East Midlands Housing Group Limited (202345280)

Decision
Case ID	202345280
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	East Midlands Housing Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	29 April 2026

 

Background

1. The resident lives in a 2-bed house with her newborn daughter. She moved into the property in June 2023 and reported issues with the boiler and a leaking radiator. The landlord attended to repair the heating system on numerous occasions, but this was ultimately not completed for several months after the resident raised her complaint. The landlord later completed a post-complaint review for the further delays in completing the repairs.

 

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. Handling of boiler and radiator repairs.
   2. Handling of the complaint and associated compensation.

 

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of boiler and radiator repairs.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint and associated compensation.

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

 

Summary of reasons

Boiler and radiator repairs

4. The landlord accepted that heating and associated repairs took far longer than its policy allowed, leaving the household, which included a new born, without reliable heating for many months and causing damage to the home. It acknowledged multiple repair failings and contractor management issues, apologised, and paid total compensation of £1,130, which provided reasonable redress to the resident.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord’s complaint process largely adhered to our Complaint Handling Code (the Code), except for a late stage 1 acknowledgement, for which it apologised and reasonably offered £10 compensation. It provided inaccurate information at stage 1 but corrected this in its stage 2 response. It later completed a further review, identified additional failings and offered extra compensation; however, this followed the conclusion of the complaint process and delayed redress by almost two years, which was a procedural failing.

 

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	Learning order The landlord must review its complaint handling in this case to identify: Why it did not identify the issues it found within its post-complaint review during its internal complaints procedure. Why it did not offer the additional £550 compensation offered in its post-complaint review at an earlier stage, to avoid the delay in the resident receiving her redress. What action it will take to prevent a reoccurrence of these issues in future cases. This may include changes to its process, staff training or policies. How it will implement these actions in a timely manner.	No later than 10 June 2026

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
5 January 2024	The resident raised her complaint and said that her boiler had not functioned correctly since she moved into the property in July 2023. She said the hot water was intermittent, 2 radiators were not functional, and the living room radiator was leaking. She said that the landlord’s contractors had committed to a new boiler and radiators, but she had not heard anything. The contractors had arranged some repairs appointments but had not attended. Additionally, she had been provided with temporary heaters but was not using these as they were costly and she believed they were unsafe. She was seeking a replacement boiler and radiators, an explanation around the delays and compensation.
30 January 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response and said: It had raised jobs promptly from July 2023, but repeated visits failed due to no access, incorrect parts and further faults. It had completed the heating works in January 2024 after fitting parts, installing a new thermostat and providing temporary heaters. The contractors had informed it that a new radiator was not needed and it held no records of a request for a new boiler. The service was unacceptable and apologised. It offered £430 compensation for the delays in completing the repairs and £10 for a delay in acknowledging the resident’s complaint. It was making changes to its complaint process and arranging further meetings with its contractors to improve its monitoring and oversight of repairs.
31 January 2024	The resident escalated her complaint and said: The thermostat had not been installed when the landlord said it had in its stage 1 response and that this was still outstanding. The radiator in her front room was still leaking and had been since July 2023. She said this had damaged her flooring. The situation had an impact on her new born baby’s health and sleep and her own mental health. The landlord had not acknowledged her concerns about the temporary heaters costing more to run or her reports that they were unsafe.
4 March 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response and said: It had found the thermostat had not been fitted, apologised. That multiple survey and repair appointments failed due to no access and contractor sickness. It had found the boiler required replacement and had arranged a new contractor, who completed the boiler installation in late February 2024 and identified further radiator works. It had addressed concerns about workmanship, carpet damage, electrics and cleaning through follow‑on visits and work orders. It apologised for the delays, increased its compensation offer to £550 and committed to staff training and improved contractor oversight.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated her complaint to us to investigate. She said that she was without heat from July 2023 until February 2024 and that multiple appointments had been booked which either the contractors did not attend, or they would attend with the wrong part. The resident said this had a significant health impact on her new born baby and her own mental health.
21 January 2026	The landlord completed a further case review while awaiting our investigation and said it had found additional failings. It apologised for these failings and said: The boiler and radiator repairs had not been completed fully, including remedial repairs to the flooring until 23 April 2024. It offered £100 compensation for this. Further remedial works in the property related to the repairs, such as carpet cleaning and repairing a damaged worktop, had not been fully completed until 18 September 2024 and had required multiple attendances. It offered £250 compensation for this. Its stage 2 complaint response had identified the impact on the household, including on the resident’s new born baby, but had not provided compensation for this. It apologised for this and offered a further £250 in respect of this. This brought the total to £1140 (including £10 for complaint handling).

 

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 boiler and radiator repairs
Finding	Reasonable redress

6. The resident told us that the heating in the property had been intermittent since she moved into the property in June 2023. This is supported by the landlord’s repair and appointment records, which show attempted attendances as early as July 2023 for this issue. Alongside this, the resident reported damage to her property during contractor appointments including damage to her privately-installed carpets, kitchen worktop, kitchen tiles and lounge laminate flooring.
7. The landlord’s post-complaint review acknowledged that the repairs took a considerable time to complete, specifically:
   1. The boiler was not replaced and the radiators were not fully repaired until 23 April 2024, almost 10 months after first being reported by the resident.
   2. The remedial works in the property to the carpets, flooring, tiles and worktop were not completed until 18 September 2024, which was over 8 months since the first report of damage to the floors in the resident’s complaint.
8. On this basis, it is not disputed that these repairs were completed outside of the timescales shown in the landlord’s repairs policy. Additionally, the landlord acknowledged that there were multiple attendances required, before a lasting and effective repair was made. These were all significant failings which left a household without reliable heating for around 8 months. The household also included a new born baby.
9. These delays were compounded by ineffective procurement, which lead to contractors attending on multiple occasions with the incorrect parts. The resident also reported contractor non-attendance and conflicting advice around repairs being required or completed. The landlord identified this within its complaint responses and post-complaint review and said that it had put additional meetings and controls in place to better manage its repairs contractors in future. This was a reasonable response to improve this service in future.
10. Within the complaint responses the landlord apologised for the delays and offered £440 compensation at stage 1 and increased this to £530 at stage 2. In January 2026, when the landlord conducted its post-complaint review, it offered a further £600 compensation in respect of the delays and a specific element (£250) for the distress and inconvenience caused to the household. This brought the total compensation offered for this element of the complaint to £1,130 which is in line with our compensation guidance for maladministration, given the length of delay and impact on the household. It is noted that the landlord paid this promptly to the resident on receipt of the appropriate details.
11. Alongside the apologies given to the resident, the process changes to improve its contractor management and the completion of the repairs, this compensation provided reasonable redress to the resident prior to our investigation, which resolves this element of the complaint satisfactorily.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

12. The Code sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process, which is in line with the Code. It says it will acknowledge complaints at both stages within 5 working days. The policy says that residents should then receive a formal response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of the complaint acknowledgement.
13. The records show that the landlord:
    1. Acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 16 January 2024, which was 11 working days after receipt. It then provided its stage 1 response 10 working days later.
    2. Acknowledged the resident’s complaint escalation on 5 February 2024, which was 3 working days after receipt. It then provided its stage 2 response 20 working days later.
14. This means that the landlord’s acknowledgements and complaint responses were issued within the timescale shown in the Code and the landlord’s complaint policy, with the exception of the stage 1 complaint acknowledgement. The landlord apologised for this in its stage 1 response and offered £10 compensation was which reasonable given the relatively short delay.
15. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response acknowledged that it had provided some factually incorrect information in its earlier response, related to the completion of the works to the thermostat. It is important that accurate information is provided at the earliest opportunity to avoid further escalations and breakdowns in trust between the landlord and resident. The landlord apologised for this and corrected the information in its stage 2 complaint response, which was reasonable.
16. It was positive to note that the landlord conducted a further review of this case, identified further failings and provided additional redress to the resident which included both an apology and additional compensation. While we consider the additional compensation to be reasonable to address the substantive issues in the complaint, the review was not completed for almost 2 years after the landlord concluded its internal complaint process. This means there was a significant delay in the resident receiving the redress offered and this was a procedural failing which must be addressed for future cases.

 

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

17. The landlord’s complaint and repairs records were generally correct and complete, however incorrect information was provided to the resident within a complaint response and these records were not used effectively to track repairs to a prompt and lasting conclusion.

Communication

18. Communication with the resident was often poor throughout the repairs and required her to chase appointments, seek updates and check information being provided as this often conflicted what she had been told previously.