East Midlands Housing Group Limited (202318591)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202318591

East Midlands Housing Group Limited

17 March 2025

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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about:
1. Repairs to radiators in the bathroom, bedroom, associated damage, and increased energy usage at the property.
2. A radiator to be installed in the living room.
3. The slabs to be replaced and removal of the waste in the garden.
We have also considered the resident’s associated complaint.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord at the property. She lives in the property with her 2 children.
On 25 July 2022 the resident asked the landlord to repair a number of broken and uneven slabs in her back garden.
On 6 December 2022 the resident said there was a leak coming from the radiator in the second bedroom of the property. She said the leak had made the carpet and the floorboards underneath the carpet wet. On 14 December 2022 the landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property. The contractor confirmed that the radiator was leaking. The contractor said that the radiator in the bathroom was also broken. They had been unable to carry out the repairs during the visit due to needing further parts. The landlord ordered the parts required to fix the radiators on 16 December 2022.

Between January 2023 and February 2023, the resident chased the landlord for it to fix the radiators in her property and repair the slabs in her back garden. She then raised a complaint about these matters on 22 February 2023. The resident said:
1. The leak had been causing her boiler pressure to drop twice per day. She was topping this up daily in order to have heating and hot water which had meant she had increased her energy usage.
2. The leaking radiator in her second bedroom had damaged the carpet, as well as the floorboards underneath.
3. In November 2022, the landlord had agreed to install a gas radiator in the living room, but it had not done the works.
4. There was still a large heap of waste in the corner of the garden which the landlord agreed to remove in 2017, when she moved into the property.
The landlord completed the repairs to the radiators in the bathroom, and bedroom between 27 March 2023 and 26 April 2023. It said it was waiting for approval from its management to install the radiator in the living room.
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 10 May 2023. It asked the resident to provide photos of the damaged carpet, as well as copies of her energy bills so it could assess her request for compensation. The landlord said that it had carried out an inspection of the resident’s garden and said it would repair the perimeter pathway leading too and around the property. It said any works to the main patio at the back of the property, as well as the conifers would be the resident’s responsibility.
On 24 May 2023, the resident requested the landlord escalate her complaint. The resident said she wanted:
1. Compensation for the damage to the bedroom carpet.
2. The flooring underneath the bedroom carpet to be repaired.
3. A discretionary payment of £150 in addition to further compensation because she had waited 6 years for the landlord to carry out works within the garden.
4. The landlord to install the radiator in her living room.
That same day, the landlord said it would arrange to clear the rubbish in the resident’s garden and apologised for its delay.

In June 2023 the landlord carried out an assessment of the works required to clear the resident’s garden. During this time, the resident chased the landlord to escalate her complaint. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 4 July 2023.
On 22 August 2023, the landlord provided a final response to the resident’s complaints. It awarded the resident £330 compensation. It asked the resident to submit her evidence in relation to the damage to the carpet and increased energy usage. The landlord apologised and said it would remove the rubbish from the resident’s garden as it had previously agreed. It said it would carry out repairs to the slabs in line with its stage 1 complaint response.
The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response to her complaints. She brought her complaint to the Ombudsman stating she had waited 5 years for the landlord to carry out the works in her garden. She wanted all of the outstanding works to be completed. This included:
1. All of the broken slabs in her garden to be repaired or replaced.
2. The radiator to be installed in her living room.
The resident also wanted an increase in compensation for what she said had been a significant level of distress and inconvenience caused to her as a result of the landlord’s response to the issues she had raised.
Between September 2023 and October 2023 the landlord cleared the resident’s rear garden, cut down the conifers and filled in the pond. The resident said that she remained unhappy because the landlord had left a large pump and a 4-foot drop in the corner of the back garden. She said the landlord had refused to remove the stumps of the trees it cut down unless she allowed them to remove all the slabs in the rear garden. The resident wanted the patio area to be fully replaced. The landlord said it was not obliged to do this.
The resident has updated the Ombudsman that between June 2024 and July 2024 the landlord installed the gas radiator in the living room. Its contractors also completed further works to the garden which included levelling the ground and clearing the rest of the waste and furniture. The patio slabs remain in the resident’s garden and have not been repaired or replaced.

Assessment and findings

When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution: Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
The Ombudsman must consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes.’

Scope of Investigation

Paragraph 42.a. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion are made prior to having exhausted a member’s [landlord’s] complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.
In February 2023, the resident included as part of her complaints, the landlord’s handling of her request for it to install a radiator in the living room. The landlord did not address this aspect of the resident’s complaint in its stage 1 or in its final written responses to her complaints. We consider that this is evidence of a complaint-handling failure. Therefore, in line with paragraph 42.a. of the Scheme, we will assess the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a radiator to be installed in the living room, although the landlord has not responded to this issue.
Section 42.c. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that we may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion were not brought to the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising. The Ombudsman has taken into consideration that the resident has said that some of her complaints go back to 2017. This was when the resident moved into the property. The Ombudsman acknowledges what the resident has said. However, as events become historic it can become more difficult for the landlord or the Ombudsman to assess what happened. There were also periods within these 5 years where the resident has said she did not chase the landlord. We consider that it would have been reasonable during those periods for the landlord to have considered that the matters in the garden had been resolved. Therefore, in line with the Scheme, the Ombudsman has considered the landlord’s handling of these matters between February 2022 to the landlord’s final complaint response on 22 August 2023.

Policies and procedures

The landlord’s repairs policy states that its timescales in responding to repairs are for guidance only. Its repair categories are:
Emergency – This is a repair where the landlord has identified a safety hazard or potential serious risk. These types of repairs are completed to make safe and prevent harm to people and property. The landlord will respond to this type of repair within 24 hours.
Appointed – This is a repair that could develop into a hazard or might materially affect the enjoyment of the property. The landlord will carry out this type of repair by an agreed appointment with the resident.
Programmed – This is a non-urgent repair which it aims to complete within 3 months.
Small works – These are complex repairs which are likely to take more than 2 hours or may require multiple trades.
Cyclical maintenance – This is its programme of works for its properties.
The landlord’s void standard states that gardens:
1. Will be cleared of rubbish and furniture.
2. Overgrown grass areas, shrubs, and bushes will be cut back, and all cuttings will be removed.
3. Trees that threaten the fabric of the property will be removed.
4. Pathways will be safe and free from trip hazards.
5. Garden ponds and water features installed by previous residents will be removed and the hole filled in and the ground made good.
The landlord’s void standard also states that any garden improvements installed by a previous resident, which are classed as a permanent structure will not be gifted to the resident and will remain the responsibility of the landlord. If the item is not considered to be a permanent structure, it can be gifted to the resident. The landlord will only do this if the resident accepts responsibility for their maintenance and upkeep by signing a disclaimer.

The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process. It will log a resident’s stage 1 complaint within 5 working days. It will then provide its stage 1 written response within 10 working days of it logging the complaint. In exceptional circumstances it may extend its response at stage 1 by a further 10 calendar days. The landlord will provide its stage 2 written complaint response within 20 working days. In exceptional circumstances it may extend its response at stage 2 by a further 20 calendar days.

The resident’s reports about repairs to radiators in the bathroom, bedroom, associated damage, and increased energy usage at the property.

On 6 December 2022, the resident said the radiator was leaking within the second bedroom of the property. She said the leak had made the carpet and the floorboards underneath the carpet wet. The contractor visited the resident’s property on 14 December 2022. This was 7 working days later which was reasonable because this would have been considered an appointed repair in line with the landlord’s repairs policy.
The contractor who visited the resident’s property on 14 December 2022, said they were unable to stop the leak in the second bedroom that day. This was because they needed parts that they did not have with them, and that the radiator needed to be replaced. The contractor also identified that the radiator in the bathroom was broken and needed to be replaced. The landlord ordered the parts 2 days later. This was a reasonable response because sometimes landlords need to order parts to complete repairs.
Between 16 December 2022 and 21 March 2023 the resident said she chased the landlord 6 times for it to carry out the repairs to her radiators. She also raised a complaint to the landlord on 22 February 2023 about its lack of communication in dealing with this aspect of her complaint. On 21 March 2023, the landlord apologised for its delay in responding to the resident. It was right that the landlord apologised. However, it was not appropriate that the landlord took 96 days to respond to the resident’s multiple requests for it to fix the radiators in her property. This was a significant delay which we understand caused the resident distress and inconvenience. This is evidence of poor communication.
This was an appointed repair in line with the landlord’s repairs policy. Therefore the landlord should have arranged an appointment, and then kept the resident updated in its handling of this repair. Although it does not have a timescale in its policy, we would expect this type of repair to be completed within 28 days, in line with industry best practice. If the landlord needed more time due to waiting for parts, then it should have communicated this to the resident whilst setting a timescale of when it would be able to fix the radiators.
Records show that the contractor attended the resident’s property to carry out repairs to both radiators on 27 March 2023. The landlord said it completed these repairs on 26 April 2023. This was 142 days after the resident first reported that there was a leak coming from her radiator. This was a significant delay in the landlord carrying out this repair. This is evidence of poor handling of its repairs.
The resident has said that the landlord’s delay in repairing the leak in her second bedroom meant that the carpet was damaged. She was also concerned that the flooring underneath the carpet was damaged. In the landlord’s complaint responses it asked the resident to supply a photo of the damaged carpet so it could assess this in respect of compensation. The Ombudsman is not commenting on the reasons the resident has not provided this. However, it was reasonable that the landlord asked for it so it could assess the damage.
The landlord said it had arranged for a contractor to carry out an inspection of the floorboards at the resident’s property. We have not been provided with any information about whether this inspection has taken place. Therefore we will make a make a recommendation for the landlord to complete this unless it has already done so. We will also make a recommendation that the landlord communicates with the resident and carries out an assessment of any compensation for the damaged caused to the carpet by the leaking radiator. This is subject to the resident providing evidence in the form of photographs of the carpet and receipts.
The resident said that the leak from the radiator caused an increase to her energy bills. The resident said that this was because the leak caused the boiler pressure to drop. This meant she had to top up the boiler with water 2 times per day between December 2022 and April 2023. In the landlord’s stage 1 and stage 2 complaint response it asked the resident to provide her energy bills so its energy team could look into this and consider compensation. The landlord has said that the resident has not provided this information. The Ombudsman is not commenting on the resident’s reasons for not providing this. However it was reasonable that the landlord asked for it, so it could calculate any increased cost to the resident. The Ombudsman will make a recommendation that subject to the resident providing her energy bills, that she is compensated for any increased energy usage to heat her home from 6 December 2022 to 26 April 2023. This can be calculated by comparing the resident’s energy usage from the period from April 2021 to March 2022.
There is evidence of failings, as mentioned above in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about repairs to radiators in the bathroom, bedroom, associated damage, and increased energy usage at the property. This includes the delays and poor communication. The resident also who had to chase the landlord repeatedly for it to complete the repairs.
The landlord apologised and awarded the resident £180 compensation in its final complaint response on 22 August 2023, for this aspect of her complaint. We have considered our own remedies guidance (published on our website) in respect of compensation. This amount awarded by the landlord is within the range of compensation in the guidance for incidents of maladministration. We would have issued this level of compensation if the landlord had not made this offer. Examples of this level of compensation in the guidance include where the landlord has made errors which caused significant distress and inconvenience to the resident.
Therefore, we make a finding of reasonable redress for the landlord’s errors in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about repairs to radiators in the bathroom, bedroom, associated damage, and increased energy usage at the property.

The resident’s request for a radiator to be installed in the living room.

The resident said the landlord agreed to install a gas radiator in the living room in November 2022. This was because the electric radiator was broken and there was no other source of heating in the living room. The resident then raised a complaint to the landlord on 22 February 2023 about the landlord failing to carry out this repair. We have reviewed records that show that on 26 April 2023, the landlord was waiting for its management to approve the installation of the radiator in the living room. This was 5 months after the resident said it agreed to install the radiator. It is also 63 days after the resident chased the landlord about this issue. We have seen no evidence that the landlord communicated with the resident. This is evidence of poor handling of its repairs.
On 21 December 2023, the landlord apologised to the resident for its continued delay in installing the gas radiator in the living room. It raised a job to carry out these works and installed the radiator in the living room in June 2024. This was 20 months after the resident said that the landlord had agreed to install the radiator. We consider that this type of repair to replace the broken electric radiator and install the gas radiator to have been an appointed repair as per the landlord’s repairs policy. The landlord should have installed the radiator within 28 days in line with industry best practice. Therefore this was a significant delay and meant the resident and her young children were without heating in the living room of the property for a significant period. The Ombudsman understands that this caused the resident a significant amount of distress and inconvenience.
For the reasons described above, the Ombudsman makes a finding of maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for a radiator to be installed in the living room.
We have considered our own remedies guidance (published on our website) in respect of compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s errors. The landlord is to pay the resident £600 compensation.

The resident’s reports for the landlord to replace the slabs and remove the waste in the garden.

On 25 July 2022 the resident said that she had a number of broken and uneven slabs in her garden. She then chased the landlord about this. On 13 February 2023 the landlord’s contractor carried out an inspection of the resident’s garden to assess what works were needed. This was 203 days after the resident first raised the repair. This was a significant delay. We would expect this inspection to have taken place within 28 days of the resident making the report.
On 22 February 2023 the resident told the landlord that she still had a huge heap of waste in the corner of her garden, from when she moved into the property in 2017. This included a bath, basin, and other items of furniture. The resident said the landlord had told her that it would remove this rubbish when she moved in. She said she had chased the landlord about this previously but that it had never carried out this work. The landlord’s void standard states that gardens will be cleared of rubbish and furniture before new tenants move in. Therefore, it was not appropriate that the landlord failed to remove these items when the resident asked it to.
In May 2023 the landlord said it had raised a job to repair the slabs leading to the property, and the slabs around the perimeter of the property. It also said it would clear the rubbish. The landlord said it was not responsible for the main patio area, or the conifer trees in the garden. The landlord repeated its decision in its final response to the resident’s complaint on 22 August 2023.
It was right that the landlord said it would repair the slabs around the perimeter and pathway of the property. It was also appropriate that it said it would arrange to clear the rubbish which it started to do on 2 September 2023. However, it was not reasonable that it took the landlord 404 days to commence these works. This type of work should have been carried out within 28 days of its original inspection. If the landlord needed longer to start the works, then it should have communicated this to the resident. The landlord should have then also set out a timescale with the resident for when it would be able to complete these works.

It is accepted that the previous resident installed the patio. The landlord’s void standard states that any garden improvements installed by a previous resident that are a permanent structure will remain the responsibility of the landlord. The patio has remained in situ for 5 years, which has led to its deterioration and outstanding repairs. The landlord should have removed the patio as part of the void standard 5 years ago if it was not going to accept responsibility for maintaining it.
The resident has said the landlord has since agreed to remove the patio slabs and plant grass seeds which should result in the area being covered by grass within 9 months. The resident has said that she is dissatisfied with this and that this will mean the patio area will become muddy and impact her children’s use of the garden. The resident wants the patio slabs to be repaired like for like.
We consider that the landlord’s decision to not repair the patio during its works in the garden to have not been reasonable. The landlord is responsible for the patio area, and it remained in the resident’s garden due to its failings to remove it in 2017. Therefore, the Ombudsman will make an order as part of this report for the landlord to repair the slabs forming the resident’s patio in her garden.
We have been updated that during the works in the garden between September 2023 and October 2023 that the contractors left behind furniture including a large pump. The contractors also left a large 4-foot drop in the garden which the resident said was a risk to her children. In June 2024 the landlord carried out these works which included filling the 4-foot drop, the pond, and making the ground level. This was 2 years after the resident chased the landlord to complete these works. The landlord failed to act in line with its void standard as referred to above. This was a significant delay which the Ombudsman understands impacted the resident’s use of the garden during that time.
For the reasons described above, the Ombudsman makes a finding of maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports for the landlord to replace the slabs and remove the waste in the garden.
The landlord awarded the resident £150 compensation in its final response to this aspect of the resident’s complaint on 22 August 2023. It is positive that the landlord attempted to put things right, but we do not consider that the landlord went far enough. Therefore, in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance as referred to above, the landlord is to pay the resident £400 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its significant delays, and its poor communication in its handling of this aspect of her complaint.

The resident’s associated complaint.

On 22 February 2023, the resident raised a complaint to the landlord about its handling of her reports of repairs. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint 20 working days later, on 21 March 2023. Between 5 April 2023 and 25 April 2023, the landlord extended its timescale to respond to the resident’s complaint 3 times until it provided its stage 1 written complaint response on 10 May 2023. This was 34 working days after it logged the resident’s complaint, and 53 working days after the resident initially raised her complaint. We have not seen any proportionate reason the landlord needed to continue to extend its stage 1 complaint response. Therefore the landlord failed to act in line with its complaints policy. It should have:
1. Logged the resident’s complaint within 5 working days.
2. Issued its stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days of it logging the resident’s complaint.
3. If there was an unavoidable delay the landlord could have written to the resident to explain the delay and agree an extension of no more than 10 days.
The landlord apologised for its delay in handling the resident’s stage 1 complaint. It said its delay had been due to it receiving a high number of complaints. It was right the landlord apologised. However, the Ombudsman expects landlords to have the resources available to manage its daily functions which includes handling resident’s complaints, including at times of high demand.
The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint on 24 May 2023. Records show that the resident then chased the landlord to acknowledge her request. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate her complaint on 4 July 2023. This was 29 working days later. This was not appropriate because the landlord should have logged her complaint within 5 working days. This is evidence of poor complaint handling.
The landlord provided its final response to the resident’s complaints on 22 August 2023. This was 36 working days after it logged the resident’s complaint and 64 working days after she first asked the landlord to escalate her complaint. The Ombudsman has not been provided with any exceptional reason there was a delay in the landlord providing its final response. Therefore, the landlord should have provided the resident with its final response to her complaints within 20 working days. The Ombudsman understands that these multiple delays in its complaints process caused distress and inconvenience to the resident, who was chasing for the landlord to respond.
The landlord failed in both its stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses to address the resident’s complaint that it had previously said it would install a radiator in the living room. The resident’s communication about this was clear. Therefore, the landlord failed to use its complaints process to address this issue. The landlord should have:
1. Reviewed its previous communication with the resident about this issue.
2. Considered if there was any negative impact to the resident by its handling of this issue. If so, it should have sought to put things right.
3. Explained that it was waiting for its management to approve the works.
4. Set out a timescale for when it would install the radiator.
For the reasons described above, the Ombudsman makes a finding of maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.
In line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, as referred to above, the landlord is to pay the resident £200 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its delays in its handling of her complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint about its handling of the resident’s reports about repairs to radiators in the bathroom, bedroom, associated damage and increased energy usage at the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the:
1. Request for a radiator to be installed in the living room.
2. Reports for the landlord to replace the slabs and remove the waste in the garden.
3. Associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord is to apologise to the resident in writing. The apology is to be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance that it acknowledges the maladministration and expresses a sincere regret for its handling of the resident’s:
1. Request for a radiator to be installed in the living room.
2. Reports for the landlord to replace the slabs and remove the waste in the garden.
3. Associated complaint.
The landlord is to pay the resident a compensation payment of £1,200. The breakdown of this compensation is as follows:
1. £600 for its errors in its handling of the resident’s request for a radiator to be installed in the living room.
2. £400 for its errors in its handling of the resident’s reports for the landlord to replace the slabs and remove the waste in the garden. This includes the £150 it awarded in its stage 2 complaint which it may deduct from the total if this has already been paid.
3. £200 for its errors in its handling of the resident’s associated complaint.
The landlord is to pay the resident the £330 it awarded her in its stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses unless this has already been paid.
The landlord is to repair the slabbed patio area of the garden of the resident’s property.
The landlord is to share evidence with the Ombudsman confirming that it has complied with the above orders within 28 days of the date of this report.

Recommendations

The landlord should complete a survey of the floorboards in the second bedroom of the property unless it has already done so. If follow up works are required it is to set out a schedule of works it is responsible for, including estimated timescales, which it is to share with the resident in writing.
Subject to the resident providing evidence in the form of photographs and receipts, the landlord should assess the damage caused by the leaking radiator to the carpet in the resident’s second bedroom. It should then communicate with the resident in respect of compensation which it should carry out in line with its compensation policy.
Subject to the resident providing copies of energy bills for the relevant period, the landlord should calculate the increased energy usage for heating her property between December 2022 and April 2023. It should then compensate that difference to the resident.