Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

Soho Housing Association Limited (202411916)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202411916

Soho Housing Association Limited

30 September 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. Reports about the hot water supply to the resident’s bath and shower.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. For the purposes of this report, we will refer to both the resident and his representatives as the ‘resident’.
  2. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord, which began on 10 July 1995. The landlord is a housing association. The resident lives in a 2-bedroom flat. The resident has an illness that compromises his immune system, which the landlord is aware of.
  3. On 15 October 2023, the resident said he had previously told the landlord about the lack of hot water to his bath and shower, which had been ongoing for 13 years. He said the water supply to his bath and shower was only lukewarm even when he set the temperature to maximum.
  4. On 29 and 31 October 2023, the resident reported that he had no heating or hot water, for which the landlord raised emergency repairs. When a contractor attended on 1 November 2023, it identified that it needed to fit a new plate heat exchanger in the boiler. Due to this, the resident asked the landlord to delay a surveyor appointment from 2 November 2023 until after the contractor had revisited.
  5. On 14 November 2023, due to the boiler repair not resolving the hot water issue in the bathroom, the contractor suggested that a plumber should replace the mixer tap on the bath. This work took place on 6 December 2023 but did not resolve the issue.
  6. On 7 December 2023, the resident said the plumbing inside the bathroom wall where the shower was installed was the cause of the lack of hot water to his bath and shower.
  7. On 24 June 2024, the resident complained to the landlord about a lack of hot water to his bath and shower; the key points were as follows:
    1. Since the landlord installed a shower 13 years prior, he had repeatedly reported that his bath and shower did not provide a reliable hot water supply. The landlord had made some unsuccessful attempts to resolve this.
    2. Having to wash in the sink or use his neighbour’s shower had impacted his physical and mental health. He had an illness that compromised his immune system.
    3. The landlord had stopped communicating with him. He had made countless complaints over 13 years, but it had failed to follow its complaints policy.
    4. He asked for a repair to provide a consistent hot water supply to his bath and shower. He requested alternative living arrangements until the landlord resolved this, and compensation for 13 years of stress, deterioration of health and a lack of access to basic living conditions.
  8. The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response on 29 July 2024; the key points were as follows:
    1. It apologised for the service experienced.
    2. Following the most recent gas safety check on 16 October 2023, its contractor reported that the property had heating and hot water. However, it received additional correspondence stating that the hot water issue remained in December 2023. The contractor suggested installing mixer taps to ‘potentially help regulate the temperature in the shower’. Mixer taps were then installed.
    3. Its contractor would revisit to investigate the issue. Following this, it would consider its contractor’s suggestion to ensure the resident’s bathroom had a consistent hot water supply.
  9. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and asked to escalate the complaint to stage 2 on 29 July 2024; the key points were as follows:
    1. The landlord had not considered the ‘extreme length of time’ that the issue had been ongoing.
    2. It had not acknowledged or apologised for the delay in its complaint handling.
    3. The gas safety visit information was contradictory and not in line with his evidence and notes that there was no reliable hot water supply to his bath and shower. The installation of mixer taps did not make a difference.
    4. It had not provided details of any previous investigations or repairs.
    5. It had not offered compensation, nor had it offered alternative living arrangements until it resolved hot water supply to his bath and shower.
  10. The landlord issued a stage 2 response on 22 November 2024; the key points were as follows:
    1. It understood that works completed in 2012 had caused the hot water not to work in the resident’s shower, and that this had failed to work ever since. The resident had explained that the shower had hot water for a minute but did not remain hot, and that he had been unable to shower in the property.
    2. A contractor surveyed the issue on 2 September 2024, but no follow-on works were completed.
    3. It acknowledged that not having a working shower had impacted the resident’s day-to-day living and caused frustration. Despite multiple attempts to resolve this, it had left the resident without a working shower. It offered £500 compensation for distress caused and £2,000 compensation for the length of time that the resident had been without a shower.
    4. It apologised for its delayed response to the resident’s stage 2 escalation request and acknowledged that it had not apologised for the previous delay in its stage 1 response. It offered £250 compensation for its delayed stage 2 response.
    5. There was no issue with the boiler. It needed to investigate the plumbing of the shower, particularly behind the wall, and would visit with a contractor on 9 December 2024 to assess this. It would then arrange a repair to ensure that the shower had a working hot water supply.
    6. The resident had not accepted its offer of a move to temporary accommodation, which would remain open.
    7. It would consider awarding further compensation once it had resolved the issue.
    8. The resident could contact this Service if he remained unhappy.

Events Post Internal Complaints Process

  1. The complaint became one that we could consider on 4 July 2025.
  2. On 18 June 2025, the landlord paid the resident £2,750 compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. We would expect a resident to raise a formal complaint with the landlord within 12 months of an issue arising. Based on this, we have started our investigation at the earliest event that we are able to evidence in the 12 months prior to the resident’s complaint. This was when the resident told the landlord on 15 October 2023 that he had been experiencing problems with the temperature of his bath and shower for 13 years, which he said he had previously reported. This investigation considers how the landlord approached matters starting from this point, and subsequently up to its final stage 2 response on 22 November 2024.
  2. In his complaint to the landlord, the resident explained that the lack of hot water to his bath and shower had affected his physical and mental health. Personal injury claims are more appropriate for a court because they can obtain independent medical evidence. The resident has the choice to seek legal advice if he wishes. This Service is an informal alternative to the courts. It is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages.

Landlord’s handling of reports about the hot water supply to the resident’s bath and shower

  1. The landlord does not dispute that there were failings in its handling of this matter. Where the landlord admits failings, our role is to consider whether it resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances and offered appropriate redress. In considering this, we assess whether the landlord’s actions were in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  2. On 15 October 2023, the resident said he had experienced problems with his bath and shower since the landlord installed a shower 13 years prior. He said he explained during a meeting with the landlord the previous month that the water in his bath and shower was only lukewarm even at maximum heat. He said the shower was ‘unbearable’, as he could sometimes only shower for a couple of minutes before the water went cold whereas some days the water would only be cold. Under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord is obliged to keep in repair and proper working order installations for heating water. It is also obliged to complete repairs within a reasonable timeframe. The Housing Health and Safety Rating System, prepared in consideration of the Housing Act 2004, also states that landlords should provide properly connected/fitted baths/showers.
  3. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy says it will complete routine repairs within 20 days. On 16 October 2023, it asked the resident’s availability for a surveyor visit over the next couple of weeks. On 23 October 2023, the resident asked what dates were available. The landlord responded the next day to provide these, which was reasonable in the circumstances.
  4. The next contact was on 29 October 2023, when the resident reported by email that he did not have any hot water in his bath or shower and wanted someone to attend as soon as possible. He said he had serious health issues and disabilities, and that it was embarrassing that he had to ask to use his neighbour’s shower. On 30 October 2023, the landlord appropriately raised an emergency job to restore the resident’s hot water within 4 hours and arranged for a surveyor to attend 3 days later. However, the landlord has not provided any further details regarding the emergency repair or how soon it attended, which indicates an issue with its record keeping. There is also no evidence that it completed a risk assessment or took any other steps to consider the resident’s vulnerability at any stage, which showed a lack of empathy for his situation.
  5. The landlord does not have a vulnerable resident’s policy. However, given the known vulnerability of the resident, it would be expected under both the Equality Act 2010 and the Social Housing Regulator’s Tenant Involvement and Empowerment Standard, to demonstrate that it had taken steps to ensure it understood the needs of the resident and to demonstrate that it had responded to those needs in the way it provided its services.
  6. On 31 October 2023, the resident again reported that he had no heating or hot water. The landlord appropriately raised another emergency repair. In line with the timeframe set out in its responsive repairs policy, it should have attended within 4 hours. However, there is no evidence that a contractor attended until 1 November 2023. This is a failing, which likely caused the resident inconvenience and distress during a colder time of year.
  7. A landlord is entitled to rely on its contractors’ assessments. The contractor identified that it needed to fit a new plate heat exchanger in the boiler following a previous ‘service call’. However, there is no evidence of a previous visit, which indicates an issue with the landlord’s record keeping. It is also unclear whether the contractor restored the resident’s heating and hot water during the emergency visit, or whether it discussed alternative options such as moving the resident to temporary accommodation. This further indicates an issue with the landlord’s record keeping. It also shows a disregard for the resident’s situation.
  8. The resident asked the landlord if it would delay the surveyor visit arranged for 2 November 2023 until after the contractor had repaired the boiler. However, the repair did not resolve the issue regarding the hot water supply to the resident’s bath and shower so, on 14 November 2023, the contractor suggested that the landlord arrange for a plumber to replace the mixer tap on the bath. The landlord raised the job with a plumber the same day and updated the resident. This was appropriate and prevented further delay.
  9. The resident said the plumber cancelled 3 appointments before attending on 6 December 2023. We do not doubt the resident’s account. However, there is no independent evidence to corroborate events. Therefore, it is not possible for this investigation to make a determination on this point. The landlord has also not provided any details regarding the plumber’s visit, which, again, indicates an issue with its record keeping.
  10. On 7 December 2023, the resident said the plumbing inside the bathroom wall where the shower was installed was the cause of the lack of hot water to his bath and shower. The landlord’s failure to respond prompted the resident to pursue this on 11 December 2023. However, there is no evidence that the landlord took any action. This is a significant failing, as the landlord knew the resident had been without a working shower for an extensive period and he had also made it aware of his vulnerabilities. The ensuing gap in contact likely prompted the resident to raise a formal complaint on 24 June 2024.
  11. While the landlord’s failure to take any action during that time period of 6 months was not reasonable, there is also no evidence that the resident pursued a repair. Where there is such a gap in contact and the issue continues, there is also an onus on the resident to report the issue again. When the resident complained, that was an opportunity for the landlord to raise a repair. However, it took no action until the resident pursued the issue again on 26 July 2024. This was not appropriate and, again, showed a disregard for the resident’s situation.
  12. During that next contact, the resident reported that he had no hot water in his bathroom. The landlord appropriately raised an emergency repair that day. Although it should have attended within 4 hours in line with the timeframe set out in its responsive repairs policy, there is no evidence that a visit took place. This showed a lack of urgency and further disregard for the resident’s situation.
  13. It was not until 3 days later, on 29 July 2024, that the landlord pursued the emergency repair with its contractor. On the same day, it issued a stage 1 complaint response that said it would act on its contractor’s suggestion to ensure that the resident’s bathroom had a consistent hot water supply. Although the landlord told the resident how it intended to resolve the issue, we would have expected it to check that the emergency appointment had gone ahead sooner than it did.
  14. The landlord next followed up the emergency repair on 7 August 2024. It is unclear why it waited 9 days before pursuing this, which is a failing. We would expect a landlord to have a robust system in place to track and monitor repairs. However, the lack of urgency in following this up further shows a lack of effective communication between the landlord and contractor. It also showed a further lack of empathy for the resident’s situation.
  15. The contractor said it had agreed to visit on 2 September 2024 in line with the resident’s request. The reason for the delayed visit is unclear. It would have been useful for the landlord to contact the resident to understand why he had requested an appointment at such a time in the future and consider any temporary measures that it could provide in the meantime. That it did not do so is a failing.
  16. On 29 October 2024, the resident said no repairs had taken place. This is further evidence of a lack of communication between the landlord and contractor. A landlord should not discover from a resident that a repair has not taken place. By this time, the resident had reported a lack of hot water in his bathroom for over a year and had since raised a formal complaint. The landlord’s failure to complete any repair work and its subsequent failure to take any action following the resident’s latest contacts are significant failings.
  17. When the landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaints process on 22 November 2024, it acknowledged that the resident’s shower had not worked since 2012. It said it needed to investigate the plumbing of the shower, particularly behind the wall, and would visit to assess this. Following the visit, it would arrange a repair to ensure that the resident’s shower had a working hot water supply. It said its offer of a move to temporary accommodation in the meantime would remain open despite the resident declining this. Although we consider the landlord’s proposals reasonable, they were significantly delayed given the ongoing issues reported by the resident. It is unclear why the landlord did not acknowledge how long the issue had been ongoing when responding at stage 1. The landlord has also not provided any evidence regarding when it discussed a temporary move with the resident, which further indicates an issue with its record keeping.
  18. This landlord offered £2,000 compensation for the length of time that the resident had been without a working shower and £500 for distress caused. It also said it would consider awarding further compensation once it had resolved the issue. The resident’s inability to use his bath and shower for an unacceptably long period due to a lack of hot water impacted his enjoyment of the property. The landlord’s failure to keep an overview of the issue meant he had to repeatedly pursue this.
  19. We consider it appropriate to require that the landlord provides financial redress that recognises the loss of the use of the bath and shower. The landlord’s compensation policy proposes a ‘20% net rent reduction’ where there is a loss of hot water for over a week. The period considered for this calculation is 15 October 2023, when the resident reported that he had been experiencing problems with the hot water supply to his bath and shower for 13 years, up to the landlord’s final complaint response on 22 November 2024. Therefore, the landlord should reimburse 20% of the resident’s net rent for the period from 15 October 2023 to 22 November 2024, minus the £2,000 that it previously offered.
  20. The landlord failed to repair the hot water supply to the resident’s bath and shower, which meant he was unable to shower or bathe in his home despite reporting this on numerous occasions. This no doubt inconvenienced and distressed the resident. This meant that the landlord did not comply with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 or its own repairs policy. The excessive length of time that the resident was without a working bath or shower represents severe maladministration due to the significant long-term impact that this had on him.
  21. Although we were able to determine this case using the information that was available, the lack of information provided by the landlord hampered us in our investigation. It is vital that landlords keep clear and accurate records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures. A further order has therefore been made that the landlord conduct a review of its record keeping processes, ensuring that there is a clear audit trail for any repairs and communication with residents.

Complaint handling

  1. The resident logged a formal complaint with the landlord on 24 June 2024.
  2. In accordance with its complaints policy, the landlord should have acknowledged the complaint within 5 working days and issued a stage 1 response within a further 10 working days. If this could not be met, it should have agreed an extension of up to a further 10 working days with the resident.
  3. The landlord did not acknowledge the complaint, which was not in line with its complaints process. This prompted the resident to pursue a response on 4 July 2024, which likely caused him inconvenience.
  4. On 5 July 2024, the landlord apologised for the delay and said it would respond within 10 working days. However, its failure to do this prompted the resident to contact it again on 19 July 2024 and likely caused him further inconvenience. The landlord apologised and said it would reply by the following week. It said it had been unable to discuss the case due to the surveyor being on annual leave. However, annual leave should not prevent a landlord from completing a thorough complaint investigation and its failure to do this while the surveyor was on leave suggests a lack of effective record keeping. It is also unclear why the landlord did not previously contact the resident to arrange an extension and manage his expectations regarding when he could reasonably expect to receive a response.
  5. The resident next pursued a reply on 26 July 2024. The landlord then issued a stage 1 response on 29 July 2024, which was 6 working days outside the timeframe specified in its complaints process.
  6. Also on 29 July 2024, the resident asked to escalate his complaint to stage 2.
  7. In accordance with its complaints policy, the landlord should have acknowledged the escalation within 5 working days and issued a stage 2 response within 20 working days. If this could not be met, it should have agreed an extension of up to a further 20 working days with the resident.
  8. The landlord did not acknowledge the escalation request, which was not in line with its complaints process. This prompted the resident to pursue a response 6 times between September 2024 and November 2024, which likely caused him inconvenience.
  9. The landlord said it would phone the resident on 12 November 2024, but this was not forthcoming. Its failure to contact the resident likely caused further frustration.
  10. On 15 November 2024, the landlord apologised for its lack of contact, following which it arranged a phone meeting for 19 November 2024. However, it has not provided any details of this meeting, which indicates an issue with its record keeping.
  11. The resident experienced a significant delay in the landlord issuing a stage 2 complaint response on 22 November 2024, which was 59 working days outside the timeframe specified in its complaints process.
  12. We would expect a landlord’s complaint responses to be written clearly. In this case, the landlord’s stage 2 response likely caused the resident confusion, as its explanation of its complaint handling was difficult to understand and its offer of compensation regarding the hot water supply to the shower incorrectly indicated that it had resolved the issue.
  13. Overall, the resident experienced complaint handling delays totalling 69 working days. The landlord’s failure to contact him meant he pursued a response on several occasions. It also failed to phone on one occasion. The landlord offered the resident £250 compensation for its delayed stage 2 response. However, this has not prevented a finding of maladministration for its complaint handling failures and an order has been made for remedy.
  14. On 8 February 2024, the Ombudsman issued the Complaint Handling Code (the Code). The Code sets out the requirements that landlords must meet when handling complaints in both policy and practice. The statutory Code applies from 1 April 2024. We have a duty to monitor compliance with the Code. We will assess landlords using our compliance framework and take action where there is evidence that the requirements set out in the Code are not being met. In this investigation, we found failures in complaint handling. The landlord should therefore consider the findings highlighted in this investigation when reviewing its policies and practices against the statutory Code.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of reports about the hot water supply to the resident’s bath and shower.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must provide us with evidence that it has:
    1. Issued a written apology for the distress caused by the failings identified.
    2. Contacted the resident to ascertain whether the issue regarding a lack of hot water to his bath and shower is still ongoing and establish a timebound action plan aimed at resolving this. The landlord should also establish whether it offered the resident a move to temporary accommodation and his position regarding this.
    3. Paid compensation totalling £2,850, comprised as follows:
      1. The £500 offered for distress caused.
      2. The £2,000 offered for the length of time without a shower.
      3. The £250 offered for its delayed stage 2 response.
      4. A further £100 for the distress caused by its complaint handling failures.
    4. Paid further compensation for the length of time without a shower, calculated as 20% of the resident’s net rent for the period from 15 October 2023 to 22 November 2024 minus the £2,000 that the landlord previously offered. The landlord should provide us with evidence of the rent charged during this time.
  2. The landlord must make this payment directly to the resident.
  3. Within 6 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must provide us with evidence that it has carried out a review of this case to identify what went wrong and what it will do differently to prevent a recurrence of the failings identified.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should consider awarding further compensation for the lack of a working hot water supply to the resident’s bath and shower for the period prior to 15 October 2023.
  2. The landlord should consider awarding further compensation for the period from 23 November 2024 up to its resolution of the hot water supply to the resident’s bath and shower.
  3. The landlord should consider the findings highlighted in this investigation when reviewing its policies and practices against the statutory Code.