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

LiveWest Homes Limited (202321678)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202321678

LiveWest Homes Limited

21 May 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 landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the efficiency of the heating system at the property and its refusal to install an air source heat pump.

Background

  1. The resident has a secure tenancy. The property is a 1-bedroom bungalow.
  2. The resident has informed the landlord and the Ombudsman that he has disabilities including mobility difficulties and an autoimmune deficiency which affects sensitivity to the cold.
  3. The resident made a request for an update to the heating system at the property on 29 April 2022. He said the existing storage heaters were not fit for purpose. He requested an Air Source Heat Pump (ASHP.)
  4. The resident reiterated his request on 8 May 2023 and was informed that the request was being shared with the landlord’s Renewable Technology Team.
  5. The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 14 August 2023. He said that his heating system was inefficient and had not been given a response to his request for an updated system.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 22 August 2023. It said the resident had been offered a modern upgrade to his existing system. It refused to install an ASHP. It apologised for delays in responding to his requests and offered compensation of £100.
  7. The resident asked for the complaint to be escalated to stage 2 on 22 August 2023. He said the property’s inefficient heating system had impacted on his health. He said that his requests to be considered for installation of an ASHP were ignored repeatedly. He refused the offer of compensation.
  8. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 22 September 2023. It explained its decision not to offer an ASHP and repeated its apology for delays in response to the resident’s requests for an upgrade to his heating system. It offered an additional £200 in compensation in recognition of issues with complaint handling and response times.
  9. The resident refused the offer of compensation on 22 September 2023 and stated he would be escalating the complaint to the Ombudsman.
  10. Evidence provided shows that the resident agreed to accept the compensation and the installation of updated storage heaters on 27 September 2023. The heating system replacement was completed on 22 November 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope

  1. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the resident first raised concerns with his heating over 12 months before the internal complaints procedure took place. In the interest of fairness, we have limited the scope of this investigation to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint and the landlord’s responses. This is because complaints must be brought to the attention of the landlord within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising.
  2. The resident has said the issue had an impact on his health and wellbeing. It is important to explain that this Service cannot establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. These matters are likely better suited for consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. However, the Ombudsman will give consideration to the general impact of the living conditions on the resident and what the landlord did when it was informed of health concerns.

The landlord’s response to the heating system efficiency and request for ASHP

  1. The landlord’s repair policy says that planned works are scheduled where components of a home have ‘reached their optimum lifecycle or where their current condition means they need replacing.’ It says it will review the priority of these works based on a range of perspectives, including for improvements to the energy efficiency of its stock and through consultation with customers.
  2. On 8 May 2023 the resident raised a request for an ASHP to be installed at the property. He said this was following a request made a year earlier which was not considered by the landlord. The resident said the system needed updating as his existing storage heaters were inefficient. He said the running costs in winter were becoming difficult to afford and the cold mornings and evenings were impacting his health. The resident asked for the landlord to acknowledge his request for an ASHP.
  3. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s request on 9 May 2023. It said it would be passing the request on to its Renewable Technology team. It took steps to manage the resident’s expectations around the installation of a new system, which was appropriate. It said it would organise an inspection of his existing heaters to ensure they were set correctly.
  4. On 14 August 2023 the resident raised his stage 1 complaint. He said there had been no further communication from the landlord since his request. He reiterated the inefficiency of the existing system. The landlord failed to respond in a timely manner and missed an opportunity to consult with the resident about the works as it says it will in its policy. The resident was put to inconvenience in having to chase for a response and was not given any reassurance that the heating system would be looked at.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the stage 1 complaint on 16 August 2023 and began chasing internally for a response to the request. It made its stage 1 complaint response on 22 August 2023 in line with the timelines set out in its complaints procedure.
  6. In its response, it acknowledged the delays in responding to the resident’s initial request in April 2022. It apologised for the delay and distress caused by poor communication with the resident and offered £100 compensation, made up of £50 for the lack of communication and £50 for the distress and inconvenience it caused. This was an appropriate amount to offer and aligned with its compensation policy in considering the service failure to have had a moderate level of impact. However, it failed to acknowledge its delay in responding to the resident’s second request on 8 May 2023 which was not appropriate.
  7. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out the way in which it will support vulnerable residents when dealing with repairs. It says it will take the vulnerabilities of its residents into account by ensuring a consistent approach to dealing with residents and contractors so work can be sensibly and sensitively prioritised.
  8. The landlord said in its stage 1 response that the resident was offered an upgraded version of his existing storage heaters but that he refused these in favour of an ASHP. The landlord considered the resident’s concerns about the impact on his health and wellbeing but said it would not install an ASHP. It reiterated the offer of upgraded storage heaters and said that this would provide more efficient heating in the property. It was appropriate to consider the resident’s health and wellbeing in its decision. However, delays in responding to the concerns raised did not demonstrate the sensitive prioritisation of the work as set out in its policy.
  9. The landlord’s compensation policy says that complaints ‘not effectively dealt with’ are considered to have a moderate level impact on the resident. The resident raised his stage 2 complaint on 22 August 2023. He restated his concerns about the impact of the inefficient heating system on his health and asked for an ASHP to be reconsidered by a senior manager. The offer of compensation was refused by the resident.
  10. The landlord’s stage 2 response was outside of the timeframes in its complaint procedure. The landlord acknowledged this delay and awarded compensation which was reasonable. However, the landlord did not explain the delay which added to the resident’s frustrations with the landlord’s communication with him, further impacting the landlord tenant relationship.
  11. The landlord’s environmental policy defines its principles for compliance, which include working to ‘provide efficient heating which will support the provision of affordable warmth’ for its residents.
  12. In its stage 2 response, the landlord gave an explanation of why it refused the installation of an ASHP. It highlighted its obligations to maintain electric based heating systems in line with government ambitions to decarbonise. It said it had conducted an Energy Performance Certificate assessment of the property which showed an ASHP would decrease its efficiency. It used this as the basis for refusing the ASHP. It maintained a modern version of the storage heating system would be more efficient and offer greater control of the heat in the property. This was a reasonable response which took into consideration the needs of the resident as well as its responsibility to provide efficient, cost effective heating in the property.
  13. In summary, the landlord acted reasonably in its decision to refuse the installation of an ASHP but there were failures in its response to the concerns raised by the resident, particularly in its communication. While it considered the resident’s health and wellbeing during the process of reviewing the heating system, it failed to consider the effect that poor communication would have on the resident. The resident was inconvenienced by having to chase the landlord for a decision on his heating over an extended period (May 2023 until August 2023) and was not given sufficient reassurance that his health and wellbeing were a priority due to delays in the landlord’s responses. For these reasons, a finding of service failure has been made.
  14. In considering compensation, a further amount of £100 is appropriate. This is in addition to the compensation already offered by the landlord. This amount has been considered with the Ombudsman remedies guidance in mind.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the efficiency of the heating system at the property and its refusal to install an air source heat pump.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Provide a written apology for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay additional compensation of £100 for distress and inconvenience caused by its poor communication regarding the resident’s concerns from May 2023 to August 2023.
    3. Provide evidence to this Service of compliance with the above orders.