Southern Housing Group Limited (202113632)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202113632

Southern Housing Group Limited

24 January 2022

 

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 refers to the landlord’s handling of:
    1. The repair to the resident’s heating and hot water system and its offer of compensation.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord and occupies a two-bedroom detached house.
  2. The landlord’s records suggest that the resident’s boiler was due to be serviced on 18 November 2020, however, the appointment was cancelled. On 24 November 2020, the resident reported that her boiler was defective and the heating did not turn off. The landlord’s records show that it attended the resident’s property on 30 November 2020 to carry out an inspection of the boiler. It identified a fault with the timer switch which needed replacing. The resident could manually turn the heating on and off in the meantime.
  3. The resident called the landlord on 1 December 2020 and expressed dissatisfaction with the service she had received by its contractors. She noted that the gas service appointment had been cancelled on multiple occasions despite her reports that her heating would not turn off.
  4. On 23 December 2020, the landlord arranged and booked an appointment with the resident for 12 January 2021 to replace the timer switch for the heating system.
  5. The landlord’s records show that the contractor attempted to collect the part on 12 January 2021 but it had not arrived. A new appointment was made with the resident for 14 January 2021. On 14 January 2021 the contractor identified that an incorrect part had arrived from the supplier.
  6. The landlord spoke to the resident on 18 January 2021 and agreed a new appointment date for 26 January 2021. The contractors attended on that date and identified that the supplier had again provided an incorrect part which was not compatible with the resident’s heating system.
  7. The resident asked for a formal complaint to be raised on 26 January 2021 as her heating and hot water was still not working correctly after two months. She expressed dissatisfaction that an incorrect part had been sent twice and the wrong part had been fitted that day. She advised that the situation had become very upsetting.
  8. A further appointment was arranged for 11 February 2021, where the contractor fitted the correct time switch. The heating and hot water system was reportedly left working as normal.
  9. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s formal complaint on 22 February 2021 and apologised for not acknowledging the complaint sooner. It explained that it had been busier than usual which had led to a backlog of work.
  10. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response on 23 March 2021 and explained the following:
    1. It noted that there was some delay to obtaining the correct time switch from the supplier despite providing photographs and codes of the required item. It had discussed this with the supplier directly to prevent future reoccurrences. It confirmed that the repair had now been completed on 11 February 2021.
    2. It apologised for the delay the resident had faced and the further service failures it had identified. It offered the resident £200 compensation, comprised of:
      1. £25 for three failed appointments due to not having the correct part.
      2. £50 for the repair delays.
      3. £100 for the loss of hot water and heating between 30 November 2020 and 3 February 2021.
      4. £25 for overall service failure.
    3. The landlord confirmed that the resident could escalate her complaint if she remained dissatisfied with its response.
  11. The resident emailed the landlord on 13 April 2021 and explained that the engineer that had fitted the part on 11 February 2021 had not set the switch to the correct date or time. She said that she was experiencing further issues with the heating and noted that if she did not have the heating on she would have no hot water. She added that the under-floor heating in her living room was now not working. On 18 April 2021, she confirmed her desired outcome was to have a working hot water and heating system and for an experienced engineer to attend the property to resolve the issues.
  12. The landlord issued its stage two complaint response to the resident on 19 May 2021 and explained the following:
    1. It noted that an engineer had attended the property on 13 May 2021 following the resident’s reports of further issues with her hot water. They identified that the cylinder was incorrectly wired. This was rectified, however, did not resolve the issue. In addition, they identified an installation defect which appeared to have never worked. During this time, the resident was still able to access hot water through her immersion heater.
    2. An appointment was arranged for 17 May 2021 to fit a new cylinder part to stabilise the heating and hot water system but the supplier then said that there would be a two-week delay on the part required. It confirmed that it would keep the resident updated and arrange an appointment when the part was available. It had also raised another appointment of 24 May 2021 with a specialist contractor for the other issues it had identified.
    3. It confirmed that its previous offer of £200 stood should the resident wish to accept it. The landlord then set out the steps that the resident could take if she remained dissatisfied with its response.
  13. The resident emailed the landlord on 21 May 2021 explaining that she did not feel able to accept the landlord’s offer because the repair issues remained. She advised that she now had hot water following a visit the previous day, although the heating in her hallway or living room had not been resolved.
  14. The resident referred her case to this Service on 15 September 2021 as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s offer of compensation. She advised that she had not had consistent hot water for over a year and that the underfloor heating downstairs was not functioning properly; she was not able to regulate the temperature, meaning that the floor was too hot when in use. She wanted the landlord to resolve the ongoing issue which had not been fixed and offer further compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In her communication with the landlord and this Service, the resident also raised concerns that her hot water only worked when the heating was on and that the temperature of the underfloor heating in her property could not be regulated. As these are separate issues to the initial complaint raised with the landlord about her heating not turning off, this is not something that this Service can adjudicate on at this stage, as the landlord needs to be provided with the opportunity to investigate and respond to these aspects. It is noted that the resident has raised a separate complaint with the landlord regarding these issues. If she remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s response once the complaint has exhausted the landlord’s internal complaint procedure, she may approach the Ombudsman for further assistance.

The landlord’s handling of the repair to the resident’s heating system and its offer of compensation.

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement confirms that the landlord would be responsible for repairs needed to the heating and hot water system within the property. The landlord’s repairs policy confirms that emergency repairs, including those due to no heating or hot water between 31 October and 1 May or total loss of electricity, would be attended to within 24 hours. Routine repairs would be completed as quickly as possible and at a time that suits the resident. The landlord’s website states that routine repairs were taking longer than usual to complete due to the impact of Covid-19 and pressure on materials supply chains.
  2. The landlord’s compensation policy confirms the amount of compensation that would be paid in the following circumstances
    1. £10 + £2 per day up to a maximum of £50 for delays in completing repairs, partial heating loss between 31 October and 30 April and partial loss of hot water between 31 October and 30 April respectively.
    2. A maximum of £25 for missed or failed appointments.
  3. In this case, it is not disputed that there was a significant delay in replacing the timer switch on the resident’s heating system, thus, she needed to manually turn her heating on and off. The landlord has acknowledged the delay in installing the new timer switch between 30 November 2020 and 11 February 2021. It explained that it had experienced issues with the supplier sending incorrect parts which led to failed appointments.
  4. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. The landlord acted fairly in acknowledging its mistakes and apologising to the resident. It put things right by raising the issues it had faced regarding incorrect parts being sent directly with the supplier and offering £200 compensation to the resident.
  5. It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the amount of £200 compensation would provide adequate redress for the service failures identified. This amount is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website) as well as the landlord’s own compensation policy. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests awards of between £50-£250 where there has been service failure which had an impact on the resident but was of short duration and may not have significantly affected the overall outcome of the complaint. This includes instances where there has been failure to meet service standards for actions but where the impact was not significant. The resident was able to use her heating during this time and had been informed on how to turn the heating off manually. The impact of the delay did not cause significant inconvenience, although financial compensation was warranted for the service failures identified in line with the landlord’s compensation policy.
  6. Furthermore, the residents further report after the repairs of 11 February was made approximately 2 months later, on 13 April 2021. This Service has no evidence of any reports being made to the landlord in the weeks between those dates.
  7. For the reasons set out above, the landlord has made redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily. The measures taken by the landlord to redress what went wrong were proportionate to the impact that its failures had on the resident. It is noted that the resident continued to experience issues with her heating and hot water system which were not fully resolved as of November 2021. It is recommended that the landlord takes steps to inspect and resolve the further issues if it has not already done so. It is recommended that the landlord pays the resident £200 as previously offered if it has not already done so as the finding of redress was found on this basis.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it has a two-stage formal complaints process. At stage one, the landlord should acknowledge the complaint within 1 working day and provide a response within ten working days. If the resident remains dissatisfied, they can escalate their complaint to stage two. At stage two, the landlord should respond within 20 working days. If, at any stage, there is likely to be a delay, the landlord would be expected to contact the resident, explain the reason for the delay and provide a new timescale.
  2. In this case, the resident made a formal complaint by telephone on 26 January 2021. The landlord did not acknowledge the complaint until 22 February 2021, which was significantly outside of its one working day timescale. Whilst the landlord apologised and explained the delay in its acknowledgement letter, it did not provide a timescale for when the resident would receive a response.
  3. Furthermore, following its acknowledgment, the landlord did not provide its stage one complaint response until 23 March 2021, which was 21 working days after the acknowledgment and 48 working days since the complaint was originally raised. The landlord failed to acknowledge or explain the delay to the resident in its complaint responses which is likely to have caused further inconvenience.  The resident confirmed her reasons for escalating her complaint on 18 April 2021, the landlord provided its stage two complaint response on 19 May 2021, which was within a reasonable timescale in line with the landlord’s policy at stage two.
  4. In view of the service failures identified, the landlord should pay additional compensation to the resident in recognition of the inconvenience caused by its poor complaint handling. It is recommended that the landlord reviews its training for complaint handlers to ensure that residents are adequately updated if there is likely to be a delay in issuing a complaint response at each stage.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation in respect of its handling of the repair to the resident’s heating system, which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of the associated complaint.

Reasons

  1.  The landlord has satisfactorily acknowledged the delay in replacing the timer switch for the resident’s heating system. It has offered compensation which is considered proportionate to address the impact its failings had on the resident in line with its compensation policy and the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.
  2. There was a significant delay in issuing a stage one complaint response to the resident which has not been acknowledged or explained by the landlord in its complaint responses. This is likely to have caused inconvenience to the resident and warrants additional financial compensation.

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders that the following actions are taken within four weeks:
    1. The landlord is to pay the resident £100 in recognition of the inconvenience caused as a result of its poor complaint handling.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Pays the resident £200 as previously offered if it has not already done so as the finding of redress was found on this basis.
    2. Takes steps to inspect and resolve the further issues the resident had reported in relation to her heating and hot water system, if it has not already done so, and consider whether further compensation is warranted.
    3. Considers reviewing its training for complaint handlers, to ensure that residents are adequately updated if there is likely to be a delay in issuing a complaint response at each stage.