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

Clarion Housing Association Limited (202219645)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202219645

Clarion Housing Association Limited

4 September 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:
    1. The resident’s reports of defective heating and a lack of insulation within the property;
    2. The resident’s associated complaint.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s recordkeeping in this case.

Background

  1. The resident held an assured tenancy for the property that is subject of this complaint from September 2020 until June 2023, when she moved into another one of the landlord’s properties. The landlord’s records confirm that the resident suffers with multiple sclerosis (MS).
  2. The resident reported issues with the heating at the property almost immediately. Records show various issues with the heating system and leaking radiators between October 2020 and February 2021. A routine service in January 2022 found no issues. However, a heat loss survey carried out on 1 February 2022 deemed the air source heat pump (ASHP) system to be inadequate for the size of the property and it “should have never been specified.” It also found that the radiators in the property were too small, there was no cavity wall insulation, and the loft insulation needed to be upgraded.
  3. The ASHP system was replaced in February 2022, the cavity wall insulation installed in November 2022, and the loft insulation upgraded in April 2023.
  4. The resident made her complaint to the landlord on 18 October 2022. The landlord’s record of the complaint shows that the resident reported receiving an electricity bill for £2,467.05, which she attributed to inadequate heating in the property, the radiators being too small and no insulation in the walls. She claimed that her heating costs had doubled since moving in but the property remained cold. She could not afford to pay this bill and asked the landlord to pay £1,233 towards it.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 15 December 2022. It noted the heat efficiency improvements it had carried out to the property over the past year. It said its calculations had not found the heat loss in the property to be excessive and it believed it had completed works to maintain the heat load in a reasonable timeframe. It stated that the resident had been provided with a correct EPC prior to her moving in. Whilst it empathised with her concerns, it did not believe there had been any service failure on its part. It did, however, apologise for the delay in responding to her complaint, for which it offered her £50 compensation.
  6. The complaint was escalated to stage 2 via this Service on 4 January 2023 as the resident wanted the landlord to bear some responsibility for her increased electricity bill. She told this Service that the main reason for her complaint “was due to my heating being 9°” between October 2020 and March 2022 and the heating was on constantly along with 5 fan heaters to warm up the house. Whilst she confirmed that the insulation had now been installed, she said the landlord was also trying to arrange further works to address the gaps in the walls around the windows.
  7. The stage 2 response, dated 9 February 2023, stated that the landlord could find no obvious reasons why the resident was still struggling to maintain a comfortable temperature in the property. It noted that loft insulation was due to be installed on 24 April 2023 and suggested fitting monitoring equipment to identify any other causes of heat loss. In recognition of the fact that additional insulation had to be installed and the time it had taken to resolve the issue, it awarded compensation of £350. It also awarded her £100 compensation for incorrectly advising her to contact this Service to escalate her complaint.
  8. The resident referred her complaint to this Service on 24 March 2023 as she was not satisfied with the compensation offered by the landlord. She said that, until March 2022, her monthly heating costs were approximately £300 to £350. After the upgraded heating system and insulation were installed, those costs fell to £185 to £200 per month. She insisted that the landlord should bear some of the increased costs she incurred as a result of its delays in resolving the heating issues. She believes the property’s original Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) was wrong and, had she known this beforehand, she would never have moved into the property. Furthermore, she has told this Service that she suffered multiple chest infections due to the property being cold.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. At stage 2 of its internal complaint procedure, the landlord investigated and responded to several issues, some of which were not raised at stage 1. However, the resident has subsequently confirmed to this Service that she only considers the issues defined at paragraph 1 above to be outstanding and that the other issues of the complaint have been resolved, predominantly because she moved out of the property. Accordingly, this investigation has focussed on and assessed the circumstances of the issues that remain outstanding.
  2. The resident has expressed concern about the accuracy of the EPC issued for the property in 2020. This Service cannot determine whether or not the EPC was accurate. Instead, this investigation considers whether the landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s concerns about the quality of the EPC.
  3. The resident has told this Service that the heating issues at the property caused her to suffer multiple chest infections. This Service recognises that this situation has caused the resident significant distress as she has experienced the issue over several months. Where this Service identifies failure on a landlord’s part, we can consider the resulting distress and inconvenience. However, unlike a court, we cannot establish what caused the health issue or determine liability and award damages. This would usually be dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts.

The resident’s reports of defective heating and a lack of insulation within the property

  1. The contractor, who carried out the heat loss survey and prepared the EPC dated 17 February 2022, disagreed with some of the assumptions made in the EPC dated 20 July 2020. Their email to the landlord on 7 February 2022 advised that they believed there was no cavity wall insulation as “there are no obvious injection points on any part of the building to prove otherwise.” Also, they found that the loft insulation was not as thick as assumed. However, this Service cannot determine if and to what extent any inaccurate assumptions would have affected the property’s EPC rating. In any case, the crux of the resident’s complaint is the heat loss and insulation in the property.
  2. This Service has not investigated the steps taken by the landlord prior to installing the ASHP system in 2020. In any case, its fuel switching/heating upgrade policy, which post-dates the installation in 2020, provides for an assessment of the suitability of the heating system for the property type and size, including consideration to the insulation of the walls and loft. This would ensure that it complies with its obligations under the Decent Homes Standard.
  3. The landlord should have appropriate systems in place to record its interactions with residents and keep records of repairs so that it can demonstrate its actions and interventions. In this instance, there is no evidence to show what prompted the landlord to obtain a heat loss survey and further EPC in February 2022, so it is not clear if the heating issues reported by the resident from the outset continued into 2021/22. The resident asserts it did. She says she reported the heating issues in the property to the landlord from the start of her tenancy and throughout, and there were several attendances by engineers but the problem was unresolved.
  4. The findings of the heat loss survey in February 2022 – which were not disputed by the landlord – clearly indicate that the heating system, radiators and insulation in the property were inadequate. From this point onwards, the landlord was aware that these issues had been present in the property from the start of the resident’s tenancy. The findings support the resident’s claim that she was not able to heat the property sufficiently to achieve and maintain a comfortable temperature.
  5. Whilst the heating system was upgraded promptly in February 2022, there were significant delays – of at least 9 and 14 months respectively – in installing the required cavity wall insulation and replacing the loft insulation. Records suggest that, on 3 March 2022, the landlord was awaiting quotes for the installation of cavity wall insulation, but this work was not scheduled to be carried out until 3 November 2022. There is no evidence to cover the intervening period. Similarly, the stage 2 response noted that the loft insulation was due to be replaced on 24 April 2023. Although the landlord has provided no evidence to this Service of these works being completed, the resident has confirmed the work was done.
  6. The resident’s complaint to the landlord on 18 October 2022 and her email of 26 October 2022 reflect the distress, concern and frustration caused to her as a result of its delays in addressing her reports. She said she could not afford to pay the electricity bill she had received and her electric company had threatened to disconnect her or fit a prepayment meter. However, this was not addressed in the landlord’s complaint responses, even though it knew, by this point, that the heating system was not powerful enough to heat the property, which supported the resident’s inflated heating costs. In the circumstances, it would have been reasonable for it to consider her request for compensation. Its failure to do so was neither reasonable nor resolution-focussed.
  7. Following the resident’s complaint, the landlord emailed the contractor on 20 October 2022, enquiring as to what works were carried out at the property to address the resident’s concerns about heating. It asked if the heating system was working effectively and if loft insulation had been installed. Whilst this demonstrates that the landlord was actively trying to assess the current situation with the heating system, it also demonstrates a failure to keep records of repairs in this case, which is consistent with its failure to provide evidence relating to the same to this Service. Its poor recordkeeping has contributed to the delay in completing outstanding works. For instance, it failed to monitor and follow-up the installation of cavity wall insulation and upgrading the loft insulation.
  8. The lack of evidence provided by the landlord also makes it difficult to assess its communications with the resident regarding her reports relating to the heating issues she was experiencing at the property. Its failure to demonstrate that it kept the resident reasonably informed throughout its handling of the repairs is consistent with the resident feeling ignored.
  9. The landlord’s multiple failings in resolving the heating issues at the property spanned a prolonged period of time. In all the circumstances, it is appropriate to make a finding of maladministration in its handling of the resident’s reports of heating issues and a lack of appropriate insulation within the property.
  10. On the basis of the undisputed findings of the heat loss survey, this Service accepts that the resident incurred increased heating costs due to using additional, expensive-to-run, electric heaters to heat the property effectively. The resident has provided an electricity bill dated 23 June 2023, shortly before she moved out of the property, which totalled £4,060.91. She says the landlord should pay 50% of the bill as she accepts she would have had to pay reasonable heating costs.
  11. Although the resident has provided 2 earlier bills, these are estimates. Therefore, this Service does not have accurate bills to show the electricity consumption at key stages – for example, once the ASHP system was upgraded, the cavity wall installed, or the loft insulation replaced – so we cannot ascertain the actual increased heating costs attributable to the landlord’s delays. That being said, this Service considers it appropriate that the landlord bear a fair proportion of the electricity bill in recognition of the higher heating costs incurred by the resident.
  12. In deciding a fair contribution, the starting point is the time it took to resolve the heating and insulation issues at the property. This must be balanced with the fact that the resident would have paid reasonable heating and other electricity usage costs in any event, as well as the dramatic energy price rises in autumn 2022. In all the circumstances, a contribution of 25% of the June 2023 bill is fair and reasonable. This amounts to £1,015.23.
  13. In addition to this, the landlord should pay compensation to the resident in recognition of the significant amount of distress, concern, frustration and inconvenience caused as a result of its failings. Whilst broadly in line with its compensation policy, the £350 awarded and paid by the landlord at stage 2 for its handling of the heating issue does not fairly reflect the long-term, significant impact that its failings had on the resident. Compensation at the higher end of an award for maladministration, as set out in this Service’s remedies guidance, is a more proportionate reflection of the detriment suffered by the resident in this case. Therefore, a further compensation payment of £250 has been ordered to be paid by the landlord.
  14. Overall, the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of defective heating and a lack of insulation in the property fell short of a reasonable standard in a number of respects:
    1. It delayed in installing cavity wall insulation and replacing the loft insulation.
    2. It failed to keep accurate records of the heating issue and the works carried out to address the resident’s concerns.
    3. Its failure to provide this Service with evidence of the repairs and works carried out to resolve the heating issue has meant that we cannot assess its communications with the resident.
    4. Its complaint responses failed to address the resident’s reasonable request for a contribution towards her increased heating costs.

The resident’s associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s email to the resident on 21 October 2022 accepted that it had not recorded her previous email as a complaint but that it would now deal with her concerns under its complaints policy. The landlord has not provided this Service with a copy of that previous email so it is unclear when the resident first brought her concerns to its attention. This further reflects the landlord’s failure to keep appropriate records in line with good recordkeeping practice, or otherwise a failure to comply with its obligations under the Scheme to provide information required by this Service.
  2. The stage 1 response was issued on 15 December 2022, 40 working days after the landlord’s admittedly late acknowledgement of the resident’s complaint on 21 October 2022. This was an unreasonable delay and compounded the resident’s feeling that the landlord had not taken her reports regarding inadequate heating in the property seriously. That being said, the landlord accepted and apologised for the delay in providing its stage 1 response and offered the resident compensation of £50 for this failing, which was sufficient to put right this delay.
  3. The stage 1 response itself was not consistent with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles. It did not fairly and objectively address the resident’s concerns about heat loss in the property and the time taken to resolve the issues. Nor did it respond to her request for it to contribute towards her increased heating costs or acknowledge and seek to remedy the distress and inconvenience caused as a result of its shortcomings. This was reflected in the markedly different position taken by the landlord at stage 2 on the resident’s complaint about its handling of the heating issues.
  4. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged that the resident had incorrectly been advised by a member of its staff that she could only have her complaint escalated to stage 2 via the Housing Ombudsman. This caused unnecessary and avoidable delay to the escalation of the resident’s complaint, which she contacted this Service about on 21 December 2022.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 9 February 2023. This was 27 working days after the stage 2 acknowledgement, which was sent to this Service promptly on 4 January 2023. However, had the landlord accepted the stage 2 escalation request directly from the resident, as it ought to have done, this could have been as early as 21 December 2022. From that earlier date, the stage 2 response was issued in 34 working days. Whilst this goes beyond the 20-working-day timeframe for a stage 2 response set out within this Service’s Complaint Handling Code, given that it included the Christmas/New Year period, the delay was not excessive.
  6. The stage 2 response dealt more fairly with the crux of the resident’s complaint about heating and insulation issues, acknowledging and apologising for its delays in resolving these matters and for its mishandling of her complaint. It sought to put things right by way of its compensation offer of £450, which included £100 for its poor complaint handling in addition to the £50 paid at stage 1. It also offered to install monitoring equipment in the property to help it to identify and resolve any further heating issues, demonstrating a proactive approach to ensuring a satisfactory resolution for the resident.
  7. However, as at stage 1, the landlord failed to meaningfully address the resident’s concerns about the substantial electricity bill she had received. Its offer to refer her to its tenancy support team for advice on managing her energy bills did not address her claim for it to contribute towards her increased costs. It also failed to acknowledge the concern or show empathy for the distress the electricity debt had caused.
  8. Further, the landlord’s response to her concerns about the accuracy of the 2020 EPC focussed on the improvement works it had carried out since the heat loss survey. It failed to properly address her concerns in light of the inaccurate assumptions highlighted in the contractor’s email of 7 February 2022, which was unreasonable.
  9. The resident has confirmed that the sums awarded for the landlord’s poor complaint handling at stages 1 (£50) and 2 (£100) were paid at the time. The level of compensation was fair and reasonable to reflect the relatively modest impact of the complaint handling failures for which they were awarded. However, the resident has also experienced distress and concern as a result of its failure to respond to her concerns regarding her heating costs and the EPC rating from 2020. Furthermore, it has not demonstrated that it took away sufficient learning from its complaint handling failings in this case. In all the circumstances, a finding of service failure is appropriate.
  10. In addition to the £150 already paid, the landlord should make a further compensation payment in recognition of the distress, concern and inconvenience caused as a result of its failure to fully and empathetically address all of the resident’s concerns. This compounded its failings in its handling of the heating and insulation issues at the property. Therefore, it is ordered to pay a further £100 compensation to address this impact.

Recordkeeping

  1. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management, published in May 2023, highlights the importance of good recordkeeping practices.
  2. It is vital for landlords to keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail of events. This helps the Ombudsman to understand the landlord’s actions and decision-making at the time. If this Service investigates a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to determine that an action took place or that the landlord acted fairly and in line with its policies.
  3. As set out in paragraphs 16, 18, 20 and 21 above, there were significant gaps and omissions in the landlord’s records of events relating to this complaint. Due to the lack of evidence provided by the landlord, the Ombudsman is unable to conclude that it acted appropriately in line with its obligations or that it kept the resident reasonably updated throughout. Given the failings identified in this case and the resulting impact on the resident, the Ombudsman has made a separate finding of maladministration in respect of the landlord’s recordkeeping.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was:
    1. Maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of defective heating and a lack of insulation within the property.
    2. Service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint;
    3. Maladministration in respect of the landlord’s recordkeeping in this case.

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders that, within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Apologise in writing to the resident for its failings in this case, in accordance with this Service’s Apologies guidance | Housing Ombudsman Service (housing-ombudsman.org.uk).
    2. Pay the resident additional compensation totalling £1,365.23, which comprises:
      1. £1,015.23 as a contribution towards the resident’s increased heating costs.
      2. £250 in recognition of the distress, concern, frustration and inconvenience caused to her as a result of its failures in the handling of her reports of heating issues and a lack of insulation in the property. This is in addition to the £350 it has already paid at stage 2 of its complaints procedure.
      3. £100 in recognition of the distress, concern and inconvenience caused to her as a result of its service failure in the handling of her complaint. This is in addition to the £150 it has already paid at stages 1 and 2 of its complaints procedure.
      4. These sums should be paid directly to the resident and must not be offset against any arrears.

Paragraph 49 investigation

  1. Using its powers under paragraph 49 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman completed a special investigation report into the landlord in October 2022. It found the landlord responsible for a series of significant systemic failings impacting residents. These included the handling of complaints and its recordkeeping.
  2. The Ombudsman required the landlord to make changes, including improvements to its complaint handling and recordkeeping practices. Therefore, no orders or recommendations have been made in addition to those made within the special report.