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

Homes Plus Limited (202311851)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202311851

Homes Plus Limited

25 February 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 the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about loss of heating and hot water.
  2. This Service has also considered the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has a sole assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association. She lives alone. The landlord noted on its system that it considered the resident ‘vulnerable’ due to her age.
  2. The resident made multiple reports about problems with her boiler affecting hot water and heating at her home from 2019 onwards. She made complaints, leading to the landlord apologising for her experience and offering to fit a new boiler in October 2022. The resident declined this offer due to concerns about disruption from its fitting. She continued to report issues with the boiler.
  3. On 28 April 2023 the resident made a complaint to the landlord that it had delayed fixing her boiler since 17 April 2023 and given her inconsistent advice about its timescale for repair. The landlord raised an emergency job to reconsider interim repair and to offer temporary heating on 2 May 2023. On 4 May 2023 it fitted a replacement boiler part and checked it was working. The next week, the resident contacted the landlord to arrange a replacement boiler.
  4. On 19 May 2023 the landlord sent to the resident its stage 1 complaint response. It acknowledged having completed multiple repairs since 2018. It suggested that the resident’s operation of her radiators and refusal of a new boiler contributed to the issues. It accepted delay in its recent repair due to it waiting for a part. It acknowledged that it had managed the recent break down below its expected standards of service. The landlord identified learning points and apologised to the resident for its delay, communications, and any impact on her. It offered £100 for her time and inconvenience. The landlord said that this compensation was also for service failings about bathroom repairs. This separate matter was not referred to this Service to assess.
  5. The resident requested escalation of her complaint the same day. She denied the number of repairs acknowledged by the landlord, saying that it was much greater. The resident disputed parts of the landlord’s account of its recent actions and said it had blamed her unfairly for its failings. She considered that its compensation offer was disproportionate to the impact on her.
  6. The landlord installed a new boiler at the resident’s home on 26 May 2023. On 26 June 2023 it issued its final complaint response. The landlord:
    1. Acknowledged that its background summary in its stage 1 response had not reflected the full number of attendances at her home or associated issues.
    2. Admitted that there had been too many attendances and repairs at her home and that this contributed to its decision to replace her boiler.
    3. Apologised that she did not find its explanation about her use of the radiators appropriate. It advised that it was passing on feedback from its specialist engineers and it was necessary to provide this advice.
    4. Confirmed that it still considered its offer of £100 to be appropriate.
  7. The resident referred her complaint to this Service for investigation. She said that the outstanding issues were the amount of the landlord’s offer and her disagreement about its allegation that she caused boiler problems. This Service contacted the landlord in March 2024 for records to support this investigation. Within days, the landlord made an updated offer of compensation to the resident of £600. She accepted its offer and it paid her on 3 April 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The complaint made by the resident to the landlord was about how it handled her reports about loss of heating and hot water. The landlord subsequently acknowledged multiple failings to the resident in how it handled the issue over a number of years. As its historical failings were not disputed, this Service did not investigate the landlord’s agreed service failures. We investigated only the issues referred to as outstanding by the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about loss of heating and hot water

  1. The landlord within its stage 1 response explained to the resident that her operation of the radiators and refusal of an earlier new boiler installation contributed to the issues that she experienced.
  2. The landlord identified in October 2022 that a new boiler would help to prevent repeat of the loss of hot water and heating. It was reasonable that it highlighted to the resident that delay to installing the boiler affected its ability to provide an effective solution. It is reasonable that it concluded that this increased the likelihood of interim breakdowns.
  3. When investigating the wider history of issues with the boiler, the landlord received specialist advice that problems were linked to how the radiators were being used. While it was reasonable that the landlord had regard to this advice, it presented the advice as findings before having given the resident any opportunity for comment or response. Such engagement was important as part of a fair process considering it relied on the information to make adverse findings. There is no evidence in the landlord’s contact records of it telling the resident at any time of a concern about her use of the radiators or providing her with relevant advice or support. There is no evidence that it reviewed whether it had given her any prior notice of the alleged concerns before its response. 
  4. In these circumstances it was unfair and unempathetic to the resident’s experience to rely on alleged contributory actions that she had not had the opportunity to dispute or consider. The tone of the assertion in the landlord’s stage 1 response was direct and not appropriate considering that it had not discussed any concerns with her before. While its final response was more sensitively worded, it did not identify that its previous response was inappropriate. It simply apologised for the resident’s perception of its response. The landlord caused unnecessary distress to her and failed to recognise this.
  5. The resident was dissatisfied at the compensation offered by the landlord. When considering whether the landlord’s offered redress put things right, in line with this Service’s outcomes guidance, we assess those steps taken within its internal complaints process and of its own initiative. The final response of 26 June 2023 confirmed its offer of £100 to the resident.
  6. The landlord’s compensation policy said that it would make offers proportionate to the level of inconvenience caused. It also said that where it had found repeated service failures, it would consider the impact on its customer to assess their severity and impact. This included consideration for vulnerabilities, the landlord acknowledging that any impact was worsened by ‘old age’.
  7. The landlord accepted that the resident had encountered issues with the boiler dating back to 2018 and there had been too many attendances and repairs at her home.  It acknowledged that its recent delay was unreasonable. Considering the accepted background, the offer of £100 did not reflect the repeat impact to the resident from intermittent loss of hot water and heating over multiple years. It did not show regard for her vulnerability and the associated risk of harm arising to her from cold living conditions. The landlord acknowledged to this Service that its £100 offer was inadequate to reflect the relevant background. This Service agrees with its acknowledgement. 
  8. While the landlord acknowledged failings, it relied on information in a way that was unfair and unempathetic to the resident. This meant that its response did not put matters right. It also failed to offer redress proportionate to the detriment caused to the resident. The landlord is therefore responsible for maladministration in its handling of her reports about loss of heating and hot water
  9. This Service’s remedies guidance considers that where these circumstances for maladministration apply, the appropriate range of financial award is between £100 to £600. This Service considers that the repetition of the boiler issue, the resident’s vulnerability and the level of distress experienced by her would place the appropriate award at the higher end of this range. This assessment also considered that the most recent boiler issues from October 2022 may have been mitigated by an earlier installation of a new boiler.
  10. The landlord made an accepted offer to the resident of £600, paid to her in April 2024. We have therefore made no additional compensation order, considering that £600 reflects the award that would otherwise have been ordered. We have made an order that the landlord  apologise to the resident that its June 2023 offer failed to have regard to the particular impact on her and that it did not fairly engage with or reasonably communicate any concerns about her use of the radiators.

This landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

  1. The landlord made a substantially increased compensation offer to the resident in March 2024 as resolution to her complaint. The resident raised to the landlord during its internal complaint process that its May 2023 offer of £100 was disproportionately low. Its final response reflected on its offer but said it was appropriate. It was only after this Service contacted the landlord about the next steps in our investigation that it reviewed its position 10 months later. Its increased offer was in direct reaction to the involvement of this Service.
  2. This Service’s Complaint Handling Code required the landlord to resolve a complaint at ‘the earliest possible opportunity’. The reflection that it conducted in March 2024 upon its failings and their effect on the resident should have taken place within its complaint process and of its own initiative. Its failure to do so added to the resident’s time and trouble referring her complaint to this Service. It also failed to show that the landlord acted in a way that was consistent and fair.
  3. The landlord failed to act in a way that was consistent with the early resolution of a complaint. Its £600 offer did not reflect the additional time and trouble that its late timing caused to the resident. The landlord is therefore responsible for service failure in its handling of her complaint.
  4. The landlord is ordered to pay compensation of £50 to the resident. This sum is within the appropriate range of awards set out in this Service’s remedies guidance where the circumstances for service failure apply.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports about loss of heating and hot water.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this decision, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Arrange for an apology in writing to the resident from a senior member of its staff for the failings identified in this report and their impact on her.
    2. Pay the resident £50 compensation for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble she may have incurred from its handling of her complaint. The above ordered compensation should be paid direct to her and not be offset against any outstanding arrears.