London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202118974)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202118974

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

31 July 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of the lack of heating and hot water.
2. Various repair reports regarding the property.
3. Reports of fly-tipping.
4. Request to move to an alternative property.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy which commenced on 30 July 2021.
The property is described as an end of terrace three-bedroom house. The property is next to the communal bin store for a nearby block of flats. The property is opposite a play area.
The resident suffers from depression.
The tenancy agreement obliges the landlord to keep in repair and in working order all fixtures and fittings for the supply of water, gas and electricity. In addition, the tenancy agreement obliges the resident to provide access to the landlord to inspect the condition of the property or to carry out works to the property.
The landlord’s repair policy categories repairs into emergency or routine repairs. Emergency repairs will be completed within 24 hours and it will arrange a mutually convenient appointment with the resident for routine repairs.
The allocations and letting policy advises that it will carry out a risk assessment if it assesses that the property is not suitable for the incoming tenant. Also, the circumstances in which it will directly rehouse residents on an emergency, temporary or permanent basis.
The landlord’s estate management policy sets out that it carries out regular visual checks of its neighbourhoods. This is to ensure compliance with health and safety and to ensure the neighbourhood is maintained to a high standard.
The landlord’s anti-social behaviour policy (ASB) policy available online states that it considers rubbish or fly tipping of waste on its property or by its residents as fly tipping. Also, it does not consider “young people and/or children playing in authorised play areas as ASB.” It will take into account the vulnerability of the resident and other agencies who can supply support.
The landlord’s complaints policy sets out that it will respond to complaints within 10 working days at the first stage of its complaints procedures and within 20 working days at its final stage.
The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will pay £20 for each appointment that is not attended where 24 notice is not given to the resident. Also, discretionary compensation payment must consider the impact of any failure in its complaint handling and it will partly or fully offset its compensation awards against any debt owed including rent arrears.

Scope of complaint

Whilst this Service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint. These matters are better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim.

Summary of events

On 24 August 2021, the resident reported that the lock to the front door was faulty and that once the door was locked, it could not be opened from the inside. The landlord’s records show that it attended the same day and there was no access at the property.
The following day, 25 August 2021 the resident reported that the boiler was not working. It was noted that she had recently moved into the property. The repair was recorded as an emergency and completed on the same day.
The resident reported on 6 September 2021, 5 October 2021 and 11 October 2021 that she had no heating and hot water. With regard to the report on 5 October 2021, she advised that had just come out of the and the repair was completed on the same day. The repair reported on 11 October 2021 was completed on 13 October 2021.
The landlord’s records noted on 25 October 2021, that repairs were required to repair the shelf in the bathroom, the window frame and bathroom door. It was noted that the resident was not living in the property.
On 27 October 2021, 12 November 2021 and the 15 November 2021 the resident reported that she had no heating or hot water and that she was staying with friends as the property was too cold to live in. The landlord noted that the boiler was old, that the company was having difficulty sourcing parts and the resident was tearful on the call. The resident requested a new boiler or for the landlord to rehouse her as the anxiety was making her unwell. Furthermore, she would not be paying rent until the repairs to the property were resolved.
The landlord chased its gas contractor on 24 November 2021 and on 3 December 2021. On 5 December 2021, the gas contractors sent the resident a letter advising that it would attend on 8 December 2021 in the morning to repair the boiler.
The resident informed the landlord on 8 December 2021 that the heating and hot water was restored. In addition, the engineer had recommended that the boiler be changed. The resident reported cracks in the kitchen ceiling and that it appeared to be caving in. The internal door had a hole and she did not believe that the property was habitable. Furthermore, she had to leave her previous tenancy as her life was in danger. The current property did not have adequate security and there were “crackheads” in the areas. She expressed that she wanted to move.
On 13 December 2021, an inspection was raised for the kitchen ceiling. The notes stated that it was unclear whether the resident was reporting anti-social behaviour (ASB), however, the resident wanted to move. Therefore, information was to be provided on obtaining a mutual exchange. On 20 December 2021, an appointment was arranged for 11 January 2022 to repair the kitchen ceiling.
The resident reported on 23 December 2021 that young boys were gathered in front of the playground smoking weed and their presence scared her when she arrived and left the property. The resident questioned why she had been offered the property which was not suitable to live in. In addition, it had taken four months to repair the boiler and the crack in the ceiling was getting worse. In response, the landlord called the resident who advised that she had contracted pneumonia and was receiving treatment for depression. The landlord signposted the resident to the police to report the young people by the play area and noted that the resident was distressed during the conversation.
Later that day, (23 December 2021), the tenancy management officer called the resident to carry out a welfare check and signposted the resident to 101 regarding her mental health.
The following day (24 December 2021) during a telephone conversation with the landlord, the resident advised that there was a leak from the crack in the kitchen ceiling and that refuse was being dumped close to her front door which was becoming a health hazard. In addition, she had not been contacted by the lettings officer as she had been previously advised. She had been unwell since she moved into the property in August 2021 and had been unable to look for a property to move to. The resident also expressed her disappointment in the work carried out by the tiler as he had not removed the existing tiles but had covered them when replacing the shelf above the wash hand basin.
In response, the landlord advised that a surveyor would carry out an inspection in January 2022 and signposted the resident to the police to report the young people. It also informed the resident that it did not operate a transfer list, therefore, she would need to register for a mutual exchange and it would contact her on 30 December 2021. In addition, the landlord asked the resident whether she wanted to make a complaint.
On the same day, (24 December 2021), the landlord’s gas contractor provided a timeline of its contact. It informed the landlord that it attended on 16 September 2021 and it assessed that a part was required. On 23 September 2021 and 7 October 2021 there was no access when it attended and a no contact letter was left on 7 October 2021. On 8 December 2021, the part was fitted and the boiler was left working.
The landlord updated the resident on 30 December 2021 to advise that a plumber had attended before Christmas to remedy the leak to the kitchen ceiling. A further appointment had been arranged for 11 January 2022. It reiterated that if the resident wished to move, she needed to undertake a mutual exchange or home swap.
On 31 December 2021 and 15 January 2022, the resident’s daughter emailed the landlord to explain the resident’s circumstances and stated that no one had assisted them with the tenancy. She provided pictures of a door with a hole near the handle and a video of a tradesman repairing the shelf above the wash hand basin. She advised that the crack to the kitchen ceiling had not been resolved, that it had taken four months to repair the boiler and experienced two missed appointments when the gas contractors had not attended. She repeated that there were “dodgy characters” handing around the park in front of the property. She informed the landlord that her mother suffered from deep anxiety and depression and its decision to advise her to undertake a mutual exchange showed a lack of compassion as she could not manage the process. Furthermore, if the landlord did not arrange a transfer to an alternative property, her mother would consider taking legal action.
On 16 January 2022, the resident reported that she was locked in the property as the front door lock had jammed. The lock was repaired the same day.
The resident complained on 17 January 2022 that she was locked into the property for two hours the previous day. She advised that she had to use the kitchen window to leave the property and that this was not the first time that this had occurred. She maintained that the property was not fit for human habitation.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on the same day, (17 January 2022) and that it would respond by 28 January 2022.
The following day (18 January 2022) the landlord raised a repair to overhaul the bedroom window and repair the bedroom door located on the top floor. The landlord’s records show that the repair was completed on 19 May 2022.
The landlord provided its complaint response on 28 January 2022 and acknowledged its delay in acknowledging the complaint. The landlord acknowledged that following the serious incident at her previous address, there had been an urgent need for the resident to move to another address. A summary of the key findings are:
1. It had raised orders to repair the front door, crack in the kitchen ceiling, shelf in the bathroom and to remedy the leak in the airing cupboard. Orders were also raised to check for a blockage in the toilet and to remedy the faulty towel rail and living room radiator.
2. As the property is a house, intercoms or additional gates are not installed. However, it could install a dead lock to the front door as an additional security measure.
3. It had not received any evidence or reports of ASB for it to conclude that the property was not suitable for the resident or that she had not been adequately housed.
4. The resident advised on 26 January 2022 that due to her ill health, she was unable to have visits at the property, therefore, they have delayed undertaking further visits until the resident advised she was better.
5. Accepted that the resident did not have heating or hot water from the start of the tenancy. Also, on two occasions, its gas contractor had not attended appointments.
6. Provided information to the resident on the different ways she could obtain a transfer and explained that it did not operate an internal transfer list.
7. Awarded compensation of £680 broken down as: £290 for loss of heating, £350 for loss of hot water and £40 for the missed appointments.
8. Advised that due to the resident’s rent arrears, the compensation would be offset against the resident’s rent arrears.
On 7 February 2022, the resident informed the landlord that she was staying with her sister in Manchester as the property was uninhabitable and she would not be able to make the appointment arranged for the following day. The record does not say what the appointment was for. It was noted that the resident would not agree to reschedule the appointment.
The resident sent in a medical letter from her GP on 11 February 2022 advising that the property was in a poor condition. It advised that the resident suffered from depression, the property had a cracked ceiling and there was no heating in the property. Also, the property condition was affecting the resident’s mental health.
The landlord’s records record the following actions taking place in March 2022:
1. Following attendance by the surveyor an emergency appointment was arranged for the resident’s property. The records do not say what repairs the appointment related to or what action was undertaken following attendance by the operative.
2. It arranged to replaster the kitchen ceiling on 9 April 2022.
On 1 April 2022 the landlord’s records noted that the resident had moved to an area known for high levels of gang activity. However, since the move, it had not received any reports from the resident or the police regarding ASB related to her. Furthermore, the resident had not raised concerns with the property location before the move and it had not persuaded her to accept the property.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalated complaint on 12 April 2022. Its acknowledgement offered to speak with the resident or her daughter on 13 April 2022. It advised it would respond to the complaint by 9 May 2022.
The resident’s daughter responded on 13 April 2022 that her mother was unwell but would be available to speak with the landlord that day. She provided photos showing the condition of the kitchen ceiling, hole in the door and cardboard dumped outside the property. Photos were also provided of the missing shelf in the bathroom, a hole in the wall, the pipe work in the airing cupboard and the tradesmen carrying out work in the property. A medical letter regarding her mother dated 27 March 2022 was also provided.
The following day, 14 April 2022, the resident also sent in a medical letter from her GP. In response, the landlord confirmed to the resident that it would action the outstanding repairs and repeated its advice that it had a limited supply of three-bedroom properties. It acknowledged that the resident did not want to return to the tenancy and asked whether she wanted to consider moving to a smaller property. Also, it requested the location of the dumped rubbish.
The landlord’s internal records noted in April 2022, that the:
1. Resident had been referred to the multi- agency safeguarding hub and the outstanding repairs to the property had not been completed.
2. Resident has reported two pieces of cardboard and plastic dumped by the property and more rubbish had been added. It considered sending a letter to the block near to the resident’s property regarding the dumped rubbish.
3. Resident had not lived at the property for some time.
On 4 May 2022, the landlord contacted the resident advising it needed to conclude its final stage complaint investigation. It advised that it needed to know whether the resident intended to return to the property. The investigating officer advised that she would be away on leave and requested a convenient time to speak with the resident before the complaint response was sent. It also asked about the resident’s health and whether she was taking legal action.
In response, the resident advised on 6 May 2022, that she intended to return to the tenancy and her preferred outcome was to be moved to North London.
The landlord provided its final stage complaint response on 9 May 2022. It acknowledged that the resident had been unwell during the handling of the complaint. A summary of its findings are:
1. Acknowledged that the resident’s complaints at both stages of the complaint process had been acknowledged late and the resident had experienced an unacceptable delay in receiving its complaint response at the first stage.
2. Recognised the resident’s suffered from depression and that following the ASB which she had experienced the resident was concerned about her security. It signposted the resident to agencies who could assist her in that regard.
3. Signposted the resident to its insurance team if she wished to make an insurance claim for injury, damage or regarding her health. It advised that the resident should provide comprehensive information to assist with her claim.
4. Provided the contact details of its legal team if the resident intended to take legal action against the landlord.
5. Advised that emergency housing is provided by local authorities and that it had provided the resident with their details as a way of finding alternative housing before she accepted the property.
6. Accepted that when the resident moved into the property, there were outstanding repairs that were required. The property was the only property available and it has a limited supply of three-bedroom properties. It did not know if before accepting the property, the resident had attended the multi-agency public protection arrangement, which would have given her another opportunity to obtain alternative accommodation.
7. Confirmed that she did not qualify for an emergency move and signposted her to the multi- agency safeguarding hub and provided details of the adult social care team.
8. Repeated that the resident could apply for a mutual exchange or she could consider downsizing to a one-bedroom property. However, if she moved to a smaller property, her children would have to find their own accommodation.
9. Confirmed that the fly tipping outside the property had been removed.
10. Advised that it would get a specialist contractor to complete the outstanding repairs once the resident returned to the property.
11. Awarded compensation of £720. This was broken down as £320 for the distress, time, effort and the inconvenience experienced by the resident. £250 for the right to repair and £150 for its late complaint responses at both stages of the complaint procedure.
12. Advised the compensation would be offset against the resident’s rent arrears.
On 9 May 2022 the compensation award of £720 was offset against the resident’s arrears.
After the complaint response was exhausted, the following occurred:
1. The resident reported on 11 May 2022 that the landlord’s gas contractors had broken into her property on 3 May 2022 and that this was reported to the police. The landlord confirmed on 13 June 2022 that they had not accessed the property without an appointment and that they needed access to the property to complete the outstanding repairs.
2. The resident’s daughter sent pictures of people standing outside the park and informed the landlord on 27 June 2022 that her mother had been admitted to hospital.
3. The resident’s Member of Parliament wrote to the landlord on 11 October 2022 and 4 November 2022 regarding the lack of heating and hot water in the property. The letter also advised of the outstanding repairs to the property and that the resident had reported an incident on 16 August 2022 of people standing outside the property. The resident’s preferred outcome was to move to an alternative property due to the disrepair and ASB. The landlord responded to the MP on 7 December 2022, advising it had provided its complaint response on 9 May 2022. It provided an update on the boiler, the outstanding repairs and the reported ASB. Also, it reiterated that the resident did not meet the threshold for an urgent move and that it had signposted the resident to alternative rehousing options.
4. The resident advised that she returned to live in the property on 8 November 2022.
5. The landlord’s records show that the repair to the bathroom shelf was completed on 1 November 2022 and the crack in the kitchen ceiling was completed on 30 November 2022. Also, on 8 December 2022, a new boiler was installed at the property.
On 14 December 2020, the Member of Parliament escalated the complaint to this Service.

Assessment and findings

It is acknowledged that the resident has found the move to her current property distressing. However, this investigation must consider whether the landlord has taken appropriate steps to respond to the resident’s concerns in line with its responsibilities and legal obligations.

Reports of the lack of heating and hot water.

The landlord has a responsibility to ensure that the resident had heating and hot water. Looking at the available evidence, the resident first reported that she had no heating or hot water shortly after she moved into the property on 25 August 2021. In line with its repairing obligations, the operative attended and the hot water and heating was restored the same day.
The landlord’s records show at least seven further reports between September 2021 and 8 December 2021 regarding the failure of the boiler. The landlord has accepted that there were delays in sourcing parts for the boiler. In addition, there were missed appointments by the resident and the contractor which contributed to the delay in repairing the boiler. The landlord appropriately chased the contractor to minimise the time the resident was without heating and also requested a timeline of its contact with the resident.
The Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles are: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. The landlord has demonstrated in its complaint responses that it has formally acknowledged and accepted that it delayed in restoring the heating and hot water to the resident’s reports of a lack of heating and hot water at the property. It has apologised for the unacceptable delay experienced by the resident and offered compensation of £680, broken down as £290 for the lack of heating, £350 for the loss of hot water and £40 for two missed appointments.
The landlord’s compensation award is in line with its compensation policy as its compensation award recognised that it had an obligation to repair the boiler and it did not do this within a reasonable time scale. Furthermore, for periods of time that the boiler was not working, the resident was unable to remain at the property. It is noted that the landlord’s contractor after reporting that there was no access at the property on three separate occasions, had to write to the resident to agree a mutually convenient appointment to repair the boiler.
After the boiler was repaired on 8 December 2021, the resident informed the landlord on 26 January 2022 that she was unable to have visits at the property due to her ill health. Though the resident references the delay in completing the repair to the boiler in her communication with the landlord, there are no further reports that the boiler was not working until the Member of Parliament made contact in October and November 2022. It is noted that the boiler was replaced the following month in December 2022.
Without diminishing the resident’s experience, there is no evidence of significant service failure. The landlord has acted appropriately by apologising for the delay in repairing the boiler and its award of compensation represents proportionate and reasonable redress for this.

Repair request to the kitchen, bathroom and front door.

The landlord has a responsibility to keep in repair the front door to the property. The resident reported shortly after moving in to the property that the lock to the front door had jammed. The landlord acted appropriately and arranged for its operative to attend the same day. The landlord notes that when the operative attended, there was no access.
The resident made a further report five months later in January 2022 that the lock to the front door had jammed and she was locked inside. The landlord acted appropriately by raising an emergency repair and the repair was resolved. The resident has said that she experienced difficulty with the lock jamming on other occasions which were not reported to the landlord. This report has not considered the other reports as the dates of these occurrences were not provided for this investigation.
The resident reported in October 2021 that repairs were required to the bathroom. She reported that there were no tiles on shelf above the wash hand basin, problems with the window frame and the bathroom door. The landlord’s submission to this Service does not make clear when it raised the repairs to remedy the defects reported by the resident. This Service spotlight report on knowledge and information management sets out the importance of good records management in landlord’s evidencing the action it has taken and to respond effectively to residents.
The resident also complained about the quality of the workmanship to the bathroom and supplied a video recording of the tradesman carrying out the work. The evidence shows that the landlord agreed for a further works order to be raised, and the repair to the bathroom shelf were completed in November 2022. It is noted that the resident was not staying at the property due to her ill health and returned to the property on 8 November 2022.
The resident reported that there was a leak into the kitchen from the crack in the kitchen ceiling on 8 December 2021. The repair to the ceiling was arranged for 11 January 2022 which was 21 working days later. The resident provided photos of the crack in the ceiling but did not provide further information about the extent or the impact of the damage, other than before Christmas she had found water on the kitchen floor. The landlord records indicate that it attended before 30 December 2021 to remedy the leak and no one was home. However, the submission to this Service does not provide the date it attended and whether the appointment had been agreed with the resident as stipulated by its repairs policy.
From what can be seen, the crack to the ceiling was not remedied on 11 January 2022 but on 30 November 2022. This is a delay of 11 months; however, contributory factors are the resident’s ill health, the periods she was staying with her sister, her request in April 2022 not to be contacted and her return to the property in November 2022.
During the complaint process, the landlord raised orders in its stage one response to repair the front door, the kitchen ceiling and to replace the shelf in the bathroom. It also raised repairs to check the cylinder in the airing cupboard, toilet, towel raid and the radiator in the living room. Its records show that that it overhauled the bedroom window and repaired the bedroom door on the top floor on 19 May 2021. These took 85 working days to complete.
The landlord has demonstrated that it had regard to the resident’s request in April 2022 that she did not want contact from the landlord due to her ill health and she would update them when she felt better. It was reasonable for the landlord to agree to the resident’s request as its verbal contact with the resident noted her distress on the phone and her daughter had advised that she had been hospitalised.
In the final complaint response, it was reasonable for the landlord to offer for a specialist contractor to attend to complete the outstanding repairs to the property. The resident had raised concerns about the quality of the workmanship and this was an appropriate action for the landlord to ensure that the repairs were completed in line with its repairing obligations.
The resident has maintained that due to the repairs required to the property it was not in a liveable condition. From the available information, there is no evidence that the landlord assessed that the property was not habitable, neither has this been supplied by the resident. In response to the resident’s concerns, it agreed for its surveyor to attend the property. Though, the records have not been provided of his inspection of the property, there is no evidence that he assessed that the property was not suitable to live in.
Under the terms of the tenancy agreement the resident is required to allow access to the landlord for repairs to be carried out. The resident informed the landlord in February 2022 and in April 2022 that due to her ill health, she was not living at the property but staying at her sister’s. In response, the landlord tried to support the resident by referring her to its tenancy team and tried to agree a mutually convenient appointment to speak with her regarding her concerns. From what can be seen, the landlord did not consider whether to progress with tenancy action to get the repairs carried out but maintained contact with the resident to agree a convenient appointment date. This was appropriate as the landlord was aware of the resident’s vulnerabilities.
The landlord in its final complaint response made the resident an award of compensation of £600. This was broken down as £320 for the distress, time, effort and inconvenience that she experienced and £250 for the right to repair. This reflected the unacceptable delay experienced by the resident in getting the outstanding repairs resolved. This is in line with the landlord’s complaint procedure and our remedies guidance where there has been a service failure by the landlord which has impacted the resident.

Reports of fly-tipping.

Looking at the available evidence, the resident reported on two separate occasions that there was fly tipping outside her property which had caused her distress. The landlord’s submission to this Service does not show that it took any action in regard to the resident’s report in December 2021 and its first complaint response did not address this issue. This was a short coming as it missed an opportunity to provide the resident with information on the action it had taken.
The resident’s daughter made a further report about the fly tipping at the property in April 2022 including photos showing abandoned cardboard and plastic. From the information provided by the resident and the landlord, it is not apparent how long the fly tipping had been located outside the resident’s property. The landlord requested information about the location of the fly tipping and appropriately considered whether it should write to the residents living in the nearby block regarding the disposal of the rubbish. Whilst there is no evidence that it did so, there is also no evidence that the occupants of the block were responsible for the discarded rubbish outside the resident’s property.
The photos provided by the resident’s daughter showed cardboard and plastic discarded outside the property. The landlord inspection stated that more rubbish was added to the fly tipping and it appropriately arranged for the fly tipping to be cleared. This was confirmed in the landlord’s final complaint response.
It is noted that the resident was not staying at the property consistently from October 2021 to when she returned to the tenancy in November 2022. It is accepted that the resident would have found the fly tipping shown in the photos frustrating and annoying. However, as the fly tipping was cleared before she returned to the tenancy it was likely to have a limited impact on the resident.

Request to move.

The resident has expressed her dissatisfaction with the current property and expressed her wish to move to other accommodation preferably in North London. The landlord has acknowledged that the resident had to move quickly from her previous address and the property was all that it had available at the time.
The landlord has acted appropriately in its communication with the resident. It explained that it did not operate a transfer list and that the majority of its empty properties were allocated via the local authority nomination agreement. It advised the resident of the housing options available to her such as mutual exchange or the home swap scheme.
The landlord responded appropriately to the request for additional security advising that it was not possible to install security gates due to the type of property and offered an additional lock to the front door. The resident has raised concerns about her safety as has advised that she finds the proximity of the property to the park challenging. She expressed her worry about the young men hanging around the park and photos of young people standing around were provided to the landlord. The landlord has demonstrated that it has given consideration to the resident’s concerns. It recognised that the area is known for high gang activity, but it had not received any reports of anti- social behaviour which would meet the threshold to be considered for a move. It signposted the resident to the police to raise her concerns. Looking at the available evidence, the landlord determined that the resident reports of young people hanging by the park was not an ASB report but raised to support her need to move. In light of this, the landlord arranged for its tenancy team, lettings officer to contact her and signposted her to the police.
The resident and her daughter have advised that due to the resident’s health condition, she is unable to progress a mutual exchange. The landlord demonstrated support to the resident by informing her of its multi-agency partners who could support her request to move. While this Service has sympathy with the resident’s situation, there is no evidence of a service failure caused by the landlord.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 53(B) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion resolves the complaint satisfactorily.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of fly tipping.
In accordance with paragraph 53(B) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion resolves the complaint satisfactorily.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s’ handling of the resident’s request to move to alternative accommodation.

Reasons

The resident reported on several occasions the boiler failure which resulted in her having no heating or hot water. The delay in repairing the boiler was in part due to the gas contractor experiencing difficulty in sourcing the parts and missed appointment by the resident and the gas contractor. The landlord has apologised and made an award of compensation in recognition of this.
The resident reported repairs to the landlord and experienced an unacceptable delay in getting those resolved. The delay was affected by the fact that the resident was not always living in the property and had requested for around a six-month period that it did not make contact with her about this.
The resident reported that there was rubbish dumped outside her property. There is insufficient information about the length of time that it was there and the landlord arranged its removal by its contractors.
The landlord has explained to the resident that it does not operate a transfer list and it has not received any evidence to support the resident’s request for a transfer. The landlord gave advice on the options available to the resident to obtain alternative accommodation and signposted her to agencies who could support her.

Recommendations

Recommendation

The landlord to review its record keeping practices regarding the management of its heating and hot water in line with recommendations set out in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on knowledge and information management (2023) available on the Housing Ombudsman’s website.