From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

London Borough of Islington (202407787)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202407787

London Borough of Islington

18 August 2025

 

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:

a        Reports of repair issues with the boiler and thermostat.

b        Reports of draughty and loose windows.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the property, which is a second-floor flat owned by the landlord.
  2. The resident first reported having no heating or hot water on 8 November 2023. The landlord attended on the same day and said the boiler was in good condition and safe to use. It attended to another fault and completed a temporary repair on 11 November 2023. During this visit it found it needed to install a condensation pipe and a carpenter to remove kitchen units for this. She made further reports of similar issues in January 2024.
  3. On 23 January and 5 February 2024, the resident reported to the landlord that all her windows were whistling and draughty. It inspected the windows on 12 February 2024 and found them well sealed with no gaps. She made a further report about the condition of the frames on 16 April 2024.
  4. The resident complained to the landlord on 17 April 2024. She said she had been without heating since November 2023 following failed repair appointments. She was concerned about the impact of this on her child. She also said she was scared the windows would fall out due to an issue with the fittings.
  5. The landlord sent a stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 2 May 2024. It provided a history of boiler repair works and said it had scheduled an appointment for 30 May 2024 to complete carpentry works. It raised pending works to repair the boiler following this. It said it tried to attend a scheduled appointment to assess the window frames on 2 May 2024, but it could not access the property. It apologised for the inconvenience caused and offered £499.96 compensation, made up of:
    1. £150 for inconvenience.
    2. £100 for distress.
    3. £249.96 for the delay completing boiler repairs between December 2023 and May 2024. It calculated this at £41.66 per month for six months.
  6. On 2 May 2024 the resident escalated her complaint. She was not satisfied with the offer of compensation.
  7. The landlord responded to the resident at stage two of its complaints process on 22 May 2024. It visited on 9 May 2024 but she did not answer the door so it could not assess the window frames. It made another appointment for a carpenter to visit on 30 May 2024, following which it would book an appointment to repair the boiler. It increased its compensation offer to £650, made up of:
    1. £300 for inconvenience.
    2. £100 for distress as offered at stage 1.
    3. £249.96 for the delay in completing boiler repairs as offered at stage 1.
  8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response to her complaint and asked us to investigate. She wants the landlord to complete prompt and satisfactory repairs. She also wants the landlord to increase its compensation.
  9. The landlord sent the resident an additional offer of £200 compensation on 29 April 2025. This was £50 per week to cover the 4 weeks it took to complete boiler repairs after its stage 2 response. This brought its total offer across all responses to £850.

Assessment and findings

Boiler repairs

  1. The landlord attended within 24 hours of the resident’s first reports of no heating or hot water on 8 and 11 November 2023.This followed its repairs guidance for an urgent response within 24 hours.
  2. The repair records from 11 November 2023 said the landlord completed a temporary repair to the boiler. It said the resident was waiting for it to complete further works. It did not specify the nature of these works nor arrange any other works. Its housing repairs guide says it should have made a new appointment to complete the repair.
  3. On 4 December 2023, the resident reported intermittent problems with the heating and hot water. The landlord attended on the same day, but she did not answer the door. A landlord cannot complete a repair if it cannot access a property, but it was not clear if the landlord told the resident about the visit before it attended.
  4. On the 19 January 2024, the resident reported another issue with intermittent heating and hot water, the landlord attended the same day. It found she was still waiting for it to remove kitchen units so its contractor could install a condense pipe. It spoke to its contractor on 5 February 2024, who said they were still waiting for it to raise the works. It asked its repairs team to raise these works on the same day but there was no evidence it did this until the resident’s complaint of 17 April 2024. At this stage, the landlord had already passed its 20-working day response for routine repairs.
  5. In her complaint, the resident said issues with the heating and hot water system had been ongoing since November 2023. She reported issues and had a visit from the landlord before complaining, but the problem was unresolved. She felt it did not care about the impact of the problem on her young son.
  6. Following the resident’s complaint, the landlord raised works to remove the kitchen units on 19 April 2024, but it could not attend until 30 May 2024. It remained outside of its repairs policy response times. However, it was a positive step forward to rectifying the ongoing issues.
  7. In its stage 1 complaint response of 2 May 2024, the landlord acknowledged it had not completed boiler repairs because it needed to send a carpenter to remove kitchen units. It made an appointment for 30 May 2024 and said it would complete boiler repairs afterwards. It apologised for causing inconvenience and frustration and acknowledged the impact on the resident and her son. It offered £499.96 compensation, but it wrote the incorrect total amount in its response.
  8. The landlord’s complaint response was honest and factual. Its compensation offers for distress and inconvenience were in line with its compensation policy. This allows for payments between £100 and £300 based on professional judgement. Its offer of £41.66 for each month of delay exceeded its policy amount of £25 per month. Overall, it was a good response, and it offered appropriate redress.
  9. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s communication about the 30 May appointment and its compensation offer. She requested it escalate her complaint on 2 May 2024.
  10. In the landlord’s stage 2 response of 22 May 2024, it increased its compensation offer for inconvenience by £150. This brought its total offer to £650. It confirmed the appointment for 30 May 2024. This was a brief but appropriate response given these were the reasons for the resident’s escalation request. The offer of compensation was fair and in keeping with its policy.
  11. The landlord made the resident a further compensation offer of £200 on 29 April 2025, after she brought her complaint to us. There were clear and obvious failings in its handling of boiler repairs but the remedies it offered (apology, compensation, and a date for repairs) were in line with its compensation policy. As such, we have found reasonable redress and recommend the landlord pays this to the resident if it has not done so already.

Windows

  1. The resident reported a heavy draught and whistling sounds from the windows on 23 January 2024. The landlord was unable to contact her to arrange an appointment and cancelled the works order. This was a fair approach as it was not an emergency repair.
  2. After the resident’s follow-up report of draughty windows throughout the property on 5 February 2024, the landlord inspected on 12 February 2024. It found the windows well sealed on the outside with no gaps and could not hear the whistling sound she reported. Its inspection was within its repairs guidance timescale of 20-working days.
  3. The resident reported loose and shaky wooden window frames on 16 April 2024. She included these concerns in her complaint of 17 April 2024, saying she feared the windows would fall out. It arranged with her to attend on 2 May 2024 in the morning and afternoon, but it could not access the property. This appointment was within its 20-working day timescale.
  4. In the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, it explained its inspection findings. It said it could not access the resident’s property to inspect the window frames on 2 May 2024, but it would contact her to rearrange the appointment. Its response was fair and appropriate.
  5. The landlord inspected the windows again on 10 May 2024. It found an issue with faulty friction hinges on 9 separate windows. It completed the repairs on 20 May 2024, within 20-working days.
  6. The landlord did not include the date it completed the works in its stage 2 response. It incorrectly said she would need to reschedule an appointment from 9 May 2024.This error was easily avoidable if it had checked its records before writing the response but had little impact on the resident or its overall response.
  7. The resident reported 2 separate window issues within a 4-month period and, the landlord dealt with each report within its repairs timescales. Any delays were due to its inability to access the property and not within its control. As such, we find no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of draughty and loose windows.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered redress to the complainant. In our opinion it satisfactorily resolves the complaint about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repair issues with the boiler and thermostat.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of draughty and loose windows.

Recommendations

  1. We recommend the landlord pay the total compensation offer of £850 for its handling of boiler repairs if it has not done so already. The offer recognised genuine elements of service failure, and we make the reasonable redress finding on that basis.