Lambeth Council (202310071)

Back to Top

 

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202310071

Lambeth Council

17 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 handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of boiler repairs required in the property.
    2. Associated formal complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is the secure tenant of the landlord which is a local authority. The property is a 2-bedroom property in a block of flats.
  2. On 12 March 2023, the resident complained to the landlord through her member of parliament (MP) that she was unhappy about the length of time it took to repair her boiler. She said that she requested a repair on 6 December 2022, and it did not replace the boiler until 13 February 2023. She also said she made a formal complaint on 15 February 2023, and it did not respond.
  3. In its stage 1 response of 28 March 2023, the landlord apologised and acknowledged the frustration and upset the situation would have caused the resident, especially as it happened over the Christmas period. It said that the cause of delays was the requirement of further investigations and ordering of parts.
  4. The resident requested escalation of her complaint on 16 April 2023. She said that the landlord had not responded to her concerns around how it managed her complaint, and she did not agree that it needed to complete further investigations before it finished the works.
  5. In its stage 2 response of 25 May 2023, the landlord stated that it attempted to repair the boiler before realising that it was beyond repair. It said that on 22 December 2022, its engineer noted that the water temperature was not responding at full capacity and at that point it should have prioritised the repair. It acknowledged and apologised for the delay in its complaint handling and in completing the works and it offered her compensation of £405.
  6. The resident brought her complaint to this Service as she was unhappy with the level of compensation offered. She agreed for this Service to mediate between her and the landlord. It agreed to offer additional compensation of £200 to resolve the complaint, bringing its total compensation offer to £605. The resident rejected this offer.

Assessment and findings

Reports of boiler repairs

  1. The landlord is responsible for boiler repairs under its policy and the tenancy agreement. Its repairs policy sets out time limits for completing repairs at its properties. It should complete priority 1 emergency repairs within 24 hours and priority 2 repairs within 2 working days. It should complete priority 3 repairs within 5 working days and priority 4 repairs within 30 working days. Priority 5 should take no longer than 90 working days.
  2. The resident made her initial report about having limited heating and no hot water on 6 December 2022. The landlord’s internal correspondence shows it attended within 24 hours in accordance with its repairs policy. Its records show that it ordered parts and attended on 22 December to complete repairs. However, during this visit on 22 December 2022, it discovered that it required a further part, and it returned to fit this part on 26 January 2023.
  3. After the landlord completed the repair on 26 January 2023, it discovered that the boiler was still working at a low efficiency level so it decided that it should replace the boiler. It arranged for a surveyor to take measurements on 1 February 2023 and installed a new boiler on 13 February 2023.
  4. It is understandable that there might be some delays in completing works when parts and further investigations are required. In these cases, this Service would expect the landlord to keep the resident updated about the status of the repair. In this instance, it did not keep her adequately informed of the repair. There were up to 4 missed appointments between 19 December 2022 and 25 January 2023. This was a failing and not in line with the expectations of this Service.
  5. The resident reported that she had to boil water multiple times a day to bath and wash the dishes as well as having to constantly burn energy to try and keep her home warm. The landlord stated in its internal correspondence that when it attended on 22 December 2022, although the boiler was working, the heating and hot water were not working to the correct temperatures.
  6. The Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 introduced a requirement that rented properties are fit for human habitation at the start of a tenancy. This means, among other things that they must have sufficient heating and hot and cold water and be free from hazards. A list of hazards is set out in the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004. This Act requires landlords to assess hazards and risks within their rented properties. Appropriate heating and hot water are included in this list.
  7. The resident did not have access to adequate heating and hot water for a period of 69 days. This was a failing and not in line with the landlord’s obligation under the Act. Furthermore, as it knew that the boiler was not working to the correct standard, it should have prioritised this repair and attempted to complete it within its high priority time limit of 30 days. However, as stated above, it did not complete this repair until 13 February 2023. This was 39 days outside its repairs policy timescale. By not giving adequate priority to the works, it is clear that it did not fully consider the impact on her. This was an inadequate response to the resident’s complaint.
  8. Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, this Service will consider whether the redress offered by it (including an apology and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, this Service considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  9. The landlord, in its stage 2 response, apologised and acknowledged the distress and inconvenience the situation caused the resident. It apologised for missing appointments and said it should have prioritised her repair. It offered £405 compensation for delays in completing the repairs and its complaint handling. During the mediation process, it increased this offer to £605 compensation. It did not state how much of the compensation offered was in relation to the delays and how much of it was for its complaint handling failures.
  10. While this Service appreciates that the delays in completing the boiler repairs and the circumstances surrounding this would have been distressing for the resident, the landlord’s offer of redress was reasonable and in line with the remedies guidance for maladministration published by this Service.
  11. We, therefore, find that the landlord has made an offer of reasonable redress, prior to which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion satisfactorily resolves the complaint.

Complaint handling

  1. At the time of the complaint, the landlord operated a 3-stage complaint handling process. It stated that it should acknowledge complaints at all stages within 3 working days. It should respond to complaints within 15 working days at stage 1 and stage 2 and within 20 working days at stage 3. The landlord currently operates a 2-stage complaints process in line with this Service complaint handling code.
  2. The resident reported that she made her initial complaint on 15 February 2023, however, she did not receive an acknowledgement or a response by 12 March 2023, when she approached her MP for help in bringing her complaint to this Service.
  3. This Service has not seen a copy of the resident’s complaint. However, the landlord did not challenge her reports. According to its policy, it should have acknowledged her complaint within 3 days and responded within 15 working days. It had not responded to her complaint by 12 March 2023, this was 10 days outside of its complaints policy.
  4. On 28 March, the landlord issued a response to the resident’s MP. The stage 1 response issued to the resident’s MP did not address all the complaint points she raised, neither did it include any information on how she could escalate her complaint.
  5. Paragraph 6.7 of this Service’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) states that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law, and good practice where appropriate. Its failure to do so in this case would have led the resident to believe that it had overlooked her concerns. Thereby causing her unnecessary distress and inconvenience.
  6. The resident requested escalation of her complaint on 16 April 2023. Again, the landlord did not acknowledge this complaint within 3 days or respond within 15 days in accordance with its policy. It issued its stage 2 response on 25 May 2023. This was 24 days outside its complaints policy timeline.
  7. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged and apologised for its complaint handling failures. It said the failures were an oversight due to heavy workload during that period. It said it would complete some learning to help it improve its services. As stated above it offered £405 in compensation and increased this amount to £605 during mediation.
  8. This Service concludes that the landlord’s apology and offer of £605 in recognition of its failings is in line with this guidance. It therefore offered reasonable redress for its failures in this case.
  9. The Ombudsman completed a special investigation on this landlord and published a report in January 2024 in which we reviewed its complaints handling and made recommendations which also referred to its record keeping and handling of repairs. The Ombudsman has therefore not made further orders around these aspects of service in this report but expects the landlord to take all relevant learning points from this case into account in its overall reviews of complaint handling, record keeping, and its repairs service.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves its handling of boiler repairs satisfactorily.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves its complaint handling satisfactorily.

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord pays the resident the £605 compensation it previously offered (if it has not yet done so). The finding of reasonable redress is on the basis that this payment is made to the resident. This payment must be paid directly to the resident and not her rent account.