City of Westminster Council (202229076)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202229076

Westminster City Council

30 September 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

The complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of no heating or hot water and request for an electric boiler.
2. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

The resident has a secure tenancy which started on 4 March 2013. The property is a second-floor studio flat. The housing records confirm the resident is disabled.
The resident told the landlord on 13 September 2021 that she had no heating or hot water and she was not staying at the property. The landlord raised a job on the same day, but it was cancelled on 16 September 2021 because the resident said no work was required to her boiler. She said the problem was due to the gas supply being cut off to the whole building by the gas supplier following a gas leak. She asked the landlord to instal an electric boiler.
The resident’s social prescriber made a complaint on her behalf on 30 March 2022. They said the resident had moved out of her home because she had no heating or hot water. They noted she had restricted mobility and would struggle to access the gas meter if it was relocated underneath the kitchen sink, as recommended by the gas supplier. The social prescriber also noted the resident had not received a response to her request for an electric boiler.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 4 April 2022 and said:
1. There was a gas leak in the building in August 2021 and this was repaired by the gas supplier in September 2021.
2. The gas supplier recommended that the resident’s gas meter was relocated underneath the kitchen sink. This was refused by the resident and as a result, there was no gas supply to her meter.
3. It raised a job on 13 September 2021 given the resident’s report of no heating or hot water, but this was later cancelled given she said there were no problems with her boiler and the issue was due to no gas supply.
4. The resident’s boiler did not need to be replaced and if she needed an electric boiler fitting for medical reasons, she would need to contact the landlord’s occupational therapist (OT), who would carry out an assessment.
5. It offered to contact the gas supplier on the resident’s behalf and ask it to install a gas meter and connect the gas supply temporarily whilst she made enquiries with the OT about installing an electric boiler. This offer was refused as the resident wanted a permanent solution.
6. It would ‘‘de-escalate’’ the resident’s complaint to an enquiry and arrange for it to be closed.
The resident’s social prescriber responded on the same day and asked for the complaint to be reopened. They said the resident refused to agree for the gas meter to be relocated because she would not be able to bend down to access it or the emergency control valve because of her disabilities. She also said she refused to agree to move the meter temporarily because she believed the landlord would not move it again.
The landlord raised a job on 8 December 2022 and the resident was given temporary heaters. The gas was not uncapped because there was no gas supply to the meter. It attended again on a number of occasions in December 2022 and January 2023 but was unable to uncap the meter as there was no gas supply or credit on the gas meter.
The resident raised a further complaint on 26 January 2023. She said she had been without heating or hot water since August 2021 and the landlord’s contractor had failed to attend appointments. She said she wanted the gas turning back on and to be compensated for the delays in resolving the problem.
The landlord arranged for the gas supply to be uncapped on 8 February 2023.
The landlord issued a further stage 1 complaint response on 8 February 2023 and said:
1. The company responsible for supplying gas to the building had advised the resident that her gas meter needed to be relocated following a gas leak in August 2021. It was recommended the meter was relocated underneath the kitchen sink.
2. The resident had refused to allow the gas supplier to move the meter because she would have difficulty accessing it. This was the reason why she had no gas.
3. The resident would need to contact the landlord’s OT and ask for an assessment to be carried out if she wanted an electric boiler installing.
4. The resident had previously refused the offer to move the gas meter temporarily whilst she waited for an assessment to be carried out by the landlord’s OT. She had since agreed to this and arrangements had been put in place to reconnect the gas supply.
5. It could not identify any service failures given the gas supply was not connected in the resident’s home.
The resident told the landlord on 1 April 2023 that she had changed her mind and did not want the gas meter moving temporarily. She said she wanted an electric boiler installing.
The landlord issued its final complaint response on 29 June 2023 and said:
1. The gas supplier needed to move the gas meter because of gas regulations.
2. The gas supplier explained this to the resident and noted the kitchen cupboard was the only option available for relocating the gas meter to. The resident refused this given she would lose storage space and said she wanted an electric boiler to be fitted.
3. The existing boiler did not require repair and installing an electric boiler would significantly increase the resident’s electric bills.
4. It would only consider replacing the boiler following an OT recommendation.
5. It received no communication from the resident between August 2021 and September 2022 about having no heating or hot water. It was not made aware the gas meter had still not been fitted until 8 December 2022.
6. It raised 11 jobs between 8 December 2022 and 26 January 2023. The resident was told there was nothing it could do until the gas supplier moved the gas meter.
7. The gas supply was reinstated on 8 February 2023 following agreement with the resident and she had a fully functioning boiler.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of no heating or hot water and request for an electric boiler.

The housing records confirm the resident told the landlord on 13 September 2021 that she had no heating or hot water. It was appropriate for the landlord to arrange an appointment on the same day. This ensured it met its repair obligations as set out in its tenants’ handbook. This confirms the landlord is responsible for the services and equipment that supply gas, heating and hot water. The gas meter and the supply of gas to it are the responsibility of the gas supplier.
The landlord cancelled the repair on 16 September 2021 given the resident reported there were no issues with her gas boiler and that the problem related to a communal issue which was being dealt with by the gas supplier. While the landlord was not responsible for the gas meter, it would have been reasonable for it to have contacted the gas supplier on the resident’s behalf to establish what the problem was and when it would be resolved. There is no evidence it responded to the resident’s request to instal an electric boiler. This was a failure.
The resident’s social prescriber told the landlord on 30 March 2022 that the resident moved out of her home because she had no heating or hot water. They said the gas supplier’s proposal to reposition the gas meter underneath the kitchen sink would mean she would not be able to access it given she had severe physical issues and restricted mobility. They also said the gas supplier had recommended the landlord install an electric boiler and no one had responded to the resident’s request to do so.
Whilst it was appropriate for the landlord to raise a job on the following day, there is no evidence it advised the resident that it was not responsible for the gas meter, offered to contact the gas supplier on her behalf or provided temporary heaters. There is no evidence the landlord considered whether it needed to make any reasonable adjustments in accordance with the Equality Act, 2010. This was a further failure.
The job was cancelled on 1 April 2022 as the resident said there was no gas supply and the meter needed to be moved.
It was appropriate for the landlord to contact the resident on the same day and to confirm the gas meter needed to be relocated and that she needed to contact the landlord’s OT if she wanted an electric boiler installing. This was in accordance with its home improvement grants and assistance policy. It also offered to contact the gas supplier and ask it to carry out temporary work whilst the resident sought advice from the landlord’s OT. This demonstrated it was sensitive to the resident’s needs and wanted to put things right for her. The resident declined the offer of assistance. However, there is no evidence the landlord considered whether it needed to temporarily decant the resident given she had no form of heating or hot water. This was a failure.
The landlord confirmed on 4 April 2022 that the existing gas boiler did not need to be replaced and the resident would need to request an OT assessment if she believed an electric boiler needed to be fitted. While this ensured it managed her expectations, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have offered to liaise with the OT on her behalf.
There is no evidence the landlord responded to the resident’s social prescriber’s follow up email that was sent on the same day in which they noted she would be unable to access the meter or the emergency control valve if it were repositioned underneath the kitchen sink. They said this was because of her disabilities. This was a failure and meant the landlord did not consider the specific needs of the resident or its obligations to assess whether it needed to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act, 2010
It was appropriate for the landlord to arrange a job on 8 December 2022 to uncap the gas supply as an emergency. This was in accordance with the repair priorities set out in the tenants’ handbook. It was also appropriate for the landlord’s out of hours team to provide temporary heaters, although it said it could not turn on the heating or hot water as there was no gas supply.
The landlord visited the resident’s home again on 9 December 2022 and established the gas meter was still disconnected and the resident had lost her gas payment card. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have liaised with the gas supplier to establish what it was doing to resolve the issue with the gas meter. This was a failure.
Further visits took place in December 2022 and January 2023, but the landlord was unable to uncap the gas due to no access and because the gas meter was still not connected to the gas supply network. The resident confirmed on 18 January 2023 that the debt on her gas meter had been cleared. Whilst it was appropriate for a job to be raised on the same day, it is unclear from the housing records whether the landlord visited the resident’s home or what the outcome was. This demonstrates poor record keeping on the part of the landlord.
A further job was raised on 26 January 2023 with an appointment for the following day, but the landlord was not able to gain access.
It was reasonable for the landlord to contact the gas supplier on 2 February 2023 and confirm the resident was happy for the gas supply to be reconnected. This demonstrated it wanted to support the resident and put things right for her. It is, however, unclear from the housing records when the gas supplier reconnected the gas meter. The housing records confirm the landlord visited the resident’s home on 8 February 2023 and recommissioned the boiler, refilled the system and tested the central heating and hot water. This was appropriate and ensured the resident had heating and hot water.
The resident told the landlord on 1 April 2023 that she had changed her mind and wanted an electric boiler installing. There is no evidence the landlord responded to the request. This was a further failure.
It was appropriate for the landlord to confirm in its final complaint response on 29 June 2023 that the gas supplier identified that the meter needed relocating in August 2021 following the gas leak. This was because of limitations on the length of pipework that could be used. It also said it would not replace the existing gas boiler given it was not defective. This ensured it managed the resident’s expectations. It again advised the resident to contact the OT if she believed the boiler needed to be replaced on medical grounds so that an assessment could be carried out. This was appropriate.
In summary, the options available to the landlord were limited given it was not responsible for the gas meter or the pipework that connected it to the gas supply network. It is evident the landlord visited the resident’s home on a number of occasions to uncap the gas meter but was unable to do so given there was no gas supply or credit on the meter. However, it could have done more to liaise with the gas supplier from the outset and did not consider the resident’s needs and its obligations under the Equality Act, 2010 at times.
It is evident the situation caused the resident inconvenience and distress. She was left without heating or hot water for 17 months and the landlord did not consider offering a decant during this time. In this case there was maladministration by the landlord for its handling of the resident’s reports of no heating or hot water and request for an electric boiler for which it is ordered to pay the resident £850 compensation. This has been calculated at £50 per month for the 17-month delay from September 2021 to February 2023.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

The housing records confirm the resident’s social prescriber made a complaint on her behalf on 31 March 2022. There is no evidence the resident’s complaint was acknowledged by the landlord. This was not in accordance with this Service’s complaints handling code which says landlords must acknowledge complaints within five days of receipt.
It was appropriate for the landlord to contact the resident on 1 April 2022 to seek to understand her complaint and the outcomes she was seeking. This was in accordance with this Service’s complaints handling code.
The landlord issued it stage 1 complaint response on 4 April 2022. While this was in accordance with the 10-working day target timescale set out in its complaints policy, it did not confirm its reply was its stage 1 complaint response. This caused confusion and was not in accordance with this Service’s complaints handling code. This says landlords must confirm in writing to the resident what stage its complaint response relates to. This was a failure on the part of the landlord.
The landlord did not advise the resident of her right to escalate her complaint if she remained unhappy but said it had been closed. Neither did it respond to the resident’s social prescriber’s email of 4 April 2022 in which they asked for the complaint to be reopened. The landlord’s failure to do this caused delays and was not in accordance with this Service’s complaints handling code. This says landlords should not unreasonably refuse to escalate a complaint through all the stages of its complaints process.
The resident’s social prescriber made a further complaint on her behalf on 26 January 2022. While it was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge the complaint on the same day, there is no evidence it sought to understand the resident’s complaint or the outcomes she was seeking. This was a further failure.
The landlord issued a further stage 1 complaint response on 8 February 2023 in accordance with the 10-working day target set out in its complaints policy. There is no evidence the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint at this point.
It was appropriate for the landlord to confirm with the resident on 19 May 2023 that it had no record of her making a request to escalate her complaint following contact from this Service. It did not, however, advise her when she could expect a response. Neither did it seek to understand her complaint or the outcomes she was seeking. This was a failure.
The landlord did not issue its final complaint response until 29 July 2023. This was outside the 20-working day target set out in its complaints policy. This was a further failure.
In summary, the landlord did not follow its complaints procedure and there were delays in issuing its complaint responses. It also failed to escalate the resident’s initial complaint despite being asked to do so. The situation caused the resident inconvenience and distress. In this case, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint for which it is ordered to pay £100 compensation.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of no heating or hot water and request for an electric boiler.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident for the failings set out in this report. A copy of the apology letter must be shared with this Service.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £950 compensation. This must be paid directly to the resident and made up as follows:
1. £850 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its handling of her reports of no heating or hot water and request for an electric boiler.
2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its handling of her complaint.
In accordance with paragraph 54g of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord is ordered to undertake a review of this case with regards to how it responded to the resident’s request given her disabilities and its obligations under the Equality Act, 2010. The review must be done within 12 weeks of the date of this report and a summary provided to the resident and this Service.