Together Housing Association Limited (202305709)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202305709

Together Housing Association Limited

5 November 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 resident has complained about the landlord’s handling of communications regarding the annual gas safety inspection for the property.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association, which began on 20 October 1997. The property is a 1-bedroom house.
  2. The landlord’s records indicate that:
    1. A gas appointment letter was sent to the resident on 14 March 2022.
    2. Gas escalation letters were sent to the resident 31 March, 7 April and 21 April 2022.
  3. The resident raised a formal complaint on 22 July 2022 that:
    1. The landlord sent warning letters to her even after she had rescheduled her appointment from 30 March 2022 to 26 April 2022 for the gas safety check.
    2. The landlord sent a joiner to the property on 20 May 2022, with the intent of forcing entry into the property, after the safety checks had been completed.
  4. The landlord responded on 5 December 2022 and apologised for the inconvenience experienced by the resident. It said its newly implemented system encountered a problem, which led to letters being generated and in some cases for appointments that had not been booked. The landlord assured the resident that it had learned from her experience and resolved the issue. The resident requested the escalation of her complaint to stage 2 on 12 December 2022. She remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and questioned why it took so long to address the issue, when other residents had reported similar experiences. She said the landlord had failed to explain the process it follows when it issues a failed access card.
  5. The landlord responded to the stage 2 complaint on 6 January 2023. It said it had acted in accordance with the processes it had in place for gas safety checks. It said its guaranteed access process was initiated as the resident had missed 3 appointments. The landlord acknowledged that it failed to cancel the arrangement made with the joiner and the housing officer who attended on 20 May 2022. It apologised for the inconvenience caused and offered £100 (this included £50 for the delay in responding to the complaint).
  6. The resident referred her complaint to the Housing Ombudsman on 16 May 2023. She said she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response because it failed to provide policy information. She said the landlord accepted there was a failure on its part in its stage 1 response, but it did not accept responsibility in its stage 2 response.

Assessment and findings

  1. The Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles are:
    1. Be fair.
    2. Put things right.
    3. Learn from outcomes.
  2. This Service will apply these principles when considering whether any redress is appropriate and proportionate for any maladministration or service failure identified.

The resident has complained about the landlord’s handling of communications regarding the annual gas safety inspection for the property

  1. Pursuant to the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 and as set out in its gas safety policy, the landlord has an obligation to undertake annual gas safety checks. This is to ensure that all landlords appliances, gas distribution pipework, fittings and flues are compliant. The policy states that a gas safety check must be completed before the expiry date of the last issued landlord gas safety record (LGSR). The landlord explained that the gas service due date was 20 May 2022. In accordance with its policy, it offered an appointment date of 30 March 2022. This Service has not seen a copy of the letter, but the resident did not dispute this. The landlord’s records also show that the letter was generated 14 to 18 days before the gas service was due which complies with its policy.
  2. The landlord’s gas safety policy states that it acknowledges its responsibility to provide flexibility for all residents. This would allow them to be able to change their gas safety appointment, if the first appointment date is not convenient for them. It will accommodate requests for alternative dates if it is within 12 months of the last service date. The resident said the landlord agreed to move the appointment to 26 April 2022, approximately three and half weeks before the expiry date of the previous gas safety check (20 May 2022). This was appropriate.
  3. The landlord’s gas safety policy further states that it will operate a zero-tolerance approach to out-of-date landlord gas safety. It has a guaranteed access process in place to ensure that it complies with the annual gas safety checks. It will start the process where:
    1. The resident has missed 3 appointments (with failure to allow access cards posted through the door) all notified through letters.
    2. The resident has failed to make contact to arrange alternative dates for an appointment.
    3. The resident has not responded to a final chance given to make an appointment through a hand delivered letter.
    4. The landlord has exhausted all reasonable steps to gain access, including door stickers, contacting the resident and their neighbours.
  4. The landlord’s records show that it sent the resident 3 letters informing her that she had missed her appointments. We have not seen actual copies of the letters, but the landlord provided templates to this Service. This would have caused the resident some frustration. In her complaint to the landlord, the resident said she was alarmed due to the tone of the letters, and she contacted the landlord (after she received the letter dated 21 April 2022) and expressed her concerns. The resident said the landlord assured her that the letters were sent in error. It confirmed that her appointment was still on schedule for 26 April 2022. The landlord’s gas engineer attended on 26 April 2022, but the resident said they were unable to complete the works as other repairs were needed to her gas fire. She said she was assured that another appointment would be sent to her, but this did not happen. This is unreasonable.
  5. The gas policy sets out that the landlord is required to send written and digital confirmation to the resident or advocate, advising them in advance of the date of their annual gas safety check appointment. The landlord’s records indicate no further appointments were scheduled for the repairs and gas service. However, the resident said the landlord’s gas engineers attempted 2 unannounced visits on different dates, after the initial visit of 26 April 2022. This is not appropriate. The resident said she was unable to allow access on both occasions as she was not previously aware of the appointment, and she had to go to work. The resident said she was able to agree a convenient date for the works, with the engineer, during the second visit and the gas service check was completed on 19 May 2022.
  6. The Ombudsman notes from the resident’s complaint that the landlord proceeded with the guaranteed access process even after the gas service checks had been completed. She said a joiner and a member of the landlord’s housing services visited the property on 20 May 2022 to cap off her gas. This would have caused the resident some distress. The resident said the joiner and the housing representative said she must have missed her appointments and letters would have been sent to her explaining this. This shows that the landlord failed to communicate effectively or update its staff on the status of the gas safety checks. This is unreasonable considering the consequences of the resident’s property being forcibly accessed.
  7. The landlord acknowledged that things had gone wrong with its handling of the resident’s appointments. In its stage 1 response dated 5 December 2022, the landlord explained that the implementation of a new system and newly trained staff caused the error. The landlord advised the resident that although the appointment had been changed, the system kept to the original timescales in the background, and it continued to generate letters. It said it realised this problem and rectified it, but it was not in time to prevent the inconvenience caused to the resident. The landlord further explained that the gas repair and safety check had been correctly closed on its system, but it failed to cancel the visit for the joiner the following day. It apologised and assured the resident that measures had been put in place to prevent this error from happening again.
  8. The landlord appeared to have learned from its mistakes as it accepted that it got things wrong and took steps to put it right. However, its stage 2 response to the resident on 6 January 2023 indicated she had missed 3 appointments. Some of the reasons given were that:
    1. The resident rescheduled her original appointment outside a 2-week timeframe, so it was classed as a missed appointment. This is unreasonable because its gas policy states that it will accommodate requests for alternative dates if it is within 12 months of the last service date.
    2. The appointment attended by an engineer on 26 April 2022 was classed as missed because it had to be rescheduled for further works. This does not align with its gas policy’s description of a missed appointment. It states that an appointment card is filled out and posted through the door asking the resident to make urgent contact for an appointment.
  9. While the landlord appeared to defend some of its actions in the stage 2 response, it acknowledged that the visit that took place on 20 May 2022 was due to an error. It apologised for any concern and upset this may have caused the resident and offered £50 in compensation. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will consider the inconvenience, disturbance, distress, and annoyance suffered by not putting things right. This includes failure to follow policy or procedure, or unreasonable time taken. It will offer up to £250 for service failure that had some impact of short duration.
  10. It is clear from the evidence that the landlord missed various opportunities to prevent the inconvenience caused to the resident. Due to its mistake the resident received letters warning her of missed appointments and a possible forced entry. She had unannounced visits to the property, which could have been prevented and another visit on 20 May 2022 where she was informed that access would be forced into the property. This would have been a distressing experience for the resident. Therefore, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the compensation of £50 offered to the resident does not reflect the impact of its failures on her. It is for this reason that the Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s handling of communications regarding the annual gas safety inspection for the property.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s policy at the time of the resident’s complaint (effective September 2019) stated that its process had one informal, and two formal stages. The policy stated that the informal stage of its complaint process was called get it sorted (GIS). It explained that this was used to put things right as quickly as possible. It would log all details of the complaint and find a resolution within 5 working days. The resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord on 22 July 2022. According to its policy it should have responded within 5 working days. The landlord said it gave a verbal response to the resident and closed the complaint, but the only correspondence seen is an email apology dated 5 August 2022. It apologised for the delay in responding to the resident’s complaint. Its policy stated that it would log what it did or said and inform the resident accordingly. We requested information on how the landlord dealt with the complaint. However, it has not provided satisfactory evidence of actions taken to resolve the complaint under its GIS stage. This is not appropriate.
  2. From the evidence seen the landlord failed to provide the resident a written response until 23 September 2023. Though it was an informal response, it was detailed. The landlord outlined what went wrong concerning the gas service appointments and steps taken to put things right. It apologised to the resident for the delay in providing a full response to her complaint, but it did not offer any compensation. The landlord missed another opportunity to put this right when it provided a formal stage 1 response on 6 December 2023. It said the resident requested a response under its formal complaints process. The landlord repeated the contents of its earlier response (informal response) and advised the resident of her right to escalate the complaint to the next stage. It did not offer any compensation for the delay in providing a formal response to the complaint. The landlord’s compensation policy allows for financial payments to redress service failures where residents have been inconvenienced. The landlord took approximately 5 months to respond to the complaint and should have offered compensation to put things right. This is not appropriate.
  3. The landlord demonstrated some learning as it responded to the stage 2 complaint within the timeframe stated in its complaints policy. The resident requested the escalation of the complaint to stage 2 on 12 December 2022 and the landlord responded on 12 January 2023. This was in line with the timescales stated in its policy which came into force in on 1 October 2022. However, its stage 2 response appeared to contradict the stage 1 response. Although the landlord admitted some failings, this was not satisfactorily explained to the resident. It fully admitted that missed appointment letters were automatically generated and sent to the resident in error in the stage 1 response. In the stage 2 response, the landlord said its handling of the communication was in line with its policy and procedures. This would have confused the resident and caused some frustration.
  4. The landlord has demonstrated some learning in its handling of the resident’s complaint. It responded to the stage 2 complaint on time. It also acknowledged that it should have responded to the complaint sooner and offered £50 for the inconvenience. The response was sent on the twenty-first working day, after it was received, but this Service recognises that its offices may have been closed for some days during the Christmas holidays. Nevertheless, the landlord acknowledged there was a delay and it offered £50 in compensation for the inconvenience. This was reasonable.
  5. The landlord also revised its complaints policy and removed the informal stage, bringing it in line with the Ombudsman’s complaint handling code published in 2022. The Ombudsman welcomes the landlord’s actions in putting things right. However, the redress offered did not reflect the inconvenience, annoyance, and distress even though its compensation policy takes these into consideration. There were severe delays in the stage 1 response, which the landlord failed to address. With the stage 2 response, the Ombudsman is not persuaded that the landlord sufficiently articulated that there had been a failing by it and to acknowledge the distress this had caused the resident. Due to this, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint. An order will be made to address this.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s communications regarding the annual gas safety inspection for the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report. This should include clarification on its position concerning its stage 1 and stage 2 responses.
    2. Pay the resident the amount of £400 broken down as:
      1. £100 previously offered if it has not yet been paid to her.
      2. £100 for the inconvenience for its handling of communications regarding the gas service checks.
      3. £200 for the frustration and time and trouble for its handling of the complaint.
    3. Any compensation awarded in this report should be paid directly to the resident.
    4. Provide evidence of compliance with the above orders.