Eldonian Community Based Housing Association Ltd (202226783)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202226783

Eldonian Community Based Housing Association Ltd

25 October 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:
    1. Response to the resident’s concerns following a missed gas safety check.
    2. Complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident moved into the property in November 2011 on a starter assured short hold tenancy that later became an assured tenancy. The property is a 2-bedroom house, and the landlord advised it has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
  2. The resident raised a stage 1 complaint on 8 February 2023 saying that he had not received a gas safety check for the year 2022. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 10 February 2023.
  3. The landlord replied on 14 February 2023 apologising for the delay in getting back to the resident. It confirmed it did not have a gas safe certificate for the year 2022 and that the inspection was not carried out. It went on to say it was undertaking an investigation into the cause and to identify any lessons to be learned from this.
  4. On 10 March 2023, the resident chased a response saying it had been 3 weeks since he made a formal complaint. On 15 March 2023, the landlord said it would escalate his complaint to stage 2. A letter was sent to the resident on 23 March 2023 saying his complaint would be investigated by another member of staff as the CEO, who the resident had been in contact with, no longer worked with the organisation.
  5. On 29 March 2023, the landlord sent its stage 1 response. It confirmed that gas safety checks were carried out in 2020, 2021, and 2023. It went on to explain that the gas safety check in 2022 was missed due to the resident’s property not being recorded on its schedule. It gave assurance that the schedule had been updated and relevant staff had received health and safety training. Furthermore, it offered its sincere apologies and said it had implemented robust measures to ensure properties were inspected on an annual basis.
  6. In April and May 2023, the landlord carried out the following actions:
    1. Carried out an internal health and safety review and presented its findings to its board members. The board requested an independent audit.
    2. Met with an independent health and safety consultant and instructed its services.
    3. Presented the work carried out by the independent health and safety consultant to its board members.
  7. On 5 May 2023, this Service contacted the landlord asking it to provide its final response.
  8. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 18 May 2023 saying it upheld the resident’s complaint as a gas safety check was not carried out in 2022. It went on to say that:
    1. All schedules had been audited by both office staff and external consultants and had then been reviewed and updated, ensuring every property was listed and what checks were required.
    2. Relevant staff had received additional training on health and safety in relation to landlord responsibilities.
    3. A new health and safety policy, along with new monitoring measures, were in place for all the landlord’s health and safety responsibilities.
  9. The resident contacted this Service on 27 June 2023 saying he was “sceptical” the landlord had done what it said it had done.
  10. On 5 January 2024, a second independent consultant provided the landlord with an audit review report. This considered the actions taken by the landlord to monitor its compliance with the statutory obligations.
  11. During recent contact with this Service the resident said that he wanted assurance that the landlord had implemented measures to ensure it was fully compliant with its health and safety obligations.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns following a missed gas safety check

  1. The facts of this case have not been disputed and the landlord has accepted that it failed in its service delivery to the resident. Therefore, this report will concentrate on whether the landlord took sufficient steps to address the failings, by considering the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  2. Under the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998, the landlord is required to arrange for a gas safe registered engineer to carry out a gas safety inspection every 12 months.
  3. The landlord has accepted that it did not carry out a gas safety check in or around February 2022. It therefore failed to meet its health and safety obligations under the gas safety regulations, which was not appropriate.
  4. It has been evidenced that the landlord complied with the regulations by carrying out gas safety checks on:
    1. 24 February 2020
    2. 8 February 2021
    3. 3 February 2023
    4. 29 January 2024
  5. It is unclear from the evidence provided when the resident initially brought the missed gas safety check to the landlord’s attention. Nevertheless, the resident raised a formal complaint on 8 February 2023 in relation to not receiving a gas safety check for the year 2022.
  6. The landlord responded on 14 February 2023, saying that it had contacted its contractor and checked its records but found that it did not have a gas safety certificate for that time period, as the check was not undertaken. It went on to apologise, saying it was taking the matter seriously and would be investigating the cause and any lessons to be learnt. Furthermore, it would keep the resident updated. The response was reasonable in light of the complaint.
  7. The resident chased a formal response on 10 March 2023, and the landlord provided its stage 1 response on 29 March 2023. The landlord explained at this stage that the resident’s property had not been included in its schedule, resulting in the missed gas safety check. The landlord followed through with the investigation it said it would carry out in February, which was positive.
  8. Record keeping is a core function when providing a service, assisting the landlord in fulfilling its obligations such as gas safety checks. Accurate and complete records ensure that the landlord has a good understanding of its properties and enables it to monitor and manage any outstanding requirements. In addition, it allows the landlord to provide accurate information to its residents. In this case the landlord has failed to do so, thus demonstrating a record keeping failure, which was not appropriate.
  9. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management, published in May 2023, highlights the importance of good record keeping practices. It is vital for landlords to keep accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail of events. A recommendation has been made in relation to this.
  10. On 3 April 2023, the landlord presented a review of how it managed its health and safety obligations to its board members. This was appropriate and demonstrated that it was taking steps to address its failings. The review was presented to the board 38 working days after the resident’s stage 1 complaint. This was reasonable and within the timeframe of 8 weeks that is often set by this service when requesting a review to be carried out.
  11. The board subsequently requested an independent audit. A meeting was held with the landlord and an independent health and safety consultant on 24 April 2023 and a report produced on 26 April 2023. The landlord acted appropriately and promptly when instructing an independent consultant to audit its health and safety systems. This evidenced that the landlord had made improvements to address its failing in relation to health and safety, which was appropriate.
  12. The report dated 26 April 2023 said “the standard of compliance within the business is very good. From the evidence supplied; it appears to be managed effectively and pragmatically. The business should aim to maintain this standard and continue to improve where possible.”
  13. In relation to gas safety, the report confirmed that all properties were up to date with gas checks and certificates could be accessed “easily through the landlord’s systems”. This was appropriate and demonstrated improvement in the landlord’s recording keeping.
  14. The landlord sent a stage 2 response on 18 May 2023 confirming the action it had taken in instructing external consultants and providing additional staff training in relation to health and safety. Furthermore, it had updated its policies and arranged quarterly meetings to review all its health and safety works. This was appropriate and resolution focused given that the resident wanted assurance the failing would not happen again.
  15. The landlord later updated its gas safety policy on 28 September 2023. This was appropriate and demonstrated the landlord’s willingness to learn from its failings.
  16. An independent assurance review of the landlord’s health and safety compliance was provided on 5 January 2024. The overall assessment was “substantial assurance”. This was defined as there being “a robust system of internal controls operating effectively to ensure that risks are managed, and process objectives achieved”. This demonstrated continued compliance with its obligations and was again appropriate.
  17. In summary, the landlord failed to meet its obligation under the Gas Safety Regulations 1998 by not carrying out the required annual gas safety check. However, it took action to address those failings by:
    1. Acknowledging its failings and apologising to the resident.
    2. Instructing 2 independent health and safety consultants to audit its compliance with its obligations.
    3. Providing staff training in relation to landlord health and safety obligations.
    4. Reviewing and updating its gas safety policy.
  18. This is considered reasonable redress for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns following a missed gas safety check. The Ombudsman would have made a finding of some level of maladministration was it not for these steps the landlord took to put things right, by accepting its failing, apologising, and taking learning from the complaint to prevent recurrence.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints procedure. At stage 1, it aims to provide a response within 10 working days. At stage 2, it aims to provide a response within 20 working days.
  2. It has been evidenced that the resident requested to raise a formal complaint on 8 February 2023. The landlord responded to the resident on 14 February 2023 saying it was taking the matter seriously and would identify lessons to be learnt from the complaint. While it was appropriate that this response was sent promptly, within 4 working days, it did not clearly outline to the resident that it was a formal stage 1 response. This was not appropriate or in line with our complaint handling code which says that residents should be advised of the complaint stage in the response.
  3. On 10 March 2023, the resident chased a response to his formal complaint. He said he had been waiting over 3 weeks for a response. The landlord acknowledged the complaint at stage 2 on 15 March 2023. This was not appropriate as the landlord had not provided a formal response at stage 1.
  4. On 23 March 2023, the landlord wrote to the resident advising that its CEO was no longer with the organisation and the matter would be investigated by another member of staff. It said it would provide a response within 10 working days. This was in line with its complaints procedure, which says if it is unable to respond to a complaint within the policy timescale, it will explain this to the resident and provide an indication of when they can expect a reply.
  5. On 29 March 2023, the landlord provided a response, headed “your complaint”. It is reasonable to conclude that this was a stage 1 response. While the contents were detailed and clear, it once more did not clearly identify what stage the complaint was at. This was not appropriate or in line with this Service’s complaint handling code.
  6. The stage 1 response was sent 35 working days after the resident requested to raise a formal complaint. However, it provided good reason for the delay and kept within the amended timescale, and is therefore considered reasonable.
  7. Following contact from this Service on 5 May 2023, the landlord sent a stage 2 response to the resident on 18 May 2023. This was 43 working days after it had said it escalated the complaint to stage 2. This was not appropriate and significantly outside of its policy timescale of 20 working days. Furthermore, it was 2 working days outside of the timescale set by this service.
  8. In summary, the landlord was late in providing both complaint responses, with the stage 2 complaint being provided following intervention from this Service. The landlord failed to apologise for the delays in its formal responses or offer compensation to put things right.
  9. We acknowledge that the landlord’s complaint policy says it “offers compensation as the exception not the norm”. Nevertheless, the resident expended time and trouble in pursuing the complaint, having chased the matter, and was delayed in bringing his complaint to this Service. Therefore, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint and £100 compensation has been awarded to him.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress by the landlord in its response to the resident’s concerns following a missed gas safety check.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to take the following action and provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance:
    1. Write to the resident to reiterate its apology for the service failures identified in this report, in line with this Service’s apologies guidance.
    2. Pay directly to the resident compensation totalling £100 for the time and trouble he spent in pursuing the complaint as a result of its complaint handling failure.
    3. All frontline staff involved in complaint handing to complete this Service’s free online dispute resolution training for landlords at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/landlords-info/e-learning/ if this has not been done recently.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord assesses its internal recording procedures against the recommendations of this Service’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM). This should include the completion of this Service’s free online training in relation to KIM for landlords and relevant staff if this has not been done recently.