Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Manchester City Council (202319523)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202319523

Manchester City Council

11 June 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
    1. Handling of boiler repairs.
    2. Complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has a secure tenancy with the landlord, which began on 20 June 2017. The landlord is a local authority. The resident lives in a 3-bedroom, semi-detached house. We told the landlord on 18 October 2023 that the resident has social dysmorphia.
  2. On 17 August 2023, the resident complained to the landlord about boiler repairs, the key points were as follows:
    1. He had no hot water or heating on 25 May 2023. The landlord repaired the boiler, but the same issue happened again on 6 June 2023, which it was unable to fix. The landlord disconnected the boiler on 7 July 2023, which it then replaced.
    2. He had experienced issues with the new boiler leaking since 20 July 2023, which the landlord had not resolved. He was fed up with having to keep reporting this and the fault returning straight after each repair.
  3. The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response on 4 September 2023, the key points were as follows:
    1. It apologised for its service falling below normal expectations and for the delays experienced.
    2. A contractor repaired a leak on the new boiler on 4 September 2023 and reported that this needed a replacement isolation valve.
    3. The manufacturer would fit the valve on 7 September 2023 due to the boiler being under warranty.
  4. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and asked us to escalate the complaint to stage 2 on his behalf, which we did on 18 October 2023, the key points were as follows:
    1. It took a long time to replace the previous boiler.
    2. Pets had died due to carbon monoxide poisoning from the previous boiler.
    3. The landlord failed to respond to his complaints of a leaking boiler. He said it sent 12 contractors, but nothing was being done.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 27 October 2023. It then wrote to confirm an extension agreed with the resident on 7 November 2023, the key points were as follows:
    1. It apologised for its response to the boiler repairs not being in accordance with its service standard.
    2. There was no evidence to confirm a carbon monoxide leak from the boiler, but it would appoint a third-party gas specialist to investigate further. The resident agreed a complaint response extension until 22 November 2023 to allow this. It asked the resident to forward any images or supporting information he felt would assist.
  6. The landlord issued a stage 2 response with a copy of the specialist’s report on 22 November 2023, the key points were as follows:
    1. It found no evidence that the previous boiler had a carbon monoxide leak or other defect that would have placed the resident’s home at risk.
    2. The specialist’s report indicated that there was no evidence to suggest a carbon monoxide leak. It said there was a leak from the gasket within the boiler case and that all carbon monoxide readings taken at the time were acceptable.
    3. It acknowledged that the prospect of a carbon monoxide leak had caused the resident distress but said it had repaired and replaced the boiler in a suitable manner.
    4. The resident could contact the Ombudsman if he remained unhappy.
  7. The resident referred his complaint to us on 29 November 2023. The complaint became one that we could consider on 8 June 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident says this complaint impacted his mental health. The Ombudsman cannot conclude the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This is outside our jurisdiction, but consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience that may have been caused to the resident.

Policies and procedures

  1. The Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 set out the legal requirements for the safe installation, maintenance and use of gas systems and appliances.
  2. The tenancy says the resident must allow access for repairs.
  3. The landlord’s gas work policy says, immediately following any work on a gas appliance, it will examine the appliance to ensure its safe operation. It will disconnect an appliance that is classed as immediately dangerous.
  4. The landlord’s service standards say it will offer an emergency appointment within 3 hours if reported during working hours or if waiting could make this seriously worse, or within 24 hours if reported outside of working hours. Emergency repairs include no heating or hot water at any time of the year, but only if a delay would cause severe problems.

Landlord’s handling of boiler repairs

  1. The landlord raised a boiler repair on 25 May 2023. A contractor attended 5 days later, on 30 May 2023, and noted that the boiler needed a diverter valve. As the landlord was not aware that the boiler was not working at this stage, it was reasonable not to attend as an emergency.
  2. On 31 May 2023, the contractor received the valve and phoned the resident to arrange to replace this on 2 June 2023. This was appropriate action to take to complete the repair.
  3. The landlord raised another repair on 6 June 2023. A contractor attended on 7 June 2023, during which time it noted there was no hot water and that the resident required this for medical needs. Therefore, it returned the same day to fit a printed circuit board and hot water thermostat to fix the boiler. This was appropriate to ensure the resident had hot water. However, it then identified that the boiler needed a new flue.
  4. When the contractor next visited on 8 June 2023, it reported that the boiler required further parts and that there was a carbon monoxide leak inside the boiler. Therefore, it disconnected the boiler. This was appropriately in line with the landlord’s gas work policy, which says it will disconnect a gas appliance that is considered ‘immediately dangerous’. The contractor recommended replacing the boiler.
  5. On 9 June 2023, the landlord approved the installation of a new boiler, and the contractor visited to complete a survey for this. We consider that the landlord acted reasonably to approve a new boiler installation within 24 hours of the contractor recommending this due to the age of the existing boiler and plans to replace this soon.
  6. The contractor fitted the replacement boiler on 13 June 2023 and issued a new gas safety certificate. Although this was a warmer time of year, the resident was without a working boiler for 5 days while he awaited the replacement. The contractor failed to evidence that it discussed with the resident the impact of being without hot water and heating to understand how this might affect him and consider whether it needed to provide a solution while it awaited the boiler replacement. This likely caused distress due to the resident requiring hot water for medical needs.
  7. We would have expected the new boiler to be more reliable than the boiler that it replaced. However, from 20 July 2023, the resident reported water leaks from the new boiler. On 31 July 2021, due to 4 repair visits in 11 days, the landlord made an internal request to inspect the boiler to determine why the leak kept returning. It was not reasonable for the resident to repeatedly report the same issue with the boiler, which likely caused him inconvenience. Therefore, the landlord’s decision to inspect the boiler was appropriate. However, there is no evidence that it then did this, which is a failing.
  8. A contractor visited on 1 August 2023 in response to a further boiler repair raised that day. It was reasonable that it then returned later the same day due to the water leak returning and being ‘severe’, so that it could make this safe with the boiler continuing to work. It then raised a further repair in line with its policy for 14 August 2023.
  9. However, the landlord then raised a further repair on 30 August 2023 due to a leak, which the contractor attended on 4 September 2023. It replaced pipework to the boiler but reported a hairline crack in the isolation valve, which the manufacturer would replace due to the boiler being under warranty. The contractor left the boiler on because the leak was minimal. We consider it a failing that it took several visits to identify the cause of the leak. This likely further inconvenienced the resident and caused distress due to the repeat visits and repairs for the same issue.
  10. When the resident escalated his complaint to stage 2, he raised concerns about the possibility of a carbon monoxide leak from the previous boiler, which he considered had impacted the household and caused the death of his pets. An internal landlord email dated 6 November 2023 said the seals that failed were inside the case sealing element of the boiler so carbon monoxide would not have escaped into the room. However, it asked a third-party gas specialist to investigate, which was reasonable to obtain an impartial opinion on the matter. In doing so, the landlord demonstrated how seriously it considered the resident’s concerns.
  11. The specialist issued a report dated 17 November 2023, which the landlord provided to the resident with its stage 2 response. This allowed the resident to view and consider the content of the report, which was appropriate as this would have helped to alleviate his concerns. It also provided the report within a reasonable timeframe.
  12. The landlord’s stage 2 response explained that neither it nor the gas specialist found any evidence to indicate a carbon monoxide leak. However, it also reasonably acknowledged that this matter had caused the resident distress, which showed empathy towards his circumstances. We consider that the landlord acted appropriately when responding to the resident’s concerns.
  13. Overall, during a period of over 4 months, 13 visits took place to install a new boiler and complete repairs on both the previous and new boiler. Several visits failed to identify the cause of a water leak on the new boiler, which required a manufacturer visit due to the boiler being under warranty. The resident was also without a working boiler for 5 days. The landlord’s failings represent maladministration, and an order has been made below for remedy.

Complaint handling

  1. The resident told us that when he initially tried to raise a formal complaint the landlord refused to log it. While we do not dispute the resident’s assertion, we cannot make a determination about this issue as neither party has provided any evidence to support the claim.
  2. The resident logged a formal complaint with the landlord on 17 August 2023.
  3. In accordance with its complaints policy, the landlord should have acknowledged the complaint within 5 working days and provided its stage 1 response within 10 working days. Where it is unable to respond within 10 working days, the landlord should contact the resident to agree an extension.
  4. There is no evidence that the landlord acknowledged the complaint, which is a failing. It also did not contact the resident to agree an extension for its stage 1 response, which it issued 2 working days late on 4 September 2023. However, we do not consider that this unduly affected the resident, as the landlord issued its response within the maximum 15 working days detailed in its complaints process.
  5. The resident asked to escalate the complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process on 18 October 2023.
  6. In accordance with its complaints policy, the landlord should have acknowledged the stage 2 escalation request within 5 working days and provided its stage 2 response within 20 working days. Where it is unable to respond within 20 working days, the landlord should contact the resident to agree an extension.
  7. An internal landlord email dated 27 October 2023 noted that it had spoken to the resident, but there is no evidence that it acknowledged the complaint, which is a further failing. There is also no evidence of the discussion that took place, which indicates an issue with its record keeping.
  8. On 7 November 2023, the landlord wrote to confirm an extension for issuing its stage 2 response, as discussed with the resident that day. There is no record of the discussion, which further indicates an issue with its record keeping.
  9. However, the landlord issued its stage 2 response on 22 November 2022, which was 18 working days after the resident’s escalation request and, therefore, in line within the timeframe set out in its complaints policy.
  10. We consider the landlord’s failure to acknowledge the resident’s complaint and escalation request, as well as the lack of evidence of discussions with the resident, represent service failure. Therefore, we have made an order for remedy below.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of boiler repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure regarding the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Provide a written apology for the failings identified.
    2. Pay compensation totalling £350, comprised as follows:
      1. £300 for its failures regarding its handling of boiler repairs.
      2. £50 for its complaint handling failures.
  2. The landlord is to confirm compliance with these orders within the timeframe set out above.