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

London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (202326813)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202326813

London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

12 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 complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports she had no hot water in the property.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident was a secure tenant of a 1-bedroom flat between 20 February 2014 and 30 June 2023.
  2. On 7 June 2023 the resident told the landlord she had no hot water in the property. No action was taken by the landlord despite her calling it again on 12 and 20 June 2023. 
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 22 June 2023.
  4. The resident left the property on 30 June 2023.
  5. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 11 July 2023. It did not respond to her complaint about not having hot water. She escalated her complaint the same day.
  6. On 23 August 2023 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It offered £50 compensation for its handling of her reports she had no hot water.
  7. The resident contacted us on 6 November 2023. She said she was unhappy with the landlord’s response to her complaint.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s response to the residents reports she had no hot water in the property

  1. The resident called the landlord on 7 June 2023. She said she had no hot water. The landlord said its estate manager would contact its contractor regarding the issue.
  2. The landlord’s repair policy states it should repair a loss of hot water within 3 working days.
  3. No action was taken by the landlord. The resident called it again on 12 June 2023. The landlord explained the delay by stating it discovered the estate manager it had tried to contact no longer worked for it. It said it would call the resident back about the problem.
  4. The resident called the landlord on 20 June 2023. She said she still had no hot water. The landlord took no action. 
  5. The resident complained to the landlord on 22 June 2023. She said there had been no hot water at the property since 7 June 2023. The landlord had taken no action in the interim period to effectively resolve the issue.
  6. The resident vacated the property on 30 June 2023.
  7. On 11 July 2023 the landlord emailed the resident. The landlord has told us this was its response at stage 1 of its complaints process. The email did not specifically make it clear it was the landlord’s official response to her complaint. It apologised for the delay in replying to her. It said it had spoken to her when she left the property, but it gave no further details. It said she could ask for a review of the complaint if she remained dissatisfied. The landlord did not mention as part of its response anything about her complaint that the property had no hot water.
  8. The resident asked the landlord to review her complaint on 11 July 2023. The landlord acknowledged the escalated complaint on 12 July 2023.
  9. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 23 August 2023. It said there was no standard timescale for when it should complete repairs when there was no hot water as the matter should be passed to a manager to determine what action would be taken. It said it had reported the matter to its estate manager. However, it said it later realised the estate manager they had attempted to contact no longer worked for it, so no repairs were arranged. It apologised for not restoring the hot water and offered £50 compensation for the inconvenience.
  10. A review of the landlord’s complaint response shows it gave incorrect information to the resident when it said it did not have a standard timescale to repair when there was no hot water. The landlord accepted it had mistakenly sent the matter to a manager who no longer worked for it and offered £50 compensation for the inconvenience in not restoring the hot water.
  11. The resident contacted us on 6 November 2023. She said she was unhappy with the landlords handling of her complaint.  
  12. On 24 May 2024 we spoke to the landlord as part of attempts to resolve the issues between the parties prior to commencing a full investigation into the matter. The landlord made an increased offer of compensation which comprised of:
    1. £150 for its poor communication and not restoring the hot water.
    2. Compensation based on 33% equivalent amount of rent from June 2023 totalling £225.
  13. The resident declined the landlord’s revised compensation offer on 28 May 2024 and the matter was subject to a full investigation by us.
  14. When a failure is identified, as in this case, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right, and Learn from Outcomes, as well as our own guidance on remedies.
  15. The evidence shows the landlord failed to manage the resident’s reports of no hot water at the property in line with its repairs policy. Its communications were poor, and it failed to adequately utilise the resources at its disposal to resolve the issue.
  16. The landlord failed to consider the resident’s complaint at stage 1 of its complaints process. At stage 2 it acknowledged it had not dealt with the repair as it should have, and it offered £50 compensation to the resident.
  17. The initial offer of redress was insufficient to compensate for the landlord’s failures, the loss of service and the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s complaint. Following the resident’s complaint to us, the landlord increased the compensation offer to £375.
  18. The Ombudsman encourages landlords to take resolution focussed action, irrespective of the stage at which a case is at. However, the main focus for a landlord should always be to ensure that a case in dispute progresses to a fair resolution during its internal complaints process. It was not until the resident referred her complaint to us that the landlord conducted a further review of the case and increased its offer of compensation. Although this did indicate a willingness to learn, in line with the Dispute Resolution Principles, appropriate redress is something which should have been considered as part of the internal complaints procedure. A referral to us should not be seen as another opportunity for the landlord to consider its handling of the complaint.
  19. When considering our guidance on remedies, the landlord’s revised compensation offer £375 is fair. This offer acknowledged there was a failure which adversely affected the resident. In making the offer the landlord accepted its failings, and the compensation offered was proportionate to those failings. However, the failure to offer the amount as part of its complaints process and the subsequent delay to resolve the matter in a timely manner leads to a determination of maladministration. The landlord is ordered to reoffer the amount of £375 as compensation to resolve the issue.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process. Its complaints policy from 2023 stated it should acknowledge complaints within 5 days of receipt. It aimed to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaints within 30 working days.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord on 22 June 2023. It did not acknowledge the complaint. This was not in line with its complaints policy.
  3. The landlord emailed the resident on 11 July 2023. It did not make it clear in its response what stage of its process the resident’s complaint was at. It has since told us it considered its response dated 11 Jul 2023 as its stage 1 complaint response. It told the resident she could request a review of the complaint of she remained dissatisfied. 
  4. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code 2022 (the Code) states at paragraph 5.8 landlords must confirm in writing to the resident what stage the complaint is at when it has completed its stage 1 review. The landlord’s response failed to comply with the Code, and as such made the process more difficult for the resident to navigate than it should have been.
  5. On 11 July 2023 the resident asked the landlord to review her complaint. The landlord acknowledged the complaint the following day.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 23 August 2023. This was 6 weeks after the escalated complaint was made and was outside of its policy timescale. The landlord did not acknowledge it had not told the resident what stage her complaint was in its response at stage 1. The landlord did not offer any redress for the delay in replying to her complaint.
  7. In summary, the landlord did not adhere to its policy or the Code when responding to the resident’s complaints, and it failed to offer redress for its failures. This led to delays and a process that was unclear and more difficult to navigate than it should have been. This caused unnecessary distress and inconvenience to the resident. These failings lead to determination of service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. An order for compensation has been made below.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports she had no hot water in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay £375 compensation to the resident for its handling of resident’s reports she had no hot water.
    3. Pay £150 compensation to the resident for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling failures.
  2. The landlord should provide us with evidence of its compliance with these orders within 4 weeks of the date if this report.