Read our new Corporate Strategy 2025-30 and Business Plan 2025-26.

Notting Hill Genesis (NHG) (202319998)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202319998

Notting Hill Genesis (NHG)

13 February 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:
    1. The safety of the boiler and heating system in the resident’s property.
    2. The resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord. She lives in the property with her husband and child.
  2. Emails exchanged between the landlord and the resident in December 2022 show that works were required to the resident’s boiler and heating system following the installation of a new boiler several months earlier.
  3. A contractor attended on 14 January 2023. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord the next day. She said the contractor did not check the radiators or thermostat during their visit, and had not ‘signed off’ the boiler installation.
  4. The resident has explained that on 27 April 2023 her carbon monoxide (CO) alarm sounded and she suspected a gas leak. She contacted the emergency gas network service who capped off the gas supply as a safety measure. She contacted the landlord who attended her property the following day, on 28 April. On 5 May the landlord confirmed to the resident that the gas components were safe and in working order.
  5. After an initial informal response to her complaint in May 2023, the landlord provided its first formal response on 19 June. It apologised for its delay. It confirmed that the thermostat and monitoring alarms were working correctly, and it had requested a copy of the quality assurance (QA) report for its April visit. It said it would share the report with the resident if it was allowed to.
  6. On 22 June 2023 the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint. She said its first response did not address all of her points. She listed these to the landlord on 26 June. In summary, she asked the landlord to check the radiator valves and to address her safety concerns by providing a copy of its QA report.
  7. On 29 July 2023 the landlord gave its final response to the resident’s complaint. It agreed it had failed to deliver an adequate service and apologised. It offered a total of £100 compensation for the inconvenience and delays.
  8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and escalated her complaint to the Service. She said the landlord had not addressed all of the points she raised. Her main issue was the safety of her heating system. She said she had not been using her radiators because of her concerns.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident has raised concerns about the impact the issues may have had on her health. The Ombudsman is unable to assess the cause of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. The resident may be able to make a personal injury claim if she considers that her health has been affected by the landlord’s actions or inaction. This is a legal process, and the resident may wish to seek legal advice if she wants to pursue this option. In accordance with paragraph 42.f. of the Scheme, this issue is more effectively resolved and remedied through the courts. It will therefore not be considered in this report.

The safety of the boiler and heating system in the resident’s property.

  1. The resident’s initial complaint to the landlord was triggered by a visit from a contractor in January 2023 to fit a part to her boiler. She contacted the landlord on 15 January and said the contractor had not signed off the outstanding work from the boiler installation the previous year. The landlord responded to the resident the next day confirming the work had been signed off in its records and there was no need for a further visit. The resident disputed its explanation because she did not believe the thermostat and radiator valves had been checked. She asked to see evidence of its sign off record.
  2. The resident chased the landlord for a response to her concerns on 31 January 2023. The landlord apologised for the delay and acknowledged the complaint the following day. However it did not send a response until 18 May, and only in the form of what it referred to as a “quick fix” rather than a formal complaint. This step was in line with its complaints process at the time. However the resident had made clear on more than one occasion that she wanted her safety concerns treated as a complaint, so the landlord’s decision here was not reasonable or customer-focused.
  3. The quick fix response did not resolve the resident’s concerns, and on 18 May 2023 she asked the landlord again to treat her complaint formally. By this point the resident’s issues of concern had grown. They included the carbon monoxide alarm event, and the inspection of the works done by the landlord in April in relation to the boiler and heating system.
  4. The landlord sent its formal complaint response on 19 June 2023. It acknowledged the resident had asked for the report from the inspection the landlord undertook in April, and said it would obtain and share it with her if it could. It said it had inspected again in May, and that its inspections showed “compliance with the necessary standards and regulations.” It also provided an extract from its records showing the inspections’ conclusion. This said that the CO alarms were in working order and that the contractor had added an additional alarm for the resident’s peace of mind. It recognised there had been considerable delay in completing the final inspections and apologised.
  5. The landlord’s complaint response attempted to offer reassurance to the resident that the boiler and heating system were working correctly and safely. However, the resident had shown in her communications with it since January 2023 that she was seeking more than its reassurances, which is why she had asked for the relevant documents from both the January visit and sign off, and the April inspection. In the circumstances of her safety concerns for herself and her family, the resident’s request was understandable. The landlord therefore missed an opportunity to provide the further information she had been seeking.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint specifically because she did not feel the landlord had understood the basis of her concerns and dissatisfaction. She explained what issues she did not feel it had addressed or resolved.
  7. The landlord sent its final complaint response on 29 July 2023. It said it understood the resident’s complaint to be about the time taken for a contractor to complete the QA (it did not say what the QA related to), and its poor communication with her. It set out the history of the resident’s complaints and enquiries in 2023, but said it could not locate her January complaint. It noted that it had investigated the complaint in June and acknowledged poor service but had not offered any compensation.
  8. The landlord said it upheld the complaint because of its delays completing the QA and its delays responding to the resident’s original complaint. It explained how it had used the complaint to improve its complaint service, and offered her £100 compensation for the inconvenience caused.
  9. The landlord’s response did not clearly address the specific issues the resident had complained about, including her overarching concern about the overall safety of the boiler and heating system and the information she had been asking for. It acknowledged it had provided a poor service. However the compensation it offered was not proportionate to the length of time the matter had been ongoing and the number of times the resident had needed to chase the landlord. This included asking for updates for both the boiler and heating checks, and her complaint. The lack of detail, thoroughness, and reasonable remedies meant that the resident’s complaint and concerns were not resolved.
  10. It important to emphasise that this investigation is not concluding there were failings in the landlord’s installation of the boiler and heating system, or in its follow up inspections and further work. The failings were in its poor communication with the resident about how and why it was satisfied the boiler and heating systems were working and safe. The resident had clearly shown she wanted further reassurance. After its initial efforts failed to provide that, the landlord showed no meaningful consideration of either changing its approach, or explaining why it could not do as she was asking.
  11. We have seen gas safety records covering the period 10 August 2022 (the date of the new boiler installation), 28 April 2023 (following the suspected leak), 12 June 2023 and to date. However the resident has told us that she is unsure whether she has a copy of these.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord operated a 2-stage complaint process during the time of the complaint. It committed to acknowledging complaints within 2 working days at both stages and issuing responses within 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2. Its policy said that it may close cases without providing a formal response if it was able to resolve the resident’s complaint as a “quick fix”.
  2. In this case the landlord delayed in its response to the resident’s initial complaint on 15 January 2023. The resident chased the landlord for a response to the complaint on 3 occasions, including on 31 January when she again asked it to open a stage 1 complaint.
  3. The landlord attempted to offer the resident a “quick fix” to the resident’s complaint on 18 May 2023. When the resident remained dissatisfied with this response, it provided its stage 1 response on 19 June. This was over 5 months after the resident had complained, as such this initial response was well outside of its policy timeframes. This was an unreasonable delay.
  4. The landlord apologised and said that it had taken learning from the complaint. It said that it had spoken with its contractor and it had introduced a new complaints form, which it intended to use to track its responses from the contractor and put measures in place to ensure complaint delays would not happen in future.
  5. Whilst the landlord had made attempts to remedy its failings with regards to its complaint handling, what it offered was not proportionate to the resident’s time and trouble chasing the complaint, and its overall significantly delayed complaint response. Because of that it cannot reasonably be said to have fully remedied its poor complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the safety of the boiler and heating system in the resident’s property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay £300 to the resident for its handling of the safety of the boiler and heating system in her property (this amount is inclusive of the £100 it has already offered).
    2. Pay compensation of £100 to the resident for its poor complaint handling.
  2. Within 6 weeks from the date of this report the landlord must arrange with the resident a visit by a senior manager from the relevant department to discuss and understand the grounds for her concerns, and what it can and cannot do to resolve those concerns. Any actions the landlord agrees to take can be the subject of a new formal complaint by the resident if she is dissatisfied with its implementation of whatever it has agreed to do.
  3. The landlord must provide this Service with evidence it has complied with the above orders within their respective deadlines.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord has provided the gas safety records covering the period 10 August 2022 (the date of the new boiler installation), 28 April 2023 (following the suspected leak), 12 June 2023 and to date. However the resident has told us that she is unsure whether she has a copy of these. Because of that, and to help reassure the resident, the landlord should consider providing copies of the relevant records to her.