London Borough of Hounslow (202120565)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202120565

Hounslow Council

15 March 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 concerns:
   1. How the landlord handled the replacement of the boiler in the resident’s property.
   2. The associated formal complaint into this matter.

Background

2. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, which is a local authority. The property is a flat in a communal building. The resident moved into the property in October 2020 via a mutual exchange.
3. The landlord’s records state that the gas was turned on in the property on 28 October 2020 and that the operative who attended informed it that the boiler in the property was beyond repair and required replacing. The landlord arranged for a survey and safety check to go ahead on 30 October 2020, then raised a work order to install a new boiler. The work to replace the boiler went ahead on 9 and 10 November 2020.
4. The resident contacted this Service on 7 December 2021 to state his dissatisfaction with how the landlord had handled the boiler replacement. He described the elements of his complaint as:
   1. When he moved into the property, the boiler was not working and required replacement. The temporary heating provided by the landlord was not adequate and as a result, he moved out of the property until the new boiler was installed.
   2. During the period he was not in the property, he contracted Covid-19. This had resulted in long-term health problems that had affected his work and caused financial difficulties.
   3. He requested to raise a formal complaint into the matter in March 2021. However, the landlord did not respond.
   4. He was dissatisfied with how the landlord responded to the issue and how he was treated by the landlord before and after the new boiler was installed.
5. This Service passed on the resident’s concerns to the landlord, who opened a formal complaint into the issues raised. In its complaint responses, the landlord:
   1. Explained that as part of the mutual exchange, it was the incoming resident’s responsibility to arrange a gas safety check and for the gas to be turned back on.
   2. Stated that when it was informed by the operative that the boiler required replacement, it arranged for a new boiler to installed. The work was completed within nine days, which was inside its target time of 14 days for this type of repair.
   3. Noted that it had amended the start date of the tenancy from 19 October 2020 to 16 November 2020 so that the resident was not liable for any rent while the boiler replacement was outstanding.
   4. Stated that when it was informed by the resident that he was experiencing financial difficulties, it provided information on what benefits were available and referred him to its money advisor team, who provided support between 11 May 2021 to 9 August 2021.
   5. Disputed that it was responsible for the resident contracting Covid-19 during the period he was not staying in the property.
6. In referring the case to this Service, the resident described the outstanding issues of the complaint as the length of time it took the landlord to open a formal complaint and how it handled the boiler replacement. As a resolution to the complaint, the resident requested compensation in recognition of the inconvenience that the matter had caused him and to cover the loss of wages he experienced as a result of contracting long Covid.

Assessment and findings

Relevant policies and procedures

7. The mutual exchange property condition form sets out the incoming tenant’s responsibilities when accepting the property. The form, in part, states that “the incoming tenant must accept the property in its present condition (including any structural alterations, unless found to be unsafe). This includes porches and extensions”. In regard to gas safety checks, the form states that “gas and electrical checks are to be carried out when the new tenancy begins. It is the new tenant’s responsibility to contact [the landlord’s heating contractor] to arrange this on the moving in date.
8. Section 4.3 of the tenancy agreement sets out the landlord’s repair responsibilities. This, in part, states that the landlord will “keep in repair, the structure and exterior of the property including drains, gutters and external pipes. We will keep in repair and working order any installations we have provided for space heating and water heating. We will keep in repair and working order any installations we have provided for the supply of water, gas and electricity and sanitation including basins, sinks, baths and toilets”.
9. The landlord’s website describes its repair categories and timescales. The landlord categorises its repair types as “Emergency” (respond within 24 hours), “Urgent” (complete within five days) and “Routine” (complete within 20 days). During the period when the boiler required replacement, the landlord’s services were restricted as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and national lockdowns. The landlord’s website advised its resident’s that as a result of these restrictions, it may not be able to meet its published timescales for non-emergency repairs.
10. The landlord operates a two-stage complaints process. When a complaint is received, the landlord aims to provide a response at stage one within 15 working days. If the complainant is dissatisfied with the response, they can request an escalation of the complaint to the next stage. The landlord will then undertake a review of the complaint and provide a stage two response within 20 working days. This will be the landlord’s final response to the complaint.
11. The landlord does not have a separate compensation policy. When providing evidence for this case, the landlord explained that it follows the Housing Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (which is available from our website) when calculating compensation offers.

Scope of investigation

12. As an element of his complaint, the resident held that the landlord was responsible for him contracting Covid-19 when he moved out of the property while waiting for the boiler to be replaced. The resident also stated that the landlord should be liable for the loss in earnings he experienced while recovering from long Covid. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments. However, it is beyond the remit of this Service to make a determination on whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions and the resident’s health. The resident therefore may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if he considers that his health has been affected by any action or lack thereof by the landlord. Whilst we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any errors by the landlord.

How the landlord handled the replacement of the boiler in the resident’s property

13. When informed by the operative who turned on the gas as to the condition of the boiler in the property, the landlord had a duty to respond to the issue in line with the obligations set out in the tenancy agreement and its published policies and procedures. Overall, the landlord responded to the report appropriately. Upon being informed of the condition of the boiler, the landlord arranged an inspection of the boiler the next day and then raised a work order to replace it. The work was completed inside its published timescale for a routine repair and also within the 14-day target that the landlord has stated it expects a boiler replacement to be completed.
14. The landlord also acted in line with its obligations set out in the mutual exchange property condition form detailed above. The inspection of the property prior to the exchange taking place is described in the form. The staff member who undertook the inspection stated that “[the] flat [is] in good condition. Tenant reports no electrical or gas tests have been done. This form states gas and electric test are for the new tenant to arrange”. The resident signed the form, stating, in part, that:
    1. “I/We am/are aware of and accept the conditions that apply to Mutual exchange.
    2. I/We accept the property in its current condition.
    3. I/We understand that a gas and electrical safety check must be arranged for the property. I/We will contact the [heating contractor] directly immediately following sign-up to arrange this as a priority for the day I/we move.”
15. Therefore, there is no evidence of service failure by the landlord in how it handled the boiler replacement. It correctly carried out the inspection of the property prior to the exchange taking place. The resident was informed that it would be his responsibility to arrange for the gas to be turned on. This inspection would therefore not have assessed the condition of the boiler. Once the landlord was informed of the boiler’s condition, it arranged for an inspection of it within 24 hours and installed a new boiler in the property within its published timescale for a routine repair.
16. The resident has requested that the landlord pay compensation for the inconvenience that having the boiler replaced caused. As part of the boiler replacement, the landlord agreed to change the tenancy commencement date so that the resident was not liable for any rent until the new boiler was fitted. The property was without a working boiler from 29 October 2020 to 10 November 2020. The landlord waived rent payments from 19 October 2020 to 16 November 2020. While the evidence provided does not suggest that the property was uninhabitable during this period, there was a clear loss of facilities due to the faulty boiler. It was therefore appropriate for the landlord to recognise this inconvenience to the resident by waiving rent payments and in light of the length of time it waived the rent, which was over two weeks longer than the period the boiler was inoperable, the level of redress it provided to the resident was more than reasonable in the circumstances. As previously stated, it is not within the remit of this Service to consider compensation for the resident’s health and any financial difficulties that this caused.

The landlord’s complaint handling

17. The landlord’s records show that the resident called it on 4 November 2020 and requested to raise a complaint into the boiler issues. Internal landlord emails at this time described the telephone conversions it had with the resident. While the landlord did respond to the issues the resident raised, a formal complaint was not opened.
18. On 4 February 2021, the resident wrote to the landlord’s complaints team and requested to raise a formal complaint. The resident set out the elements of the complaint and what outcome he sought as a resolution. The landlord replied on the same day. It acknowledged the resident’s request and stated it would respond in writing by 15 February 2021. The landlord did not open a formal complaint. The resident wrote again on 17 February 2021 stating his dissatisfaction that he had not received a response from the landlord. A note on the landlord’s systems, added on 23 February 2021 stated that a staff member called and then wrote to the resident on 22 February 2021. The landlord has not provided any evidence of an email or call from 22 February 2021.
19. It was not until the intervention of this Service on 7 December 2021 that a formal complaint was opened by the landlord. In its complaint responses, the landlord provided a timeline of its contact with the resident. However, it did not explain why it had not opened a formal complaint despite several clear requests from the resident. Nor did it apologise to the resident or consider offering financial redress.
20. Therefore, there has been maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling and in order to fully resolve this element of the complaint, financial redress is warranted. This Service’s remedies guidance suggests a payment of £100 to £600 in cases of considerable service failure or maladministration. This includes distress and inconvenience, time and trouble, disappointment, loss of confidence, and delays in getting matters resolved. However, given that the delay in the response had no bearing on the issue complained of, it would therefore be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident £150 in recognition of the ten-month delay in opening a formal complaint following the email sent by the resident on 4 February 2021 and the time and inconvenience caused to the resident in having to chase the landlord and seek the assistance of this Service in order to have a complaint opened.
21. The stage two complaint response sent to the resident on 8 February 2022 incorrectly signposted the resident to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO). While this error did not cause any additional delay, as the resident had already been in contact with this Service prior to receiving the stage two response, it is recommended that the landlord review its complaint handling procedures to ensure that a complainant is signposted to the correct ombudsman service once its internal complaint process has been exhausted.

Determination

22. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of redress to the resident in respect of how it handled the replacement of the boiler in the resident’s property which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves this element of the complaint.
23. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders

24. For the service failure and reasons set out above, the landlord is ordered to pay to the resident £150. This payment should be made within four weeks of the date of this report. The landlord should update this Service when payment has been made

Recommendations

25. It is recommended that the landlord review its complaint handling procedures to ensure that a complainant is signposted to the correct ombudsman service once its internal complaint process has been exhausted.