A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202120037)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202120037

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

31 August 2022

 

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:
    1. the compensation offered to the resident by the landlord for the loss of heating and hot water.
    2. the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord.
  2. The landlord’s notes state its contractor first attended the resident’s property on 14 November 2021 due to a boiler leak. The contractor deemed the boiler beyond economical repair (unrepairable) and ordered a new boiler to be installed. This was done on 27 November 2021.However, a sensor failure was reported by the engineer in the new boiler, resulting in a loss of heating and hot water. The landlord provided temporary heaters to the resident on 28 November 2021, and called the warranty company the following working day, who sent their own engineer. An electrician attended, sent by the landlord to complete the boiler wiring and issued an electrical safety certificate on 30 November 2021. The landlord’s contractor then re-attended on 1 December 2021 to commission (check it is installed and set up correctly) the boiler, at which point it was left in working order.
  3. The resident raised concerns with this Service on 30 November 2021 about the boiler repairs and being without heating or hot water. She said she had raised a complaint with the landlord but not had a response. We passed on her concerns to the landlord.
  4. The landlord raised a complaint for the resident and sent its response on 1 February 2022. It confirmed there was no work outstanding, but acknowledged some failings in its service. It offered compensation of £185, broken down as: £75 for lack of communication, £50 for quality of work, £10 for five days without heating and hot water, and finally £50 for the time taken to respond to the complaint. The specific details of these service issues are not apparent from the evidence.
  5. The resident remained dissatisfied and asked to escalate her complaint. She set out a wide range of reasons why she believed more compensation was due, which included for the additional costs incurred for electric usage from temporary heaters, the time taken to replace and repair the boiler, poor complaint handling, and the impact of not having heating and hot water in winter.
  6. In response the landlord issued its stage two complaint response on 24 March 2022. It explained that the correct process was followed by its contractors when replacing the original boiler, and the level of compensation offered was in line with its compensation policy.
  7. The resident referred her complaint to this Service because she was dissatisfied with the level of compensation offered for her time without heating and hot water, and the stress and inconvenience experienced.

Assessment and findings

The compensation offered for the loss of heating and hot water

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy does not give a specific timeframe for resolving total loss of heating and hot water. However, in winter (as was the case here) such a repair issue would usually be considered an urgent matter, with a one-day response time (using the local authority right to repair scheme as a general guide to what is reasonable. The landlord incorporates the Scheme in its own policy). It should be noted that this timeframe will not be relevant if more substantial work or replacement parts are required to fix things. In such circumstances a landlord would be expected to consider interim measures, and take the necessary steps to resolve the repair as quickly as possible.
  2. The landlords first visit about a boiler leak on 14 November 2021 resulted in a finding that the boiler was unrepairable and needed replacing. The resident raised a complaint on 16 November 2021, however, the complaint has not been provided and the reasons for the complaint at that stage are unclear. There are no indications or comments throughout the evidence to suggest the resident was without heating and hot water at this point in time.
  3. Once the landlord’s contractors had installed the new boiler on the 27 November 2021 they found the boiler to be faulty, resulting in the resident having no heating or hot water. This was identified at the point of installation. The landlord appropriately provided temporary heaters to the resident the following day and promptly contacted the manufacturer of the boiler This was in line with the one-working day timeframe outlined in the right to repair scheme. The resident was without heating and hot water until the 1 December 2021 (five days). It is understandable that this would have been frustrating and inconvenient for the resident, especially in the middle of winter. Nonetheless, the landlord actively sought to resolve the repair by contacting the manufacturer as soon as possible (i.e. the next working day), and took the relevant steps to necessary to resolve the problem.  The circumstances and nature of some repair issues (such as a boiler) mean that it is not always possible to rectify them immediately, so interim solutions are needed, which the landlord did by providing temporary heaters.
  4. In her complaint the resident explained that only one small heater was provided, and not until the day after the heating stopped. However, the solution provided by the landlord could only ever be a stopgap measure to provide some level of relief, however small, until the problem was resolved. The exact timing of the repair efforts on the day the new boiler was installed are not apparent from the evidence, so it is not possible to assess whether the landlord had an opportunity to provide the heater more promptly. Nonetheless, a one-day response time would not usually be considered unreasonable in most circumstances.
  5. In its stage one response, the landlord compensated the resident at £2 per day, £10 in total for the five days without heating and hot water. That level of compensation is set out in its compensation policy. That daily rate is broadly in line with other landlords, and also with the right to repair scheme.
  6. It is important to appreciate that a landlord would usually be expected to consider offering compensation only when its own actions or inaction contributed to the problem. In this case a new boiler experienced problem with its installation. Nothing in the evidence indicates the landlord could have anticipated the problem, or that it could have resolved it any more speedily than it was. Accordingly, beyond what the landlord was obliged by its policy to pay, there were no apparent grounds on which it could reasonably be expected to offer compensation.
  7. The resident complained to the landlord about the time taken to replace the original boiler. She said in her complaint that the operative who inspected it told her he “couldn’t guarantee the safety of the old boiler”, and that the subsequent wait for the replacement caused her fear, anxiety, and stress. We cannot know precisely what was said by the landlord’s operative, but the repair records do not show any meaningful level of urgency for the replacement. Because of that, the approximately two-week period between ordering the replacement boiler and installing it does not appear unreasonable. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

The landlords handling of the residents complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy and procedures do not provide specific response timeframes, other than for an escalated complaint which goes to its review panel, which it says should provide a response within 25 working days. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code sets out that a landlord should issue any stage two complaint response within 20 working days. In this case the resident escalated her complaint on 2 February 2022, and the landlord sent its final complaint response on 24 March. It did not acknowledge or apologise for the delay, and there is no evidence of any updates to the resident in the interim. In the circumstances, the delay was a failing.
  2.  Furthermore, in the resident’s escalation she explained she incurred additional costs using the temporary heater. It is not apparent if she provided actual evidence in support. Nonetheless, the landlord did not respond to the point, either to provide appropriate reimbursement, decline and explain why, or ask for supporting evidence. In responding to a complaint a landlord must ensure it addresses each of the points raised. Not doing so here meant that a relevant part of the complaint was left unresolved.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its compensation for the loss of heating and hot water.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders

  1. In light of the findings in this investigation the landlord is ordered to, within four weeks, pay the resident £75 for its delayed and incomplete complaint response.
  2. Evidence of compliance with this order must be provided to this Service by the respective deadline.

Recommendation

  1. If, within the next three months, the resident can provide evidence of increased energy consumption for the period the temporary heaters were run, the landlord should consider it and provide reimbursement where appropriate.