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

Islington Council (202017231)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202017231

Islington Council

11 November 2021


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 level of redress offered to the resident following her reports of a defective heating and hot water system.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident lives in a first floor two bedroom flat and holds a secure tenancy which started in 2003.
  2. In her complaint escalation letter of 4 August 2020, the resident says she has had difficulty lighting her boiler since the start of her tenancy. The resident says it often took between 30 and 60 minutes to light her boiler. The resident says that this problem was not resolved until her boiler was replaced at the end of June 2020.
  3. The resident says that one of the engineers that attended her property gave her advice to be careful what was put down her sink as this caused blockages and problems lighting the boiler. As a result, the resident did not use her sink for anything other than clear water in the period from May 2019 to June 2020. The resident carried heavy containers of non-clear liquids to her toilet to empty them during this time.
  4. In her complaint, the resident has also raised concerns that engineers attending her property did not wear appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) during the Coronavirus pandemic.
  5. On 9 April 2020, the resident reported problems with her boiler and an operative attended the same day. The boiler pressure was low and this was rectified. On the following day, an operative needed to attend again and found a defective pump. The necessary part had to be ordered and this issue was not resolved until 15 April 2020. The resident contacted the landlord again on 2 June 2020 regarding her boiler and an operative came to repressurise the boiler.
  6. On 17 June 2020, an operative attended to the boiler again and the boiler was recommended for renewal. On the same day, the resident contacted the the landlord and a stage 1 complaint was registered.
  7. The resident was without a fully functioning boiler in the period from 17 June 2020 – 24 June 2020 when the installation works were completed.
  8. The landlord sent a stage one response to the resident on 8 July 2020. No amount of compensation was specified but it was advised that compensation would be paid in consideration of the period from 17 June 2020 to 24 June 2020. The resident wrote to request a review of the response on 4 August 2020 and proposed a settlement of £4,000. The figure was based on reported problems since 2003. In her letter of 4 August 2020, the resident estimated the compensation due to not being able to use her sink at £125 a week for 52 weeks.
  9. On 21 August 2020, the landlord completed its review of the stage 1 response. This included an apology for its staff not wearing PPE but did not substantively change the position of the landlord that matters over a year old would not be considered. The amount of compensation being offered to the resident was still not specified.
  10. On 13 September 2020 the resident requested escalation of her complaint to the second and final stage. The resident was concerned that the distress and inconvenience she had suffered since the start of her tenancy would not be taken in to account when calculating the amount of compensation to be awarded.
  11. The landlord sent a stage two response to the resident on 14 December 2020 but it’s position remained the same: Only matters that occurred within 12 months of the complaint were taken in to consideration. As redress for the issues raised in the complaint the landlord offered £25 for the late stage 2 response, £281.20 for loss of heating calculated at £7.40 per day for 38 days and a further £100 for time and effort bringing the total amount of compensation offered to £406.20.
  12. The resident remains dissatisfied with the amount of compensation offered. The resident made a Freedom of Information request for the repairs history at her address in July 2020 and received a response in August 2020 which has been provided to this Service as evidence for additional compensation. 

Assessment and findings

  1. This investigation has considered the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports from May 2019 onwards. This is because there are limits on how far back an investigation can go as residents are expected to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner. This is so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issue while they are still ‘live’ and while the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events that occurred.
  2. The Freedom of Information (FOI) request made by the resident does show how many times since 2003 she has been visited by the repairs team. However, it does not provide evidence that a formal complaint was raised prior to June 2020. Paragraph 39e of the Ombudsman scheme states that the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which ‘were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period.’
  3. I note that in her letter of 13 September 2020, the resident writes that ‘I didn’t use the kitchen sink for a year to avoid the inconvenience of having to call out the Gas Team to get the boiler started and functioning again.’ In these circumstances, where the resident has been working around the problem rather than making a complaint it is unreasonable to expect the landlord to pay compensation. There is no other evidence to suggest that these issues were repeatedly brought to the landlord’s attention and that it failed to act or respond appropriately.
  4.  The complaints policy of the landlord states that ‘any complaint known about by the customer that was not reported to us within 12 months will not be accepted unless there is good reason for the delay.’ It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to refuse to take into consideration matters prior to 17 June 2019. There is no evidence that the issue of a defective boiler or sink was raised as a complaint prior to 17 June 2020.
  5. The landlord did respond promptly to the residents reports of disrepair, however there was some service failure with staff not wearing PPE and it is not disputed by the landlord that there were times in the months prior to June 2020 that when the resident was without heating and hot water.
  6. The landlord’s repairs policy does not set out clearly the amount of compensation to be paid in the event of loss of heating and hot water. The stage 1 response refers to a ‘refund for loss of services’, while the calculation of compensation in the stage 2 response suggests a period of 38 days running from 17 June 2020 until 24 July 2020 rather than 24 June 2020. A recommendation to the landlord regarding this lack of clarity has been made below.
  7. Although it is not clear how the figure of £7.80 per day has been reached, taken as a whole the landlord’s offer of £406.20 which includes £25 for late responses and £100 for time is proportionate to the delays and failures set out above. This figure is broadly in line with the landlord’s compensation guidance which suggest that payments from £500 per annum can be made for disrepair payments. This figure is in line with housing ombudsman guidance on remedies.

Determination (Decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55 b of the Housing Ombudsman scheme, the landlord has offered reasonable redress to the resident that satisfactorily resolves the complaint about the heating system.

Reasons

  1. The landlord has offered £406.20 to the resident which has been calculated in accordance with their compensation guidance and is in line with Ombudsman guidance on remedies.
  2. Although the resident did inform the landlord when things went wrong, it would be unreasonable to expect the landlord to factor in matters over a year old when calculating the level of compensation. This is because the landlord has not been given sufficient opportunity to investigate the issue as a formal complaint and put things right. Although the resident may have experienced inconvenience and distress in the period from 2003 to 2020, the resident did not make a formal complaint about these issues until 2020.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord to re-offer and pay the resident its original compensation offer of £406.20
  2. That the landlord reviews its compensation guidance so that it can provide clearer indications to customers on compensation for loss of services at an earlier stage of the complaints process.