London Borough of Hillingdon (202105216)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202105216

London Borough of Hillingdon

20 April 2023

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 repairs to the resident’s boiler.

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord.
3. The resident reported a loss of heating and hot water on 4 November 2020. The landlord’s repair records show that the resident subsequently made 11 further reports of boiler breakdowns and various repairs were completed.
4. Following correspondence from the resident, this Service contacted the landlord on 3 June 2021 and advised it to raise a complaint regarding the handling of the repairs to the boiler. The resident said that the ongoing boiler issues were impacting on her health conditions and she was also concerned about increased energy costs due to using electric heaters and heating up water on the stove.
5. In the landlord’s final response to the complaint, it outlined that it had received reports of 12 breakdowns over the last 12-month period, and on each occasion, the boiler was repaired within its five working day timeframe. It noted it had experienced difficulties in identifying the cause of the breakdowns and it had sought advice from the boiler manufacturer. It stated it had a responsibility to repair the boiler, until it was no longer economically viable to do so and once this became apparent, the boiler was replaced on 23 July 2021. It apologised for the inconvenience caused and offered £100 compensation.
6. In the resident’s complaint to this Service, she said she remained dissatisfied as she wanted additional compensation for the length of time the issue was ongoing, as it caused distress and inconvenience and impacted her health. She said she had to use inconvenient and costly measures to access heating and hot water. She also said she thought the landlord had overlooked the evidence she had provided.

Assessment and findings

7. In accordance with the landlord’s repair policy, it is responsible for repairs to fixtures and fittings for heating and water, including a total or partial loss of heating and hot water. The landlord’s website states that it considers “no heating in cold weather and there is no other form of heating available” as an emergency repair. Its target response timeframe for repairs are four hours for an emergency, one working day for urgent repairs and 20 working days for routine repairs. As a result, the landlord was obliged to complete the repairs to the resident’s boiler within the relevant timeframe.
8. The resident initially reported a loss of heating and hot water on 4 November 2020 and a contractor attended on 6 November 2020. The landlord’s repairs policy does not specify what the conditions are for “cold weather”, but in accordance with the right to repair scheme a loss of heating or hot water between 31 October and 1 May should be attended within one working day. As a result, the landlord failed to attend within a reasonable timeframe. This was particularly difficult for the resident, as she had outlined that her disability was impacted by the loss of hot water. However, in the appointment record, the contractor stated that the boiler was working on arrival, so the resident may have been able to reset the boiler in the interim.
9. The landlord’s records show the resident made a further three reports of loss of heating and hot water between 27 November 2020 and 16 December 2020. There was an intermittent fault with the condenser pump, and on each occasion a contractor attended within one working day, which was a reasonable timeframe. The resident subsequently did not make a further report of boiler repair issues until 5 February 2021 and repairs were completed to the immersion heater. A work order for a full investigation was ordered on 22 February 2021. Given that by that stage the resident had reported the boiler had broken down on five occasions, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have completed a holistic inspection of the boiler at this stage, as this may have prevented multiple appointments for various repair issues, and decreased the impact on the resident.
10. This Service’s spotlight report on “complaints about heating, hot water and energy in social housing”, (published on our website) states that the landlord should ensure contractors have the “sufficient skills, tools and parts to undertake the work required”. As there had been numerous attempted repairs, with limited long–term success, it was reasonable that in February 2021 specialist contractors attended and the landlord contacted the boiler manufacturer for support with the repairs. Following the appointment with the specialist contractor on 25 February 2021, repairs were carried out to the personal computer board and the electrodes and the resident did not report any further issues until 15 May 2021, thus the actions taken had been successful for almost a three-month period.
11. Following the resident’s report of a further boiler breakdown on 15 May 2021, there were subsequently seven appointments between 18 May 2021 and 7 July 2021 to complete replacements of the pump, filter and valve and repairs to the float switch assembly, seal and overheat stat. Again, when reported, repairs were attended within a reasonable timeframe. It is important to note that social landlords have limited resources and are expected to manage these resources responsibly, to the benefit of all their residents. As a result, it was reasonable to some extent that the landlord advised it would attempt to complete repairs, unless it was not economically viable to do so. However, if it is clear that repairs have been attempted on numerous occasions but have not been successful, or similar repairs are repeatedly completed, the landlord should consider replacing the boiler. In this case, the contractors completed extensive repairs (albeit repairing different elements of the boiler) but the boiler continued to regularly break down. As a result, it was reasonable that the boiler was replaced on 23 July 2021, providing a full resolution to the issue.
12. Part of a landlord’s handling of extended repairs should be a consideration of possible interim actions to mitigate the impact on the resident. In this case, following her initial report the resident had advised she had access to electric heaters and was heating water using the stove when there was a complete loss of hot water in the property. The contractor also completed repairs to the immersion heater, so the resident did not have to rely on the boiler for use of hot water, thus reducing the overall impact of the boiler breakdowns. The resident was also able to reset the boiler the majority of the time the repair issues were ongoing. It is acknowledged that resetting the boiler would cause inconvenience to the resident; however, ultimately, it meant she had access to heating. Despite this, it is important to note that temporary solutions should not be relied upon in place of a permanent repair.
13. In her complaint, the resident raised concerns that the use of electric heaters and heating up water using her stove had led to additional energy costs. There is no evidence to suggest the landlord addressed her concerns within its response. In line with this Service’s remedies guidance (published on our website), landlords should consider offering compensation for quantifiable financial loss that has been caused by the landlord’s maladministration. However, in this case, it has been determined that the landlord generally acted in line with its repair obligations, so it would not necessarily be obliged to award compensation. Regardless, the landlord should contact the resident to confirm its position regarding the issue, in order to reasonably manage her expectations.
14. This Service’s spotlight report on heating and hot water states that “landlords should be particularly aware of the needs of vulnerable residents and respond accordingly”. While the Ombudsman is unable to assess the impact of the repair issues on the resident’s health, we will take this into account the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her health. The Ombudsman recognises that some residents’ circumstances mean that they are more affected by landlords’ actions or inactions than others. In this case, the resident had advised the landlord that she relied on the use of heating and hot water as a pain management tool. The landlord would be expected to consider the resident’s health conditions when determining how best to proceed with the repair. In this case, the landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s individual reports. There is also no evidence to suggest that a boiler replacement was deemed as necessary at an earlier date, so it was reasonable that repairs were attempted first. The boiler breakdowns were also intermittent, in most cases the resident was able to reset the boiler and interim solutions were in place to ensure that the resident had access to alternative heating and hot water sources when the boiler was not functioning. As a result, although it is acknowledged that the boiler repair issues would have caused greater distress and inconvenience to the resident in view of her circumstances, ultimately the landlord took reasonable steps to mitigate the impact while working towards a permanent repair.
15. In the resident’s complaint to this Service, she stated she remained dissatisfied as she did not think the landlord had considered the account of events she had provided. When investigating a complaint, the landlord will typically rely on its own records to assess whether its actions taken were reasonable, but it should also consider any information provided by the resident. Although the resident’s account provided a greater level of detail than the contractor’s records, this Service has found no significant discrepancies between the two versions of events. Therefore, while it may have been helpful for it to do so, it was reasonable that the landlord did not refer directly to the resident’s account in its response.
16. The landlord offered £100 compensation due to the inconvenience caused to the resident by the repairs. In accordance with this Service’s remedies guidance, awards of £50-£100 are appropriate in cases where there has been a minor failure by the landlord. The landlord generally handled the repairs appropriately; however, it failed to respond to the resident’s initial report within a reasonable timeframe. It is also acknowledged that multiple appointments and the need to consistently reset the boiler would have caused inconvenience to the resident. In view of this, the level of compensation offered by the landlord was appropriate

Determination

17. In accordance with paragraph 53 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about the landlord’s handling of the repairs to the resident’s boiler satisfactorily.

Recommendations

18. If it has not done so already, the landlord should pay the resident £100 as offered in its final complaint response.
19. It is recommended that the landlord contacts the resident to confirm its position on her concerns regarding increased energy bills.