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

Cirencester Housing Limited (202203149)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202203149

Cirencester Housing Limited

23 October 2023

 

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 repairs to the resident’s heating and hot water systems.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured shorthold tenancy with the landlord, which began on 27 March 2017. The resident  lives in a two-bed terraced house.
  2. The resident states that she has reported issues with her thermostat since the summer of 2019 and the wider heating and hot water system since October 2019. Whilst the landlord has stated it was only made aware of these issues in May 2020, it is not disputed that this has been a longstanding issue which resulted in periods of loss of heating and hot water for the resident.
  3. During the earlier period of this complaint, the resident was pregnant and more latterly, had a newborn baby in the property.
  4. Ultimately the heating system was replaced on 16 December 2021, following multiple attends to repair the previous system which did not result in a lasting or effective repair.
  5. The resident raised a complaint on 10 October 2021 due to the ongoing loss of heating and hot water over an extended period and the delays to the repairs being attempted. Additionally, the resident felt that contact from the landlord had not been sufficient and requested written confirmation of the steps being taken to resolve the heating / hot water issues. Alongside this, the resident requested the installation of a smart thermostat as a goodwill gesture.
  6. The landlord issued two stage 1 responses, which both acknowledged and apologised for the delays in repairing the heating and hot water systems. The initial response committed to replacing the heating system and installing the smart thermostat in December 2021 and offered compensation. The further response acknowledged two failures in service and offered additional compensation.
  7. The resident remained dissatisfied with the level of compensation offered and escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint process. The landlord’s response considered the level of compensation offered and made an increase of £150 on the previous offer.
  8. The resident escalated her complaint to the Ombudsman seeking a review of the amount of compensation offered.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to the resident’s heating and hot water systems

  1. The substantive element of the resident’s complaint relates to longstanding issues with her heating and hot water system. The resident stated that she first reported issues with the thermostat during the summer of 2019 and later lost heating to her home in December 2019. The landlord’s complaint responses state that they only consider that they were made aware of the issue in May 2020, despite the landlord’s contractor logging these issues and providing temporary heaters in March 2020. Having considered the evidence available, the date of March 2020 has been used as the starting point for these issues within this determination.
  2. Section 11 (1) (c) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 states that landlords must “keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling-house for space heating and heating water.” The landlord’s tenancy handbook and repairs policy both further enforce these requirements.
  3. The landlord’s repair policy sets out three priorities for repairs:
    1. Emergency – 24hrs when there is a risk to life, otherwise 48hrs. This includes loss of heating between October and March.
    2. Routine – 10 calendar days for all other routine repairs, unless multiple trades are involved, then 20 calendar days.
    3. Planned works – as notified to the residents in advance, depending on the size and complexity of the planned works.
  4. It was concerning to note that the landlord’s repairs policy, which is still in force at the time of this determination, includes a clause stating that only emergency repairs would be carried out in the event that a tenant is in arrears of more than 8 weeks (or two months), has not agreed a repayment schedule or is not adhering to a payment schedule. The policy goes on to state that the landlord will only deliver repairs that:
    1. “meets the regulatory obligations associated with fire, health and safety, gas and electric”
    2. “[the landlord] deems is necessary to protect the condition of the property or the components within the property”
    3. “fulfils any Category 1 order is placed on [the landlord] by the local authority.”
  5. This clause does not include reference to other legal requirements placed on the landlord by virtue of Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 or the regulatory standards of the Regular for Social Housing. Under both of these, the landlord is obliged, regardless of rent status or arrears, to complete repairs that are notified to it, such as heating, hot water, sanitary fixtures and the wider structure and exterior of the property. The landlord must alter its policy to take account of these legal obligations.
  6. In this case the heating system was replaced in December 2021, which resolved the issues. It is not disputed that this was far outside of the landlord’s policy timescales for repairs. In the intervening period, there is evidence that the landlord’s contractors attended on numerous occasions to attempt to resolve issues with the previous heating system unsuccessfully. This included attempts to rewire the boiler and fit a different valve. The resident asserts that a much greater number of appointments were booked than is shown on the landlord’s repair records. It has not been possible for this service to verify the number of appointments attended, however there is reference to additional visits within correspondence that is not shown on the repair records. The landlord should ensure, in future cases, it has processes in place to adequately track all appointments and actions arising.
  7. The resident stated that the temperature of the property caused her and her family a great deal of stress and anxiety and compounded an ongoing separate issue of damp in the property. It should be noted that the resident was without any heating throughout the  winter period of November 2020 to at least May 2021. The resident asserted in her complaints that, in total, she was without heating for 25 months and hot water for 10 months.
  8. The resident also felt that she should be compensated for the lost wages and time taken to facilitate entry to her property for repairs. It should be noted that the resident’s tenancy agreement does require them to facilitate access to their home at reasonable times, for the purposes of repairs or inspections. It is acknowledged that some level of disruption is normal within repairs, however the landlord must also act competently to avoid this becoming overly disruptive or time-consuming for the resident.
  9. During the period without heating and hot water, the resident purchased an additional heater, to compliment the two previously provided by the landlord, and a tumble dryer, as she stated she was unable to dry clothes without it, particularly given that she had a newborn baby.
  10. It should be noted that the resident has provided evidence of over 42 phone calls with the landlord over the period of this complaint, attempting to progress this issue. The landlord’s records do not make clear references to the majority of these calls. In future, the landlord should ensure that all calls from residents are clearly logged, along with any associated actions.
  11. Overall, there was a period of at least 21 months between the issues being reported and a lasting fix being applied, including significant periods over the winter months. Alongside this, the heaters provided by the landlord required supplementing by the resident. There has been no evidence presented to show that the landlord considered decanting the resident to another property at any time, particularly given that she was pregnant and later had a newborn baby. Taking these factors together, this amounts to maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s heating and hot water systems.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord operates a two-stage complaint procedure made up of the complaint and appeal stages. In both cases, the landlord’s policy indicates that it will issue a response within 20 working days of receipt.
  2. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response within its policy timescales. When the resident requested to escalate her complaint to stage 2, she was instead contacted and ask whether she would like to re-open her stage 1 complaint to allow for a more detailed investigation to take place. Whilst the resident agreed to this, there is no provision in the landlord’s policy to account for this process and it is unclear why the more detailed investigation could not have been undertaken by the staff considering the stage 2 response, or indeed the earlier stage 1 complaint.
  3. The landlord’s second stage 1 response was issued 32 working days after receipt and therefore 22 working days over the timescales. The resident requested, for a second time, that her complaint be escalated to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint handling process. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response 1 working day over timescale.
  4. Overall, the landlord’s complaint responses caused an additional 23 working days of delay within this process which were further compounded by the re-opening of the stage 1 complaint for a second time. This process is not supported by the landlord’s complaint policy and caused additional delays in the process and prevented the resident from bringing her complaint to the Ombudsman at an earlier point. This practice also indicates that the initial investigation was not sufficiently detailed. The complaint process also did not accelerate the required repairs and this led to the resident and her family experiencing detriment for an extended period of time. For these reasons, this amounts to maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling in this case.

Compensation award

  1. The landlord’s compensation policy outlines three areas for which compensation may be paid:
    1. Failure of reasonable service – this includes services such as heating and hot water. The policy limits this compensation to £100 unless there has been an “extreme service failure.”
    2. Distress and inconvenience – this is usually limited to £100.
    3. Actual losses – this includes actual costs incurred by residents and requires appropriate evidence to support any claims. Where agreed, actual losses will be repaid in full.
  2. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, which is available on our website, sets out a range factors to be considered when awarding compensation, along with indicative awards based on the severity of any maladministration identified.
  3. The landlord has previously offered the resident compensation of £1172.99 within its stage 2 complaint response, alongside the installation of a Nest smart thermostat which valued at £524 and repayment of additional electricity costs, once the resident supplied appropriate evidence of this. The compensation payment comprised of:
    1. £250 for service failures.
    2. £74.99 for reimbursement for a portable heater.
    3. £848 for the loss of heating and hot water, based on £4 per day over 212 days.
  4. The resident did not feel that this offer was sufficient as she had previously requested compensation of £4003.38 comprised of:
    1. £900 for 9 separate service failures identified, based on £100 per failing.
    2. £700 for the anxiety and stress caused by the delays to the repairs, particularly alongside being pregnant and, more latterly, having a newborn baby in the household.
    3. £288.40 for the loss of earnings, equivalent to 4 shifts, from the resident needed to stay at home to facilitate access to her property.
    4. £1288 for loss of heating, as the resident considered that March 2020 was the starting point of these issues, rather than May 2021, as stated by the landlord. This equates to £2 per day for this period until the heating system was replaced.
    5. £602 for the loss of hot water, as the resident stated that this was reported on either 16 or 17 February 2021. Therefore this amounts to 301 days of partial loss of hot water at £2 per day.
    6. £149.99 for the cost of a tumble dryer, which the resident stated was necessary to dry clothes, given the lack of radiators and heating within the property. There is no evidence that the landlord was advised of this purchase in advance and therefore it would not be considered to have been put ‘on notice’ of this cost.
    7. This totals £4003.38, prior to calculation of increased energy bills.
  5. Despite the resident declining the landlord’s compensation offer, this payment was made on 27 May 2022. The landlord paid £1098 into the resident’s rent account, due to arrears on the account and the remaining £74.99 directly to the resident. It was poor practice for the landlord to pay this amount without first confirming this with the resident. In future, the landlord must ensure that residents are consulted, and their agreement sought, prior to making any payments of compensation.
  6. The landlord has also committed to repaying the difference in electricity costs, however the resident has been unable to supply the required evidence to support this expenditure due to a change in energy supplier. It is recommended that the landlord consider making a discretionary payment in lieu of these costs.
  7. In line with our remedies guidance, the Ombudsman considers the length of time taken to resolve an issue, the impact that this had on the resident, any specific vulnerabilities within the household and any actual costs that may have been incurred. During the course of this investigation it has not been possible to verify the costs incurred through loss of earnings, nor can it be firmly established that the tumble dryer would have been necessary if the heating issue had not arisen. Therefore, these costs have not been considered as part of the remedy offered in this case.
  8. With this in mind, the landlord’s existing compensation offer is not sufficient in this case and it is ordered to pay the resident a further compensation payment, as set out in the orders section below. For the avoidance of doubt, this award is in addition to the previous payment made and must be paid directly to the resident, not onto her rent account, unless she requests otherwise.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there has been:
    1. Severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s heating and hot water systems.
    2. Maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 28 days of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Arrange for a senior director to apologise to the resident in writing for the delays in rectifying this issue and the errors in complaint handling.
    2. Pay the resident compensation comprised of:
      1. £2200 to recognise the distress, inconvenience, loss of amenity and time and trouble spent by the resident in pursuing this matter.
      2. £400 for the maladministration in its complaint handling processes.
      3. This compensation award is in addition to the previous compensation payment of £1172.99 made by the landlord. All remaining compensation must be paid directly to the resident and not be applied to her rent account, regardless of any arrears that may be present.
    3. Alter its repairs policy, if it has not already done so, to remove references to restriction of repairs based on rent arrears, to ensure that it complies with its legal obligations under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and its regulatory requirements with the Regulator for Social Housing.
    4. Cease its practice of paying compensation to residents, without first consulting them or seeking their agreement.
  2. Within 12 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Review its complaint handling processes, to ensure that complaints are investigated fully at each stage, to avoid escalations, or complaints being re-opened unnecessarily, which cause delays to residents.
    2. Review its processes for monitoring the rates of complaint escalation to identify any trends or improvement opportunities at an earlier stage.
    3. Review its processes for managing longstanding complaints, to consider undertaking more substantial repairs or replacements at any earlier stage to avoid residents living in homes that are potentially unfit for human habitation in the interim.
    4. Review its processes for recording repair appointments, telephone calls and actions to ensure complete records are held and available for inspection by this service. The landlord may wish to consider the findings in the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM), which is available on our website, to support this.
  3. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with these orders.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should:
    1. Consider making a discretionary payment to the resident in lieu of the actual difference in energy costs throughout the period of the repairs, as the resident has been unable to obtain suitable evidence to support this.