Notting Hill Genesis (202405383)

Decision
Case ID	202405383
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Notting Hill Genesis
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	20 March 2026

Background

1. The resident reported cold conditions caused by inadequate heating since 2022. In response, the landlord completed heat loss surveys, carried out minor repairs, and replaced the boiler, but the resident said the problem remained. In December 2023, he raised a complaint because the landlord had not provided a resolution.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
   1. Reports of inadequate heating.
   2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of inadequate heating.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Reports of inadequate heating

4. The landlord took a reasonable approach when investigating the heating concerns. It carried out a thorough investigation and completed minor improvements to find a customer focused resolution. However, it did not communicate the heat loss survey findings, which led the resident to rely on the contractor’s comments that larger radiators were required. The landlord did not acknowledge the communication failure or offer the resident proportionate redress.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord did not respond to the complaint in line with its complaint policy or the Code. It did not acknowledge any failures in its complaint handling and therefore did not offer the resident proportionate redress.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration, or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: the apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic it has due regard to our apologies guidance	No later than 13 April 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £175 made up as follows: £100 for the time, trouble and inconvenience to the resident caused by the landlord’s response to inadequate heating £75 for the time and trouble caused by the landlord’s complaint handling This must be paid directly to the resident and the landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 13 April 2026

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
The landlord, if it has not done so already, should consider checking for building related heat loss issues, such as draughts around windows and doors, gaps in insulation, or localised cold spots and feedback to the resident. This would ensure the landlord has fully explored any non‑heating factors that may contribute to the resident’s experience of his home feeling cold.
The resident said he has a medical condition, the landlord does not have any medical or vulnerabilities listed for him. We therefore recommend the landlord confirms this with the resident and updates its records accordingly.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
19 December 2023	The resident complained. He said there was a heat loss issue which he believed was caused by the thermostatic controls or the boiler. He wanted a full review of the heating system and the faults repaired. He also said the contractor told him the radiators required replacing.
29 December 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It said it completed a heat loss survey and obtained a detailed report, which confirmed the radiator was suitable for purpose, in good condition and not undersized.
5 April 2024	The resident escalated his complaint. He repeated his original concerns and said he remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s investigation and the outcome.
11 April 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It said the boiler was fully operational and the heating was sufficient. It had completed 2 heat loss surveys, balanced and flushed the system, and replaced the thermostats. Further, it offered to replace 2 radiators but the resident declined. It concluded that despite its comprehensive efforts, it could not resolve the matter to the residents satisfaction.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident said the issue remained unresolved and the landlord had not provided a resolution. He said its offer to replace 2 radiators would not resolve the issue and the landlord had failed to complete certain checks such as a flow test before installing the boiler. He wanted the landlord to resolve the inadequate heating within his home.

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

Complaint	Landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of inadequate heating
Finding	Service failure

6. Between January 2023 and 11 April 2024, the landlord’s contractor visited the property on 9 occasions in response to reports of inadequate heating or hot water. Its repairs policy requires it to keep heating and hot water in working order and to provide a safe and adequate heating system. The evidence shows it took the resident’s concerns seriously. It carried out investigations, including heat loss surveys, replaced the boiler and thermostats, checked and balanced the system, and offered to replace 2 radiators for larger units. The landlord acted in line with its policy and sought to resolve the resident’s concerns.
7. In July 2023, the landlord replaced the boiler. The resident said it had not completed the required checks, such as a flow test, before replacing the boiler. Following installation, the landlord provided the resident with the certificate which demonstrated the necessary checks had been completed. This was a reasonable response to reassure the resident regarding the efficient installation of the boiler.
8. On 26 October 2023, following a call from the resident regarding inadequate heating, the contractor inspected and reported that all radiators were heating up sufficiently but appeared undersized and recommended replacement. It also recorded the resident was unaware of the findings from the January 2023 heat loss survey. The landlord told the resident it would not replace the radiators because the survey had not found them undersized and room temperatures were between 18 and 22 Celsius. While the landlord was entitled to rely on the survey findings, it was unreasonable it took 10 months to communicate the results. Earlier communication would have prevented the confusion caused by a differing opinion between the contractor and the survey findings. This caused unnecessary frustration for the resident and was a communication failure.
9. In November 2023 and January 2024, the landlord showed it was actively seeking to provide a customer focused resolution. In November 2023, it instructed a second heat loss survey, which confirmed the heating was sufficient for the property size. In January 2024, it agreed to replace the bedroom and lounge radiator with larger units. This was a reasonable response to the resident’s continued reports of a heating issue.
10. On 8 February 2024 the contractor attended to replace the 2 radiators. Upon arrival, the resident asked for the heating system, to be flushed and balanced before the installation. The contractor completed the checks and demonstrated that all radiators were hot to the touch and working sufficiently. As a result, the resident declined the radiator replacements. The landlord took reasonable steps to address the resident’s concerns and evidenced the heating system was working adequately.
11. On 16 February 2024, the contractor checked the boiler and controls and confirmed the hot water and heating were operating sufficiently. Tests were completed with the resident to explain and demonstrate its operating functions. The contractor did not find any faults with the boiler, thermostat, or system controls and recorded the system was working competently. This evidenced the heating and hot water was functioning adequately.
12. The landlord concluded, based on its investigations and in line with its repair policy, the heating system was safe and adequate, and repairs were not required. It was reasonable for it to suggest the resident contact his housing officer to discuss whether any improvements could be made to the heating system. This provided the resident with an opportunity to explore alternative options, either self-funded or through potential grants.
13. Overall, the landlord acted in accordance with its policies. It completed a full investigation, completed minor repairs, and offered to install 2 larger radiators in seeking a customer focused solution. Nonetheless, it failed to communicate the outcome of the January 2023 heat loss survey, which led the resident to rely on the contractor’s comments that larger radiators were required. The delayed communication caused confusion and created false expectation, which frustrated the resident and contributed to the complaint.
14. The landlord’s compensation policy states it will ensure residents are compensated fairly where they have been distressed or inconvenienced and suggests an award of up to £100 for a low impact failure. The landlord’s complaint response did not identify the failing around its communication or that it raised the resident’s expectations, therefore it didn’t follow our dispute resolution principles: to act fairly, put things right and learn from outcomes.
15. Having considered all the circumstances of the case, we have found service failure. In line with our remedies guidance, we have ordered the landlord to pay £100 compensation. This is for a failure that may not have significantly affected the overall outcome for the resident but acknowledges the likely distress and inconvenience caused.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

16. The landlord’s complaint policy at the time of the complaint complies with the definition of a complaint in the Code (April 2022). The timescales in the landlord’s complaint procedure complied with the Code.
17. The resident raised a complaint on 19 December 2023. The landlord acknowledged it the same day and provided its response on 29 December 2023, 6 working days later. This was in line with the timescales set out in its policy.
18. The resident escalated his complaint on 11 January 2024. It is unclear why the landlord did not acknowledge it or respond. This caused the resident time and trouble having to escalate his complaint again. This was not appropriate and was a complaint handling failure.
19. The resident escalated his complaint again on 5 April 2024. The landlord provided its final complaint response on 11 April 2024, 4 working days later. While the response was provided on time, there is no evidence the landlord acknowledged the complaint, this was a failing and not in line with its policy. Further, the landlord did not acknowledge the complaint handling failures and therefore did not act in line with our dispute resolution principles. Its compensation policy states it will compensate residents when it fails to meet service standards.
20. In summary, we find service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. The lack of a stage 2 acknowledgement caused limited detriment, but the lack of a response to the stage 2 escalation request caused time and trouble for the resident. Having considered our remedies guidance, we have ordered the landlord to pay £75 compensation. This sum reflects the distress and inconvenience caused by the complaint handling failures.

Learning

General learning

21. Landlords must have an effective complaint process to provide a good service to their residents. An effective complaint process means landlords can fix problems quickly, learn from their mistakes and build good relationships with residents. In this case the landlord missed an escalation request and failed to provide a stage 2 acknowledgement. The landlord should review their policy to ensure all complaints are handled accordingly.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

22. The landlord did not correctly monitor its complaints process which indicates a record keeping failing. Further, it did not seem to be aware of the failings.

Communication

23. The landlord should ensure its communication with residents provided in a timely manner. In this case, clearer communication around the findings of a heating loss survey would have managed the resident’s expectations and may have avoided confusion.