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

London Borough of Waltham Forest (202428160)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202428160

Waltham Forest Council

31 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of no heating and hot water.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord which is a local authority. The property is a one-bedroomed flat within a block containing 6 flats. All properties on the resident’s estate are served by a communal boiler which provides heating and hot water.
  2. The resident has vulnerabilities resulting from being autistic; this means that he requires communications to be ‘autism-friendly’. The resident has explained that this means no complex written communications and he has requested the landlord and this Service ring him before sending any written communication.
  3. The communal boiler broke down on the evening of Friday, 18 October 2024. The landlord’s repairs log shows that various residents contacted the landlord early on 19 October 2024 and jobs were raised for the landlord’s heating contractor to attend. The resident contacted the landlord’s out of hours service on 20 October 2024 to report that he had no heating or hot water. The call operator confirmed that they were aware of the problem and the matter was in hand with the heating contractor.
  4. The resident phoned the out of hours service again on 21 October 2024 to report that he still had no heating or hot water. The operator again advised the resident that the matter was in hand with the heating contractor. The landlord’s records state that the heating and hot water was reinstated during the morning of Monday, 21 October 2024.
  5. The resident submitted a stage one complaint on 22 October 2024 because he said he had been without heating and hot water during the weekend and he had been concerned about his wellbeing and that of his cats. He said he had phoned the out of hours service 4 times and each time had been told an engineer would attend. However, he said he had not seen an engineer on site. The resident also said he had requested the out of hours service provide him with temporary heating and he said they had refused.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 5 November 2024 in which it stated the following:
    1. The resident had expressed his distress at not having heating or hot water between 18 and 20 October 2024 and because he had not been offered temporary heating.
    2. The resident had advised the landlord that an ambulance had attended his home due to his elevated blood pressure, which he said had been exacerbated by the lack of heating in his property.
    3. The resident had said that when he had requested temporary heating, the operator had said that it could not provide this. The resident said this had also affected his health.
    4. The landlord said that it had checked with the heating contractor who had confirmed it did not receive a job from the out of hours service for loss of heating and hot water at the resident’s property. The contractor said this was because the fault had affected the whole block, rather than just the resident’s individual property.
    5. The landlord confirmed that the heating contractor had checked with the resident on 23 October 2024 and he had advised the contractor that his heating and hot water were working.
    6. The landlord said the heating contractor had shared the report received from the out of hours service over the period 19 to 20 Oct 2024 and there had not been any record of calls received from the resident.
    7. The landlord apologised for the inconvenience and discomfort experienced by the resident due to the loss of heating and hot water, which had been due to a building-wide issue in the boiler plant room.
    8. The landlord confirmed that the contractor had addressed the leak that had caused the issues and the services had been reinstated as quickly as had been realistically possible.
    9. The landlord accepted, however, that the outage had caused the resident distress and inconvenience. The landlord also accepted that the resident should have been offered temporary heating during period in question.
    10. The landlord partially upheld the resident’s complaint and offered him £50 compensation.
  7. The resident made a stage 2 complaint on 15 November 2024 as he disputed the stage 1 reply which had said there was no record of him calling. He said he also disputed the advice he had been given by the out of hours service that an engineer would be called out urgently. He said he believed he had been misled and was also unhappy that he had not been offered temporary heating. Finally, he said he was concerned that the landlord was not keeping his data safe as it said it had no record of his calls.
  8. The landlord sent its stage 2 reply on 16 November 2024 and stated that it had reviewed its stage 1 response and considered it to have been adequate and reasonable.
  9. The resident wrote to this Service on 18 November 2024 and said he was unhappy with the landlord’s response because he said it implied that he had not called the out of hours service. He copied his email to the Information Commissioner’s Office because he said they were dealing with an ongoing complaint about non-compliance with data handling.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident advised this Service on 14 March 2025 that he had a faulty heat exchange valve in his bedroom and this had been the case for 2 years. He said the heating contractor was aware of the issue and said it had to order a new part. A key part of the Ombudsman’s role is to assess the landlord’s response to a complaint and therefore it is important that the landlord has had an opportunity to consider all the information being investigated by the Ombudsman as part of its complaint response. This matter was not raised as part of the resident’s stage 1 or stage 2 complaint and has therefore not been included in the Ombudsman’s investigation. A recommendation has, however, been included in this report for the landlord to contact the resident about the valve.
  2. The resident stated in his stage 1 complaint dated 22 October 2024 that the loss of heating had affected his health and he had been concerned about the wellbeing of his pets. He added that an ambulance attended his property due to his elevated blood pressure. This Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be better dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts. The resident may wish to consider taking independent legal advice if he wishes to pursue this option.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of no heating and hot water

  1. The landlord’s website states that it has the following 3 timescales for carrying out repairs:
    1. Critical emergency repairs – the landlord aims to attend to and repair or make safe critical emergency repairs within 4 hours.
    2. Essential emergency repairs – the landlord aims to repair or make safe essential emergency repairs within 24 hours or by the end of the next working day.
    3. Routine (non-emergency repairs) – the landlord aims to complete all other types of repairs, including communal repairs within 28 days.
  2. The website states that a communal heating system failure affecting multiple properties is categorised as a critical emergency repair.
  3. In February 2021, the Ombudsman produced a spotlight report on complaints about heating, hot water and energy in social housing which stated:
    1. “Landlords should have access to and offer residents temporary practical help during a period without heating or hot water – such as electric heaters…”.
    2. “Landlords should be particularly aware of the needs of vulnerable residents and respond accordingly”.
  4. The landlord’s repairs log shows that it was aware during the early morning of Saturday, 19 October 2024 that multiple properties were affected by a problem with the communal boiler and had no heating or hot water. The landlord therefore appropriately raised orders on 19 October 2024 for the heating contractor to repair the boiler. Although the resident advised the landlord in his stage 1 complaint dated 22 October 2024 that he was without heating and hot water from the evening of 18 October 2024, the Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the resident or other residents on the estate had contacted the landlord about a problem with the boiler on 18 October 2024.
  5. The heating contractor advised the landlord on 19 October 2024 that an engineer had attended and the boiler was up and running. However, on 20 October 2024 various residents on the estate contacted the landlord to report that they still had no heating and hot water. This included the resident who phoned the landlord’s out of hours service 4 times on Sunday, 20 October 2024 to report he had no heating or hot water. He was initially told in the morning that the contractor had already attended to carry out repairs and it would take “a few hours” for the heating and hot water to reach the desired temperatures. He was told the same information during his subsequent calls, including his last call, which was late at night on 20 October 2024.
  6. The landlord has advised this Service that its out of hours service phoned the heating contractor 5 times between 8.50am and 7.40pm on Sunday, 20 October 2024 to obtain an update. On each occasion, the landlord was advised that the system had been pressurised and would be running within a couple of hours. The landlord was told that some flats would receive heating and hot water before others. This information corresponds with the advice that was given to the resident when he phoned the out of hours service on 20 October 2024.
  7. The evidence seen by the Ombudsman therefore indicates that the contractor attended on 19 and 20 October 2024 to repair the boiler. This was appropriate as the boiler outage affected multiple properties and was therefore a critical emergency under the landlord’s policy.  It was also appropriate that the out of hours service had chased the contractor for updates so that its staff could advise residents accordingly.
  8. Although the heating and hot water had not been restored by the night of Sunday, 20 October 2024, this does not necessarily indicate a service failing on the part of the contractor. This is because repairs to communal boilers can be complex and once the repairs are completed it takes time for the heating and hot water to reach all of the properties served by the boiler. However, the Ombudsman does consider it a failing that the resident had not been given clearer information on 20 October 2024 to confirm whether the repairs to the boiler had been completed and when he could expect his heating and hot water to be restored.
  9. The Ombudsman understands that the out of hours service had tried to obtain the required information from the contractor. However, the lack of meaningful information meant the resident was anxious about the heating/hot water and when it would be restored.
  10. The resident phoned the heating contractor on the morning of Monday, 21 October 2024 and was told that an engineer would be attending that morning. The landlord’s records show that the heating/hot water from the communal boiler was reinstated during the morning of 21 October 2024.
  11. It was again unreasonable that the resident was not given a clearer update when he phoned the contractor on the morning of 21 October 2024. For example, he still had not been given any information to confirm that engineers had been working on the problem over the weekend and when the repairs were likely to be completed. This added to his frustration as he had been without heating and hot water throughout the weekend and had not been given clear updates on when he could expect his heating and hot water to be restored.
  12. As well as the resident’s dissatisfaction with the time it had taken for his heating and hot water to be restored, the resident also stated in his complaint that he had not been offered temporary heating during the period. He stated that he had requested temporary heating late on Sunday, 20 October 2024 but said his request had been refused.
  13. The landlord has advised this Service that the resident was not offered temporary heating because it had received assurances from the contractor at various times on 20 October 2024 that the boiler had been repaired and that the heating/hot water would soon be reinstated. The Ombudsman understands that the lack of clear information from the contractor made it more difficult to decide whether to offer temporary heating. However, the Ombudsman’s view is that as a precaution to ensure the welfare of its vulnerable residents, the landlord should have offered temporary heating on 19 or 20 October 2024. It was therefore inappropriate that it did not do so.
  14. Although the landlord had an alert on its system to show the resident was vulnerable, the evidence seen indicates that the out of hours service did not have a record of the resident’s vulnerabilities. This was therefore a record-keeping failing. The Ombudsman would also expect the call operators to have checked with the resident whether he had any health issues or vulnerabilities that would necessitate offering him temporary heating.
  15. The landlord stated in its stage 1 reply that the out of hours service had not passed a repair order to the heating contractor for the resident’s property. In the Ombudsman’s view, this was reasonable as the landlord had established that there was a problem with the communal boiler which was affecting multiple properties on the estate. It was therefore unnecessary to raise separate orders for every individual property affected by the outage.
  16. The landlord also stated in the stage 1 reply that the heating contractor had provided it with a report it had received form the out of hours service for the period 19 to 20 October 2024. It stated that there was no record of any calls having been received from the resident. Based on the evidence seen by this Service, the information in the report was inaccurate as the resident had phoned the out of hours service 4 times on 20 October 2024. It was therefore inappropriate that the out of hours service had not documented the resident’s calls. This shows inaccurate record-keeping by the landlord’s out of hours service. Keeping a record of his phone calls would have enabled the landlord to check with the resident that his heating and hot water had been restored after the repairs to the boiler had been completed.
  17. Following the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 22 October 2024, the contractor phoned him on 23 October 2024 to check that his heating and hot water were working correctly. As the resident had made a formal complaint about the lack of heating and hot water, it was reasonable for the contractor to check with the resident that the problem had been resolved.
  18. Overall, the Ombudsman has found the following failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a lack of heating and hot water:
    1. Despite ringing the out of hours service 4 times on 20 October 2024 and again on the morning of 21 October 2024, the resident was not given clear information to confirm that repairs were being carried out and when he could expect his heating and hot water to be reinstated.
    2. The information held by the out of hours service did not reflect the alerts held by the landlord on its system regarding the resident’s vulnerability.
    3. The resident was not offered temporary heating even though the landlord’s records stated he was vulnerable.
    4. The out of hours service had not documented the resident’s phone calls made on 20 October 2024.
  19. When there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, the Ombudsman takes 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.
  20. The landlord acted fairly by acknowledging in its stage 1 reply that the boiler outage had caused distress and inconvenience to the resident. It also accepted that the out of hours service should have offered alternative heating to the resident. The landlord sought to put things right by apologising to the resident for its failings and for the distress caused to the resident. It also offered compensation of £50.
  21. In terms of learning, the landlord has advised this Service that 2 of the out of hours call operators were identified as needing to improve their tone and customer service level. They had therefore been placed on a performance improvement plan.
  22. The Ombudsman has considered the landlord’s offer of financial redress and its apology and considers the offer to be proportionate because:
    1. The loss of heating and hot water lasted for a relatively short period.
    2. The Ombudsman has not established that the time taken for the contractor to repair the boiler was a service failing.
    3. The level of compensation offered is within the range of sums identified in the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance for situations where there has been a service failure of short duration, which caused distress and inconvenience.
  23. The Ombudsman therefore considers that the landlord made a reasonable offer of redress in the circumstances. However, this Service has identified some additional learning for the landlord in terms of ensuring the out of hours service’s vulnerability records match those of the landlord and reminding their staff to check for any vulnerabilities when a resident reports a loss of heating and hot water.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, and in the Ombudsman’s opinion, there was reasonable redress offered by the landlord in relation to its handling of the resident’s reports of no heating and hot water.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should reoffer the resident the £50 compensation it offered in its stage 1 reply.
  2. The landlord should ensure the out of hours service’s records are updated so they show the same vulnerability alerts as are shown on the landlord’s records.
  3. The landlord should remind the out of hours staff to check with callers for vulnerabilities when there has been a loss of heating so an informed decision can be made about whether to provide temporary heating.
  4. The landlord should contact the resident regarding the heat valve in his bedroom which he said requires a permanent repair.