Anchor Hanover Group (202107997)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202107997

Anchor Hanover Group

18 January 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 the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s boiler and shower room.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is a two bedroomed bungalow.
  2. The landlord’s records show that on 11 May 2021 it sent an engineer to the property as it had received several reports from the resident regarding problems with the gas boiler. The engineer reported that there was no problem with the boiler and that it was only four years old.
  3. On 4 June 2021 the resident received a letter from his local authority (LA) regarding concerns he had about his boiler. His MP had raised the issue for him. The LA explained that as the boiler had been assessed as being in working order and the energy performance certificate for the property was rated as D, when the minimum is E, they had no legal grounds to take action against the landlord (in regard to the condition or efficiency of the boiler). The LA advised the resident to contact this Service if he had exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints process.
  4. After the resident contacted this Service we spoke with him on 7 July 2021. He explained he had an ongoing problem with his boiler, that it was constantly boiling, costing him a lot to keep warm, too small to keep the house warm, and its maximum temperature was 19.5 degrees. He said that the landlord had repeatedly inspected the boiler but found nothing wrong. He also explained that the shower did not have a consistent hot water supply, and that there was a leak in the wet room with water leaking into the hallway. He said that the landlord had informed him that if he reports another issue he would need to pay the landlord.
  5. Following the call, this Service emailed the landlord the same day to ask it to log a complaint for the resident, if it had not already done so. We explained that the complaint was about:
    1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s report of a defective boiler and shower.
    2. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a leak in the wet room.
    3. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s formal complaint.
  6. We explained that the resident sought repairs to the boiler and shower, to repair the leaks in the wet-room, and for the landlord to investigate the resident’s concerns as a formal complaint and provide a written response within a timely manner.
  7. On 7 July 2021 the landlord acknowledged receipt of the email and confirmed that it had now logged a complaint.
  8. The landlord’s records show that on 14 July 2021 its surveyor visited the property and inspected the boiler and the shower room. The surveyor did not report any problems with the boiler, and noted that when he turned the heating on “within 5 – 10 minutes most radiators’ surface temperatures were reading between 60 – 70 and rising”. He noted that he had advised the resident that the reason the thermometers in each room give different readings is down to “multiple factors such as the position of the readers, amount and sizes of windows, floor coverings, north or south facing, external / internal walls”.
  9. Regarding the shower room, the surveyor noted that the flooring had already been re-laid once as the previous floor level was insufficient, but that that issue had now been resolved. He tested the shower with the shower curtain open and closed and did not report any problems. He added that the floor beyond the wet room threshold would always get a little wet due to the customer moving the shower curtain when showering and exiting the shower, but that at no point did the water run towards the hallway carpet. The bulk of the water ran towards the gully and drained away as it should. The floor was lifting slightly around the gully but was not posing a trip hazard or causing any drainage issues.
  10. The surveyor did report that “the pressure on the shower was quite high which was causing some splash over the threshold and [he believed] a flow regulator (restrictor) fitted between the hose and shower head of body of shower and hose would help along with a weighted shower curtain”.
  11. The landlord’s records show that it issued its stage one response on 21 July 2021. It noted it had used information from the surveyor’s visit on 14 July 2021 and the engineer’s report from 11 May 2021. It stated that it had inspected the boiler on a number of occasions and found it was operating efficiently. It advised that monitoring the overall temperature room by room using thermometers was not reliable as the temperature would fluctuate room by room depending on a number of factors. It reiterated that at that current time it was confident that the boiler was fully operational and free from any leaks. It added “We want to continue to maintain your boiler and will attend any repair but please be aware we may look to recover cost if further visits are made when no issues are apparent”.
  12. The landlord added that the shower room had been inspected and no issues were found regarding leaks or water running to the hallway. The shower was found to be working and providing water at a temperature of 40°c, which was in line with the requirements of that type of shower. It concluded that no repairs were needed to either the shower room or the boiler.
  13. On 17 August 2021, during a telephone conversation with this Service, the resident advised that he had escalated his complaint and the landlord had informed him he would receive a response the following week. A copy of the escalation request has not been provided for this investigation.
  14. The landlord issued its stage two response on 25 August 2021. It stated that it was satisfied that it had fully investigated both issues. It confirmed that it had “assessed the type, size and operation of the boiler, and found that this is adequate and functioning correctly”. It had also inspected the shower room flooring and confirmed that the water did run to the outlet as it was designed to. It concluded that it did not feel that any repairs or replacements were necessary at that point in time. It gave instructions on how to contact this Service if the resident remained dissatisfied.

Assessment and findings

  1. The resident had reported concerns about his boiler and the shower room a number of times to the landlord. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports was reasonable as it had arranged for the concerns to be investigated every time. Each time it found that there was no fault and no repairs needed.
  2. The resident also approached the local authority via his MP and they confirmed that as the boiler was in working order and the energy performance certificate for the property was rated as D, when the minimum is E they had no legal grounds to take action.
  3. The landlord logged an official complaint for the resident on 7 July 2021 and its response to arrange for its surveyor to go out to investigate the resident’s concerns on 14 July 2021 was reasonable as it showed that it was taking the matter seriously and was prepared to look at the concerns again, rather than relying on the outcomes of previous visits.
  4. It is not clear whether the landlord reported back to the resident the suggestions made by the surveyor about the shower after the 14 July 2021 visit (reduce the pressure and install a weighted shower curtain), but that appears to be helpful information to pass on to the resident for consideration if he finds the issue persisting.
  5. The landlord’s explanation that it might consider recovering the costs of future visits if no apparent faults are found was not wholly unreasonable on the face of it. However, the landlord should ensure that any such action is in line with clearly stated policies and procedures before proceeding with such steps.
  6. The stage two response did not contain significant additional detail, but addressed the resident’s main points of concern, and the conclusion that there were no further repairs needed to either the boiler or the shower room was reasonable as both had been fully inspected in July.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in how it handled the repairs to the boiler and shower room.

Reasons

  1. Although it had already sent engineers out several times, in response to the resident’s concerns about the boiler and shower and found nothing wrong, upon logging this complaint the landlord arranged for a surveyor to go out to the property specifically to investigate the resident’s concerns about the boiler and the shower room. The surveyor found no fault or any issue requiring repair.