Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited (202227356)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202227356

Rochdale Boroughwide Housing Limited

15 April 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of and response to:
    1. The resident’s reports of repairs required to the heating system.
    2. The complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the property which is a 2-bedroom maisonette.
  2. On 27 November 2022 the resident reported that her upstairs bedroom heater was not working, and the landlord scheduled the repair for 5 December 2022. The resident has provided screenshots to the Ombudsman which show that she raised further reports via the landlord’s portal on 3 December 2022 stating that none of the radiators were working.
  3. The landlord attended the property on 5 December 2022. Its records state that the repair was completed and it “refilled boiler and vented all upstairs radiators, tested ch (central heating) and controls all worked fine”.
  4. The resident made a formal complaint on 8 December 2022 in which she said the heating was not working and she was unable to get through to the landlord when trying to report it. She said she logged it and did not know if it had been looked at. The resident said she had a 1 year old baby who was ill and the property was not suitable for staying in. She said the windows had condensation as a result of not being able to warm the house. She requested that the landlord send someone out as a matter of urgency to fix it.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 11 January 2023. It apologised for the excessive wait time for the resident’s call to be answered, it said it had exceptionally high call enquiries over the period and was unable to answer all calls. It said to help improve the service, resources were re-allocated from other areas of the organisation, and it was carrying out a recruitment campaign for additional advisors. The landlord said the resident’s heating system was repaired on 5 December 2022 and that was within its timescale.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint on 30 January 2023. The reasons for the escalation were that she believed the repair was not within target timescale and should have been attended to as an emergency. She said the phone line was closed when she tried to report the matter on 26 and 27 November 2022. The resident also felt that she should be paid compensation.
  7. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 6 February 2023 and stated the following:
    1. The job from 27 November 2022 which stated that a radiator was not heating up would not be classed as an emergency repair. It said the target date for her repair was 27 February 2023 and it attended on 5 December 2022, therefore there was no service failure. It said an emergency repair would be when a customer had no heating at all.
    2. It reiterated that it was unable to answer all calls over the period in which the resident contacted it. It confirmed that its service for reporting emergency repairs was open 24 hours a day. The landlord offered a goodwill gesture of £40 to take into account the problems the resident experienced when attempting to call and the inconvenience caused.
  8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and brought her complaint to the Ombudsman. She said the repair was not within the correct timescales as while she initially reported 1-2 heaters not working, she later reported that she had no heating at all. The resident said that she had tried to get through on the phone but was on hold for hours and gave up. She said she would like more compensation for the delay in repairs and a personal apology.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of and response to the resident’s reports of repairs required to the heating system.

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for all fittings and fixtures it has provided for the supply of gas and electricity. This includes boilers and central heating systems.
  2. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that a priority level 1 or 2 repair would be attended to on the same day or within 24 hours. It states that having no heating would be a priority 1 or 2. Priority 3 would be within 60 calendar days and priority 4 within 90 calendar days. The policy does not specifically refer to partial loss of heating and what category that would fit in.
  3. The Decent Homes Standard 2006 states that even if the central heating system covers most of the house making a dwelling decent, under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) a landlord must be sure that the home is warm enough for the occupant.
  4. When the resident first reported the “upstairs bedroom heater” not working on 27 November 2022, the landlord scheduled a repair for 5 December 2022. At the time, the resident had not reported full loss of heating, and therefore it appears to have been categorised as a priority 4. While the landlord scheduled the repair for 5 working days later, the target date of 27 February 2023 was not appropriate. The landlord should reflect on its repairs policy and provide clarification on its timeframe to respond to partial loss of heating, especially in winter months.
  5. The resident had a 1 year old baby who was unwell and while she did not inform the landlord of this at the time of reporting, the landlord should have done more to understand the impact on the household prior to scheduling the repair. The landlord could have offered temporary heating to the resident if it could not attend sooner but there is no evidence that it did.
  6. The landlord’s records do not show any further reports made by the resident. The resident has provided screenshots to the Ombudsman which indicate that she made 2 further reports on 3 December 2022 that none of the radiators were working in the property. One report is labelled as completed on 5 December 2022 and the other is labelled as cancelled. In line with its repairs policy, the landlord should have attended on the same day or within 24 hours. The landlord attended and completed the repair on 5 December 2022, which means that it was outside of its repair obligations to respond to the total loss of heating by 1 day.
  7. The resident did not refer to the further reports made on 3 December 2022 within her complaint to the landlord, however, she made it clear that she felt the repair should have been classed as an emergency. The landlord’s records should have reflected the 2 further reports on 3 December 2022. It is not appropriate that the records provided to the Ombudsman do not evidence the additional reports made and that no reference was made to them in the landlord’s complaint responses.
  8. In her formal complaint the resident referred to the difficulties she had with reporting the issues. The landlord acknowledged this in its complaint responses, it outlined what action it had taken to ensure it would not happen again and offered £40 as a good will gesture. While the Ombudsman can appreciate the inconvenience caused to the resident, the landlord’s response to the difficulties in reporting the issues was reasonable.
  9. Overall, there was service failure by the landlord in its poor communication in response to the resident’s reports of repairs. The Ombudsman has found that the landlord failed to outline how it assessed the impact of the reports made and how its handling of them was fair in all the circumstances. Although the repair was resolved within 5 working days, it is concerning that the landlord categorised the loss of partial heating as its lowest priority.

The landlord’s handling of and response to the complaint.

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy provides for a 2-stage process. It aims to respond to complaints within 10 working days at stage 1 and 15 working days at stage 2. It states that in exceptional circumstances, the customer will be notified should more time be required to investigate and provide a full response.
  2. The landlord’s compensation policy outlines the criteria for discretionary payments as severe inconvenience to the customer due to:
    1. Delays in providing a service, unreasonable time taken to resolve a problem and/or follow policy and procedure, temporary loss of amenity and/or part of the home.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 1 response within 21 working days. This was outside of its specified timeframe; however, the landlord contacted the resident on 21 December 2022 to confirm that it would not be able to provide a full response within timescale. It said it would aim to respond by 13 January 2023. The landlord’s internal records show that action was taken prior to its response to ensure that the issue was resolved and to contact the resident. While it is unclear why the landlord needed more time to investigate, the landlord’s actions were reasonable, and in line with its policy.
  4. The landlord provided a thorough response regarding the call wait times and what actions it had taken to put it right. The offer of £40 as a goodwill gesture was reasonable and the response was in line with the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles of being fair, putting things right, and learning from outcomes.
  5. Unfortunately, this was not replicated in relation to the resident’s complaint that the repair should have been responded to within 24 hours. The landlord has not been able to evidence that it investigated the complaint thoroughly as the reports made by the resident on the 3 December 2022 were not addressed. As such, the landlord did not put right this element of the complaint.
  6. Overall, an attempt was made to put things right. However, the landlord did not do enough to address the resident’s complaint that the repair should have been responded to sooner. The Ombudsman has therefore found service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of and response to the complaint.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of and response to the resident’s reports of repairs required to the heating system.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of and response to the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is to provide an apology to the resident for its handling of and response to her reports of repairs required to the heating system.
  2. The landlord is to pay the resident a total of £100 compensation. This is inclusive of the £40 previously offered by the landlord. This is comprised of:
    1. £100 to account for the resident’s distress caused by the landlord’s communication failures.
  3. The landlord is to provide compliance with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord is to reflect on its repairs policy and the lack of clarity in relation to partial loss of heating. It should consider updating its policy to reflect its position on partial loss of heating and the timeframe in which it should respond to such reports, in line with the Decent Homes Standard 2006 and the HHSRS.