Notting Hill Genesis (202434608)

Background

1. The landlord capped the resident’s gas in July 2024 following failed gas safety inspections. The resident then raised a complaint in November 2024 because the gas was still capped and he had no heating or hot water as a result. The gas was restored and a new boiler installed in May 2025. The resident remains unhappy with the level of compensation offered by the landlord.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of no heating or hot water.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was severe maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of no heating or hot water.

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

Reasons

4. The occupancy agreement confirms the landlord’s responsibility for repairs as set out in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. This includes installations for the supply and use of gas. The occupancy agreement also states that residents, upon being given reasonable notice, should allow access for repairs. This includes gas safety checks.
5. Under the Gas Safety Regulations 1998, the landlord has a legal responsibility to complete a gas safety check in residents’ homes at least once a year.
6. On 9 July 2024, the landlord attended to complete a gas safety check at the resident’s home. There was no access for this visit. The landlord noted that this was not the first missed appointment and the resident had not responded to previous appointment letters or texts regarding the check. Due to the failed attempts, the landlord capped the gas at the property. The landlord was under an obligation to ensure it was operating under the Gas Safety Regulations. As it had been unable to carry out the required check, it was reasonable that it cut off the gas supply for the safety of the resident.
7. We asked the landlord to provide evidence of the previous appointments leading to this. It was unable to do so as it had since changed gas contractors. This was poor record keeping which has made it impossible for us to determine if the landlord acted appropriately and provided reasonable notice of appointments.
8. The resident confirmed that he received a text message the day the gas was capped and a follow-up letter notifying him of this. The landlord said that the text and letter advised him to contact it to rearrange the appointment so the gas could be turned back on. The resident made contact with the landlord on 14 November 2024 to raise a stage 1 complaint about the lack of heating or hot water in his home. We have seen no evidence that any contact was made prior to this date. The resident was unhappy that the landlord had not attended to reinstate the gas supply. In its stage 1 complaint response the landlord said that it had turned off the gas as a safety precaution and had received no contact requesting reattendance from the resident.
9. While we recognise the landlord advised the resident what steps were needed to reinstate the gas service, it was a shortcoming that it did not monitor this more closely. At the time of the stage 1 complaint the resident had been without heating or hot water for over 4 months, including some colder months, and the landlord had made no contact with him to discuss this or attempt to book a new appointment. Better record keeping and appropriate regard for the effects of no gas over a prolonged period may have avoided the extensive delays in this case.
10. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord advised that a new appointment had been made to attend and carry out the gas safety check and turn the gas back on. The response was issued on 5 December 2024, but it said the appointment was for 16 September 2024. This would have been confusing for the resident and brought little clarity regarding when the next appointment was booked for.
11. Following the stage 1 response, the landlord attended on 10, 11 and 13 December 2024. It said that there was no access for these appointments. While the resident may have been uncertain of the initial appointment date following the error in the stage 1 response, evidence shows that the landlord sent a text message on 10 December 2024 asking him to make contact to rebook. It is unclear if the follow-on appointments were booked appointments that the resident was aware of. On 13 December 2024, the resident refused access as he said he had another appointment to go to.
12. The landlord made several attempts to attend and reinstate the gas, which was positive. However, alongside access issues, there were further issues with record keeping and internal communication which may have impacted the effectiveness of these attempted interventions. We have seen record keeping failures throughout this case which contributed to the delays and poor service delivered by the landlord. As such, we have made a recommendation for the landlord to review its record keeping and communication practices.
13. The landlord’s records show the intercom system did not work. Some repair notes asked staff to call the resident for access. Staff did not add this to all orders, and it is unclear if they acted on it when included. This may have delayed the gas supply repair. The landlord should have considered other access options. We found no evidence it explored alternatives at this time or prior to capping the gas. This showed a lack of willingness to adapt, particularly in complex situations with potentially serious outcomes such as this.
14. In raising a complaint, the resident had notified the landlord that he had no heating and hot water. While the landlord should have been aware of this, as it had completed the gas cap, the complaint formally put it on notice of the circumstances the resident was living in. As noted above, this was during the winter months. The landlord’s repairs policy states that no heating or hot water will be treated as an emergency repair between October and March and attended to within 24 hours. The landlord did not raise a repair in response to this information, and therefore did not act in line with its repairs policy.
15. We have seen no evidence that, upon being made aware of the resident’s situation, the landlord took any measures to expedite the appointment. The resident contacted the landlord several times throughout the complaint period to tell it of the difficulties he faced. He said that he was living in one room with a portable heater to stay warm and had to wear additional layers. He could not bathe at home and used a local gym. He left the property for long periods and stayed in public spaces to keep warm during the day. He said this harmed his wellbeing. The landlord should have assessed risk and considered interim support while it awaited the repair. It failed to show due regard for the resident’s safety and wellbeing.
16. After the failed appointments in December 2024, the resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 on 16 December 2024. He said he was frustrated by the continued delay in reinstating his gas supply and the conditions he was living in as a result. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 18 February 2025.
17. The landlord responded to the resident’s request to have his housing officer present when the gas safety inspection took place. It dismissed this request as it said it would mean a further delay in completing the works. However, it did not discuss the request with the resident to find out why he had asked for this. It was reasonable for the resident to ask for this and could have prevented any further issues in accessing the block. Given that the appointment to reinstate the gas was not booked until 20 March 2025, it is unclear how this may have delayed the appointment further, as there was adequate time to arrange for the housing officer to be present. The landlord’s response was therefore unreasonable and demonstrated a lack of sufficient empathy.
18. The landlord’s complaint responses said that it had taken appropriate measures in its actions to cut the gas supply and had attempted to reinstate it but had been unable to gain access. While we recognise the access issues it faced, it missed several opportunities to engage with the resident or prioritise the repair in line with its own policies. It also did not document that it carried out a risk assessment and/or considered options for gaining access to the property, even if it reasonably precluded enforcement. The resident was ultimately left without any heating or hot water for 324 calendar days (around 10 months). This was an unnecessarily extended period of time which caused significant detriment to him.
19. The landlord attempted to recognise the impact the lack of heating and hot water had on the resident in its final complaint response, and offered £100 for the time taken and £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused. Due to the length of time the landlord had been on notice for the repairs, its failures in policy and the conditions he was living in, the offer of £250 compensation did not adequately address the detriment to the resident.
20. We have considered the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident and have found that the £150 offered by the landlord did not provide adequate redress for the period the resident was without heating or hot water. In line with our compensation guidance for failures which have impacted the resident, we have made an order for the landlord to pay the resident an additional £300 compensation.
21. Our compensation guidance also states that no heating or hot water should be compensated at a rate of £15 per day. In line with our principle of fairness, we have considered the period from 15 November 2024, 24 hours after the landlord was put on notice of the issue, to 30 May 2025, when the gas supply was reinstated. This was a total of 125 days at £15 per day, totalling £1,875.

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.

Recommendations

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