Hyde Housing Association Limited (202342593)

Decision
Case ID	202342593
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Hyde Housing Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	28 October 2025

Background

1. The resident lives in a one-bedroom flat with his wife. He has diabetes and his wife lives with fibromyalgia.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
   1. Inadequate heating.
   2. A roof leak.
3. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
   1. The resident’s reports of inadequate heating.
   2. The roof leak.
5. We have found reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Heating and leak repairs

6. There were significant delays in the landlord’s handling of the heating repairs and those associated with the leak. The timescales significantly exceeded those outlined in its repairs policy. There were several instances of poor record keeping and communication throughout the period of the complaint. In addition, despite being made aware of the impact, there is no evidence to show the landlord considered the resident’s vulnerability in its decision making.

Complaint handling

7. The landlord acknowledged the delays at both stages of its complaints process and offered an appropriate amount of compensation.

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	Apology order   The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is provided by a senior director. The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 26 November 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,800 made up as follows: £1,000 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble associated with its handling of the heating repairs. £800 for time, trouble, distress and inconvenience associated with its handling of the leak repairs.   This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 26 November 2025
3	Compensation order (based on rent)  The landlord must pay the resident £2,118.39. This is based on a proportion of rent for the winter months between 1 February 2021 and 31 March 2025 (based on the Regulator’s average rent) This is to recognise the absence of an adequate source of efficient heating in the property.	No later than 26 November 2025
4	Inspection order    We have made an inspection order because the resident has reported that the ceiling in his bathroom is showing signs of damp and there is a hole in one of the bathroom walls.    What the landlord must do    The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. The landlord must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. A suitably qualified person must complete the inspection. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date.	No later than 10 December 2025
5	Record keeping order   The landlord must contact the resident to obtain details of his household’s vulnerabilities. It must then ensure these are recorded on its relevant systems.	No later than 26 November 2025

 

Recommendations

Our recommendations
Compensation If it has not already done so we recommend the landlord pays the resident the £200 for complaint handling as this was the basis of our finding of reasonable redress.

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
21 and 23 February 2021	The resident reported no heating in the property and a roof leak affecting his bathroom ceiling. The landlord marked both repairs as complete on 25 February 2021.
25 April 2023	The resident complained to the landlord. He said that he had had no proper heating in his home since 2021. He confirmed a surveyor had visited in February 2021 and told him that the landlord would install oil filled radiators. He had also complained about a roof leak into his bathroom that was causing damp and mould in his bedroom. He told the landlord that he was diabetic, and the lack of heating was having an impact on his health.
10 May 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 10 May 2023. It upheld the resident’s complaint. It confirmed it had no record of the inspection the resident said had taken place February 2021. It also acknowledged that it had inspected “the damage” several times but had not arranged the repairs. It advised it had asked its heating contractor to attend on 19 May 2023. It had also scheduled the roof repairs for the same day, and the follow–on repairs for 5 June 2023. It awarded £300 compensation. This was comprised of: £50 for the delay in acknowledging his complaint. £50 for poor communication, time and trouble. £100 for delays in service delivery. £100 for distress and inconvenience.
10 May 2023	The resident emailed the landlord after receiving the stage 1 response. He said he was unhappy that it had no records of the visit in 2021. He confirmed that 2 engineers had visited and explained they would be making a request for oil filled radiators. He told the landlord he had been reporting issues with his heating prior to 2021. He said he had been suffering with extreme cold in the winter that significantly impacted his diabetes. He informed the landlord that he had to spend 2 weeks with his parents in December due to the extreme cold.
1 September 2023	The resident called the landlord. He advised he had not been paid his compensation and none of the work identified in the stage 1 response had been completed.
15 December 2023	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It accepted that it had failed to conduct the repairs and heating works identified in its stage 1 response. It acknowledged the resident’s repeated requests for an update. It also recognised that he remained without fully working heating in his home and a continuing leak that was damaging his bathroom. It said it had arranged appointments for 19 and 21 December 2023 to conduct the repairs associated with the leak and to install the radiators. It apologised and offered an additional £850 compensation for the following: £150 for complaint handling failures. £100 for customer effort. £300 for delays. £300 for distress and inconvenience.
Events post complaint	In an internal record on 8 January 2024, the landlord confirmed that it had not completed the actions outlined in its stage 2 response. It appears the contractor installed the heaters sometime in January 2024, but the records do not make it clear when. On 23 February 2024, the resident told the landlord the radiators were not working and that one had fallen off the wall. The records submitted show that the bathroom repairs began in April 2024 and were completed in June 2024. The resident told us that the damp staining on the bathroom ceiling had returned and that there was a hole in the bathroom wall left by the heating contractor.
Referral to the Ombudsman	In October 2025, the resident told us that he wanted compensation for the length of time he had been without heating.

 

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 the resident’s reports of inadequate heating.
Finding	Severe maladministration

What we have not investigated

8. In his communication with the landlord, the resident said that the situation had a detrimental impact on his health. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this any further under any of the complaint grounds. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
9. The resident informed us that he has not had adequate heating in his property for 17 years. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) in place at the time of the resident’s complaint encouraged residents to bring matters to the attention of the landlord as a complaint within 6 months of an issue arising. The landlord pointed this out in its stage 1 complaint response.
10. However, the resident told us that he had complained to the landlord in 2021 and had complained regularly about the heating ever since. The 6 months would not apply if this were the case, as the issue was a continuing one. We therefore asked the landlord about the resident’s contacts and complaints about the heating going back to 2021. We also asked it to explain the issues with the heating in the resident’s property prior to the installation of the new oil filled radiators.
11. The landlord failed to respond to our requests for information. We cannot go back the 17 years the resident says he was without adequate heating. However, as the landlord did not provide the evidence we requested, we have assessed the resident’s complaint from when he notified it of the issues in February 2021. This is the same for the leak and associated bathroom repairs dealt with below.

What we have investigated

12. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a legal obligation on the landlord to keep heating installations in repair and proper working order. This responsibility is recognised in the resident’s tenancy agreement.
13. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. A property without a functioning heating system would present an excess cold hazard, which poses a risk of harm to the occupiers. The principle underlying the HHSRS is that any residential premises should provide a safe healthy environment for any potential occupier or visitor.
14. On 4 February 2021, the resident told the landlord that he had no heating in his property. The associated record states “please inspect and rectify”. The record was marked complete on 25 February 2021. There are no inspection records or details to show a visit was conducted.
15. On 3 May 2023, the landlord asked the heating contractor about the visit in 2021. The contractor confirmed that it had visited the resident’s property on 1 March 2021. It advised that the resident had told the engineer that “others” had surveyed the property and the “matter was in hand”. However, neither the contractor nor the landlord has provided a repair record or contemporaneous note to support the statement.
16. The fact that the landlord had to make enquiries with its contractor about the matter is evidence of poor record keeping. It is reasonable to expect the landlord to have information readily available in its own repair logs so that it can clarify or follow up on aspects of a repair. Not doing so is evidence that the landlord did not appropriately record or closely monitor the work its contractors were doing at the resident’s property.
17. On 3 May 2023, the heating contractor told the landlord it would arrange another survey of the resident’s property. The appointment was arranged for 19 May 2023 and communicated to the resident in the stage 1 response on 10 May 2023. The evidence indicates the survey went ahead, but there are no records detailing the findings or what work was required. This is an additional record keeping failure.
18. The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will complete non-urgent repairs within 20 working days. Recognising the already significant delays, and the landlord’s acknowledgement in the complaint response on 10 May 2024 that the radiators were necessary, we would have expected it to have completed the work in line with its repairs policy.
19. On both 9 September 2023 and 1 December 2023, the resident told the landlord that the heating works identified in the stage 1 complaint response had not taken place. The ongoing delay was unreasonable. In addition, the resident had told the landlord that he had diabetes and that the lack of heating was impacting his health. Inappropriately, there is no indication that the landlord had regard to this important information.
20. When requesting evidence for this investigation, we asked the landlord to detail the resident’s vulnerabilities. It advised he had none. This is a significant record keeping failure that would have influenced the landlord’s assessment of risk.
21. In its stage 2 complaint response on 15 December 2023, the landlord said it would install the radiators on 19 December 2023. The resident reports the radiators were installed but did not work. He said he told the operative at the time, and they confirmed they would record it in their report to the landlord. The newly installed radiators not working would likely have caused the resident significant frustration as well as inconvenience over the Christmas period.
22. The resident reported that nobody came to fix the radiators. On 21 February 2024, he told the landlord that the radiators were still not working and that the radiator in the bathroom had fallen off the wall. He informed us that the contractor returned in March 2024 and told him that the radiators were poor quality and needed to be replaced.
23. The resident said that he continually contacted the landlord about the lack of heating but that it told him to speak to the contractor. This was unreasonable and a failure of the landlord to follow up on substandard repairs for which it was ultimately responsible. More frustrating for the resident was that when he did speak to the contractor, it referred him back to the landlord.
24. The resident confirmed that the contractor installed the new radiators in June 2025. This was 4 years and 4 months after he had first raised the issue with the landlord. We acknowledge that the landlord had provided the resident with convector heaters prior to 2021. However, this type of heater would only be considered suitable as a short-term measure or as a secondary heat source.
25. The HHSRS identifies an “inappropriate or inefficient [heating] system” as a factor increasing the likelihood of an excess cold hazard occurring. Additionally, the Decent Homes Standard requires a home to provide a reasonable degree of thermal comfort through the provision of an efficient, well maintained heating system. Convector heaters would not be classed as an efficient heating system and would not provide the degree of thermal comfort required by the standard.
26. This was evidenced in the resident’s email to the landlord in May 2023. He said he had been suffering with extreme cold that significantly impacted upon his diabetes, forcing him to stay with his parents for 2 weeks in December 2022.
27. Due to the above failures and the excessive timeframes involved, we have found severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the heating repairs.
28. In its complaint responses the landlord offered the resident £950 compensation for the time, trouble, delays, distress and inconvenience associated with the heating and bathroom repairs. It did not clarify what portion of the compensation applied to each complaint point. We have therefore assumed an equal 50% split, which is £475.
29. Given the timeframes involved, the landlord’s failure to take account of the resident’s vulnerability and the errors highlighted above, we have made an additional award of £525 compensation for distress and inconvenience.
30. In addition, due to the loss of amenity, we have made an order for the landlord to repay a proportion of the resident’s rent for the winter months between February 2021 and June 2025. This is based on a weekly rent of £116.32 for 2020/2021, £117.82 for 2021/2022, £122.21 for 2022/2023, £129.83 for 2023/2024 and £139.83 for 2024/2025 for 879 days.
31. The additional amount of compensation we have ordered is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website), which sets out our approach to compensation. The remedies guidance recommends awards of this level where there has been a serious failure by the landlord which had a significant impact on the resident.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the leak.
Finding	Severe maladministration

32. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the resident’s tenancy agreement places a duty on the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property.
33. The resident informed the landlord on 23 February 2021 that he had a leak in his roof that was affecting his bathroom ceiling. As with the heating issue above, the initial record was marked as complete on 25 February 2021. The landlord has not provided any records to show that it attended the resident’s property or undertook any repairs.
34. The resident raised the issue again in his complaint on 10 May 2023. In its complaint response the landlord said it had “attended to inspect the damage several times but failed to arrange the works”, despite the resident chasing it up. This demonstrates the landlord’s failure to comply with the requirements of relevant legislation and its contractual obligation in the resident’s tenancy agreement.
35. The landlord has not provided any of the inspection records from the visits it refers to, raising further concerns with its record keeping.
36. In its stage 1 response, the landlord advised it would trace and remedy the roof leak on 19 May 2023. It said it would then conduct the subsequent repairs to the bathroom ceiling and extractor fan on 5 June 2023. Due to the landlord’s poor record keeping, it is not clear if the roof was inspected on 19 May 2023. The records indicate that the repair visit scheduled for the 5 June 2023 was cancelled due to the operative’s van breaking down.
37. Later records cast doubt on the reason for the cancellation and the events that followed. A record from 17 August 2023 states that the appointment on 5 June 2023 was ‘no access’ and rebooked for 20 June 2023. In a later note, as part of the complaint investigation, the contractor advised that the work scheduled for 5 June 2023 did not go ahead as the leak had not yet been fixed, which made it inappropriate to conduct the internal repairs. The records show that the appointment for 20 June 2023 had to be confirmed with the resident. There is no evidence it was, which indicates poor record keeping and communication. This led to a further no-access appointment, resulting in additional unnecessary delays.
38. In its stage 2 response, the landlord said it would attend on 19 and 21 December 2023 to repair the roof and conduct the bathroom repairs. The records are not clear, but the landlord confirmed in an internal email on 8 January 2024 that the appointment on 21 December 2023 did not go ahead. In an email to his MP, the resident said he waited at home on the day but nobody arrived.
39. The landlord failed to adhere to the guidance in our spotlight report on damp and mould (published October 2021), which required landlords to deal with such issues in a timely manner. The delay would have likely left the resident feeling that his complaint was not a priority for the landlord.
40. The landlord has also not been able to show that it complied with its own damp and mould policy, which required a surveyor to attend to inspect the premises and produce a report in relation to damp and condensation.
41. The records provided by the landlord indicate that the works to the fix the leak and repair the bathroom began in April 2024 and were completed in June 2024. The delay was unreasonable and significantly exceeded the 20-day timescale for anytime repairs outlined in the landlord’s repairs policy. It also demonstrates that it failed to deliver on commitments made in both complaint responses. The landlord did not demonstrate learning from its mistakes and did not put things right for the resident.
42. As outlined above, the landlord’s compensation for the delay, time, trouble, distress and inconvenience associated with the leak was £475. However, given the extended timeframes, we do not consider the compensation was sufficient. We have therefore made an additional award of £325. As above, this amount is in line with our remedies guidance.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint.
Finding	Reasonable redress

43. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints procedure. The timeframes in its procedure mirror those in our Complaint Handling Code. The Code says stage 1 responses must be sent within 10 working days, and stage 2 responses within 20 working days.
44. There was a short delay in the landlord acknowledging the resident’s complaint. In its stage 1 response it apologised and offered £50 compensation, which was reasonable.
45. The landlord missed several opportunities to escalate the resident’s complaint after he had communicated his dissatisfaction on 10 May 2023 and 1 September 2023. It also delayed in paying the resident the compensation offered in the stage 1 response. In its stage 2 response it offered an additional £150 compensation for its complaint handling errors. The amount was reasonable.
46. The landlord’s failure to deliver on the commitments made in its complaint responses has been dealt with in the previous complaint points.
47. Aside from the delays, there were no other issues with the landlord’s complaint handling. We have therefore made a finding of reasonable redress.

Learning

Knowledge and information management (record keeping)

48. The issues with the landlord’s record keeping have been a contributing factor to our finding of severe maladministration in both complaint points. The landlord did not provide records for the majority of the inspections that took place. Also, records that were present were contradictory and confusing. We are aware that this case is old and the landlord may have taken action to improve its record keeping as recommended in our special investigation report. Nonetheless, it may be helpful for it to review the record keeping errors highlighted here to facilitate further improvement.

Communication

49. From the available records, it appears the communication was poor. This is especially so in relation to the resident being passed between the landlord and heating contractor. In such instances, frustration may have been avoided if the landlord had accepted its responsibility to follow up on repairs and kept the resident informed.