Women’s Pioneer Housing Limited (202305090)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202305090

Women’s Pioneer Housing Limited

13 March 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

The complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of problems with the heating system and thermostat.
2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy which began on 8 February 2021. The landlord is a housing association. The landlord’s records state that the resident is vulnerable and suffers from mental and physical ill-health.
The property is a one-bedroom flat on the ground floor.
The landlord arranged for a contractor to inspect the property on 21 February 2023 to diagnose a fault that the resident had reported with the heating system. Following this visit, the contractor attended the property on 6 March 2023 and installed a new thermostat.
The resident contacted the landlord on 15 March 2023 to report a fault with the heating system. The landlord therefore raised an order on the same day to inspect the system and a contractor carried out the inspection on 20 March 2023. Following the inspection, the contractor sent the landlord a quote to carry out various repairs to the boiler and to recalibrate the thermostat control.
The contractor made an appointment with the resident to attend on 24 March 2023 to carry out the work. However, the resident phoned on the day of the appointment to cancel it as she was unwell. The appointment was rescheduled to 12 April 2023, however, the contractor cancelled the appointment as the resident had asked for an earlier appointment and the contractor was unable to provide an earlier date.
The resident contacted the landlord on 11 May 2023 to register her dissatisfaction with the landlord’s handling of the reported heating issues and the landlord registered this as a stage 1 complaint.
During May 2023, the resident contacted the landlord to request updates and express her dissatisfaction about the reported issues with the heating. The resident also contacted the Ombudsman during this period. The landlord’s records show that it arranged further appointments for 11 May, 19 May and 25 May 2023 to carry out the works. However, these appointments were cancelled by the resident due to ill health.
The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 30 May 2023 in which it outlined the events that had occurred in March 2023 and confirmed that the appointment on 12 April 2023 had been cancelled. It said that the contractor had then offered the resident an appointment for 25 May 2023 and had expected the resident to confirm her availability. The landlord’s records show that the resident did not confirm her availability and therefore the contractor did not attend on this date.
After contacting the Ombudsman during August 2023 to express her dissatisfaction with the landlord’s stage 1 reply, this Service requested the landlord on 25 August 2023 to log a stage 2 complaint.
The landlord arranged for a contractor to attend on 29 September 2023 to check the heating and hot water system and to provide the resident with information about operating the system. However, the resident refused access as she stated that she had not been notified of the visit beforehand. The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on the same day (29 September 2023) and stated the following:
1. the landlord referred to letters it had sent to the resident in August and September 2023 asking her whether she would be happy for someone to show her how to operate the thermostat
2. the landlord said that although the resident had refused access to the contractor on 29 September 2023, it still wanted to check the thermostat and therefore gave 2 further dates when the landlord could attend – the landlord added that alternatively it was happy to arrange for a contractor to attend and to provide more notice to the resident
3. the landlord partially upheld the complaint and offered the resident £50 compensation for “poor communication leading to service failure” – the landlord said it should have been clearer about the purpose of its proposed visit when it wrote to the resident on 31 August 2023 and then in September 2023
A further appointment was agreed for 11 October 2023 but the resident cancelled the appointment because she was unwell. The landlord offered a further appointment for 17 October 2023 but its records stated that the resident did not respond. The resident wrote to the landlord on 25 October 2023 and said she was not feeling well mentally or physically and therefore she would make an appointment with the landlord when she was feeling better. She added on 26 October 2023 that her friend had put her heating in the ‘timer position’ and it was operating correctly on this setting. However, she said it was not working correctly when the heating was on the continuous setting.
The landlord advised this Service on 28 February 2025 that it understood the heating issues had been resolved. However, the resident advised the Ombudsman on the same day that the heating was not operating as it should. She said that she had to set the thermostat temperature very high to ensure the heating remained on.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident wrote to this Service on 17 May 2023 and said that the reported heating problems had caused her medical conditions to worsen. The Ombudsman is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be better dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts. The resident may wish to consider taking independent legal advice if she wishes to pursue this option.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 24 March 2023 and stated that the heating system had not operated correctly for over 2 years. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner. This is because with the passage of time, evidence may be unavailable and personnel involved may have left an organisation, which makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out and for informed decisions to be made. Therefore, having considered the evidence available, the Ombudsman considers it fair and reasonable to begin its investigation from 21 February 2023 when the contractor inspected the heating system. References to events that occurred prior to this date have been included for context only.
This Service has received correspondence between the resident and the landlord which was sent after the landlord’s stage 2 response on 29 September 2023. A key part of the Ombudsman’s role is to assess the landlord’s response to a complaint and therefore it is important that the landlord has had an opportunity to consider all the information being investigated by the Ombudsman as part of its complaint response. It is therefore considered fair and reasonable to only investigate matters up to the date of the final complaint response on 29 September 2023. Correspondence sent after this date has, however, been included in this report for context.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of problems with the heating system and thermostat

As part of the tenancy agreement, the landlord is required to keep in repair and proper working order any installation provided by the landlord for space heating and water heating.
The tenancy agreement also states that the resident is required to give access to the landlord’s employees or contractors at reasonable times and subject to reasonable notice to inspect the property or carry out repairs. It states that the landlord will normally give at least 24 hours’ notice, however, in an emergency it may need immediate access.
The landlord’s tenants’ handbook states that there are 4 priority categories for repairs as follows:
1. P1 – to be made safe or completed within 24 hours
2. P2 – to be completed within 3 working days
3. P3 – to be completed within 7 working days
4. P4 – to be completed within 28 working days
The handbook states that repair problems that are not an emergency but which stop the resident using important amenities like heating or hot water are classified as P2 to be repaired within 3 working days.
When arranging repairs, the landlord used an online platform to raise the repairs and contractors would bid for the work. The landlord would then select the successful contractor to undertake the work.
The landlord arranged for a contractor to inspect the property on 21 February 2023 to diagnose a fault that the resident had reported with the heating system. The contractor attended on this date and reported that the temperature dial on the thermostat was not working. The landlord therefore agreed that a contractor should replace the thermostat.
The contractor attended the property on 6 March 2023, installed the thermostat and explained to the resident how to operate it. It had therefore taken 9 working days from the date of the inspection on 21 February 2023 to the completion of the work on 6 March 2023. This was a reasonable timescale given that the contractor had to produce a quote, bid for the work on the online platform used by the landlord and then the landlord had to approve the quote before the work could proceed.
The resident contacted the landlord on 15 March 2023 to report a fault with the heating system. She stated that when the thermostat reached the desired temperature, it was switching itself off and was not automatically switching itself back on. The landlord therefore raised an urgent 3-working day repair order on the same day to inspect the system. The contractor carried out the inspection on 20 March 2023, which was within the 3-working day timescale for urgent jobs. As the resident had reported problems with the heating system, it was appropriate that the landlord had raised an urgent order on 15 March 2023 and it was also appropriate that the contractor had attended within the 3-working day target.
Following the appointment on 20 March 2023, the contractor provided a quote to carry out various repairs to the boiler and the thermostat control, including to repressurize the boiler, repair a leak on the system, check the voltage shortage and recalibrate the thermostat control. The landlord approved the quote on 21 March 2023 and an appointment was booked for the contractor to carry out the work on 24 March 2023. The landlord had therefore approved the quote in a timely manner and an appointment had been booked to take place 3 working days later, which was reasonable.
The resident phoned on the day of the appointment (24 March 2023) to cancel it as she was unwell. The resident asked for the appointment to be rescheduled and was given an appointment for 12 April 2023. The resident phoned the landlord on 24 March 2023 and requested an earlier appointment, but the contractor advised that this was the earliest appointment available.
The appointment date of 12 April 2023 meant the resident would have to wait 12 working days from 24 March 2023 for the contractor to attend. This was longer than the than the 3-working day target stated in the tenants’ handbook for heating problems. As the resident was known to be vulnerable, it was unreasonable that she was not given an earlier appointment to repair the heating system, despite the resident requesting an earlier date.
The appointment on 12 April 2023 was cancelled as the contractor who had been allocated the job was unable to provide an earlier appointment. The contractor asked the landlord to place the job back onto its platform so that other contractors could bid for the job. However, the Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the resident was notified in advance that the appointment would be cancelled. This was unreasonable as the resident would not have been aware that the job had been cancelled.
The landlord’s records show that it arranged further appointments for 11 May and 19 May to carry out the works. However, these appointments were cancelled by the resident due to ill health. Therefore, the evidence shows that the landlord made reasonable efforts to carry out the heating repairs between 11 and 19 May 2023. However, a month had elapsed between the cancelled appointment on 12 April 2023 and the appointment on 11 May 2023. It was unreasonable that the landlord had not offered an earlier appointment given the resident’s known vulnerability.
The Ombudsman has noted that the landlord raised an order on 24 March 2023 to supply the resident with 2 temporary heaters. This was reasonable as it would help to mitigate the delay in the contractor attending. However, the contractor reported that it had tried ringing the resident but she had not answered. It added that the resident did not have a facility for the contractor to leave a message.
The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the landlord or contractor followed up the offer of temporary heating with the resident, for example, by texting her or hand-delivering a note. Given that the contractor had not been able to resolve the reported heating issues within its published timescale of 3-working days, it was a shortcoming on the landlord’s part that it had not made further attempts to contact the resident to offer temporary heating.
The landlord stated in its stage 1 reply that at a meeting on 16 May 2023 the resident had expressed concerns about the contractor’s behaviour. The landlord had therefore agreed that its Resident Engagement and Resolution Officer (RERO) would also attend an appointment with the contractor on 25 May 2023. It was reasonable that the RERO had agreed to attend with the contractor given the resident’s stated concerns about the contractor.
The landlord stated in its stage 1 reply that the resident was meant to confirm the appointment that had been booked for 25 May 2023. It was reasonable that the landlord had asked the resident to confirm the appointment as she had previously written to the landlord (via the Ombudsman) on 16 May 2023 to express her dissatisfaction regarding the amount of notice she had received from a contractor.
The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the resident confirmed the appointment scheduled for 25 May 2023 and therefore the appointment did not go ahead. The landlord’s records show that a further appointment was scheduled for 20 July 2023 and the resident phoned the landlord on the day of the appointment to say she was unwell and therefore had to cancel the appointment.
The evidence therefore shows that in May and July 2023, the landlord and the contractor attempted to access the property to carry out repairs to the boiler. However, the Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the landlord made further attempts to resolve the reported heating issues during the 39 working day period from the proposed appointment on 25 May 2023 to the appointment on 20 July 2023. The resident was known to be vulnerable due to her poor mental and physical health. Therefore, the lack of action during the period from 25 May 2023 to 20 July 2023 to resolve the heating issues was unreasonable.
Following contact between this Service and the resident, the Ombudsman requested the landlord on 25 August 2023 to log a stage 2 complaint regarding the resident’s reports of issues with the heating system. The landlord therefore logged a stage 2 complaint. However, it then wrote to the resident on 31 August 2023 to advise her that it could not find any records on its system of requests for heating repairs. It offered to ask someone to show her how to use the thermostat.
The landlord’s response was inappropriate as the landlord had approved a quote to carry out works to the heating system following the contractor’s attendance on 20 March 2023. Furthermore, appointments had been made for the contractor to attend, for example, in March, May, and July 2023.The landlord’s response showed poor record-keeping and a lack of tracking in relation to repairs.
The landlord followed up its letter of the 31 August 2023 by writing to the resident again on 4 and 12 September 2023 and asked whether there was still a problem with the heating system. It repeated its offer for someone to show the resident how to use the thermostat. This Service understands that the landlord was trying to assist the resident by making an offer for someone to show her how to operate the thermostat. However, as the repairs identified by the contractor on 20 March 2023 were still outstanding, it was unreasonable that the landlord had not arranged for these repairs to be completed first.
The resident replied to the landlord’s letters on 18 September 2023 and declined the landlord’s offer for someone to show her how to use the thermostat. She said she had evidence of contractors attending her property in relation to the heating. She advised that the heating system was not operating as it should because when it was on the continuous setting, it would switch itself off and would not come back on.
The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 29 September 2023 and said it had arranged for a contractor to attend the property on that day (29 September 2023) to check the thermostat. It said it had hand-delivered a letter to the resident on 28 September 2023 advising her of the appointment. However, the landlord stated that the resident had refused access as she said she had not been given sufficient notice.
The tenancy agreement states that the landlord will normally give at least 24 hours’ notice. In this case, although the evidence shows that the landlord hand-delivered a letter on 28 September 2023, this Service has not seen any confirmation of the time the letter was delivered or the time the contractor attended. Therefore, the Ombudsman is unable to assess whether the resident received at least 24 hours’ notice. The resident later said she had not seen the hand-delivered letter until after the contractor had left on 29 September 2023.
The landlord said in its stage 2 reply that it still wanted to check the thermostat and therefore gave the resident the option of 2 further dates when the landlord could attend. The landlord also said it was happy to arrange for a contractor to attend but this time it would give more notice. As the contractor had not been able to access the property on 29 September 2023, it was reasonable that the landlord had offered to rearrange the appointment for the contractor to attend and to give more notice.
Following further correspondence with the resident from 3 October to 6 October 2023, the resident agreed an appointment for the landlord and the contractor to attend the property on 11 October 2023 to assess the heating issues reported by the resident. However, the resident contacted the landlord on the day of the appointment to cancel the appointment as she said she was unwell. The landlord offered a further appointment for 17 October 2023, but its records stated that the resident did not respond.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 25 and 26 October 2023 to say that she was not well mentally or physically and would make an appointment when she felt better. She added that her friend had put the heating on the timer and it was working satisfactorily. However, it was not working when the heating was on the continuous setting.
Overall, the Ombudsman has found the following failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of problems with the heating system and the thermostat:
1. after the appointment was cancelled on 24 March 2023 the resident was offered an appointment for 12 April 2023 – this meant that she would have to wait 12 working days, rather than the published 3-working days to carry out heating repairs
2. the contractor cancelled the appointment scheduled for 12 April 2023 and did not explain to the resident why it was cancelled at the time or in its stage 1 and 2 complaint replies
3. the resident was offered an appointment for 11 May 2023, which meant there was a further delay of a month after the contractor had cancelled the appointment for 12 April 2023
4. there was an unreasonable gap of 39 working days between the proposed appointment on 25 May 2023 and the next appointment on 20 July 2023
5. the landlord wrote to the resident on 31 August 2023 and said it had no record of the resident requesting heating repairs, despite approving a quote for repairs to the system in March 2023 – this showed poor record-keeping on the landlord’s part and poor tracking of repairs
6. during September 2023, the landlord focussed on arranging for someone to show the resident how to use the thermostat, rather than on carrying out the repairs to the heating system which had been identified by the contractor on 20 March 2023
The Ombudsman recognises that the landlord had experienced difficulties in accessing the property due to the resident’s ill-health and there were also challenges in managing communications with the resident. This culminated in the landlord issuing a formal notice to the resident on 28 March 2023 restricting contact with the landlord under its unreasonable behaviour policy. The resident had also requested the landlord to communicate with her by letter only and this had created further challenges when booking appointments.
These factors made it more difficult for the landlord to address the reported issues with the heating system and thermostat. Therefore, the Ombudsman’s view is that these factors did provide some mitigation in relation to the landlord’s failings. Had it not been for these mitigating factors, the Ombudsman would have made a finding of maladministration. Instead, this Service has made a finding of service failure because, despite the challenges it faced, the landlord should have done more in terms of its communications and tracking of the repair.
In its stage 2 reply, the landlord offered compensation of £50 for poor communication. The Ombudsman agrees with the landlord’s decision to offer compensation for its handling of the reported repair, however, this Service does not consider the offer of £50 to be proportionate financial redress to put things right in terms of the failings identified during this investigation. Furthermore, the Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the landlord has learned from its failings.
The Ombudsman has therefore ordered the landlord to pay compensation of £150 to put things right. The sum ordered recognises the distress, time, trouble and inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s failings, but also takes into account the mitigating factors mentioned earlier. The sum ordered is in line with the range of sums identified in the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for cases where there has been service failure.
The landlord has advised this Service that its understanding is that the heating issues had been resolved. However, the resident advised this Service on 28 February 2025 that the heating was still not operating correctly. The Ombudsman has therefore ordered the landlord to agree a further appointment with the resident to carry out any necessary repairs to the heating system. Given the resident’s known vulnerabilities, the landlord should arrange any necessary support for the resident to help ensure the appointment is agreed and takes place.
The resident has advised this Service that she has difficulties operating the heating system using written instructions given to her by the landlord. She states that the instructions are complicated. The Ombudsman has therefore included a recommendation for the landlord to consider providing a more user-friendly version of the instructions to the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints

The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints process. At both stages it will acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days. It will then reply to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days of the complaint being acknowledged and to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of the acknowledgement. These response timescales may be extended by a further 10 working days where necessary. If an extension beyond a further 10 working days is needed, this will be agreed with the resident.
The resident contacted the landlord on 11 May 2023 to register her dissatisfaction with the landlord’s handling of the reported heating issues. She stated that she was also unhappy about a telephone call she had had with one of the landlord’s staff on 24 March 2023. The landlord logged the contact as a stage 1 complaint and sent her an acknowledgement on 12 May 2023. The landlord had therefore acknowledged the complaint within the 5-working day deadline stipulated in its complaints policy.
The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 30 May 2023, which was 11 working days after it had acknowledged the complaint. Therefore, the landlord was slightly outside its 10-working day timescale for responding to stage 1 complaints and therefore this was a shortcoming on the landlord’s part. However, the Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the short delay caused any material detriment to the resident.
Following correspondence between the resident and the Ombudsman in August 2023, the Ombudsman requested the landlord to log a stage 2 complaint on 25 August 2023. The landlord therefore logged the complaint and sent an acknowledgement of the stage 2 complaint to the resident on 30 August 2023. The landlord therefore sent the acknowledgement 3 working days after receiving the request from the Ombudsman and had therefore acknowledged the complaint within an appropriate timescale.
The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 29 September 2023, which was 22 working days after it had acknowledged the stage 2 complaint. This was longer than its 20-working day timescale for responding to stage 2 complaints and this was therefore a shortcoming on the landlord’s part. However, the delay was not excessive and the Ombudsman has not identified any material impact caused to the resident by the delay.
Overall, the Ombudsman has concluded that the landlord responded to the resident’s complaints within reasonable timescales and there was therefore no maladministration in its complaints handling.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of problems with the heating system and thermostat.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the associated complaints.

Orders

The landlord is ordered within 4 weeks of this report to:
1. write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report
2. pay the resident a total of £150 compensation in relation to its handling of the reported heating issues. The landlord may deduct the £50 it has offered if this has already been paid
3. contact the resident to agree an appointment for a contractor to carry out any necessary repairs to the heating system and thermostat – the landlord should arrange any necessary support for the resident to help ensure the appointment is agreed and takes place

Recommendation

The landlord should consider providing the resident with more user-friendly instructions for operating the heating system.