A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202514685)

Background

1. The landlord installed a new boiler in the resident’s property in July 2024. She experienced faults following this and complained to it about an outstanding boiler repair.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of a boiler repair.
3. We have also considered its complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found there was:
   1. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of a boiler repair.
   2. Reasonable redress in its complaint handling.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the boiler repair

5. The landlord responded to the resident’s first report of a boiler fault in September 2024 in line with its responsive repairs policy. However, it failed to show it acted in line with this policy in connection with the second fault reported that month. It offered the resident an apology and compensation at stage 2 of its complaint process which was proportionate to the failings we found.

The landlord’s complaint handling

6. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 of its complaint process in line with its complaint policy but there was a long delay in its response at stage 2. It offered the resident an apology and compensation for this delay which was proportionate redress.

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.

7. The landlord received a report of no heating and hot water on 17 September 2024 and completed the repair that day. This was appropriate as it was in line with its responsive repairs policy. This stated it must make safe any emergency faults within 4 hours and complete emergency repairs within 24 hours. The landlord also appropriately attended on 30 September 2024 following a similar report and found an issue with a “3port” and an electrical fault which required an electrician. While it attended, it is unclear what work, if any, it completed. Its records show it left the boiler working.
8. The landlord did not complete the required repair until 8 November 2024, 29 working days after the report. This was not appropriate because it failed to complete the repair in line with its timeframe for standard repairs (20 working days). This failure likely caused the resident distress and inconvenience. While it said it attended on 21 October 2024 it has not provided us with a record of this. It also said it attempted to contact her after this visit but had been unable to make contact until 4 November 2024. However, it has not provided us with evidence of the attempts it made to make contact. This is a record keeping failure and means we cannot be satisfied it acted reasonably.
9. Where there are failures by a landlord we must assess whether it acted in line with our dispute resolution principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes. It accepted there were unacceptable delays in its repairs. It apologised for these and offered £300. It also told the resident it had learnt from this by agreeing to offer post-work inspections to ensure the quality of boiler wiring.
10. These steps showed the landlord acted in line with our dispute resolution principles. The compensation it offered was in line with its compensation policy where its failures had caused the resident moderate disruption. It was also in line with our remedies guidance which allows for payments of this amount where a landlord’s failures have adversely affected a resident, but where there was no permanent impact. We have not seen evidence of higher energy bills during the delayed repair. We have found the redress offered is reasonable and our determination is made on the basis it re-offers the compensation to the resident.

11. The landlord’s complaint policy at the time of the complaint complies with the definition of a complaint in the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (April 2024). The timescales in the landlord’s complaint procedure complied with the Code.
12. The landlord acknowledged and responded to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 of its complaint process in line with its complaint policy timeframes. It also acknowledged the resident’s complaint at stage 2 of its complaint process in line with its policy. However, it took it 235 working days to respond at stage 2 of its complaint process, against a target of 20 working days. It only provided this response after we contacted it. This was inappropriate and meant there was a delay in the resident referring her complaint to us. This likely caused her distress and inconvenience.
13. The landlord apologised for this delay and offered the resident £150 compensation. This was in line with our dispute resolution principles: be fair and put things right. The compensation was in line with its compensation policy where there were extensive failures to follow its policy which had a significant impact on the resident. This amount was also in line with our remedies guidance where a landlord’s failures have adversely affected a resident. We have found reasonable redress on this basis and on the understanding it re-offers the compensation to the resident. As it has not shown what learning it has taken from this, we have addressed this below.

Learning

14. There was an unacceptable long delay in the landlord’s handling of the complaint at stage 2 of its complaint process. Failures to manage complaints effectively can cause landlords to miss opportunities to resolve matters and cause additional distress to residents. Our severe maladministration report (April 2025) offers good practice and learning (see page 9).

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

15. The landlord failed to provide reports of its appointment on 21 October 2024 and the efforts it made to contact the resident following this. Poor record keeping can make it harder for a landlord to show it has complied with its obligations and offer an effective repair service.

Communication

16. The landlord failed to show it communicated effectively with the resident to make an appointment in 2024. It also failed to provide its stage 2 response in line with its complaint policy.