Origin Housing Limited (202308589)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202308589

Origin Housing Limited

18 December 2024

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 repairs to the boiler.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord in a 3-bedroom flat, which she occupies with her 3 children. She is disabled and has a mobility issue which the landlord is aware of.
On 29 September 2022 the resident reported a loss of heating and hot water to the landlord. The landlord’s contractor attended the property on 3 October 2022 and found that the boiler needed a new thermostat. They subsequently fitted new controls to the boiler on 17 October 2022. On 10 January 2023 the resident reported a fault with the thermostat. The contractor attended on 12 January 2023 and found the thermostat was too complicated for the resident and on 19 January 2023 replaced it with a new one.
The contractor attended the property on 6 February 2023 and found the flue inside the boiler was leaking and the pressure kept dropping. On 22 February 2023 and 28 February 2023, they undertook work to resolve these issues. They also recommended that a survey be carried out for a new boiler.
On 22 March 2023 following a further report of a loss of heating and hot water the resident complained to the landlord. In summary, she said that over the past few months, she had experienced several instances of the boiler breaking down leaving her without heating and hot water. She was concerned that despite attempts to fix the issue the problem persisted, and she felt the boiler was beyond repair. She added that the lack of reliable heating and hot water made her living situation particularly challenging given her disability and the needs of her children. As a resolution, she wanted the boiler replaced.
On 12 April 2023 the landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaints process. It acknowledged there had been issues with the boiler. It said its contractor had informed it that they had left the resident with heating and hot water at each visit. However, it recognised that the resident had advised that this was not the case and apologised for the disruption and inconvenience caused. It added that further work to the boiler had taken place, but it did not warrant a replacement. It felt that the works were managed well while awaiting new parts and there was no reason to suggest the boiler would fail again. It offered £90 compensation in recognition of the stress the work would have caused, the inconvenience of not having a fully functional boiler and being left intermittently without heating or hot water for approximately 4 weeks.
The resident escalated her complaint on 29 April 2023. She said the flue issue had not been resolved despite several visits from the contractor. She said the boiler was unreliable and would constantly break down leaving the household without heating or hot water. She explained that after reporting issues with her thermostat on 10 January 2023 she was left without heating or hot water for 9 days and another 4 days following her report on 2 February 2023. She felt the contractor had not addressed the underlying issue that caused the pressure to drop. She added that she increased the pressure manually, but this stopped working, leaving her without heating or hot water for nearly 2 weeks. On 5 May 2023 the contractor fitted a new flue to the boiler.
The landlord issued its stage 2 final response on 8 June 2023. It agreed with its stage 1 response. It said that although the boiler had experienced breakdowns the issues were repairable, and it would not replace it. It acknowledged that on some occasions parts may have taken longer to be installed and it would continue to monitor the boiler and review whether it needed to be replaced.
Dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response the resident referred her complaint to this Service for investigation. As an outcome she wanted the landlord to replace the boiler.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the boiler

When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution:

a. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.

b. Put things right.

c. Learn from outcomes.

The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.
The landlord’s repair policy states that it is responsible for repairs to gas installations such as boilers. Where there is a heating or hot water failure between October to March this will be treated as an emergency repair and attended to within 2 hours to ‘make safe’ and repair if possible. It adds that if further works are required, residents will be contacted the following day with a suitable appointment. It states that it will aim to complete non-urgent routine repairs within 10 working days but in exceptional circumstances, it may take up to 20 working days. It adds that it recognises it has vulnerable residents living in its properties and at its discretion it may tailor its service to these households when appropriate.
On 29 September 2022 the resident reported a loss of heating and hot water. The landlord’s repair records showed a target date for attendance for the next day. However, its contractor did not attend until 3 October 2022, 4 days later. While this report was made just before October it is unclear why the contractor did not attend within the landlord’s target timescale. Indeed, given the household’s circumstances, it would have been appropriate to do so. Further, it is unclear if the resident was without heating and hot water for these 4 days.
Upon attendance, the contractor found a defective thermostat and fitted new controls to the boiler on 17 October 2022. Although the repair was carried out within its policy timescales, it is again unclear if the resident was without heating or hot water during this period. Moreover, it is concerning that when the resident reported a faulty thermostat again on 10 January 2023 the same contractor noted the thermostat was too complicated for the resident. This would suggest that when they fitted the controls on 17 October 2022 they had not carefully considered the household’s needs.
The contractor did not install the new thermostat until 19 January 2023. While it is appreciated that an electrician was needed to carry out this work, the resident asserted that she was without heating and hot water over these 9 days. As the landlord has not provided any evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to conclude that this was likely the case. This would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident who had to live in cold conditions during the winter months. Furthermore, the adverse effect was exacerbated due to the resident’s disability.
On 26 January 2023 the contractor carried out an annual gas safety check. Their records showed that at this check they found the boiler flue was leaking and that this, along with the expansion vessel and pressure relief valve needed replacement. Yet no immediate action was taken to resolve these issues. The resident said in her escalation request that she reported having no heating and hot water again on 2 February 2023 due to the boiler’s low pressure. However, there is no record of this report which likely indicates issues with the landlord’s record keeping.
Nonetheless, the landlord did not dispute this, and its contractor inspected the boiler on 6 February 2023. This was 4 days after the resident’s report and was contrary to the landlord’s emergency timescales. Further, they found the same issues as the ones they had already identified on 26 January 2023. This likely indicated no repair order was raised to resolve these matters following the gas safety check. This was a failure on the landlord’s part and would have caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident who continued to report issues with the boiler.
The contractor completed the repairs to resolve these problems on 28 February 2023. Their repair records state that the heating and hot water worked afterwards. This would suggest that the heating and hot water was not working beforehand. Indeed, the resident asserted she was without heating and hot water for around 2 weeks in February 2023. Again, the landlord did not dispute this. Further, this Service recognises that following the contractor’s 28 February 2023 visit, they recommended a survey be carried out for a new boiler, noting that the current one was ‘quite old’. However, there is no evidence that the landlord surveyed the boiler as recommended.
The landlord’s record shows that the resident has reported issues with her boiler from 2016 to 2024. Given that she has raised multiple concerns about the boiler and a loss of heating and hot water over several years, the landlord should consider whether the boiler needs replacing. Furthermore, the landlord’s final response said it would continue to monitor the boiler and review it for replacement, yet the Ombudsman has not seen any evidence of this.
On 22 March 2023 the resident again reported a loss of heating and hot water. On this occasion, the contractor attended the same day and found a ‘slight leak’ from the boiler’s flue seal. However, it is unclear what or if any action was taken to remedy this or whether the resident had heating and hot water after this visit. Moreover, the contractor records indicated that when they attended to this repair on 14 April 2023 they had an incorrect flue seal and instead carried out a temporary repair to resolve the leak. However, it is again unclear whether, after this temporary repair, the resident had heating and hot water. The contractor fitted a new flue on 4 May 2024 around 6 weeks after the resident’s 22 March 2023 report. This was outside the landlord’s repair timescales and would have caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident.
Overall, the landlord’s handling of repairs to the boiler was poor and it did not act fairly in this case. It regularly failed to attend to reports within its target and repair timescales and did not adequately consider the urgency of these matters given the resident’s disability. Furthermore, its repair records were unsatisfactory and lacked detail. The landlord’s stage 1 response suggested it was unsure whether the resident had been left with heating and hot water after its contractor’s visits and their records were unclear in this respect. This demonstrated a lack of oversight on the landlord’s part. Additionally, having recognised that the resident had at times been without heating or hot water, the landlord should have considered if any interim measures were needed, such as temporary heaters. However, there was no evidence it had considered this, and the landlord failed to tailor its service in this respect.
Although the landlord offered £90 compensation in its stage 1 response this did not adequately reflect the level of detriment caused to the resident for the failings identified in this report. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests awards of up to £600 should be considered where there are failings that have adversely affected the resident, and where the offer of compensation was not proportionate to the failures identified. This Service has therefore found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of boiler repairs and orders are made below for remedy.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will take learning from complaints seriously and will ensure that lessons learnt from the complaints process are used to inform service improvements. Its policy also sets out that as part of a stage 2 investigation, it will focus on whether relevant policies and procedures were followed and whether there is any further information or evidence that is now available that was not supplied or available at the time of the initial stage 1 investigation.
The landlord’s stage 2 response was unsatisfactory and appeared hurried. It lacked detail and did not address all the resident’s points despite her providing it with specific dates of when she said she was without heating or hot water. Further, the resident’s escalation request included new information some of which had occurred after the landlord’s stage 1 response. However, the landlord did not address these matters in its final response. The landlord failed to consider this new information in line with its policy nor did it fully respond to all the key points she had raised. This would have caused frustration to the resident who already felt the landlord had not adequately addressed her concerns.
Also, had the landlord fully investigated the complaint it would have likely realised that its repair policy timescales were not followed in this case. This is particularly concerning as the resident indicated as such in both her complaint and escalation request.
Overall, the landlord’s responses demonstrated it had not fully considered the adverse effect this situation had on the resident, particularly given her disability. The landlord failed to learn from the complaint and did not take the resident’s escalation request seriously. It did not act fairly or in accordance with its own complaints policy and failed to focus on whether it had followed its policies and procedures in this case. Had it carried out a full and fair investigation, it would have identified clear service failures that could have been used to inform service improvements. This amounts to service failure and orders are made below for remedy.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the boiler.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders

The landlord must do the following within the next 4 weeks:
1. Provide a written apology for the failures identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident compensation of £590 comprised of:
  1. £90 as offered in its stage 1 response if it has not done so already.
  2. A further £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of boiler repairs.
  3. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling.
3. Appoint an independent specialist heating surveyor and instruct them to carry out a survey of the boiler. An appointment to carry out this survey must be arranged within 28 days of the date of this determination. The survey must:
  1. Assess whether the boiler is in proper working order or whether there is disrepair.
  2. If there are repairs, what repairs will put the boiler in proper working order. It must also consider whether a replacement boiler is needed.
4. Within 8 weeks the landlord must provide a copy of the survey report to the Ombudsman and the resident and provide an action plan on what steps it intends to take.
Within the next 8 weeks, the landlord must:
1. Review this decision and the failures set out within it. The landlord should consider if its repairs record keeping is satisfactory and whether its contractor and complaint handling staff need any feedback and/or training based on the failures found in this report. In doing so, the landlord must:
  1. Consider the cause of each of the failures in this report.
  2. Why they occurred.
  3. What it will do to prevent these failures from happening again.
2. The landlord must then produce a written report on its reflections on this and what actions it will take to prevent similar failures in future. It must share a copy of this report with the resident and the Ombudsman. This is in accordance with paragraph 54g of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.
The landlord should provide this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescale set out above.