Hyde Housing Association Limited (202100704)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202100704

Hyde Housing Association Limited

23 August 2021

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 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 response to the resident’s concerns over the heating system in his property.

Background and summary of events

Policies and procedures

2. Section 10 of the landlord’s responsive repairs operational procedure confirms that an appointment will be made within 20-working days.
3. Section 11.2 of the landlord’s complaints and compensation policy statement confirms that compensation payments should be considered:
   1. Where it had failed to deliver a service to its advertised standard.
   2. In recognition of the time and trouble taken by the resident to progress the complaint.
   3. To recognise the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident.
   4. To reflect where a resident has suffered a loss because of its failure in service.
4. The landlord’s compensation procedure says: “Major impact” complaints could be a persistent failure over a protracted time period, or an unacceptable number of attempts to resolve the complaint and can apply to “appropriate” expenses incurred by the resident. It confirms that the following compensation awards can be considered:
   1. Up to £500 where there is a delay in delivering a service.
   2. Up to £500 for distress and inconvenience with injury to health. This can include frustration, uncertainty and inconvenience, and should consider the length of time the resident has suffered.
   3. Up to £50 for the resident’s time and trouble.

Background

5. The resident is a tenant of the landlord.
6. There have been historic issues with the resident’s heating system within the property. While this has been included to add context to the complaint, this report will focus on matters included in the resident’s complaint to the landlord of 15 October 2019.

Summary of events

7. In January 2019, an inspection of the resident’s heating and hot water was carried out, which found that the temperate of the resident’s water was around 50 degrees Celsius, where 65 to 75 degrees Celsius was expected. The inspection recommended that the landlord investigate the heating supply to the property, and flush and pressurise the heating system within the resident’s property.
8. On 17 October 2019, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint of 15 October 2019. This Service has not seen a copy of this complaint. It confirmed that it would provide a written response by 12 November 2019.
9. On 12 November 2019, the landlord provided its stage one complaint response to the resident, which is summarised as follows:
   1. It understood that the resident’s heating had not been effective for “some years”.
   2. A heating inspection had been completed, but he had not received any further communication from the landlord regarding his heating requirements. It apologised for not clearly communicating this to him.
   3. It confirmed that it had installed a new radiator on 8 November 2019, and understood he was pleased with the heating. It also re-fixed the water tank to the wall. 
   4. It apologised for its poor communication, and for the distress and inconvenience it caused him. It also apologised for not offering the additional radiator sooner.
   5. It offered him a total of £150 compensation, comprising of £100 for the distress and inconvenience, and £50 for his time and trouble in progressing the complaint.
   6. It would be reviewing his complaint to understand how it could improve its service in the future.
10. On 12 November 2019, the resident emailed the landlord to confirm that the heating had been working. However, he had to turn the heating off due to a strong burning smell that was coming from the boiler cupboard. He requested it investigate this.
11. On 13 November 2019, the resident emailed the landlord to explain that despite being informed by the contractor that an electrician would visit, this was not the case. This meant that he would be without heating until an electrician could visit. He was very disappointed and felt let down by the contractor. He wanted to be reimbursed for his heating costs.
12. On 26 November 2019, the resident responded to the landlord’s stage one complaint response, stating the following:
    1. An electrician had visited his property on 22 November 2019 to re-wire the heating electrics. However, the heating was still not working, and his flat was “very cold”.
    2. He was unhappy at having wasted his annual leave by taking the day off for the appointment.
    3. He could not accept the compensation offered by the landlord, as he still had no heating. He requested a second opinion, as he had lost faith in the contractor.
    4. He requested records of the heating work the landlord had completed since he had lived in the property.
13. On 20 December 2019, the resident emailed the landlord to confirm that it had replaced a faulty component, and his heating and hot water was now working properly.
14. On 3 January 2020, the landlord’s records confirm that the resident had informed the landlord of continued concerns over his heating.
15. On 29 January 2020, the landlord emailed the resident to explain that it was able to provide fan heaters as a temporary heating solution. The resident did not feel that these were effective and asked whether the landlord would reimburse him for the cost of purchasing portable radiators.
16. On 31 January 2020, the resident submitted his final stage complaint to the landlord, stating the following:
    1. He was thankful for its efforts in trying to resolve the heating issues in his property, which had worked for “three weeks in December 2019”. However, it was now “not working as it should”; two radiators were “completely cold” and the other two were “barely warm”. His hot water supply had also been affected.
    2. He wanted an update on his recent request for portable radiators, and for the following:
       1. Reimbursement for his increased electricity costs, as he had to use his own electric heaters to heat the property.
       2. Compensation for his time and trouble, and for the inconvenience caused by the heating problems in the property.
17. On 1 July 2020, the landlord issued its final stage complaint response to the resident, which is summarised below:
    1. It agreed that it had contributed to the delay in the repair of the resident’s heating system, as the root cause of the issue “was not diagnosed as quickly as it [should have] been”.
    2. It apologised; for not resolving the issue when it installed the additional radiator in the property in November 2019; and for the contractor’s poor communication, resulting in him having suffered from the cold during winter.
    3. Following receipt of his final stage complaint, it has instructed a survey to be completed to help identify the root cause of the heating issues; the contractor had already contacted the resident, who would ensure it was resolved prior to next winter.
    4. It offered the resident £300 compensation, comprising of the following:
       1. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the heating issues in the property.
       2. £50 for his time and trouble in progressing the complaint.
       3. £150 for his “patience” during the complaints process.
18. On 7 April 2021, an inspection of the resident’s heating and hot water was carried out. After “several” previous visits, it concluded that “the only possible problem” was with the pipework. As this was inaccessible, it recommended that new pipework be installed.

Assessment and findings

19. The resident has said he is dissatisfied with service charges levied by the landlord, due to the issues with the heating system in his property. Under Paragraph 39(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we will not consider complaints that concern the level of service charge or rent or the increase of service charge or rent. The resident would be advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to how to proceed with a case. The resident could make acclaim to the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber), who can consider claims about the level of service charges.
20. The issues with the resident’s heating system were clearly complex; following the heating inspection in April 2021, the landlord had suggested the installation of new pipework as it had exhausted all other possibilities during its previous visits. The landlord has evidenced it had attempted to address the issues with his heating system. These only provided a temporary solution. As a result, the resident has struggling with poorly functioning or no heating for two seasons. This was not fair on the resident, and the considerable delay in addressing the heating issues in the property represents service failure by the landlord.
21. Following the landlord’s stage one complaint response, the resident had responded on 26 November 2019. However, this complaint was not escalated until January 2021, following further correspondence from the resident. This delay would have caused inconvenience to the resident and the landlord acknowledged this and offered compensation in line with its complaints policy. The Ombudsman has also seen evidence to confirm that the landlord has addressed this with its operative, which was appropriate in response to the complaint.
22. Whilst it was reasonable for the landlord to offer compensation, the amount it offered was not adequate in recognising the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident, in not having effective heating during two winters. The Ombudsman has found service failure for not offering appropriate compensation in view of the distress and inconvenience caused. Also, the landlord has not addressed the resident’s request for reimbursement of his electricity costs, as per its policy as detailed in paragraph 4.
23. As per this Service’s remedies guidance (published on our website), awards of £250 to £700 may be awarded where considerable service failure has been found but there may be no permanent impact on the resident. Examples could include a landlord failing over a considerable period of time to address repairs.
24. Therefore, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident financial compensation, as set out below, to reflect the impact of the landlord’s failings on the resident. The landlord is also ordered to confirm whether it has carried out the repair works recommended from its inspection, and if not, to explain why to the resident.

Determination (decision)

25. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its response to the resident’s concerns over the heating system in his property.

Reasons

26. The landlord has recognised it had failed to diagnose the root cause of the issue sooner; this resulted in the resident suffering with heating issues throughout two heating seasons.
27. It has offered compensation; however, this is not adequate in recognising the impact on the resident.

Orders and recommendations

28. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Pay the resident total compensation of £450 within four weeks, compromising of:
       1. £300 for its delay in completing suitable repairs to the resident’s heating system.
       2. £100 for the resident’s resulting distress and inconvenience because of errors in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.
       3. £50 for the resident’s time and trouble in progressing the complaint.
    2. Write to the resident within four weeks to:
       4. Confirm whether it has carried out the installation of new pipework in his property, as recommended in its inspection of 7 April 2021, and if not, to explain the reasons why.
       5. Request the relevant information from the resident to consider his claim for reimbursement for increased electric usage, which was necessary to heat his property during the winter.
29. It is recommended that the landlord review its staff’s training needs in relation to their application of its policies and procedures with regard to repairs, complaints and compensation, to seek to prevent a recurrence of its above failures in the resident’s case. This should include consideration of this Service’s guidance on remedies, at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/corporate-information/policies/dispute-resolution/policy-on-remedies/, and the completion of our free online dispute resolution training for landlords, if this has not been done recently, at https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/landlords/e-learning/.
30. The landlord shall contact this Service within four weeks of this determination to confirm that it has complied with the above orders and whether it will follow the above recommendations.
31. The Ombudsman accepts that, because of the present restrictions due to the corona virus pandemic, the timing of the above actions will depend on what is reasonable in the light of Government guidance regarding the health of the resident and of the landlord’s staff.