The Guinness Partnership Limited (202112215)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202112215

The Guinness Partnership Limited

31 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. The resident’s report of a faulty boiler.
2. The resident’s request for compensation for home improvements on his previous property.
3. The resident’s report of the cooker space being too small.
4. The associated complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

The resident is an assured resident of the landlord. He moved properties on 31 March 2021, both of which were managed by the landlord.
An internal email on 25 February 2021 following the inspection of the resident’s former property stated, “Property in immaculate order – non standard kitchen, shower/ tiling and fitted wardrobe but great condition and can stay”.
On 30 March 2021 the resident called the landlord and requested compensation for the improvements he made to the previous property. The landlord advised that the resident had completed the work with knowledge it was a rented property and he had access to free repairs. It said he needed to get permission prior to making such improvements. It advised the resident would receive a follow-up call.
On 8 April 2021, the resident reported that the heating was constantly on and despite the thermostat being off, the property was still a high temperature. A contractor attended the following day and marked the job as complete.
A planned maintenance work order was raised on 14 April 2021 to replace the boiler.
The landlord called the resident on 15 April 2021 for a “settling in review”. The resident reported that the cooker space did not fit a standard sized cooker.
On 27 April 2021, the resident reported that he had no heating or hot water. The landlord ensured that the resident had electric heaters and that he was able to use the immersion heater to provide hot water.
The landlord called the resident on 28 April 2021 and informed him that the surveyor had confirmed the cooker space was standard. The resident disputed this and said the contractor that attended had confirmed it was not. The landlord then requested the surveyor to investigate the issue and contact the resident. The resident also said the immersion heater had broken and he no longer had hot water. The landlord said a contractor would attend within 24 hour and the job was marked as complete the same day.
The landlord called the resident on 29 April 2021 and he confirmed the hot water had been repaired. It also advised it would raise an inspection for the cooker space. A work order was raised the following day for a surveyor inspection, as the resident said he had measured the gap to be less than the standard size of 600mm.
The resident called the landlord on 6 May 2021 to check the arrival time of the contractor to replace the boiler. The landlord advised he was unwell and would not be attending. The resident then called the landlord to raise a complaint as he was unhappy with the multiple boiler issues and that he could not fit his cooker in the space between the units. He also said he had been informed that he would be reimbursed for improvements made on his previous property. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the same day and said it would respond within 20 working days.
The landlord noted on 6 May 2021 that the void report for the resident’s property showed “white goods in the gaps for washing machine and oven”.
An internal email on 7 May 2021 stated the landlord had not made any promise of compensation for the improvements, but had advised the resident of the process during the exit interview and property inspection.
The boiler was replaced on 11 May 2021.
The resident requested a complaint update on 26 May 2021 and the landlord called him the same day. He was dissatisfied with the long delays with the boiler repairs and as he had to rely on temporary electric heaters, his electricity bill had increased by £100. He reiterated that the cooker had no space either side. He also said that a landlord staff member had advised he needed to add the shower and tiling and the landlord could compensate him for it when he left the property.
The resident requested a complaint update on 1 July 2021 and 8 July 2021. On 8 July 2021 landlord advised the resident the staff member handling his case was on annual leave and would return on 12 July 2021. The resident rang the landlord again on 14 July 2021.
The resident rang the landlord on 19 July 2021. The landlord advised that his compensation claim was being assessed and he would have a response that week. A work order was raised the same day to extend the gap around the cooker, this has not been marked as completed.
The landlord sent its stage one response on 10 August 2021. The landlord said it had measured the cooker gap to be 580mm and while the cooker did fit, as the resident had fire safety concerns, a contractor would contact him to schedule an appointment to widen the cooker space. As the improvements the resident made to his previous property were not standard and he had not requested permission, his compensation request was denied. It acknowledged that there was a delay in the boiler replacement, caused by the contractor being off work with illness, and that the resident believed the temporary heaters had caused an increase in utility bills. It offered a good will payment of £100 as a result of the stress and inconvenience caused.
The resident said he was dissatisfied with the complaint outcome on 26 August 2021. He said he paid someone to be at the property to wait for the contractor that did not attend, as he could not get time off work, and his utility bills had increased. As a result, he had incurred costs exceeding the £100 compensation the landlord had offered. He also queried why the improvements he had made to his previous property had not been removed if they were not to standard. The landlord acknowledged the escalation the same day.
The resident rang the landlord on 10 October 2021 as a contractor attended on 8 October 2021 to widen the space for the cooker but the job could not be completed and he had not been contacted about follow on works. The landlord noted it had spoken to the contractors and they would call the resident with an update.
The resident called the landlord on 12 October 2021 as the landlord had exceeded the 20 working days response timeframe.
The landlord sent its stage two response on 21 October 2021. It said the resident had advised that a contractor had attended to widen the cooker space but had not been able to complete the works as it was a two-person job. It said it would chase up the follow-on job. It said it had spoken to the staff member that the resident had discussed the improvements with, and they had confirmed they had explained the process of requesting permission, but it did not have any record of a request, or permission being granted. It offered the resident an additional £250 for improvements he “clearly made” in the previous property.

Assessment and findings

The tenancy agreement states:
1. The resident must gain written permission to “improve, change or add to your home”.
1. The resident must allow access to contractors to assess the property’s condition and carry out repairs.
The landlord’s customer alterations policy states:
1. The resident will need to get written permission for any improvements, including changes to the kitchen and bathroom.
1. The resident has to confirm whether they intend to claim compensation when they leave the property and provide estimations of the cost of the work.
2. The landlord will not pay compensation if the resident did not gain written permission to carry out the works.
The landlord’s repairs policy states:
1. It is responsible for repairs to the heating and water heating installations.
1. An emergency repair should be completed or made safe within 24 hours.
2. Routine repairs should be completed within 28 calendar days.
The landlord’s complaint policy states:
1. It will acknowledge complaints within two working days.
1. It will issue its stage one response within ten working days and its stage two response within 20 working days.
The landlord’s compensation policy states:
1. Compensation will account for “any quantifiable loss or damage” and distress and inconvenience caused by a service failure.
1. “If missed appointments are part of a series of failures, we will take this into account as part of any compensation for a service failure.”

Request for compensation for improvements

In accordance with the tenancy agreement and the landlord’s customer alterations policy, in order for the resident to be eligible for compensation he would need written permission and to confirm whether he intended to claim compensation, prior to completing the improvements.
The resident stated the landlord informed him that if he completed the improvements he would be reimbursed, however there is no evidence to show that he was given this advice. He has also said to this Service that he was not informed he would have to get permission when he advised the landlord he would be undertaking the work. In its stage two response the landlord said it had spoken to the staff member concerned, who stated they had explained to the resident the process for obtaining permission when wishing to make any improvements to the property.
Therefore, the landlord provided a reasonable response to this issue by raising the matter with the member of staff concerned. As there is no evidence to show the landlord either misinformed the resident or failed to provide appropriate advice about the process that needed to be followed, and the resident is obligated by his tenancy agreement to request permission prior to making improvements, there are no grounds to criticise the landlord’s handling of this matter.
As there is no evidence that the resident was given permission to install the shower, or add tiling, the landlord was within its rights to deny the resident’s compensation claim. The resident did not dispute the fact that he had not requested permission for the improvements in his complaint escalation, so it would have been reasonable for the landlord to maintain its position in its stage two response. It therefore exceeded its responsibilities by offering £250 compensation as it was not obligated to do so under its policies.

Boiler repairs

In accordance with the tenancy agreement and the landlord’s repair guide, the landlord is obliged to repair the installations in the property for heating and hot water. As a result, it was necessary for the landlord to investigate the resident’s reports of a faulty boiler and take appropriate action to resolve any identified issues.
When the resident initially reported there was a fault with the boiler on 8 April 2021, as the temperature was constantly high, a contractor attended the following day and marked the job as complete. As this would not be classed as an emergency job, this was within a reasonable timeframe. A work order was raised on 14 April 2021 to replace the boiler. As this was planned maintenance, rather than a responsive repair, the landlord would not have to adhere to its usual timeframes.
The resident reported that he had no heating or hot water on 27 April 2021, to which the landlord appropriately responded by ensuring the resident had alternative heating and hot water sources until the boiler was replaced. The immersion heater stopped working the following day and again the landlord responded reasonably by arranging for a contractor to attend and address the matter within 24 hours.
The contractor did not attend the scheduled appointment on 6 May 2021 to replace the boiler, and the resident was only told the operative would not be attending when he contacted the contractor about this. This caused inconvenience to the resident, which the landlord acknowledged in its complaint responses and apologised for.
In his stage two complaint, the resident referred to paying someone to be at his property for the appointments that were not attended to by the contractors. While this is clearly frustrating, under the tenancy agreement the resident is responsible for granting access to the property for repairs. Therefore, the landlord would not be responsible for reimbursing any costs the resident incurred as a result of providing access.
The landlord also acknowledged that the resident had incurred additional electricity costs through the running the temporary heaters and immersion heater, and offered £100 for the overall inconvenience caused by its handling of the boiler repairs. Given the timeframe during which the resident was using temporary heaters (two weeks) and that he did not provide evidence to support his claim for additional electricity costs, the landlord’s overall offer for the additional costs and inconvenience the resident experienced as a result of the boiler repairs was reasonable.

Cooker space

The resident reported that his cooker space was not large enough and was a fire safety risk. The landlord checked the voids report which stated white goods were in the gap previously and a surveyor concluded that the cooker space was the standard size. The landlord promptly informed the resident of this. When the resident reported the cooker gap was less than 600mm (the standard size) and that a contractor had also agreed with this, the landlord arranged for a further surveyor to assess the issue and report back to the resident. In its stage one response, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s fire safety concerns and said the contractor would contact him to book an appointment to widen the gap.
It is reasonable for the landlord to rely on the conclusions of its appropriately qualified staff and contractors, however it is unclear whether the first surveyor actually visited the property to confirm whether the gap was too small. In addition, once the landlord identified that it was responsible to extend the space for the cooker, it would need to adhere to its repair timeframes, therefore it should have been completed as a routine repair within 28 working days.
A works order was initially raised during July 2021 and the available evidence indicates that a contractor attended on 8 October 2021 but was unable to complete the works, as it was a two-person job. No evidence has been provided to explain the delay or that the resident was kept adequately updated on the matter. The resident also informed this Service on 10 November 2021 that the repair was still outstanding, over seven months since the issue was initially reported. Overall, the landlord has failed to ensure the repair was completed in a reasonable timescale.

Complaint handling

The resident raised a formal complaint on 6 May 2021. While this was acknowledged the same day, the landlord did not send its response until 10 August 2021, despite the resident requesting an update on several occasions. As it took three months to issue a response, this clearly exceeded the landlord’s response timeframe of ten working days and caused additional time and effort to the resident in pursuing the complaint. The landlord also exceeded the stage two response timeframe of 20 working days, totalling 56 days to issue its response. The landlord failed to acknowledge these failings, or make redress, in either of its complaint responses and has therefore failed to put things right.
The landlord is also obliged to adhere to this Service’s complaint handling code which states the maximum timeframe for a stage one response is ten working days and 20 working days for a stage two response. If these timeframes cannot be met, the landlord must provide an explanation to the resident and not exceed a further ten working days. While the landlord has provided some explanations for the delayed response, such as the staff member being on annual leave, and the resident’s compensation claim being assessed, this does not justify such a long delay or the lack of updates the resident received.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for compensation for the improvements.
In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress by the landlord regarding the complaint about the landlord’s response to reports of a fault with the resident’s boiler.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of the cooker space being too small.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Reasons

The landlord acted in line with its policies in regard to the resident’s request for compensation for the improvements and was not therefore obliged to offer compensation for this matter.
The landlord acted in line with its repair responsibilities for the boiler, and has offered appropriate compensation for the additional electricity usage and missed appointment.
There were significant delays in the repair to extend the cooker gap.
The landlord did not adhere to its complaint timeframes or respond to the resident’s request for a complaint update, causing additional time and effort.

Orders

In light of the failings found in this investigation, and the frustration and inconvenience they have caused the resident, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Pay £250 compensation to the resident for the delay in extending the cooker gap.
2. Pay £150 compensation to the resident for the failures in the complaint handling.
3. The total payment of £400 must be made within six weeks of this report. Evidence of payment must be provided within that timeframe.
Within six weeks of the date of this report, complete the repair to extend the cooker space, if it has not done so already.