MHS Homes Ltd (202305073)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202305073

MHS Homes Ltd

5 July 2024

Our approach

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The Ombudsman must determine whether a complaint comes within their jurisdiction. The Ombudsman seeks to resolve disputes wherever possible but cannot investigate complaints that fall outside of this.

In deciding whether a complaint falls within their jurisdiction, the Ombudsman will carefully consider all the evidence provided by the parties and the circumstances of the case.

The complaint

1.     The complaint is regarding the landlord’s handling of an electrical outage at the property.

Determination

2.     When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.

Summary of events

4.     On 27 February 2023 the leaseholder contacted the landlord to report loss of power in the property. An emergency job was raised but later cancelled as it was not the landlord’s responsibility.

5.     The leaseholder again contacted the landlord later the same day to advise the communal lights were also out and requested access to the electrical cupboard for its repair work. A job was raised by the landlord to provide this.

6.     The leaseholder raised a complaint on 28 February 2023 as it was unhappy it had to liaise with the building’s electrical network supplier, which it considered was the landlord’s responsibility. It was also unhappy that it incurred costs for accommodating its tenant in a hotel due to the lack of power at the property.

7.     The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 9 March 2023. It did not uphold the complaint as it stated it was not aware of the communal issue until later in the day when it responded.

8.     The leaseholder requested the complaint be escalated to stage 2 as it disputed the landlord’s claim it responded appropriately. It claimed the landlord did not raise the jobs correctly and that it was forced to liaise with the network supplier until the next day. It also claimed that further work was required to correct the issue.

9.     The landlord issued a stage 2 response on 6 April 2023, it again stated it was only made aware of the communal issue in the late afternoon when it responded by raising a job for its out-of-hours team. The landlord further advised it was not aware of any further issues in the buildings or the requirement for further work.

10. The leaseholder was dissatisfied and referred the complaint to this Service. The landlord was later contacted by the network supplier who confirmed no further work was required. It also advised the leaseholder it would consider reimbursing the leaseholder for its hotel costs as a goodwill gesture.

Reasons