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

Aster Group Limited (202209004)

Back to Top

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202209004

Aster Housing Group Limited

2 September 2022

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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:

  1. The landlords handling of heating upgrades.
  2. The landlords handling of upgrades to:
    1. The external door.
    2. The inner door.

Background and summary of events

2.     The resident has held an assured tenancy since 2014. The property is a two– bedroom house.

3.     The tenancy outlines the landlord‘s responsibility for the repair and structure of the property. This includes external doors.

Responsive Repairs Procedure

4.     The landlords repairs procedure says on occasion a repair may need more significant investment or is too complicated and will need to progress in a different way outside of this procedure.

5.     The landlord states that some works will require pre-inspections. This includes works that could fall into a planned programme, are structural or are more technical.

 

 

Compensation Procedure

6.     The landlord has a compensation procedure which includes a section entitled ‘inconvenience and distress’. This gives guidance on a compensation range for the length of time (relevant to the issue) and the impact of the issue. The range runs from £0 to £250. Managers are given discretion to offer payments during the complaints process.

Summary of events

7.     On 12 October 2021, the resident emailed the landlord with a query asking what could be done to improve the property’s insulation and heat efficiency. He said the porch area was not insulated and the porch inner door was old and wooden, which allowed cold air to seep into the property. The resident also asked the landlord whether there was sufficient radiators in the property.

8.     The landlord responded to the resident letting him know that they would be:

  1. Referring to the heating team to assess the radiators in the property.
  2. Reviewing the property’s loft and wall insulation.
  3. Referring for a surveyor to inspect the door and porch.

9.     On 4 November 2021, the landlord’s heating team visited the property. Three new radiators were ordered to replace existing radiators. This work was set to take place on 24 November 2021.

10. On 24 November 2021, the resident made a complaint to the landlord as the landlord had not turned up to replace the radiators. He said that he had taken the day off work and there had been no call to explain the job would not take place, instead he had to chase the landlord.

11. A fast track complaint was registered and £50 compensation offered to the resident for the inconvenience caused. The appointment then took place on 10 December 2021.

12. On 26 November 2021, the resident made a second complaint about lack of contact from the landlord on the subject of the porch doors and insulation. The resident acknowledged the action taken so far in response to the heating. A new fast track complaint was registered.

13. On 21 December 2021, the landlord’s surveyor inspected the porch. It was noted that the landlord’s records showed both the external (front door) and rear door had been replaced in 2020. However the inner front door was still a wooden one. A note was made for the resident to be contacted about the door being on a future programme for renewal and for a radiator to be installed in the porch and utility room.

14. On 16 January 2022, the resident escalated his second complaint about communication on the porch doors. Although some radiator work had taken place, there had been no update about the insulation, external door or the inner front door.

15. The porch radiator installation was booked for 17 February 2022. But due to covid related sickness the appointment was moved to 3 March 2022.

16. On 18 February 2022, the landlord issued its stage one response. The response acknowledged that there had been communication failings about the replacement of the front door. Information had not been relayed to the resident about when this work would take place. £50 was offered for this communication breakdown. In addition the letter stated:

  1.  The front door was placed on a programme of works due in 2022/23.
  2. The inner door would not be replaced as part of these works.
  3. New radiators were fitted to the porch on 18 January 2022.
  4. An operative would attend to overhaul the internal door between the porch and the hallway.

17. On 20 February 2022, the resident requested a stage two review as the stage one had not responded to all of his queries. The resident asked

When the front door would be replaced.

  1. When the inner door would be replaced.
  2. What the properties EPC (Energy Performance Certificate) rating was.
  3. Whether the landlord would consider insulating the porch.

18. On 3 March 2022, the resident called the landlord as the appointment to fit radiators in the porch had not taken place. After making enquiries the landlord called the resident back to explain there had been an error. The job had been given to the wrong team and could not go ahead. The resident raised this issue as a formal complaint. The earlier fast track complaint was now escalated for a formal stage one response from the heating team about missed appointments.

19. The landlord sent a stage one response to this complaint on 10 March 2022. It included an apology and £100 in compensation for the time taken chasing the landlord and the stress caused. It explains that there had been unexpected illness caused by covid-19 resulting it missed appointments.

20. On 21 March 2022, the landlord wrote its stage two response to the resident. This complaint response was about the thermal qualities of the porch and the communication over whether the porch doors would be renewed. This letter explained:

  1. The inner front door had been listed for replacement and had been prioritised for between April 1 and 30 June 2022.
  2. The letter said ‘When this door is measured your outside front door will also be assessed for replacement so that both can be replaced at the same time’.
  3. Information on the properties current EPC was shared. Also, a contractor would organise to carry out an inspection of the property’s loft and cavity wall insulation.
  4. It apologised for missed appointments and the general standard of customer care. An extra £150 compensation was offered with acknowledgement made for the inconvenience and distress caused.

21. On 23 March 2022, the appointment  to fit the radiators took place. The attending operative completed the job. Afterwards the resident discovered the central heating system was airlocked. This needed a repair to ensure the system was working. An operative attended the next day and completed this repair.

22. On 25 March 2022, the landlord wrote to apologise for the inconvenience caused to the resident having to have an operative come back. An explanation was given that it had been caused by pressures on the heating team work force following Covid-19.

23. On 1 May 2022, the resident chased the landlord for an update as no compensation payment had been made following the stage two letter. Two items remained outstanding.

  1. A prioritised date for replacement of both doors.
  2. A contractor to carry out an inspection of the loft and wall insulation.

24. This email was responded to by the landlord, explaining the member of staff who issued the stage two letter no longer worked for them. A manager was appointed as lead in this complaint.

25. On 9 May 2022, the manager visited the property. He made an assessment of the external door. This assessment said that that this uPVC door was in a serviceable condition with a double glazed section to the top with an insulated panel to the lower section.

26. On 27 May 2022, a stage two update was sent. This letter explained:

  1. That the external door did not need replacing.  
  2. The inner door did need replacing. It was on the programme of works for that financial year. Due to an issue with appointing a contractor for the door replacement programme, it would be later than the original deadline of June 2022.
  3. The letter explained that the porch was not designed with the same thermal qualities as the main house so it would be colder. To solve cold air coming into the house from the porch the plan would be to replace the inner door with a modern, insulated door.

27. The letter went on to offer:

  1. An additional £50 as the door renewal programme had been delayed and the door would not be renewed before 31 August 2022. A further  commitment was made to prioritise this door within the programme.
  2. £100 was also offered for confusion caused by the previous statements being unclear about whether the external door would be replaced.

Events following the complaint exhausting the landlord’s complaints process.

28. Following contact with this service during September 2022 the landlord noted delays to the door replacement would mean the 31 August 2022 target would be missed. It also found that its appointed contractor had measured both the inner and external doors, despite only the inner door being listed for replacement.

29. On 11 November 2022, a further stage two letter was sent by the landlord. This letter explained that the contractor for the inner door was behind schedule. A new contractor was offered to deliver and install a new inner door by 31 January 2023.  The landlord apologised that the contractor had measured both doors and would have raised expectations. Compensation was offered in addition to the previous offers, totalling £350 broken down into:

  1. £50 for the contractor measuring the external door unnecessarily.
  2. £50 for the additional inconvenience.
  3. £50 a month for every month the replacement of the inner door remained outstanding. The calculation was from the target of 31 August 2022 up to January 2023. A total of £250.

30. The landlord has advised this service that the inner door replacement is yet to take place. It has a contractor in place to measure, manufacture and install.

 

 

Assessment and findings

31. The Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles are:

  • Be fair
  • Put things right
  • Learn from outcomes

This Service will apply these principles when considering whether any redress is appropriate and proportionate for any maladministration or service failure identified.

Heating upgrade

32. The landlord acted promptly from the report made on 12 October 2021. The resident’s query about the heating and thermal efficiency of the home was sent to the relevant internal departments for advice and action. The resident had asked about whether the porch could be insulated in consideration of the local micro climate. From the evidence this service has seen, the landlord engaged in conversations about the thermal efficiency of the porch when its operatives visited to assess it. The stage two update letter dated 27 May 2022 provided a detailed explanation on the thermal qualities of the porch area describing the build style and stating that the porch was ‘not designed with the same thermal qualities as the main house and the porch area is classed as  non-habitable space’. The landlord would not be required to insulate a porch and has instead considered what other measures it can take to improve the properties thermal qualities through upgrading the heating.

33. The landlord visited in November 2021 and identified existing radiators in the house that needed replacement. The first appointment for this work did not take place and the resident had to chase the landlord for a new appointment time and date. Using the landlord’s fast track complaint process he was compensated £50 for time and trouble. The work was completed on 10 December 2021. It was reasonable for the landlord to identify inefficient radiators in the house for replacement as this would have ensured a higher heat output which in turn will have improved the properties thermal qualities.

34. The resident was inconvenienced on two occasions due to failed appointments to install the new radiator in the porch. In these examples nobody turned up and the landlord did not contact the resident. This resulted in the resident taking time off work unnecessarily and having to chase the landlord to find out what was going on. The loss of confidence in the landlord due to repeated issues with keeping appointments and keeping the resident updated is understandable.  The landlord gave a reasonable explanation, that covid-19 related illness was leading to a reduced work force although on notification of absence from work, it should have made sure all appointments were rescheduled through contact with the resident. It offers redress in the form of apologies and compensation totalling £150. This is in line with the landlord’s compensation policy which gives guidance on inconvenience and distress payments to be within the region of £50 to £250.

35. Overall, the landlord made a plan to improve the thermal qualities of the home. It replaced existing radiators and installed an additional one in the porch, which the resident said was a problem area. As a porch is not considered to be the main living space of the home (such as a bedrooms or living room) the landlord would not have been required to install a new radiator. In doing so it has demonstrated a willingness to seek a resolution to the problem of cold air entering the home.

Inner and external door replacement.

36. There were delays in giving a full and detailed assessment of the external and inner doors. The resident had to chase the landlord repeatedly to get further action and answers. This inconvenience is recognised in the stage one response dated 18 February 2022 which offered £50 and an apology. In this letter the landlord said it was the external door that would be replaced on a programme of works. The inner door was referred for some repair work.  This letter did not fully answer the resident’s query about the porch insulation nor did it commit to any timescales for the door replacement.

37. In its 21 March 2021 stage two response the landlord decided that the wooden inner door should have been on programmed works for replacement and the external door needed to be assessed so that ‘both can be replaced at the same time.’ Considering the nature of this complaint, it would have been useful for a full assessment to have been completed prior to issuing this stage two response, the landlord needed to set out its position on the doors clearly, at the earliest possible stage, which it did not do.

38. The response also acknowledged the challenges the resident faced with general customer care. He had chased for updates in respect of both the heating upgrade and the position on the porch doors.

39. At stage two the landlord offered £150 for the miscommunication over the doors and the customer care service failure. In offering this payment the landlord provided reasonable redress to the resident, taking into account the inconvenience caused. This compensation amount is in line with the landlord’s compensation policy which allows managers to make payments based on the length of time and impact caused.

40. The external door assessment took place on 9 May 2022 and concluded that it did not need to be replaced. In the stage two update letter dated 27 May 2022, the resident was given the detail of the assessment, which found the door serviceable. It recognised that the statement ‘both can be replaced at the same time’ used in the previous letter sent on 21 March 2022 was misleading and the resident would have been disappointed that the external door was not going to be replaced. It offered £100 compensation in recognition of the distress caused.

41. The landlord has shown that it has carried out an assessment of the door and it is reasonable for it to rely on the assessment when deciding whether or not to replace the door. It was also entitled to change its view based on further information it obtained. The landlord did take too long to carry out a thorough assessment of the doors and due to this it was unclear about its intentions. As a result it caused disappointment and distress to the resident. In the letter dated 9 May 2022 it sought to remedy this by explaining its decision making, providing written detail of its assessment of the doors and offering redress for its previous unclear positions but it did not recognise the delays in providing the decision on the external door. Considering the resident first asked about this subject on 21 October 2021 it then took until the 9 May 2022 for a full assessment to be made and a decision relayed to the resident.

42. The letter also stated the replacement of the inner door ‘will prevent cold air coming into the house as the new door will provide better insulation than a wooden door as it has good heat retention’. This is a reasonable approach for the landlord to take to resolve the issue of cold air coming into the home through an outdated door.

43. The target date of June 2022 for installing the inner door was not met due to issues appointing a contractor to complete the door replacement programme. The landlord took steps to mitigate these delays by offering the resident £50 whilst setting a new prioritised target of 31 August 2022.

44. Following contact with this service the landlord’s internal records showed delays to the door replacement contract meant the 31 August 2022 target was missed. It also found that its contractor had measured both inner and external doors, despite only the inner door being listed for replacement. It was reasonable for the landlord to expect the programme works contract to be fulfilled as intended and when it was highlighted that this was not the case, this service has seen evidence that it considered how they could replace the inner door as quickly as possible. To do this a new contractor was offered which a reasonable step to take to enable the works to be completed as soon as is practical.

45. In its 11 November 2022 letter the landlord sought to remedy its further error with an offer of £100 for the contractor incorrectly measuring the external door. It also offered £50 a month from September until the end of January 2023 (£250 total) when it anticipated the inner door would be replaced. These payments combined committed an additional £350 to the resident.

46. The resident has advised this service that a desired outcome is to have clarity on what the landlord intends to do to bring the properties EPC up to a C. The landlords stage two letter says that it plans to bring properties into the C rating by 2025 although, at the time of writing it was unable to say what these plans would be.

47. The landlord has sought to offer financial redress using its compensation policy repeatedly through the length of this investigation period. A total of £850 has been offered during separate complaint handling stages in recognitions of where it has failed. This is broken down into:

  1. £50 fast track payment for a failed appointment for a radiator install.
  2. £100 stage one payment for a second failed appointment for a radiator install.
  3. £50 at a separate stage one for a delayed response about the external / inner door replacement.
  4. £150 at stage two for miscommunication relating to which door would be replaced and service failures relating to the radiator installation.
  5. £150 total at stage two ‘update’ for revising which door would be replaced following an assessment and the delays in the inner door being replaced.
  6. £350 at Stage 2 ‘ongoing works’ for continued delays in installing the inner door (at £50 a month from September 2022 until January 2023) and inconvenience caused by the contractor measuring both doors for renewal when only the inner had been ordered for replacement.

48. Overall, it was appropriate, and in line with the guidance set out in the landlord’s compensation policy, for the landlord to compensate the resident for its admitted service failures and the inconvenience caused. The Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance (with is available on our website) recommends a payment of £50 to £250 in instances of service failure resulting in some impact on a complainant. In this case there has been disappointment, loss of confidence, delays and time and trouble.

Determination (decision)

Heating upgrade

49. In accordance to paragraph 53 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

 

 

Door replacement

50. In accordance to paragraph 53 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Reasons

51. Although there were service failings through delays and poor communication, the landlord has sought to resolve the resident’s initial query of improving the thermal quality of the home. To do this it has set in motion a plan to upgrade heating and install a new radiator which it has completed. It has offered reasonable explanations, apologies and redress for the mistakes made with missed appointments.

52. The landlord has assessed doors for replacement and committed to replacing the inner door, which it has deemed needs renewing. There were significant delays in it providing a thorough assessment of the doors. For its mistakes, the landlord has apologised and used its compensation policy to offer redress.

Recommendations

53. The landlord is recommended to pay the £850 offered through its complaints processes if it has not done so already, in the next four weeks.

54. The landlord is recommended to make contact with the resident to organise the measuring of the inner door and then overseeing the delivery to ensure that it is renewed.

55. It is recommended that the landlord considers its compensation offer of £50 a month until January 2023 and whether this should be extended to the date of the inner doors final installation.

56. It is recommended that the landlord write to the resident to confirm its EPC plans and when it is likely to be in a position to give specific information relating to the resident’s property.