Octavia Housing (202316527)

Back to Top

 

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202316527

Octavia Housing

15 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:
    1. The resident’s reports of intermittent water pressure.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 1-bedroom flat on the second floor.
  2. On 2 August 2022, the resident reported low water pressure in the shower. According to the repair log, the repair was completed the following day. The contractor confirmed pressure issues from the main pump.
  3. On 9 August 2022 and 3 January 2023, a contractor visited the property to assess the issue however there was no access.
  4. On 12 January 2023, the resident submitted a complaint, stating that the landlord had ignored multiple repair requests for water pressure since a radiators replacement and had not responded to his formal complaint.
  5. From January to August 2023, the resident contacted the landlord on 8 occasions, about the ongoing water pressure issues and radiator problems and requests to be moved to a property with working shower. The evidence shows that the landlord worked with its contractors to find a solution and visited the property to explore options.
  6. On 30 August 2023, the landlord installed a cold water booster pump and thermostatic mixer tap for the shower. Following the resident’s contact with us that the issue remain unresolved we chased a response from the landlord in November 2023.
  7. On 25 January 2024, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It explained it had completed some repairs to the hot water pressure after installing a pressure booster to the cold water. It acknowledged delays due to a change in contractors and explained that a new contractor was instructed to carry out an inspection and repair. It apologised and offered £100 for the inconvenience experienced from the delay.
  8. On 27 January 2024, the resident requested escalation of his complaint. He said that the £100 compensation was inadequate and the water pressure problem persisted. Due to no response the resident asked us for assistance with the escalation and in July 2024 we chased a response from the landlord.
  9. On 17 July 2024, the landlord issued its stage 2 response. It acknowledged that the stage 1 response was unreasonable as the issue remained unresolved and the resident could not use the shower. It explained that its contractor had inspected on 16 July 2024 and it would follow up with the next steps once it received the outcome. It stated it had taken learning from the feedback in relation to communication with its contractors and monitoring works. It acknowledged and apologised for the delays and “the standard” of the repairs and the handling of the complaint.
  10. The landlord fitted a water valve in August 2024. We accepted the resident’s complaint on 14 January 2025. Following this, on 4 February 2025, the landlord inspected the property and confirmed to us the water pressure issue was ongoing. It scheduled an appointment for 26 August 2025 to install a new pump and carry out a full mechanical and electrical survey. The landlord issued a follow up response on 4 February 2025. It acknowledged delays in repairs and complaint handling. It apologised and offered a total of £700 compensation (£500 for the inconvenience caused by its repairs handling and £200 for its complaint handling failures).

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. . The resident stated to us and the landlord that the water pressure issue had been ongoing since 2017 when the radiators had been replaced. He said he had raised previous complaints. However, we have not seen evidence of those complaints being raised with the landlord and the resident had not contacted us at the time.
  2.  While the historical issues provided contextual background to the current complaint, this investigation has primarily focused on the landlord’s handling of the water pressure repair from August 2022 that were considered in the landlord’s final response. This is because, residents are expected to raise complaints with their landlord’s normally within 12 months of the matters arising. This is so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and while the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events that occurred.
  3. Throughout the period of the complaint, the resident raised concerns about how the radiators cannot be switched off and caused medical issues. The Ombudsman is unable to make a determination that the actions or omissions of a landlord have had a causal impact on a person’s health. Such a determination is more appropriate through an insurance claim or by a court. Should the resident wish to pursue a personal injury claim he has the option to seek legal advice. The Ombudsman has, however, taken into account any general distress and inconvenience that the landlord’s service delivery may have caused.

Handling of the resident’s reports of intermittent water pressure

  1. Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 state that landlords must ensure that its properties are fit for human habitation, including by avoiding defects from repairs.
  2. The tenancy agreement stated that the landlord was responsible for repairs to the property and its installations. It is not disputed that the water pressure repair was the landlord’s responsibility.
  3. The landlord’s repairs policy states that routine repairs will be completed within 15 working days. The initial repair request was raised on 2 August 2022 and responded to the following day, with a contractor instructed to assess the issue on 9 August 2022. Although the landlord responded in accordance to its timescales for routine repair, no repair work was carried out.
  4. According to the landlord’s summary of events provided to this Service, there was no access to the property on 9 August 2022 and 3 January 2023. There is no evidence of whether this was followed up. Given that the landlord was aware of an outstanding repair issue, it should have contacted the resident to discuss the no access and rearrange another appointment. The issue had an adverse impact on the resident’s bathing amenities, and it had been ongoing for months. It was therefore unreasonable that it failed to follow this up and rearrange the inspection in a timely manner.
  5. Further repair reports raised in February and March 2023 were not responded to. This was not reasonable and the landlord should not have ignored the resident’s repair requests. Additionally, on 8 August 2024, the resident reported having no hot water. The resident followed this up again on 16 August 2024, after which the landlord attended the property on the same day to carry out the repair. This delay in the landlord arranging the repair was a further failing.
  6. The landlord confirmed to us that repair remained incomplete and no permanent solution had been provided, a year after the stage 2 response, and just about 3 years after the resident’s reports from August 2022. While it is appreciated that this was a complex repair, this length of time was unreasonable.
  7. The landlord, however took a resolution focused approach. We have seen evidence that it considered the issue internally, worked with its contractors and the manufacturer to explore cost-effective options and followed professional advice to resolve this issue. The landlord carried out repairs including installation of the booster and mixer in August 2023 and further repairs in August 2024. The landlord explained the delays in completing some of those repairs were due to a change in contractors which affected its ability to investigate promptly.
  8. However, the length of delay exceeded what would reasonably be considered an acceptable timeframe. We have seen evidence of delays in approving the initial quote and various alternative repairs which were considered and undertaken. Furthermore, the interim measures did not resolve the issue fully and only temporarily fixed the problem. The landlord failed to consider the impact of this on the resident. Given the adverse impact on the resident, it should have monitored the repairs, implemented a permanent and comprehensive solution sooner and involved the required professionals.
  9. During the 3-year delay, the resident had use of a bathtub but he could not use the shower properly. The resident informed this Service that the issue had deteriorated to an extent where a small bucket took 4 to 5 minutes to fill. The resident was further inconvenienced by having to raise multiple reports with the landlord and multiple appointments for repairs and this caused a considerable inconvenience to the resident and his family.
  10. Prior to receiving the stage 1 response and on 30 July 2023, the resident requested to be moved to a property with a working shower. This Service could not find any evidence that the landlord considered this request or the impact of not having a fully working shower on the resident and the household.  We have therefore ordered the landlord to discuss this request with the resident. If the resident is dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of this, he can raise a new formal complaint with the landlord.
  11. Where there are delays, a landlord should be proactive in communicating with the resident, explaining the reasons for the delays, as well as providing updated indicative timeframes. In this case, the resident had to chase the landlord on various occasions during these 3 years and seek help from this Service. This was unreasonable and caused him distress and inconvenience. Additionally, this was a recurring issue and various repairs were carried out. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to set out a clear action plan to resolve this “well known” issue affecting the block of flats instead of being reactive to the resident’s report.
  12. Email correspondence on 19 May 2023 and 28 June 2023 between the landlord and its contractor showed doubt about what the issue was and its severity as during inspections hot water was working. The contractor did not take the resident’s concerns seriously.However, a joint inspection took place on 29 June 2023and it confirmed the resident’s reports that the water pressure remained an issue and further repairs were necessary. This was inappropriate and contributed to the overall delay.It also demonstrated that the landlord did not always take the resident’s concern seriously, which was unreasonable as the landlord was aware of the complexity of the issue.
  13. In its stage 2 response dated 17 July 2024, the landlord stated that it had taken learning from this complaint to prevent a reoccurrence and was working closely with its contractors to improve communication and timely repairs. It acknowledged the need to improve communication around appointments and repairs. However, its further action did not support this and this repair remained outstanding 13 months after the stage 2 response. This demonstrates that the landlord did not take learning from this complaint and did not follow up in a timely manner.
  14. While the landlord informed this Service on 30 July 2025 that there had been no further reports made by the resident since August 2024, an inspection on 4 February 2025 confirmed the ongoing water pressure issue. The inspection recommended that the landlord installs a new pump and to carry out a full mechanical and electrical survey to increase the water pressure. The landlord informed us that it had scheduled the appointment to carry out these works on 26 August 2025.
  15. On 4 February 2025, after this Service requested information, the landlord offered an increased compensation to a total of £500 to the resident for the inconvenience caused by the time taken to find a long-term solution. However, the landlord missed an opportunity to resolve this matter in a timely manner as this was not done until a year after the end of its complaints process. The compensation review was prompted by this Service’s involvement and the landlord should have calculated proportionate compensation in relation to its failures in a timely manner. The earlier offer of £100 under its complaints process was not proportionate to the failings identified in this report.
  16. In summary, while the landlord took a number of steps to investigate and provide a solution it failed to raise and progress the works within a reasonable timeframe, resolve the issue fully, consider the impact on the household, and communicate effectively with the resident during the delay period. Once it had identified its failing, it continued to fail to provide updates, address the adverse impact on the resident from the partial loss of bathing amenities and continued inconvenience. Given the above failings and considering that the issue has still not been resolved, we have made a finding of maladministration.
  17. An order for a total of £900 has been made to reflect the impact caused to the resident. This includes the landlord’s previous offers and has been calculated at £25 per month since August 2022. An order has also been made for the landlord to arrange a post inspection within 4 weeks of the appointment scheduled for 26 August 2025 to establish if the repair was successful.
  18. The landlord acknowledged the need to learn from this complaint and improve communication around appointments and timely repairs by allocating more resources. However, it did not demonstrate this with further appropriate and timely action after its stage 2 response. Furthermore, as the issue has not been resolved for over 13 months following stage 2 response, it further demonstrates the landlord has not taken any learning and made improvements. We have therefore ordered that the landlord to review its handling of this matter.

The associated complaint

  1. The landlord failed to log the complaint submitted on 12 January 2023 and this caused delays and inconvenience to the resident. The resident chased a response on 4 occasions, including visiting the landlord’s office in person. Furthermore, he contacted this Service for help. The resident should be able to submit a complaint and receive a stage 1 response within 10 working days without inconvenience of involving this Service.
  2. On 1 November 2023, this Service instructed the landlord to provide a stage 1 response by 22 November 2023. The landlord missed the deadline and failed to provide an update. It also failed to acknowledge this further delay in the response. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 25 January 2024, a year after the initial complaint. This was unreasonable and unexplained delay.
  3. On 4 February 2025, in its follow up review after this Service requested information, the landlord offered revised compensation to the resident. It offered a £100 compensation for the delay in providing a response at stage 1. Given the length of the delay, the inconvenience caused, the failure to meet this Service’s deadline and further complaint handling failures, the compensation offered was not proportionate. We have therefore ordered that the landlord pays a total of £200 compensation. This includes the landlord’s previous offer of £100.
  4. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s request to escalate his complaint, which he requested on 27 January 2024. Therefore, this Service had to direct the landlord a second time, to provide a stage 2 response by 17 July 2024. This was inappropriate as the landlord did not demonstrate it had taken any learning or made improvements from its failures at stage 1. While the landlord met this deadline, the stage 2 response was sent 6 months after the escalation request.The landlord failed to acknowledge its complaint handling failures during its complaints process and missed this opportunity toput things right in a timely manner.
  5. In the landlord’s revised compensation offer, it offered £100 compensation for the delay in providing the stage 2 response. While this was an attempt to put things right, this was done after the end of its complaints process and the compensation review was prompted by this Service’s involvement.
  6. Additionally, the landlord despite acknowledging some failures in its follow up review, it did not consider any learning and need to improve its complaint handling process. We have therefore ordered that the landlord reviews the case in relation to how it responded to formal complaints, in particular delayed complaints and steps it could take to improve services.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the water pressure repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay £900 compensation(including £500 offered prior to this investigation if not paid already) to the resident in recognition of the inconvenience caused by its handling of the water pressure repairs.
    3. Undertake a post inspection after the planned repair works in August 2025.
    4. To contact the resident to discuss his request for decant.
    5. Pay £300 compensation (including £200 offered prior to this investigation if not paid already) to the resident in recognition of the time and trouble caused by its complaint handling failures.
  2.  Within 6 weeks from the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to consider the failings identified in this report and complete a case review into its handling of repairs and complaints to identify how it can prevent similar failings happening again. The landlord should provide the outcome of the review to the Ombudsman and the review should have a particular focus on:
    1. How it responded to the repair.
    2. How it responds to formal complaints, in particular delayed complaints.
    3. What steps it should take to improve its services in relation to the above.
  3. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to provide evidence of compliance with the above orders within their respective timeframes.