From 13 January 2026, we no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

Clarion Housing Association Limited (202306492)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202306492

Clarion Housing Association Limited

20 June 2025

 

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 the resident’s concern that the cavity wall insulation had collapsed, resulting in heat loss and high energy bills.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant. The property is a bungalow.
  2. The resident is an older person. The landlord’s records indicate that the resident was disabled and had a respiratory disease.
  3. For context, the first mention of the bedroom being cold we have seen was in November 2020. The landlord raised a number of repairs during the remainder of 2020 and 2021. The landlord’s records are silent between August 2021 and December 2022. We are aware that the landlord had a cyber-related incident in July 2022, which affected its repairs records.
  4. The resident made several complaints between 4 January 2023 and March 2023 about outstanding repairs to the property. The landlord issued the resident with a stage 1 complaint response on 2 October 2023, which recognised there was an outstanding job related to cavity wall insulation. It committed to topping up the cavity wall insulation on 9 November 2023. It offered £450 compensation for delays completing repairs, for the resident having to repeatedly chase outstanding repairs, for failure to follow its own processes, and for repeatedly attending the property to inspect the same issue.
  5. The resident raised another complaint 10 months later, on 19 September 2024. The resident expressed dissatisfaction with the length of time he was having to wait for the landlord to replace the cavity wall insulation. The resident added in a separate email, that he was keen for the cavity wall insulation to be replaced before the autumn, to avoid the extra cost and financial difficulty arising from heat loss through the walls. The resident said the landlord had not confirmed when this work would be completed and suggested the landlord was not keeping him updated.
  6. We wrote to the landlord on 15 October 2024 asking it to provide the resident with a complaint response. The landlord issued the stage 1 complaint response on 22 October 2024. The landlord maintained that it had followed the correct procedures in relation to the cavity wall insulation. But recognised it had failed to keep the resident fully updated on its findings which had caused some confusion. It also recognised there had been failings in its handling of the complaint. The landlord offered £300 compensation in recognition of the failings it itself identified, which it broke down as follows:
    1. £250 compensation for poor communication concerning the cavity wall insulation, for its repeated failure to reply to letters and return phone calls, and because the resident had needed to repeatedly chase it for updates.
    2. £50 compensation for the inconvenience caused by its failure to open a complaint and because the resident had needed to chase for the complaint outcome.
  7. The resident raised the stage 2 complaint on 22 October 2024. The resident said the landlord had not fully addressed his complaint, it had failed to replace the cavity wall insulation as it previously committed, and because of this the property did not meet the Decent Homes Standard. The Decent Homes Standard is a set of minimum standards, designed to ensure that any property let by a social landlord is fit for habitation, is in a reasonable state of repair, has modern facilities, and provides a reasonable degree of thermal comfort.
  8. The landlord issued the stage 2 complaint response on 29 November 2024. The landlord:
    1. Reassured the resident that it had identified no significant issues with the cavity wall insulation.
    2. Clarified that due to the design of the building, there was an area approximately 200mm below the roof plate, where the cavity wall insulation was incomplete. It recognised this would affect thermal performance in the area in question to some extent. But said this did not mean the insulation was defective or inadequate.
    3. Said it was unable to add further cavity wall insulation without carrying out significant works to the roof. And while it was unable to immediately resolve the design related restrictions, it had added the property to its planned works programme for consideration.
    4. Apologised for any confusion that may have been previously caused. But said it was satisfied that it had fully investigated and considered all aspects of the resident’s complaint.
  9. The resident told us in February 2025 that the landlord’s failure to replace the cavity wall insulation was causing the property to lose heat, which was resulting in high energy bills. He said there was damp and mould everywhere, which was affecting his health. The resident said the situation was causing him stress and inconvenience.
  10. The landlord told us in April 2025 that it was intending to remove and replace the cavity wall insulation as part of its planned works programme. But it did not say when this work would be carried out.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. This investigation will focus on the landlord’s actions relating to the cavity wall insulation and its response to the resident’s concerns about heat loss and high energy bills. This is because these were the issues the resident specifically escalated to stage 2 of the landlord’s internal complaint process and that the landlord considered.
  2. The evidence shows the resident was actively raising complaints and chasing the landlord from at least 4 January 2023 about when it was going to replace the cavity wall insulation. Therefore, our investigation will focus on the landlord’s actions between 4 January 2023 and 29 November 2024 when the landlord’s internal complaint process was exhausted.
  3. The resident told us that the landlord’s failure to replace the cavity wall insulation had impacted his health. We cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. However, this investigation may consider the general distress and inconvenience that the situation was likely to have caused the resident.
  4. We were concerned to learn in February 2025 that significant issues with damp and mould had developed in the property. While outside the scope of this complaint, we would encourage the landlord to arrange a timely damp and mould inspection and then act accordingly.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concern that the cavity wall insulation had collapsed, resulting in heat loss and high energy bills

  1. According to the Decent Homes standard, properties should have a reasonable degree of thermal comfort, which includes programmable heating and adequate insulation.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy states that as far as is practicable, responsive repairs are limited to minor building repairs, with the driver to keep properties in a safe state, fit for habitation, and with all components safe and serviceable for day to day use by residents. The landlord aims to complete responsive repairs within 28 days. But any non-economical repairs will be added onto the landlord’s planned investment programme. The landlord will deliver major component replacements through planned programmes, to ensure best value for money.
  3. The resident raised dissatisfaction and chased the landlord multiple times between 4 January 2023 and 11 November 2024 about replacing the cavity wall insulation in the property. Over this timeframe, the resident said:
    1. The landlord had advised him the cavity wall had collapsed and needed to be replaced.
    2. The landlord had attended the property on multiple occasions to look at the cavity wall insulation and had made several attempts to top the insulation up. But the cavity wall insulation had not been replaced.
    3. The landlord had not kept him informed about its intentions regarding the cavity wall insulation, he had repeatedly had to chase the landlord for updates, and the landlord had not always responded to his requests for information.
    4. The landlord should replace the cavity wall insultation, as he was disabled and he was struggling to stay warm.
  4. While we do not seek to dispute the resident’s account, we were unable to verify from the available evidence, that the landlord told him the cavity wall insulation had “collapsed”. It is unclear when the landlord first identified the cavity wall insulation could benefit from being topped up. It is reasonable to assume from the resident’s communications that this was sometime before January 2023.
  5. The landlord reassured the resident in the second stage 1 complaint response on 22 October 2023 that the cavity wall insulation had not collapsed. It added in the stage 2 complaint response on 29 November 2023 that the cavity wall insulation was not defective. It is unclear why the landlord did not seek to correct the resident’s understanding about this sooner.
  6. It is not in dispute that the landlord inspected the property on multiple occasions between March 2023 and 3 January 2024 in relation to the cavity wall insulation. The landlord identified an area in the main bedroom, approximately 200mm below the roof plate, where the cavity insulation was incomplete. It is not in dispute that there was some loss of heat through the wall in this specific area of the room. Our investigation found a number of failings in the landlord’s handling of the substantive matter over this timeframe, which prolonged resolution of the matter for the resident. For example:
    1. The landlord recommended in March 2023 the cavity wall insulation be topped up. The landlord made internal enquiries. But concluded this work could not be added onto its existing planned programme of works. It is unclear if the landlord considered addressing the matter as reactive works. The issue was left unresolved.
    2. The landlord carried out a post works inspection of the property on 6 July 2023. It noticed during this inspection that the cavity wall insulation had not been topped up, as previously recommended. It agreed it would arrange to complete this as reactive works, after discussing the matter internally. But no works order was raised, leaving the matter unresolved.
    3. The landlord recognised upon reinspecting the property on 9 October 2023 that it had not acted upon its previous recommendations to top up the cavity wall insulation. It raised a works order on 11 October 2023 to address this. An appointment was arranged to complete this work on 9 November 2023. But was unable to complete this upon its attendance, due to the design of the building. The landlord’s operative said the job would have to be completed by cavity wall injection. There is no evidence that the landlord acted on this information. The matter was again left unresolved.
    4. The landlord recognised the cavity wall insulation had not been topped up when it reinspected the property on 3 January 2024. It again recommended the wall be injected. The landlord’s operative commented that this was the 5th attendance since February 2023 to look at the same issue. And pointed out that the resident just wanted to know what was happening with the cavity wall insulation.
  7. The landlord does not dispute that its communication with the resident concerning the cavity wall insulation was poor over this timeframe. It has accepted that it failed to follow the correct procedures, repeatedly inspected the same issue, delayed progressing recommended works, and that the resident had to repeatedly chase for updates. The landlord apologised for this in the original stage 1 complaint on 2 October 2023 and made an offer of compensation, which was within the range we would expect for the failings the landlord identified.
  8. The landlord told the resident on 17 January 2024 that it was unable to top up the cavity wall insulation, due to the design of the property. The landlord informed the resident that it had referred the matter onto its planned investment team, who would arrange future works. We accept that the landlord might have overcome the barrier presented by the design of the building if it had revisited previously recommendations to inject the cavity. But we acknowledge there would have been a cost to this and the landlord did appear to have had a long-term plan.
  9. We accept that the landlord was obliged to provide a property with adequate insulation, to meet the Decent Homes Standard. But we do not find failing that the landlord opted to address the issue with the cavity wall installation as planned works. This is because there is no evidence that the property was unfit for habitation, which would have required it to take immediate action. And the landlord could not remove and replace the cavity wall insulation without making major alterations to the roof, for which it would have had to budget. The landlord’s approach was consistent with its repair’s policy.
  10. But the landlord ought to have considered if there was any interim support or advice it was able to offer the resident, given his evident worry about the impact to his health and his financial struggle to heat the room. We have been unable to determine the actual financial impact to the resident arising from the cold spot in the main bedroom, from the available evidence. It is apparent from thermal imaging photographs, that the room was generally well insulated, save for a small area at the top of the bedroom wall near the ceiling.
  11. The landlord might have considered if there were any temporary measures it could take to improve the situation for the resident while waiting for a decision from its planned investment team. The landlord might for example, have installed thermal boarding to address the cold spot in the main bedroom. The landlord’s own operative did suggest this as an option in March 2024 but this was not acted upon.
  12. The landlord informed the resident on 16 April 2024 that the property was on a “retrofit assessment list” for that financial year. It said it was hopeful that any works identified would be completed between 2025 and 2027. The landlord completed this assessment in mid-June 2024. It would have been helpful if the landlord had shared a copy of this assessment with us, showing what had been decided about the cavity wall insulation.
  13. The evidence suggests that the landlord considered in October 2024, if there was anything it could to do to resolve the issue with the cavity wall insulation in a timelier manner. This was encouraging. The landlord’s planned investment team suggested that the landlord might consider handling the matter as reactive works, since it could be sometime before any retrofit works began. This was reasonable advice. Ultimately, the landlord decided it would be better to wait and progress the matter via planned works. The landlord was entitled to manage the job as it saw fit. But again, failed to address the ongoing impact of the situation to the resident, or consider if there was any interim support or advice it was able to offer.
  14. The landlord does not dispute that its communication around the cavity wall insulation from October 2023 fell short. It has accepted that it repeatedly failed to reply to the resident’s communications, and that the resident had needed to chase it for updates. The landlord made an offer of compensation in the second stage 1 complaint response on 22 October 2024, which was within the range we would have expected for the failings the landlord identified.
  15. We note that the landlord’s planned investment team instructed an insulation specialist contractor to survey the property, following issue of the stage 2 complaint response. The landlord’s insulation contractor surveyed the property on 25 February 2025 and recommended the existing insulation be removed and replaced. The landlord told us in April 2025 that it had agreed to complete these works, as planned works. But did not say when this was likely to happen. We have been unable to establish the current position concerning the cavity wall insulation from either party.
  16. Overall, the landlord did acknowledge there were failings in its handling of the substantive matter and it did make some attempt to put things right. But we cannot find reasonable redress because the landlord:
    1. Did not adequately address the resident’s concerns about the ongoing impact to him and his household, arising from heat loss through the wall.
    2. Did not consider if there was any interim support it was able to offer the resident, until such time as the issue with the cavity wall insulation was fully resolved.
    3. We cannot conclude that the issues with the cavity wall insulation have been fully resolved.
  17. Therefore, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s handling of the resident’s concern that the cavity wall insulation had collapsed, resulting in heat loss and high energy bills.
  18. To remedy the complaint, the landlord is ordered to pay the £700 compensation the landlord previously offered (if it has not already done so), for the failings it identified during its own complaint investigations. The landlord is also ordered to pay £100 compensation for not adequately addressing the resident’s concerns about the ongoing impact to him and his household, arising from heat loss through the wall. And £100 compensation for failing to consider if there was any interim support it was able to offer. The landlord must also request copies of the resident’s energy statements from January 2023 onwards and make a proportionate offer of compensation in recognition of the resident’s increased heating costs.
  19. Our remedies guidance (published on our website) suggests awards in this range where there have been errors by the landlord which have adversely affected the resident, over a prolonged period.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord had a 2-stage complaints process. The landlord aimed to acknowledge stage 1 complaints within 5 working days and provide the full stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. The landlord aimed to acknowledge stage 2 complaints within 5 working days and provide the full stage 2 complaint response within 20 working days of the acknowledgement.
  2. The resident raised dissatisfaction several times between January 2023 and March 2023about the landlord’s handling of the substantive matter. But the landlord failed to open a complaint.
  3. The landlord issued the first stage 1 complaint response on 22 October 2023, following our intervention. The landlord did not appropriately acknowledge within the first stage 1 complaint response, its delay to recognise the resident’s dissatisfaction as a complaint. Nor did it acknowledge the added time and trouble caused the resident, having to repeatedly chase for a complaint outcome.
  4. The landlord’s complaints policy states that residents may ask for their complaint to be escalated to stage 2 of its complaints process, within 20 working days of the stage 1 complaint being issued. There is no evidence that the resident raised dissatisfaction with the landlord’s stage 1 complaint outcome, within this timeframe.
  5. The resident emailed the landlord on 19 September 2024 raising dissatisfaction about the length of time it was taking the landlord to replace the cavity wall insultation and about its poor communication. The landlord should have recognised the resident’s communication as an expression of dissatisfaction and logged this as a new complaint, in line with its policy. We have seen no evidence that it did.
  6. We wrote instructed the landlord on 15 October 2024 to provide the resident with a complaint response, after the resident asked for our advice.
  7. The landlord opened a new stage 1 complaint the next day and issued the full stage 1 complaint response in a timely manner on 22 October 2024. The landlord apologised for its delay to open the complaint and for the resident having to chase for the complaint outcome. The landlord offered £50 compensation in recognition of the inconvenience this had caused the resident, which was reasonable in the circumstances.
  8. The resident raised the stage 2 complaint on 22 October 2024. The landlord sent an initial acknowledgement on 24 October 2024 stating that the complaint had been forwarded onto its complaints team. But there is no evidence that its complaints team sent the resident a formal stage 2 acknowledgement, setting out the scope of the complaint and when the full stage 2 complaint response would be issued. This would have left the resident unclear of the landlord’s intentions.
  9. The landlord issued the full stage 2 complaint response on 9 November 2024, which was within the expected response timescale.
  10. Overall, the landlord recognised there had been failings in its handling of the resident’s second stage 1 complaint and made an attempt to put things right. But we cannot find reasonable redress, as the landlord did not identify all of the failings we identified during our investigation. On balance, the Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  11. To remedy the complaint, the landlord is ordered to pay the £50 compensation it previously offered (if it has not already done so), for the complaint handling failings it itself identified during its own complaint investigation. The landlord must pay an additional £100 compensation, in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its delay to open the first stage 1 complaint, for the resident’s time and trouble chasing for the first stage 1 complaint outcome, and for it not issuing a formal acknowledgement of the resident’s stage 2 complaint.
  12. This compensation is calculated in line with our remedies guidance, where there have been errors that have not been fully acknowledged by the landlord and that have caused inconvenience to the resident. But which did not significantly affect the overall outcome for the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with 52 of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme, there was:
    1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concern that the cavity wall insulation had collapsed, resulting in heat loss and high energy bills.
    2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord must write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified by this investigation. Its apology must be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on apologies, published on our website.
  2. The landlord must pay £1,050 compensation directly to the resident. This compensation is reduced to £300, if the landlord has already paid the £750 compensation it previously awarded during its own complaint investigations. This compensation is broken down as follows:
    1. £700 compensation, that the landlord previously offered, for poor communication, for delays progressing repairs, for not following its own processes, for its repeated failure to reply to the resident’s letters and return phone calls, and because the resident had needed to repeatedly chase it for updates.
    2. £100 compensation, in recognition of the landlord not adequately addressing the resident’s concerns about the ongoing impact to him and his household, arising from heat loss through the wall.
    3. £100 compensation, in recognition of the landlord’s failure to consider if there was any interim support it was able to offer the resident, pending resolution of the substantive matter.
    4. £100 compensation, in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s delay to open the first stage 1 complaint, for the resident’s time and trouble chasing for the first stage 1 complaint outcome, and for not issuing a formal acknowledgement of the resident’s stage 2 complaint.
    5. £50 compensation, that the landlord previously offered in the second stage 1 complaint response, for the inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s failure to open a complaint and for the resident having to chase for the second stage 1 complaint outcome.
  3. The landlord must request copies of the resident’s energy statements from January 2023, to help it calculate the additional heating costs incurred by the resident, arising from the cold spot in the main bedroom. The landlord must then make a proportionate offer of compensation in recognition of this.

 

  1. As we cannot conclude the cavity wall insulation has been topped up or renewed, the landlord must:
    1. Write to the resident setting out its position regarding the cavity wall insulation and confirm any timescales for action.
    2. Consider if there are any interim measures that it is able to take to address the cold spot in the main bedroom, pending resolution of the substantive matter. The landlord must confirm its position to the resident, in writing.
    3. Consider if there is any additional support or advice it is able to offer the resident, pending resolution of the substantive matter. The landlord must confirm its position to the resident, in writing.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should arrange to inspect the property, given the resident’s recent concerns about damp and mould. The landlord should act accordingly, depending on its findings.