From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new cases by email. Please use our online webform to submit your complaint. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Call us on 0300 111 3000

Hexagon Housing Association Limited (202308625)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202308625

Hexagon Housing Association Limited

2 June 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

  1. The complaint is about:

a. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s boiler. 

b. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint. 

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord. The property is a 4-bedroom house. The landlord’s records state the resident has mobility issues and uses a wheelchair.
  2. The landlord’s repair log shows the resident’s account flagged as “Please allow resident to answer the door resident disabled”.
  3. The landlord’s repair log for 2022 shows the resident’s account also flagged as “gas meter external meter capped. Service when tenant allows access”. The records show the gas supply was capped on 7 September 2022.
  4. Between 23 September 2022 and 5 January 2024 the resident reported numerous incidents of no heating and hot water to the landlord.
  5. Between the same dates the landlord’s records show numerous repair appointments were not completed and were logged as “no access”.
  6. On 23 September 2022 the landlord attended the resident’s property to repair the boiler and found 2 port valves were required. The landlord accessed the property again on 7 November 2022 and fitted the port valves. During this appointment, it was identified the boiler system required a rewire.
  7. The resident contacted the landlord on 21 March 2023 stating she had not had heating since July 2022. She said the contractors were not allowing her enough time to answer the door and she had requested numerous times that an “alert” was put on her account.
  8. The resident’s support worker complained to the landlord on 7 April 2023 on the resident’s behalf. She said the landlord had not fixed the resident’s heating and hot water and it had been ongoing since July 2022. The support worker said that the resident was extremely vulnerable and the landlord had a duty of care. Reimbursement was also requested for the resident’s increase in electricity bills.
  9. The resident chased the landlord for a response on 1, 2 and 8 May 2023. On 2 June 2023 the resident’s support worker made a further complaint to the landlord. She said:
    1. The resident’s heating was still not working despite a contractor attending recently.
    2. The landlord was refusing to compensate for the resident’s extra costs of using the booster when the heating was not working.
    3. Contractors were not allowing enough time for the resident to answer the door. She explained the resident needs “plenty of time” due to her health issues.
  10. On 9 June 2023 the resident contacted the Ombudsman as she had not received a complaint response. The Ombudsman wrote to the landlord requesting the complaint response be issued to the resident by 27 July 2023.
  11. On 14 July 2023 the landlord provided its stage 1 response. The landlord summarised the resident’s complaint and apologised for the delayed response. The landlord included a list of dates it tried to complete the repair but was not given access by the resident. It said, “we have sent your case to our housing team who will provide further advice.” The landlord advised it was “bedding in” a new contractor which began on 1 April 2022. The landlord acknowledged communication between the landlord, contractor and residents need improving and it was implementing a new customer relation management system.
  12. On 18 July 2023 the resident escalated her complaint. The resident said the landlord “left out many key points” and the landlord’s account was not accurate.
  13. The resident contacted the landlord on 28 July 2023 to ask for a response. On 2 August 2023 the resident contacted the Ombudsman for assistance. We wrote to the landlord on 21 August 2023 and 19 October requesting it respond to the resident.
  14. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 24 October 2023. The landlord:
  1. Said there were numerous repair visits where access was not given, disputes when access was given and cancelled appointments. Calls and emails to the resident had also been unanswered.
  2. Had requested the property safety team arrange a joint inspection between the heating contractor, neighbourhood officer and resident. The resident would be contacted by 4 November 2023 to schedule the appointment.
  3. Requested backdated bills for 2022 – 2023 showing above average electricity usage to review and it would consider if a refund was applicable.
  4. Apologised that it seemed the ongoing issues had been ongoing for a long period of time. The landlord stated a “further overview of the case was required with intervention if necessary”. The landlord commented it had made efforts to assist the resident and access was the issue.
  1. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s stage 2 response as she felt it was a repetition of the landlord’s stage 1 response. The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman. The landlord provided an update on 29 July 2024 that no further issues with the boiler have been reported since 8 February 2024. The resident has advised the Ombudsman that she continues to experience problems with the boiler.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s boiler

  1. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate 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 conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures.
  2. The landlord logged a repair to the resident’s boiler on 13 September 2022. It is unclear what the reported issue with the heating and hot water was. The landlord responded appropriately by booking a repair appointment for 16 September 2022.
  3. The Ombudsman has seen evidence that the gas meter was capped on 7 September 2022 due to there being no access for a gas service. It is unclear how long it was capped for and the impact this had on to the resident’s reports of no heating and hot water. The landlord was responding to the resident’s repair requests by arranging appointments and ordering parts for the boiler, so it is reasonable to conclude a repair was also needed.
  4. The Ombudsman notes there is a dispute over events regarding the repair appointments. The landlord’s position was that the resident was not giving access for repairs to be carried out. The resident’s position was that the landlord was aware of her disabilities and that due to this she needs extra time to answer the door. The resident said contractors were not following this request.
  5. The resident’s account is flagged as “Please allow resident to answer the door resident disabled”. However, there is no evidence showing when the flag was added. The resident told the Ombudsman that she had to remind the landlord on several occasions that she needed time to get to the door and was told on each occasion that it would be added to her account. This would have caused distress to the resident and made her feel she was not being listened to. If there was an existing flag on the account, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to tell the resident this, to give reassurance her request had been listened to and actioned.
  6. This Service’s Spotlight Report on Knowledge and Information Management (May 2023) sets out that a resident’s vulnerabilities should be well managed and that repair appointments should reflect any reasonable adjustments required. The landlord recorded 9 no access repair appointments between 16 September 2022 and 19 January 2023. Most of the contractor notes for the repair appointments state “no access – tenant phoned from site”. It is positive for the contractor to attempt to contact the resident and this may suggest the contractor is not immediately leaving. However none of the repair logs evidence that the contractor considered the resident’s request in allowing her time to answer the door. If the contractor had done so, it would have been appropriate for this to be included in their update following the appointment. For example, the contractors could have recorded the exact time that they arrived and left the property. As there is a lack of evidence and a dispute as to what has occurred, the Ombudsman cannot say with reasonable confidence that the landlord acted appropriately in this case, or gave due consideration to the resident’s vulnerabilities.
  7. The landlord received a safeguarding referral on 30 November 2022. It engaged with social care and arranged 2 joint visits to the property. This was positive for the landlord to do. These visits did not go ahead and were recorded as “no access”. The repairs job was then closed by the landlord on 23 January 2023 due to no access. A further note was then added on 24 February 2023 for the “job to be kept under review”. It is not clear what keeping the job under review meant, however this would have been a good opportunity for the landlord to consider if there were any further actions that could be taken to support the resident and ensure that any repairs were addressed.
  8. The resident continued to report issues of no heating and hot water to the landlord. Following a telephone call from the resident on 21 March 2023 the landlord stated the resident was “very upset”. The resident repeated that contractors were not allowing her enough time to answer the door, and she was struggling with rent payments.
  9. The landlord raised a further repair on 4 May 2023 and attended the property on 23 May 2023. The contractor identified a further part was needed and reported that the boiler was working but intermittent. Following this visit, the contractor reported to the landlord the property was “unhygienic and cluttered”. It asked the landlord to contact the resident about the condition of property so it could reattend and complete works. In an internal email on 7 July 2023 the landlord stated “I think this should go to our support team” but there is no evidence this happened. The landlord requested an update on repairs to the resident’s boiler from the contractor on 15 August 2023. The contractor repeated the issues with the condition of property and stated they informed the landlord of this but had not received a reply. The landlord’s failure to address this issue and communicate with the contractor delayed the contractors being able to complete the repair.
  10. In the landlord’s complaint responses, it missed opportunities to fully explore if there was a reason the resident was finding it difficult to keep appointments. It ought to have considered if there was any additional help that it could have offered. The landlord also should have communicated with its contractor to confirm they were adhering to the resident’s request. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to request that contractors acknowledge in their repair log that they had followed the resident’s request when visiting the property.
  11. In the landlord’s stage 1 response, the landlord did not respond to the resident’s concerns about the contractor. It also did not respond to the reimbursement request. It would have been helpful for the landlord to consider fuel poverty as a possible factor in the resident’s case and consider referring her for tenancy sustainment support, if it had such a service internally. The failure to respond to parts of the complaint, led to a lack of reassurance for the resident in the landlord’s actions. It failed to show her that it had taken the matter seriously. This was not appropriate. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) states that each aspect of a complaint should be responded to.
  12. In the landlord’s stage 2 response, it responded to most of the resident’s complaint. It was positive that the landlord agreed to review electricity bills.  However, the Ombudsman has not received evidence of the landlord’s actions following this, only that it “offered reimbursement”. The landlord sent an email to a representative of the resident on 12 April 2024, stating it had contacted the disrepair surveyor, with a view to “paying the compensation due as soon as possible”. The landlord’s actions are not clear from the evidence seen at this time. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to confirm if the landlord acted reasonably in response to the resident’s reimbursement request.
  13. The landlord’s final response was a further opportunity to consider the matter regarding access further. The landlord apologised that the repair issue was ongoing but that “access has been an ongoing concern”. It again missed opportunities to address the resident’s concerns and review how else it could support the resident. It is positive the landlord offered an inspection of the property to confirm what works were outstanding. However without the landlord considering its actions in response to the resident’s request, this may not have provided a resolution. It is clear the resident felt this aspect of her complaint had not been answered and following the stage 2 response, she requested evidence from the landlord of what date her account was flagged. There is no evidence that the landlord provided this information and this caused the resident distress and a loss of confidence in the landlord’s actions.
  14. It is not disputed the landlord made attempts to fix the heating and hot water issues. The landlord’s records also show regular attempts to contact the resident to arrange repair appointments and remind her of appointments. There is however no evidence if, or how, the landlord adopted the resident’s vulnerabilities and request regarding the contractors allowing her time to answer the door, enabling her to provide access. Overall the Ombudsman considers there to have been maladministration by the landlord in its handling of repairs to the resident’s boiler.
  15. In the absence of the landlord’s compensation policy, which it did not have in place at the time of the complaint, our award reflects the evidence we have seen and the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies. It is ordered for the landlord to pay £200 compensation for the landlord’s failings in handling of repairs to the resident’s boiler.
  16. The resident and her support worker have raised concerns to the landlord that repairs to the boiler only work temporarily. There is no evidence that considerations were made as to why the boiler keeps needing repairing, despite the boiler requiring various part replacements. The resident has told the Ombudsman that she continues to have problems with the boiler intermittently working. It is unclear if this is being reported to the landlord. There were missed opportunities during the complaint investigation to review the history of the boiler and understand why it needed so many repairs. As the resident continues to raise concerns, a recommendation is made for the landlord to contact the resident to discuss current repair concerns with the boiler.

 

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The Code outlines the timeframe for landlords to respond to complaints. The Code specifies that stage 1 complaints should be dealt with within 10 working days, unless additional time is agreed. Stage 2 complaints should be dealt with within 20 working days, unless additional time is agreed.
  2. Section 1.2 of the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code states “A complaint must be defined as: ‘an expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standard of service, actions or lack of action by the landlord, its own staff, or those acting on its behalf, affecting a resident or group of residents.’
  3. The landlord recorded the resident’s original complaint as dated 1 May 2023. The Ombudsman has reviewed evidence which shows the resident made a telephone call to the landlord on 21 March 2023. This led to an internal email being sent to the landlord’s complaints team requesting it contacts the resident. The resident’s support worker also emailed the landlord and made a complaint on the resident’s behalf on 7 April 2023. The landlord failed to recognise the above contact as a complaint which delayed the resident receiving a response.
  4. There is no evidence the landlord provided any acknowledgement to the resident’s complaint, which resulted in the resident emailing the landlord on 1, 2 and 8 May 2023. Again, the landlord did not provide an acknowledgment. This was unreasonable. Acknowledging the complaint would have allowed it to reassure the resident that it was aware of her dissatisfaction and was taking an interest in investigating what had gone wrong.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 1 response 79 working days after the resident’s initial complaint. This was unacceptable and delayed the resident receiving a resolution. Whilst the landlord apologised for the delay, it failed to provide any further redress to the resident for its failure of service.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint on 18 July 2023. There is no evidence the landlord provided an acknowledgement and so the resident chased the landlord for an update on 28 July 2023. The resident therefore requested help from the Ombudsman and had to incur time and trouble in doing so.
  7. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 24 October 2023, 70 working days after the resident’s escalation request. This was unreasonable, and well outside of the timescales set out in the Code. The landlord did not recognise or apologise to the resident for the delay in providing its response. The landlord also did not offer any redress. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to apologise to the resident and take action to put things right.
  8. The Ombudsman considers there to have been maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint. The landlord’s response was unreasonably delayed at both stages of its complaints procedure. It also failed to recognise the resident’s complaint at the first expression of dissatisfaction. The resident was not updated throughout the complaint process. The landlord missed opportunities to put things right in its complaint response and to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
  9. An order has been made for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £200 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s boiler. 
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Provide the resident with a written apology for the failures identified.
    2. Pay the resident a total compensation of £400, broken down as follows:
      1. £200 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its handing of repairs to the resident’s boiler.
      2. £200 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures in its complaint handling.
      3. This should be paid directly to the resident and not used to offset any possible arears.
    3. Contact the resident to confirm the landlord understands the reasonable adjustment requested by the resident and confirm how it will follow this. Any actions agreed should then be confirmed in writing to the resident.
    4. Provide evidence to this service that it has complied with the above orders.

Recommendation

  1. We recommend the landlord provides a response to the resident, confirming its position on the resident’s request for reimbursement for high electricity usage.
  2. We recommend the landlord contacts the resident to discuss current repair concerns relating to the resident’s boiler. If required, the landlord should arrange an inspection.