Tower Hamlets Homes (202121056)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202121056

Tower Hamlets Homes

10 January 2023


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. The resident’s reports of heating and hot water issues in the property.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord.
  2. The resident initially reported to the landlord that there were issues with the hot water in the property on 25 August 2021. There were subsequently several repair appointments for issues with the communal boiler between September 2021 and November 2021.
  3. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 6 December 2021, as she had experienced issues with the loss of heating and hot water since August 2021 and, although repairs had been completed, they had been temporary and has not provided a lasting solution. She was concerned for her child’s wellbeing in view of the heating issues, as they had a disability. She stated the landlord’s communication was poor and she regularly had to chase updates. She requested compensation due to the distress caused. In her complaint escalation, the resident asked the landlord to install an electric shower in the interim, so she would have access to hot water while the existing hot water supply was not working.
  4. In the landlord’s final response to the complaint on 10 March 2022, it advised that a contractor attended on 4 March 2022 and replaced two heat exchanger plates, which it hoped would be a permanent resolution to the heating issues. It apologised for the delays in resolving the issue. It offered £183 compensation for the resident having 127 days without heating and £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused. It stated it had raised the issues the resident had experienced with its contractor. The same day, the landlord increased the compensation to £350 in total.
  5. In the resident’s complaint to this Service, she stated she remained dissatisfied as the attempted repairs had only been temporary, as there was only enough hot water for one shower. She stated the landlord had not provided a response to her request for an electric shower. She requested additional compensation for the inconvenience caused.

Assessment and findings

Heating and hot water issues

  1. In accordance with the tenancy agreement, the landlord is responsible for keeping installations for heating and hot water within the property in good working order. The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will complete emergency repairs within 24 hours and routine repairs within 20 working days. It outlines that a loss of hot water and a complete loss of heating in winter, where no alternative heating is available, are considered to be emergency repairs.
  2. In this case, it is not disputed that there were failings in the landlord’s handling of the heating and hot water repairs. The landlord acknowledged in its complaint responses that it had taken numerous attempts to identify the cause of the heating and hot water issues in the resident’s property. 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. In considering this the Ombudsman assesses whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  3. Under the landlord’s repairs policy, a total loss of hot water in a property is considered to be an emergency repair. On 25 August 2021, the resident initially only reported a loss of hot water in the bath and that the hot water temperature fluctuated within the property. This would not necessarily be considered an emergency repair, as the resident seemingly had access to alternative hot water facilities within the property, although the hot water supply was disrupted. The landlord therefore responded within a reasonable timeframe as it attended the property within one week, on 1 September 2021 and the boiler was repaired on 6 September 2021. However, the landlord should have taken steps to manage the resident’s expectations regarding the timeframe, and there was no evidence to confirm that it did so.
  4. The resident reported to the landlord on 22 October 2021 that, again, she had no hot water in the property. In its complaint response, the landlord recognised that there were unnecessary visits on 23 October 2021, as the contractor had identified on three occasions that the blending valve needed to be replaced. The landlord identified that the failing resulted from poor communication and it demonstrated that it reviewed its handling of the repair and recognised where its service could be improved. The landlord gave feedback to its contractor in an effort to prevent similar issues with communication from occurring in future. This was a reasonable response as the landlord showed it has learnt from this complaint.
  5. There were subsequently numerous appointments, in which contractors identified and resolved further issues, including replacing a blending valve, installing a flexi pipe and stop valve, replacing the heat exchanger plates and cleaning the strainer. Following the completion of the complaints process, the resident reported issues with the hot water, including total loss of hot water, on numerous occasions between March 2022 and June 2022. During that period, similar repairs were repeatedly carried out, without the landlord providing a permanent solution. The landlord failed to assess the repair issue holistically, which meant similar repairs, notably replacing the heat exchanger plates, were repeated on numerous occasions, which caused additional inconvenience to the resident due to repeated repair appointments without a permanent resolution. The landlord advised this Service on 13 July 2022 that there had been delays as the repair was complex and a repair supervisor was scheduled to complete an inspection. The repairs were subsequently completed on 29 July 2022.
  6. This Service’s spotlight report on “complaints about heating, hot water and energy in social housing”, (published on our website) states that the landlord should ensure contractors have the “sufficient skills, tools and parts to undertake the work required”. Given the repeated appointments (often completing the same repairs that had already been attempted) and the recurrence of the issue, the landlord should have assessed whether the contractors were appropriately qualified for this particular repair. It also would have been appropriate for the landlord to have completed a detailed inspection at an earlier date to identify the cause of the issue. 
  7. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that it “will always consider reducing the time taken where possible, for repairs for frail, elderly or disabled customers, particularly for faults like broken heating systems where the residents’ health may quickly be affected if the system is out of action”. As the resident had outlined how the loss of hot water specifically impacted her child’s disabilities, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to take additional steps to identify a permanent solution; however, there is no evidence to suggest that it did so.
  8. In cases where the landlord is unable to complete the repairs within a reasonable timeframe, the landlord should assess interim solutions to reduce the impact on the resident. The contractor completed temporary repairs to unblock the heat exchanger, so that the resident would temporarily have hot water, which was an appropriate action to take. However, it is important to note that temporary repairs should not be relied upon in place of a permanent solution. The repair records show that the landlord provided temporary electric heaters on 24 December 2021. While this was also a reasonable action to take, the landlord should have offered heaters at an earlier date, given that the resident raised  her complaint on 6 December 2021 meaning she had been without heating for three weeks before heaters were provided. The resident had to chase the landlord to provide the heaters during this time, causing additional inconvenience to her.
  9. The landlord also demonstrated that it considered more extensive solutions as it offered to decant (temporarily move) the resident while the heating repairs were ongoing. However, the resident declined as she said moving would cause too much stress, and the current property had the equipment required for her disabled child. The resident was entitled to decline the decant and the Ombudsman is not questioning her reasons for doing so. While the offer of a decant was reasonable, it would have been helpful for the landlord to outline the further support it could have provided to help the resident to move properties in view of her circumstances. Landlords are expected to provide additional support where it is practical to do so, to assist disabled and vulnerable residents if they need to be decanted. The landlord also advised this Service that it had hired a new contractor in February 2022. Although it is unclear whether this decision was due to the outcome of this case, it was appropriate that the landlord had taken steps to improve its service.
  10. The resident requested an electric shower as an interim measure so that she would not have to rely on the boiler for hot water. There is no evidence that the landlord responded to her request. Regardless of whether the request was feasible, the landlord should have confirmed its position in order to manage the resident’s expectations. A recommendation has been made below for the landlord to formally address her request.
  11. Overall, the landlord has demonstrated that it took steps to resolve the heating and hot water issues and considered interim solutions. However, when it became evident that several repairs had been unsuccessful, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to assess the repair issue holistically, such as by conducting a full survey, rather than completing several individual repairs. It was appropriate that the landlord took steps to mitigate the impact on the resident by providing temporary heaters but this should have been done sooner.
  12. The landlord offered £350 compensation, in light of its failures to resolve the issues with the hot water and heating. Although the loss of hot water was intermittent, given the significant impact on the resident and her family, it was reasonable that the landlord offered £1.50 compensation per day for the whole time the issue was ongoing, rather than the specific days when the heating and hot water was unavailable. It was also appropriate that the landlord offered compensation for the inconvenience caused, considering the numerous repair appointments and the impact this had on the resident. The landlord’s offer of compensation for the loss of hot water, up until the complaint response was issued, was in line with this Service’s remedies guidance (published on our website) which sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation. The remedies guidance states that awards of £100-£600 are appropriate in cases where the landlord’s failure has adversely impacted the resident, as in this case.
  13. In light of the fact the hot water issues were ongoing following the landlord’s final complaint response, additional compensation is warranted. The landlord should award additional compensation of £1.50 a day from 5 March 2022 (as it awarded compensation up to 4 March 2022 in its final complaint response) to 29 July 2022 (the date the permanent repairs were completed), which is a total of £220.50. The resident has repeatedly advised the landlord of the importance of the use of hot water to support her son’s disability meaning it was particularly inconvenient for her household to be without this amenity.
  14. There is no evidence to suggest that the landlord awarded the resident a daily compensation amount for the loss of heating, despite the landlord discussing this internally (based on its internal notes). Although the resident does not appear to have reported issues with heating as regularly as the loss of hot water, she had reported loss of heating on several occasions and raised it within her complaint to the landlord. The landlord therefore should have addressed it within its response and considered compensation. In line with this Service’s remedies guidance, awards of £100-£600 are appropriate in cases where the landlord’s offer of compensation was not proportionate to the failings outlined in this report. As the landlord failed to offer compensation for the loss of heating, it should award the resident an additional £200 in view of this. This is in light of the distress and inconvenience caused as a result of intermittent heating during the winter period, and the delay in the landlord offering temporary heaters to the resident.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint handling policy states that it will respond to stage one complaints and stage two complaints within 20 working days. The resident initially raised a complaint on 6 December 2021 and the landlord issued its stage one response on 16 December 2021, thus within its complaint response timeframe.
  2. This Service’s Complaint Handling Code (published on our website) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations of landlords’ complaint handling practices. In accordance with the Code, landlords should issue stage one complaint responses within ten working days. The landlord should therefore review its complaint handling policy, to ensure that it brings it in line with the Code. In this case, the landlord responded at stage one within ten working days, so there was no detrimental impact on the resident by the landlord’s policy not being in line with the Ombudsman’s Code.
  3. In line with the Code, landlords are expected to fully respond to the issues raised by complainants in their complaints. In this case, the landlord did not respond to the resident’s request for an electric shower in its complaint responses. As it appears from the available evidence that the heating and hot water has been fixed, it is not clear whether the resident still requires an electric shower. Therefore, the landlord should contact the resident to check if this issue is still outstanding and if so, the landlord should formally consider and respond to the resident’s request for an electric shower. The landlord should clearly explain the reasons for its decision to the resident and if the resident is unhappy with this decision, she can raise this issue as a separate complaint through the landlord’s complaints process if she wishes to.
  4. The resident subsequently escalated her complaint on 17 December 2021 and the landlord issued its stage two response on 10 March 2022. As a result, the landlord exceeded its response timeframe by 36 working days. This caused additional time and effort to the resident, as she had to chase the complaint response. Although the landlord apologised for this failing in its stage two response, it did not take any further steps to redress the issue such as offering compensation.
  5. In accordance with this Service’s remedies guidance awards of £50-£100 are appropriate in cases where there was a minor failing by the landlord, where it has not fully put things right. The delayed complaint response will have caused additional distress to the resident, due to the uncertainty of the progress of the repairs, and additional time and effort pursuing the complaint. As a result, the landlord should award the resident £100 compensation in view of this.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in the way it handled the resident’s reports of heating and hot water issues in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in the way it handled the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident:
    1. £220.50 in light of the additional time the hot water repair issue has been ongoing for.
    2. £200 in light of its failings in handling the heating repairs.
    3. £100 due to its complaint handling failures.
    4. £350 offered in its complaint response, if it has not been paid already. 
  2. The total payment should be £870.50 and evidence of this payment should be provided to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should review its complaint handling policy, to bring it in line with this Service’s Complaint Handling Code.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord formally addresses the resident’s request for an electric shower and provides clear reasons for its decision.