A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202208692)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202208692

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

27 February 2024


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 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 handling of the resident’s reports of loss of heating in the property.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s:
    1. Complaint handling.
    2. Knowledge and information management.

Background

  1. The landlord is a housing association. The resident is an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord, the tenancy commenced 5 December 2020. The property is a 2-bedroom ground floor flat.
  2. The resident has vulnerabilities and lives with her 2 children. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident and has a record of 1 of her children on its internal information systems.
  3. In November 2021, the resident reported to the landlord that she was experiencing issues with the heating in the property. The landlord’s contractors gained access to the property on 25 November 2021 and its records show the central heating was left working. It noted that the resident was unaware of how to use the thermostat controls, however she had the instructions.
  4. The landlord received a complaint from the resident on 6 December 2021. She said that when its contractor first attended the property, they rang the doorbell at 6.16pm and left promptly. She had she was bathing her child and the contractor did not wait for longer than a minute. She further added that she called shortly after and was told they would attend the following day. She called again on 24 November 2021 and was later told by the contractors that they would not be attending that day. She was unhappy the landlord had not notified her that no one would be attending the property on that occasion. To resolve her complaint she wanted the landlord hire another contractor to complete the repairs or to reimburse her if she were to source the repairs herself. She highlighted that she has 2 young children, including a newborn and that her and her family had a cold as a result of the loss of heating. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on the same day.
  5. On 7 December 2021 the resident added to her complaint that she was unhappy with the service received by the landlord’s contractors. They had told her she would have to wait for an appointment letter, despite her still experiencing loss of heating. She also said its contractor did not know how to operate the thermostat and referred her to the installation guide. The resident mentioned the contractor had only fixed 1 radiator in the living room and advised her to call back after the weekend. She included that she had repaired 1 radiator in her child’s room as it was affecting them.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 16 December 2021 and upheld the resident’s complaint. It stated its contractor helped the resident with the use of the thermostat and left instructions. There was a delay for an engineer to attend on 24 November 2021 and it attributed this to a surge in demand because of the weather conditions. It identified a missed appointment. It said that the contractor did then attend on 25 November 2021 and the issue was resolved. In terms of an earlier attendance, the landlord explained its contractor attended the property at 6.17pm. As it was cold, went to their van and observed if the resident answered her door. The landlord told her the following:
    1. its contractors on call-outs are paid only when they gain access to the property.
    2. awarded £70 comprised of:
      1. £20 in recognition of a missed appointment
      2. £50 for the inconvenience she experienced  
    3. The landlord hoped the resident’s feedback had been fully considered.
  7. On 17 December 2021, the resident told the landlord she remained dissatisfied with its response and requested her complaint be escalated. She wanted the heating and thermostat fixed. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 30 May 2022. It reiterated that its stage 1 complaint response accepted there was a missed appointment. Subsequent appointments were kept and the heating system operated as expected. Additional information was provided regarding its control. It also said its contractors had a high first time repair rate. Although it had not upheld her complaint, it offered a further £75 in compensation. The breakdown of this was as follows:
    1. £50 for additional distress and inconvenience caused by having to go through the final stage of the complaints process
    2. £25 for the time taken completing the investigation
  8. This was in addition to the £70 offered by the landlord at stage 1. It also told the resident if she had not received the previous payment, to get in touch with it.
  9. The resident referred her complaint to this Service on 27 June 2022. The heating at her property had not worked since Nov 2021 and she was forced to obtain temporary heating. She said she informed the landlord she had a newborn baby at the time and overall was disappointed by the service provided.

Assessment and findings

  1. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. The principles of effective dispute resolution are:
    1. be fair, treat people fairly and follow fair processes
    2. put things right
    3. learn from outcomes
  2. This Service will apply these principles when considering whether the landlord has taken enough action to put things right and learn from outcomes. The Ombudsman will not find maladministration or service failure when the landlord had provided reasonable redress. The Ombudsman expects it to have done so within its internal complaints process. This encourages earlier resolution to complaints.

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident had said the lack of attendance and repairs to the heating system and thermostat in the property had caused her and her family ill-health. The Ombudsman is an alternative to the courts. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s concerns about her health, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Therefore, we cannot confirm the effect of the landlord’s actions or inaction on the resident’s health. The resident may wish to seek independent advice if she wishes to pursue this aspect of her complaint. However, we have considered the general distress and inconvenience which the situation involving the resident’s property caused her.

Policies and procedures

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places statutory obligations on the landlord. It is to keep in repair and proper working order, the installations in the property that supply heating and hot water. Under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, the landlord is to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Excess cold is a potential category 1 hazard under HHSRS. Therefore, the landlord is required to consider whether inefficient or problematic heating systems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
  2. Within the tenancy conditions, it echoes the landlord is to keep in good repair and proper working order any installations provided by it for space heating, water heating and sanitations. Also for the supply of water, gas and electricity. This includes water heaters, fireplaces, fitted fires and central or storage heating installations.
  3. At the time of the complaint, the landlord’s responsive repairs policy set out that gas, oil, solar or air heat pump systems are urgent repairs. This was to be responded to in 24 hours.
  4. The landlord operates a vulnerable persons policy. It says health and safety implications will be considered regarding repairs. As will urgency of appointments and it will utilise a risk based approach. There are various service interventions mentioned such as:
    1. more regular contact
    2. waiting longer for residents to answer the door
    3. undertaking repairs more swifty
    4. extra support when a repair cannot be completed within a reasonable timescale – putting the resident at risk
  5. There is a compensation policy where the landlord can make discretionary awards for failures it has identified.
  6. The landlord’s complaints policy has a 2 stage complaints process. It commits to providing a response within 10 working days at stage 1 after acknowledgement of the complaint. The resident has 20 working days to escalate the complaint. If the complaint is escalated to stage 2, it says it will respond in 20 working days.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of loss of heating in the property

  1. From the information received, it is not disputed between the resident and the landlord that its contractor attended the property on 25 November 2021. However, the extent of the repairs are disputed. The landlord’s records show that the heating issues were resolved and she was provided with instructions for the thermostat. In contrast, the resident has said only 1 radiator was fixed on that date, but her lack of heating issues persisted. She has also said that she was not provided instructions for the thermostat, rather it was the installation guide which she had found. This Service can only comment on the evidence it has seen, so while we cannot be sure exactly what was said at the time, the landlord’s records indicated it had supplied instructions and resolved the lack of heating on 25 November 2021.
  2. In the landlord’s communication with this Service, it said it had no record of the resident’s vulnerabilities. She had informed it about her circumstances, being a mother of 2 children, including a newborn baby. Her circumstances meant she was potentially vulnerable under its vulnerable persons policy. As the resident had made the landlord aware of her vulnerabilities on 6 December 2021, it should have been more proactive. It should have assessed the risk, made contact and decided whether she required further support in understanding how to use the thermostat. Or alternatively, assess whether it should provide temporary provisions for heating. The landlord’s response was not appropriate as it did not adhere to its vulnerable persons policy or pay due regard.
  3. The resident’s subsequent complaint about the unresolved heating and thermostat issues, indicated any instructions given by the landlord had not assisted her with the heating system. Although it believed the loss of heating was not ongoing, it was on notice from 6 December 2021 that she was still facing difficulties. When the resident exhausted the landlord’s complaints process, 127 working days had passed since it had said the issues were resolved. It was unclear from the evidence if it had made attempts to re-inspect the central heating and thermostat during that time.
  4. The landlord had stated appointments were not accepted by the resident. However, no records of these appointments had been provided to this Service. Due to the limited information and its record keeping, ultimately, the landlord has not been able to substantiate it had attempted revisits. It had not mentioned arranging appointments to the property in its final response either. Therefore it is this Service’s opinion that the landlord was unreasonable in these circumstances. It left the resident feeling dissatisfied that it had not listened to her concerns for a prolonged period.
  5. The landlord had identified 1 missed appointment on 24 November 2021. This was positive as it recognised the timeliness of its attendance was not appropriate and outside its 24 hour commitment. However, the landlord’s records show the resident contacted it on 23 November 2021. The resident says that a contractor arrived at the property on 22 November 2021 at 6.16pm. She sent an email directly to the contractors on 24 November 2021 and recalled that the contractor rang the doorbell and left promptly on 22 November 2021. Although the date of this occurrence was disputed, the landlord had accepted its contractor attended and had not left the vicinity. Instead, the contractor was waiting in the van as it was cold. The Ombudsman expects the landlord to have communicated clearly to deliver a good service. The landlord’s communication prior to attending the repairs until 25 November 2021 was poor and added to the resident’s distress, as she was not kept informed of its actions at the time.
  6. In addition to the above, the landlord had the opportunity to take into account any evidence sent by the resident and clarify any incorrect events. She said the attendance of 22 November 2021 did happen in her complaint to the landlord and later supplied video evidence on 17 December 2021. However, the landlord had made no comments about her evidence submission. By not doing so, it caused confusion and it would have been unable to accurately assess the impact on the resident and the extent to which it was outside its 24 hour commitment to urgent repairs. As well as additional time and trouble expended by her.
  7. Overall, while the landlord had offered £70 in recognition of the failings it identified in its investigation, it had overlooked its poor record keeping and poor communication. The offer of £70 does not outweigh the adverse effect on the resident, given her vulnerabilities. It needed to provide more support following her reports that the loss of heating was ongoing. This Service therefore makes a finding of maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of loss of heating in the property. Orders to put things right have been made with regards to the lack of action of ongoing heating issues and the resident’s experience.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint, the same day it had received it. It produced its stage 1 complaint response on 16 December 2021, so it had taken 8 working days since the complaint was logged. It told her she had 20 working days to escalate the complaint if she remained dissatisfied. The timeliness of the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response was appropriate and within the expected timescales of its complaints policy.
  2. The resident was dissatisfied with the stage 1 complaint response so had requested escalation on 17 December 2021. When she had not received a response by 4 January 2022, she contacted the landlord for an update. The landlord responded on 10 February 2022 and apologised for the delay in getting back to the resident. It requested that she explained her reasons for wanting the complaint escalated. She then forwarded her email of 17 December 2021, which was previously sent to the landlord, that outlined her reasons. This would have undoubtedly caused distress to the resident as she had previously not received an acknowledgement from the landlord and was not informed about the status of her complaint. She also had to send a further copy of information she had already provided.
  3. In a separate email of 10 February 2022, the landlord told the resident it needed to check whether her complaint would be assessed at stage 2 of its internal complaints process or raised as a new complaint. Although there had been delays in responding to her complaint escalation, this was fair in the circumstances. The Ombudsman expects that if additional complaints were raised during the investigation, the complaint should be logged as a new complaint.
  4. The landlord sent an email to the resident on 25 April 2022, so it had been 51 working days since its last contact about her complaint. The email was an acknowledgment of her initial complaint escalation request of 17 December 2021. It committed to providing a final response by 24 May 2022. Despite informing her of the timescales, the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response was sent on 30 May 2022. This Service has not seen any justification as to why it exceeded the deadline of 24 May 2022 that it had set. In any event, 111 working days had passed since her escalation request, which was unfair and unreasonable. This would have caused the resident further frustration and delayed her referral to this Service.
  5. The above delays and lack of communication are service failures by the landlord. It also later failed to stick to the deadlines set. However, the landlord demonstrated a willingness to put things right. It acknowledged the detriment caused by its delay at stage 2 of its complaints process. The landlord apologised and awarded a total of £75 for its complaint handling failures, £25 of this was for the delays in responding to the complaint and £50 for the distress and inconvenience. However, the redress was not sufficient for the failures identified and it had not demonstrated any learning from the complaint journey. As such, the Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. Orders have been made which acknowledge the effect on the resident.

The landlord’s knowledge and information management

  1. As set out above the landlord has not provided detailed records of the actions that it took in response to the resident’s reports of loss of heating in the property. This included scheduling revisits and its response to her escalations. A landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records. Good record keeping is vital to evidence the actions it had taken. Failure to keep adequate records indicated that that the landlords processes were not operating effectively. The Ombudsman expects the landlord to have good data management and to either use or analyse the information that was already recorded on the systems. As such, we have found service failure in the landlord’s knowledge and information management as it either did not have, or did not provide, records to substantiate its claims and help this investigation. An order has been made regarding the landlord’s knowledge and information management.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of loss of heating in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s knowledge and information management.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failings detailed in this report.
    2. If it has not done so, inspect the heating system and thermostat of the property.
    3. Pay directly to the resident’s bank account compensation totalling £400, comprised of the following:
      1. £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its failings in its handling of the resident’s reports of loss of heating.
      2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience experienced in addition to the time and trouble caused by the complaint handling failures identified.

If any of the £145 previously offered had been paid to the resident, the landlord can deduct this from the total.

  1. Contact the resident and record her current vulnerabilities appropriately in its systems and agree any reasonable adjustments.
  1. Within 8 weeks of the date of this determination, if the landlord has not already done so, it is to self-assess against the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management, published in May 2023.
  2. The landlord is to provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to this Service.