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

Orbit Group Limited (202303402)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202303402

Orbit Group Limited

31 May 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs required to the boiler.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The property is a 1-bedroom flat. The tenancy started in July 2005. The resident has mental health vulnerabilities, which the landlord is aware of.
  2. On 6 December 2022 the resident complained to the landlord about his boiler. By 22 December 2022 he would add to his complaint that he was without heating and hot water between 4 December 2022 until 6 December 2022, when a contractor repaired the issue. However, he faced issues with the boiler again on 15 December 2022.
  3. The landlord called the resident on 6 February 2023 and told him its stage 1 complaint response. Repairs to the boiler were carried out on 6 December 2022 and 19 December 2022. It awarded £65 in compensation for delays in repairing the boiler and the distress and inconvenience caused. The resident remained unhappy, so escalated his complaint on the phone, and he said his mental health was affected. The landlord sent a written copy of the stage 1 complaint response the following day.
  4. On 18 April 2023 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It said the level of service was not what the resident should have expected, and the service failure would be fed back to its contractors. It stated its offer of £65 in compensation was fair. An annual boiler service was also completed on this day by its contractors.
  5. The resident contacted this Service on 22 April 2023 asking us to investigate his complaint as he remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. He felt that he had been mistreated by the landlord.
  6. As a result of an internal case review, on 8 December 2023 the landlord had written to the resident about his complaint. It revised its stage 2 complaint response in accordance with its updated complaints policy. It noted that it originally offered £65 for the time he was without heating due to delays in attending 24-hour appointments. However, that award did not recognise complaint handling delays, which it considered unacceptable. It decided to increase its offer by £250 for complaint handling failures. This was a total award of £315.00 in compensation. It also explained learnings from the complaint review.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. It is noted the resident said that the delay in repairs exacerbated his mental health issues and he had felt suicidal as a result. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s concerns about his health, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, effects on health and wellbeing. Therefore, we cannot confirm the effect of the landlord’s actions or inaction on the resident’s health and the resident may wish to seek independent advice if he wishes to pursue this aspect of his complaint. However, the resident had raised these concerns directly with the landlord, so we can consider how it responded to these issues. We have also considered the general distress and inconvenience which the landlord’s handling of repairs caused the resident.

The landlord’s policies and obligations

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places statutory obligations on the landlord. It is to keep in repair and proper working order, the installations in the property that supply heating and hot water. Under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, the landlord is to assess hazards, which includes personal hygiene and sanitation. Excess cold is a potential hazard under HHSRS. Therefore, the landlord is required to consider whether defective boilers in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
  2. The landlord operates different tiers under its responsive repairs policy. Emergency repairs will be attended to within either 4 hours or 24 hours. Routine repairs will be attended to within 28 calendar days.
  3. Under the landlord’s compensation policy, it will pay £3.50 per day for loss of heating and £3.50 per day for no hot water. This is applicable after the third day of issues arising. It also has flexibility to provide compensation payments for service failure, as well as distress and inconvenience.
  4. The landlord has 2 stages within its internal complaints process. At stage 1 it aims to acknowledge complaints in 5 working days, and to respond within 10 working days after acknowledgement. If this is not possible, it will agree timescales and keep residents updated. At stage 2, it aims to acknowledge complaint escalations in 5 working days and respond within 20 working days. However, if this cannot be met, it will agree new timescales and keep residents informed.

Repairs required to the boiler

  1. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its dispute resolution principles. The principles of effective dispute resolution are:
    1. be fair, treat people fairly and follow fair processes
    2. put things right
    3. learn from outcomes.
  2. This Service will apply these principles when considering whether the landlord has taken enough action to put things right and learn from outcomes. The Ombudsman expects any redress offered was made during the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. This encourages earlier resolutions to complaints.
  3. Initially the landlord raised 24-hour repairs following the resident’s reports on 4 December 2022 and 15 December 2022. This showed it was treating the resident’s reports in line with its emergency repairs policy. It is not disputed that the landlord failed to repair the boiler within 24 hours of the resident’s report on both occasions. The resident was without heating and hot water on 4 December 2022 for 2 calendar days, when repairs were made. However, the issue recurred, so he was also without heating and hot water between 15 December 2022 and 19 December 2022 (4 calendar days). The repair on 19 December 2022 restored his heating and hot water services.
  4. Therefore, under the parameters of the landlord’s compensation policy, it would have been appropriate for the resident to have been awarded £7.50. This equates for 1 calendar day without heating and hot water as of 19 December 2022, where delays had exceeded 3 calendar days.
  5. This Service has noted that the resident feels the landlord’s contractor mistreated him during a visit leading up to 19 December 2022, despite the repair being relatively quick. The resident said the contractor called him several times and was rude to him. The landlord told the resident it would enquire about this internally. From the evidence provided, it was reasonable the landlord communicated with its contractor about the resident’s experience. It provided feedback to them, to improve service delivery, avoid recurrence and learn from this. The resident had not provided any further contrasting information in relation to being mistreated, but the Ombudsman expects the landlord to have communicated clearly with the resident. Therefore, a recommendation has been made for the landlord to agree contact preferences and any reasonable adjustments with the resident.
  6. The resident first made the landlord aware in a phone call on 6 February 2023, how his experience affected him and his mental health. Given the resident’s known mental health vulnerabilities, it was reasonable that the landlord acted promptly and made safeguarding referrals by 7 February 2023.
  7. Under this Service’s remedies guidance, consideration is given for distress and inconvenience caused to a resident by a particular service failure, considering the severity of the situation and the length of time involved as well as other relevant factors, such as vulnerabilities.
  8. In the landlord’s final response of 18 April 2023, the total award amounted to £65. The landlord told this Service that although it could have awarded £7.50, it made a higher discretionary payment for the resident’s overall experience. It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the landlord went above what is expected of it regarding the compensation offered. The £65 offered comprised of £35 for service failure and £30 for the distress and inconvenience caused. Given the period the resident was affected, this aspect of the compensation was appropriate and more than its policy position. It was also a fair and reasonable offer under this Service’s remedies guidance.
  9. Additionally, the landlord’s contractors carried out an annual boiler service on 18 April 2023. This was completed and no further issues found, so there were no outstanding repairs.
  10. Overall, although the landlord could have prevented further detriment to the resident sooner than it did, it acknowledged its service failures. It apologised for the inconvenience caused, took action to resolve the issue and the £65 offered was fair and reasonable. The offer recognised the delay in repairs, as well as the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident. As such, this Service finds reasonable redress regarding the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs required to the boiler.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. From the information available, the resident first raised his complaint to the landlord on 6 December 2022. There was no written acknowledgement of the complaint until 22 December 2022. In this correspondence, the landlord told the resident it was not in a position to conclude its investigation. Although it said it would write to the resident, it did not explain or agree when. As such, there was a 12 working day delay in acknowledging the resident’s complaint, which was not appropriate and outside the times set out in its complaints policy. It also failed to provide revised timescales, which was also not appropriate.
  2. The stage 1 complaint response was issued in a written format on 7 February 2023, this meant 42 working days had elapsed since the resident complained. This was unfair on the resident and not in line with the standards set in its complaints policy. It had spoken to the resident on 6 February 2023 to deliver its stage 1 complaint response over the phone. This was not appropriate as the landlord had taken 41 working days to provide this response without agreeing this in the first place.
  3. The resident escalated his complaint over the phone with the landlord on 6 February 2023 as he was unhappy with the outcome. On the following day, this was acknowledged by the landlord in its written stage 1 complaint response. A stage 2 complaint response was not sent until 18 April 2023, 49 working days after acknowledgement of the complaint. This delay was not appropriate and not in line with its own complaints policy. It had failed to keep the resident updated or provide new timescales for when a response would be provided.
  4. At that stage, the landlord had not acknowledged the above complaint handling failings or communicated clearly with the resident. It is evident there were failings in its timeliness and complaint handling communication, which was unfair on the resident.
  5. This Service acknowledges that the landlord reviewed its position on the complaint on 8 December 2023, which was after the complaint was referred to us. It apologised and made an offer of £250 for its complaint handling failures. It demonstrated learning by saying it had recruited more staff across its teams to improve its complaints service and nullify delays. Further, it sent a survey to residents and developed a new complaints quality assurance framework. It said the introduction of this would enable it to have greater oversight and control of the quality of its complaints management and outcomes.
  6. It is the Ombudsman’s view that prior to its correspondence of 8 December 2023, the landlord did not identify points of learning in relation to complaint handling. It also missed the opportunity to provide suitable redress within its internal complaints process and before the case was accepted by the Ombudsman for formal investigation. Had the landlord offered this level of compensation in its final response, the £250 offered for complaint handling would have been considered reasonable redress.
  7. Instead, the resident exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 18 April 2023. There was no compensation for complaint handling awarded at that stage. It had also not acknowledged any complaint handling failures or learning from the resident’s complaint. Therefore, it was not proportionate to the detriment the resident faced from 6 December 2022 until 18 April 2023. He experienced delays, distress and inconvenience, and time and trouble due to the poor communication. As such, the Ombudsman considers there was service failure by the landlord regarding its complaint handling. An order is therefore made for it to pay him the revised total offer of £315 it made in December 2023.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Scheme, the landlord had made an offer of reasonable redress, which satisfactorily resolves the complaint about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs required to the boiler.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendation

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must re-offer the £315 in compensation comprised of:
    1. £65 for the landlord’s failures in the handling of its delays in repairs to the boiler.
    2. £250 for its complaint handling failings.

The payment is to be made directly to the resident’s bank account. If any of the £315 previously offered had been paid, it can be deducted from this total.

  1. Within 4 weeks, the landlord is to provide evidence of compliance with the above order to this Service.

Recommendation

  1. It is also recommended that the landlord contacts the resident and records any current vulnerabilities in its systems and agrees any reasonable adjustments. This includes but is not limited to contact preferences.