City of Westminster Council (202409039)

Decision
Case ID	202409039
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	City of Westminster Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Assured Shorthold Tenancy
Date	26 February 2026

Background

The resident, her partner, and their children, live in a flat in a purpose-built block. The flat was newly built when they moved in, in January 2023. It was within the defects liability period, during which the property developer was responsible for remedying defects, until August 2024. Throughout the tenancy the resident reported problems with the hot water supply, including times when there has been no hot water. She has a particular need for hot water as a result of physical disability.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the hot water supply.
2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the hot water supply is outside of our jurisdiction.
There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Hot water supply

The issues are subject to legal proceedings and we have no power to investigate the complaint.

Complaint handling

Complaint responses were often delayed.
The complaint process failure to provide a level of confidence to the resident that it would bring about an adequate remedy.
There is limited evidence seen of any commitment to organisation learning.

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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is provided by a senior officer. The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	The landlord complied with this order on 20 November 2025
	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £100 for the failures in its complaints handling. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid in relation to the handling of this complaint.	The landlord complied with this order on 20 November 2025

Order

What the landlord must do

Due date

Apology order

The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure:

The apology is provided by a senior officer.
The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic.
It has due regard to our apologies guidance.

The landlord complied with this order on

20 November 2025

Compensation order

The landlord must pay the resident £100 for the failures in its complaints handling.

This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.

The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid in relation to the handling of this complaint.

The landlord complied with this order on

20 November 2025

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
It is recommended that relevant staff involved in this case undertake complaint handling learning from our Centre for Learning ( https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/centre-for-learning/key-topics/complaint-handling/).

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
10 February 2024	The resident complained about the landlord’s handling of her reports regarding the hot water supply since 16 January 2023. She said: It had done repairs but had not resolved the problem, and the water was not hot enough. She had no hot water at all for 3 weeks in early 2024. This caused distress and inconvenience.
17 March 2024	The landlord acknowledged the complaint at stage 1 of its complaints process.
22 April 2024	The landlord gave a stage 1 response. It apologised for the delay resolving the hot water issue, and for the distress caused. It said the building developer had now identified the root cause of the problem. Work would be done to put this right on 24 April 2024. The complaint handler would oversee the matter until the problem was resolved. It offered £400 compensation for the time taken to resolve the hot water issue, and £20 for the delayed stage 1 response.
22 April 2024	The resident said she wanted to escalate the complaint to stage 2. She said there had been multiple unsuccessful attempts to resolve the problem, and she was concerned the works on 24 April 2024 would not resolve the issue. She said the £400 compensation was not enough because she had difficulty maintaining personal hygiene for 18 months. She also wanted to be reimbursed £720 she had paid for a hot water service she had not received. She wanted a transfer to a different property.
2 May 2024	The landlord acknowledged the complaint at stage 2 of its complaints process.
3 June 2024	The landlord gave a stage 2 response. It said works to the hot water system were completed on 22 May 2024. The temperature of the water from the bath was now between 39 and 43 degrees Celsius. Although the resident said this was not hot enough for her needs, the temperature was limited by building regulations and the product design. It would however research whether there was a way to provide hotter water for the resident. It apologised that it had not acknowledged at stage 1 how difficult it had been to resolve the issues. This was due to miscommunication with the building developer. It offered £500 compensation for the time taken to resolve the hot water problem, £20 for the delayed stage 1 response, and £720 reimbursement for the cost of hot water.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate. She said she needed water above 50 degrees Celsius due to her medical condition. She has told us that since the stage 2 response there have been ongoing problems with the hot water and the heating. The resident has told us that although there have been multiple inspections and repairs, these have not resolved the problem, the landlord has not shown caring or taken into account her disability, and at times it has not responded to her communications. She has had difficulty maintaining personal hygiene and this has been distressing, and has impacted her mental health. In April 2025 the landlord provided an electric shower and tap to mitigate the impact of the hot water issues on her.

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.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of repairs to the hot water supply.
Finding	Outside jurisdiction

We cannot investigate issues which are also subject to legal proceedings or where matters at court are connected so closely to the complaint, they cannot be separated. In this case, we can see legal proceedings were issued at court on 29 December 2025. The matters at court relate to the hot water supply in the resident’s property and this is the same complaint that was bought to us. This means we have no power to investigate the complaint.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The decision on the landlord’s handling of repairs to the hot water supply was subject to review and the decision was changed. The finding in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling was not subject to review and so has not been changed since the original decision. The landlord has now evidenced that it has complied with the orders made in this section of the report, so no further compliance is required. This section of the report is included for completeness.
There were delays in the landlord’s handling of the complaint which would have contributed to the resident’s perception that the landlord did not care and was not responsive to her communications.
The landlord’s complaints policy said it would acknowledge complaints at stage 1 within 2 working days. However, the landlord took 25 working days to acknowledge the resident’s 10 February 2024 complaint.
The policy said the landlord would give a stage 1 response in a further 10 working days. However, it took 24 working days for the landlord to give a stage 1 response. It did not contact the resident to tell her its response would be late.
It took 8 working days for it to acknowledge the resident’s request to escalate the complaint to stage 2.
However, its stage 2 response was on time, being 20 working days after acknowledgment, in line with its policy.
The complaint handling delays caused stress for the resident, and impacted the landlord/tenant relationship. Although the landlord apologised for the delays within its complaint acknowledgement and response emails and letters, the £20 compensation in recognition of this was too low.
The stage 1 response acknowledged that the hot water issues had not been resolved quickly enough, apologised for the distress caused, and set out what would be done to resolve the problem. The stage 1 investigating officer said they would oversee progress on the works to completion, and had asked the building developer for a full breakdown of events so the landlord could better understand the what had gone wrong. This demonstrated the landlord took the resident’s complaint seriously, and was committed to resolving and learning from this.
The stage 2 response acknowledged that the hot water to the bathroom was not adequate after the works in April 2024, but said following further works on 22 May 2024, the hot water supply was at the temperature permitted by the building regulations. The landlord further acknowledged the resident’s frustration, inconvenience and distress as a result of the delays resolving the hot water issue, and apologised for this. It acknowledged the resident’s stated need for water hotter than permitted by the building regulations, due to her medical condition, and said it would research whether it could provide a solution. This demonstrated it took the resident’s medical needs seriously.
Complaint responses were often delayed, compensation for this was below what would be reasonable, and the complaint process failed to provide a level of confidence to the resident that it would bring about an adequate remedy to her dissatisfaction. There is also limited evidence seen of any commitment to organisational leaning seen in its responses. Cumulatively these failings amount to a finding of service failure.
As above, the landlord complied with the orders made to apologise and pay the resident compensation of £100 for its complaint handling failures when the original decision was issued. The landlord does not need to take any further action.