Clarion Housing Association Limited (202336084)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202336084

Clarion Housing Association Limited

29 July 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 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 electrical faults at her property.
2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident is an assured tenant under an agreement dated May 2003. She lives in a 3-bedroom house with her family.
4. According to its records, the landlord attended the resident’s home in September 2023, October 2023, and December 2023 to assess the wiring, check electrical sockets, and inspect for any electrical faults. It also fitted a “surge protection device” (SPD) at the property.
5. The resident raised a complaint by telephone on 9 October 2023. She said she had been having ongoing problems with her electrics for 2 years, and was told by the landlord that her appliances were causing the issues. This led to her buying new ones but it was an unnecessary expense because it did not solve the problem. She also said that the last contractor that attended found the electrics to be in “good working order”, but following this one of her appliances was repeatedly “burning out.”
6. Additionally, she explained that following the landlord’s annual electric check in January 2023 she was told wiring at the property was defective, but the landlord had taken no action since. She also explained that she had been told her kitchen and her child’s bedroom should not be running on the same circuit. She said there had been a lack of communication from the landlord , and asked it to fix the wiring, and for compensation to cover the cost of the replacement white goods she purchased.
7. The landlord responded on 16 November 2023. It said:
   1. Its area manager had confirmed that an electrical socket in the resident’s bedroom had periodic power surges, which blew any appliance plugged into it.
   2. Its repairs team completed an inspection in mid-September 2023 and found the electric circuit to be working correctly. The team also confirmed that a new SPD had been installed on a previous visit, in line with wiring regulations.
   3. Details about past visits to the resident’s property for electrical problems were on a previous repairs system, which it had limited access to following a cyber security incident in June 2022.
   4. In response to the resident’s report of her appliances continuing to blow fuses, its contractor attended mid-October 2023 to replace a single electric socket in her bedroom. After completion, the contractor confirmed the electrics were working correctly. If the resident had any further issues going forward, she could get in touch.
   5. Its area manager confirmed all communications from the resident had been responded to within its 24-hour agreed time frame, so no fault in service had been identified.
   6. If the resident wanted to make an insurance claim in relation to damage caused to her bed and carpets by a roof leak, she needed to go through her contents insurance or the landlord’s insurer.
   7. It would award the resident £50 in compensation for the delay in providing its stage 1 response, but identified no other faults in service.
8. The resident said she was dissatisfied with the decision on 30 November 2023. She said that wiring that had been identified as defective in January 2023 had not been addressed, and that the SPD had not solved the problem. She also asked it to look at its contractors report from January 2023, to confirm what works needed doing, and to contact her for more information on the problem prior to September 2023. In addition, she said that parts of the landlord’s stage 1 response seemed to be for another resident’s roof leak, but she would contact its insurer for reimbursement for white goods. She also wanted the landlord to increase its compensation offer.
9. The landlord provided its final response on 10 January 2024. It said:
   1. No faults had been identified with the wiring on any previous visits, but its area manager had since liaised with the resident and arranged a full electrical inspection for 10 January 2024. Any works found would be actioned accordingly.
   2. Electrical issues were attended to in January 2023, but because of the cyber incident in June 2022, it did not have completion notes for the works. In September 2023, an appointment took place to check a bedroom socket. In October 2023, an inspection was done. Completion notes from the inspection said that “everything looked good” and a new SPD had been installed recently. It just needed to change the bedroom socket from a single to a double.”
   3. Its area manager  had spoken to the resident about events prior to September 2023. When checking what it had on file, it found that it had attended for electrical issues in November and December 2020. Tests and works took place and the electrics were found to be working correctly.
   4. It was awarding the resident £250 in compensation for delays in addressing the electrical problems, and £50 for its delayed stage 2 response.
   5. The resident remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. To resolve her complaint, she wants it to complete a rewire of her home, and pay increased compensation.

Assessment and findings

The scope of the Ombudsman’s investigation

10. The resident has said that electrical problems at her home have been ongoing for more than 2 years, which is concerning. This investigation is nevertheless only able to consider the landlord’s handling of electrical problems in the property from October 2022 onwards.
11. This is as in accordance with paragraph 42c of the Scheme, which states that the Ombudsman will not consider complaints that were not brought to the landlord’s attention within a reasonable period – normally within 12 months of the matters arising. Records shared show that the resident first made a complaint about this matter on 9 October 2023 and as such, this investigation will only look back up to 12 months before this. Events outside of this may be noted for context, however.

The landlord’s handling of electrical problems

12. The landlord was under a duty to repair and maintain any systems for supplying electricity to the resident’s home, as set out in the written tenancy agreement, and its electrical safety policy.
13. Most landlords will have repair policies which set out target timescales within which they aim to complete the repairs. In this case the policy states:
    1. Emergency repairs are repairs that present an immediate danger to the resident or the property. The landlord aims to attend these within 24 hours and complete any make safe or temporary repair work.
    2. Non-emergency repairs are repairs which pose no risk to the health and safety of residents. The landlord aims to complete these by mutually agreeable appointment within 28 days.
14. According to the information available, the resident raised issues with the wiring and power surges around 12 December 2022. In line with its repairs policy, the landlord was required to attend the property within 28 days. The landlord attended on 3 January 2023, which means it adhered to its policies timescales. However, no information has been provided to confirm what work it carried out, which means the Ombudsman has been unable to determine whether the landlord took appropriate action to resolve the issue during this visit.
15. The lack of information available is in part because of a cyber-security incident the landlord experienced in June 2022. It is noted this was outside the landlord’s control and the incident impacted its ability to access its repairs history. With that said, in the Ombudsman’s Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) spotlight report, we highlighted our expectation that landlord’s have “contingency plans in place in the event of unforeseen critical data incidents, such as cyber-attacks. Any landlord could find itself a victim of one. Landlords should consider how systems and information can be safeguarded in such an event, with planned workarounds to minimise disruption to service delivery.” As such, the landlord ought to have in place reasonable systems, such as back-ups to ensure that it could retrieve the data within a reasonable time.
16. When the resident complained to the landlord in October 2023, she confirmed that when its contractor attended her property in January 2023 as part of an annual inspection, they told her that wiring at the property was “defective”. The landlord explained to the resident that it had no record of this due to the cyber-incident. As a result, no further action was taken until September 2023. This was an unreasonable delay, and highlights the importance of robust record keeping. In this case, the lack of records and follow up actions meant that the landlord failed to adhere to its repairs policy timescales, likely causing the resident distress and inconvenience while no action was taken to try and resolve the problem for almost 8 months.
17. When the resident contacted the landlord again on 7 September 2023 to report a problem with a bedroom electrical socket, the landlord’s contractor attended on 18 September 2023, fitted an SPD, and checked electrics were operating correctly. This was appropriate, and in line with its repairs policy.
18. However, on 9 October 2023, the resident contacted the landlord again to report there was still an ongoing fault with the socket and electrics, causing appliances to blow fuses. The landlord’s contractor attended on 16 October 2023, and replaced the faulty socket in the resident’s bedroom. They then confirmed that the electrics were working correctly. It is not clear what checks were carried out to confirm that all electrics at the property were working.
19. While it was appropriate that the landlord’s contractor attended again within a reasonable time, they do not appear to have addressed the issues with the wiring that the resident had said were raised in January 2023. In addition, a contractor had attended previously in September 2023 for the same issue with the sockets, which means a lasting and effective repair had not been put in place at the time, which was unreasonable and caused further distress and inconvenience for the resident.
20. When the resident contacted the landlord again on 30 November 2023 to escalate her formal complaint, she reiterated that the wiring problem identified in January 2023 had still not been addressed, and the SPD fitted had done nothing to stop the problem.
21. In response, the landlord arranged for a full inspection to take place on 10 January 2024. While it was appropriate for the landlord to arrange an inspection, given it had no record of what works had been carried out in January 2023, it is unclear why it took over a month to arrange one. It is also unclear why it took the landlord a further 4 months to look into the issue, after the resident had reminded it about the issue in October 2023. The onus should not have been put on the resident to remind the landlord of the works it had not carried out or followed up on.
22. Following their inspection on 10 January 2024, the landlord’s contractor told it that they were recommending a “full rewire of the property based on test results,” and that damage to the wiring appeared to have been done by rodents. They recommended trunking as part of the works, and confirmed they had spoken to the resident and she accepted the proposed works.
23. However, when obtaining a quote for the works its contractor had recommended, the landlord has explained that it found that only a partial re-wire was required.
24. In an update to this service in July 2024, the landlord has also explained that these works remain outstanding because the resident has refused access. The reason for this is because the resident disagrees with the landlord’s proposal to carry out a partial re-wire, when she was told a full re-wire would be required. The landlord has explained to this Service that its contractor used “incorrect terminology” when speaking to the resident. This has created unnecessary confusion over the works, for which the resident is understandably reluctant to have carried out, given the conflicting information she has been told. There is no information to show that the landlord has clarified this with the resident, or offered her a comprehensive explanation.
25. In summary:
    1. The landlord failed to carry out repairs within its own repairs policy timescales for over a year.
    2. The landlord failed to create and maintain adequate records to demonstrate what works it carried out in January 2023.
    3. The landlord has not provided clarity to the resident on what works are required to resolve the problem.
26. The Ombudsman considers this did amount to maladministration and therefore the landlord should pay the resident additional compensation to recognise how its failures have impacted her and her family.
27. The resident has explained the significant frustration, upset and distress she and her family have faced as a result of repeated electrical failures at the property, and the landlord’s failure to resolve the issue permanently.
28. Having carefully considered the Ombudsman’s policy and guidance on remedies, a fair level of compensation would be £400. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for failures which have adversely affected a resident, where the landlord has made some attempt to put things right, but the offer made was not proportionate to the failings identified in this investigation.
29. The resident has also said that the problems damaged a number of power packs for her child’s computer. The landlord has therefore been ordered below to contact the resident and provide her with details on how to make a claim to its liability insurer for any damages caused between October 2022 and October 2023.
30. Further, the landlord has been ordered below to arrange a visit to the resident to discuss and clarify exactly what works are required.

The landlord’s complaint handling

31. At the time of the resident’s complaint, the landlord was operating an interim complaints policy, due to the cyber-attack it suffered in June 2022. It said that:
    1. Stage 1 complaints must be acknowledged within 10 working days of receipt, and responded to within 20 days of that acknowledgement.
    2. Stage 2 complaints must be acknowledged within 10 working days, and responded to within 40 working days of acknowledgement.
32. The resident raised her complaint on 9 October 2023 over the telephone, so the landlord had already acknowledged it. It then had until 23 October 2023 to provide its stage 1 response. The landlord provided its response on 16 November 2023, 28 working days after it was raised. On this basis, the landlord failed to comply with its own complaint handling policy.
33. The resident then raised her stage 2 complaint on 30 November 2023, so the landlord had until 14 December 2023 to acknowledge it. The landlord acknowledged it on 1 December 2023, which means it then had until 31 January 2024 to provide its response. The landlord responded on 10 January 2024, which was in line with its complaints policy.
34. The landlord also awarded the resident a total of £100 for its delay in providing a response, which was reasonable and in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for service failures which have impacted a resident.
35. However, the resident also complained to the landlord that parts of its stage 1 response seemed to concern another resident and a roof leak. The landlord has not recognised this error in its responses to the resident. As a result of the error, the resident felt that her complaint was not being taken seriously, which caused her further distress.
36. Because of this, the Ombudsman finds that there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint. It has been ordered below to pay her compensation of £100 to recognise the impact on the resident. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for service failures which could result in a loss of confidence in the landlord.
37. A recommendation has also been made for it to review its process for quality checking complaint letters before dispatching them, to avoid similar incidents happening in future.

Determination

38. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the landlord was responsible for maladministration in its handling of electrical problems.
39. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the landlord was responsible for service failure in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

40. The landlord must, within 28 days of the date of this determination:
    1. Pay the resident £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the electrical repairs.
    2. Contact the resident and provide her with details on how to make a claim to its liability insurer for any damages caused between October 2022 and October 2023.
    3. Arrange a visit to the resident to discuss and clarify exactly what works are required.
    4. Pay the resident £100 for its errors in complaint handling.
41. The landlord must provide this Service with proof it has complied with the above orders.

Recommendations

42. The landlord should review its process for quality checking complaint letters before dispatching them, to avoid similar incidents happening in the future.