024 and it issued the stage 2 response on 26 June 2024.
  4. There was a failing by the landlord to escalate the complaint within 5-working days following the resident’s initial request. It is unreasonable that she was required to chase the landlord on 2 occasions before it escalated the complaint and responded at stage 2. Overall, there was a delay of 21 days in excess of the 25-working day timeframe for acknowledging escalations and responding at stage 2. The landlord also did not use the complaints process to properly respond to the resident’s questions about the heating and hot water charges, which it ought to have done (as assessed in the above section). In order to remedy the inconvenience caused by the stage 2 delay, we have made an order for the landlord to pay the landlord additional £100 compensation.

 

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 42(d) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the unit cost of heating and hot water is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure regarding the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for further information about an increase in heating and hot water charges.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure regarding the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks, the landlord must:
    1. pay the resident a total of £275, made up as:
      1. £150 for its handling of the resident’s queries about heating and hot water charges.
      2. £125 for complaint handling, inclusive of the £25 already offered at stage 2, if this has not already been paid.
    2. review its handling of the resident’s request for information about the heating and hot water charges. This review will provide clear responses to the resident’s questions about gas supply charges, recuperation of losses and any discounts obtained. This must include the information it has relied upon to support these responses. Where this information is unavailable it must confirm this. If the landlord identifies further information that can be provided to the resident as part of this review, it should do so. It should provide the outcome of this review to both the resident and the Ombudsman.
    3. The landlord should provide evidence of compliance with the orders to the Ombudsman within the timeframe stipulated.