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

Midland Heart Limited (202225075)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202225075

Midland Heart Limited

3 December 2024


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:
    1. Heating and hot water repairs.
    2. Roof leaks affecting the resident’s property.
  2. The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has been a tenant of the landlord, a housing association, since January 2021. The property is a 1 bedroom flat on the top floor of the building.
  2. In September 2021, the resident reported a roof leak affecting her bedroom and living room. The landlord raised a works order and noted works were completed. Three months later, the resident reported that the roof leak had returned. The landlord noted it attended later than month and identified that scaffolding was required.
  3. Between November 2022 and January 2023, the resident made at least 4 reports of heating and water repairs. The landlord completed works in November and December 2022. In January 2023, it agreed to install a new boiler, which was completed on 16 January 2023. The same day, the resident reported there was a leak from a radiator and pressure in the new boiler had dropped. The landlord noted it attended but no access was given.
  4. On 16 January 2023, the resident made a complaint to the landlord. She said she had made numerous reports about heating and hot water issues, but these were unresolved. The landlord had attended the previous month about the roof leak and said scaffolding was needed but she had heard nothing more since then. She had chased this up 3 days earlier and been told there was a scaffolding shortage, which meant no appointment had been arranged.
  5. The following day, the resident reported she had no heating and hot water since the new boiler had been installed and there was a leak on the radiator. The landlord noted it attended the following day and carried out works to resolve this issue.
  6. On 25 January 2023, the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response. It said there had been miscommunication regarding the heating and hot water repairs and delays in completing the roof repairs. It apologised and said it would oversee the complaint until all issues were resolved and then assess whether compensation was required. The resident asked to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on or around 17 February 2023. The landlord has told this Service it has no record of this contact so it is unclear the exact reasons given for this request.
  7. In late February 2023, scaffolding was put up and roof repairs were completed. On 15 March 2023, the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It acknowledged there had been delays in resolving the roof leaks, apologised and offered £470 compensation for this issue. The resident replied the following day and said the landlord had only responded to her concerns about the roof leak but not provided any response to the boiler issue raised in her original complaint. She reported there was an ongoing roof leak in the same place so she did not believe the repairs had been completed to the required standard.
  8. The landlord raised a further works order on 31 March 2023 to investigate roof leaks and noted works were completed in May 2023. This job was recalled in June 2023 and further works completed in July 2023. The same month, a secondary leak was identified and a further works order raised for this. The landlord noted works were completed in August 2023 and subsequent internal making good works were completed in September 2023.
  9. The landlord reviewed the complaint in November 2023 and provided an update to the resident, which confirmed all repairs had been completed but acknowledged there had been delays. It apologised for this and offered £1,696.68 compensation, made up of £1,210 for its handling of the roof repairs between December 2022 and September 2023, £70 for its handling of the boiler repair, £270 for complaint handling and £146.68 for reimbursement of decorating supplies. The resident asked this Service to investigate her complaint in March 2024. She said the landlord took too long to resolve the situation and did not take accountability.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident first reported a roof leak affecting her property in September 2021. Complaints should be brought to the attention of the landlord within a reasonable time of the problem occurring, usually within 12 months. This is so that the landlord has an opportunity to resolve the issues while they are still ‘live’ and the evidence is available to properly investigate them (reflected at paragraph 42.c of the Scheme).
  2. In this case, the resident made a formal complaint in January 2023, therefore, the scope of this investigation has included events 12 months prior to this. Anything that happened before January 2022, will be considered for context but not assessed or determined as part of this investigation.

Heating and hot water repairs

  1. The landlord is responsible for heating and hot water repairs under the terms of the resident’s tenancy agreement. This says that the landlord will keep in repair and proper working order installations for space and water heating. It is reasonable that landlords carry out repairs to a heating and hot water system, where these can resolve any issues. Where repairs cannot resolve the issues and/ or there are repeated breakdowns and failures in the system, the landlord should consider a replacement.
  2. On 3 November 2022, the resident reported the boiler pressure was low. Where there is a loss of heating or hot water, it is reasonable that the landlord treat these as emergency repairs, which its website says it will attend within 24 hours. On this occasion, as there was no indication that the resident was without heating or hot water, it was reasonable that the landlord treated this as a routine repair, which its website says it will attend within 28 days. The landlord attended on 14 November 2022, which was 12 days after the repair was raised and within the committed timescale for routine repairs.
  3. The following month, the resident reported she had no heating and hot water at the property. While a works order was raised, this was subsequently cancelled; however, there is no reason for this noted. This is a concern as the landlord should clearly document the reason why a works order is cancelled so it can account for its actions.
  4. As no reason for the cancellation is given, the Ombudsman is unable to assess whether this action was reasonable. An order has been made below for the landlord to provide staff guidance on the process for and importance of noting the reasons why a works order is cancelled.
  5. When the resident reported that the hot water was not getting hot enough on 14 December 2022, the landlord attended the same day, which was sensible considering the time of year. It identified parts were required to complete the repair and returned on 29 December 2022 to fit these, which was 16 days later. Considering this was over the Christmas period and that multiple parts were required, the length of time taken to complete this repair was reasonable.
  6. The operative that attended on 14 December 2022, noted that they enquired about whether the boiler could be upgraded, but this was declined. While frustrating for the resident that the landlord declined to upgrade the boiler at that time, it was entitled to make attempts to repair the boiler before agreeing to upgrade it. As this was only the 2nd time it had attended for a boiler fault recently, and it had identified how it could resolve the issue, this was a reasonable decision.
  7. While reasonable, there is no record that the landlord explained this to the resident. She subsequently said in her complaint that despite asking the landlord how it reached this decision, it failed to provide a response. This amounts to maladministration and was frustrating for the resident, making her feel that the landlord was not taking the matter seriously.
  8. The resident reported a loss of hot water and reduced heating on 3 January 2023. As this was a total loss of hot water, the landlord should have treated this as an emergency and attended within 24 hours. However, the landlord attended on 5 January 2023, which was 2 days after the repair was raised and not within the committed 24 hour timescale for emergency repairs.
  9. The operative that attended on 5 January 2023 noted that the resident said a new boiler was being installed and so no repair was required. It is not clear from the notes whether this decision was made by the resident or the operative. However, as the new boiler was not installed until 11 days later, and considering the time of year, the operative should have made attempts to complete a temporary repair to ensure the resident had fully functioning heating and hot water while waiting for the boiler to be replaced. Its failure to do so amounts to maladministration and left the resident without hot water for almost 2 weeks, and she said this resulted in her having to visit family members to shower.
  10. The resident said she was told on 5 January 2023 that the boiler would be replaced. This was completed 11 days later on 16 January 2023. Considering the scale of the work required this was a reasonable timeframe. While the timeframe was reasonable, this meant that the resident was without fully functioning heating for a period of almost 2 weeks during the winter months. In light of this, the landlord should have considered providing temporary heaters, but there is no record that it did. This amounts to maladministration and left the resident feeling that it did not care about her circumstances.
  11. The resident reported further problems with the new boiler on the day it was installed, which the landlord treated as an emergency. It attended the following day, which was within the committed timescale for emergency repairs, and noted no access was given. Where possible, landlord’s should inform residents when it will be attending for repairs; however, where these are raised as emergencies, this is not always possible. Therefore, the missed appointment was not a result of any failure by the landlord.
  12. When the resident re-reported this issue the following day (17 January 2023), the landlord once again treated this as an emergency. It attended on 18 January 2023, which was within the committed timescale for emergency repairs.
  13. In the resident’s stage 1 complaint, she raised concerns about communication and said there had been missed appointments and conflicting information given. This Service has seen no evidence of this and so cannot make an assessment of these issues; however, the landlord itself acknowledged there had been miscommunication in respect of this issue, as part of its stage 1 response.
  14. The stage 1 response said it would oversee works through to completion and then review whether compensation was required. However, it also confirmed the boiler had been replaced and from the records provided, all works had been completed. Therefore, it is unclear why the landlord did not consider compensation for this issue at that time, and only made an offer in relation to this 10 months later, on 30 November 2023.
  15. The landlord has apologised for its handling of this issue and offered £70 compensation. Considering the full circumstances of this matter and in consultation with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, this amount is considered insufficient. Therefore, a finding of maladministration is appropriate and an order has been made below for the landlord to pay the resident £300 compensation, inclusive of the £70 already offered, if not done so already.

Roof leaks affecting the resident’s property

  1. The landlord is responsible for repairs to the roof under the terms of the resident’s tenancy agreement. This says that the landlord will repair the structure and exterior of the property, including the roof.
  2. When the resident reported roof repairs on 7 December 2022, the landlord identified that the job required scaffolding. The landlord’s website says that repairs that require scaffolding are classed as major repairs, therefore, it was reasonable that it classed this job as major repairs. The landlord completed the works on 26 February 2023, which was 82 days after the repair was reported and in line with the landlord’s 90 day target timeframe for major repairs set out on its website.
  3. While this repair was completed within the landlord’s target timescale, it acknowledged there was a delay as there was a period of almost 2 months where no action was taken. The landlord told the resident this was because of a scaffolding shortage and while frustrating for her, this was outside of the landlord’s control.
  4. While the reason for the delay was not attributable to the landlord, it did not keep the resident updated about this and she only found this out when she made contact to chase up the repair. This was unreasonable as the landlord should have been proactive in updating the resident so she knew what was going on and felt reassured that it had not forgotten about the repair.
  5. When the resident reported the leak was ongoing in March 2023, the landlord raised a further works order on 31 March 2023 and completed works on 9 May 2023. This was 40 days later, which was again within the landlord’s committed 90 day target timeframe for major repairs. However, the records provided show that there were a number of issues with the scaffolding being incorrectly removed in April 2023. This delayed the works from being completed and had these errors not been made, the works could have been completed sooner.
  6. The landlord recalled the works order for the roof repairs on 14 June 2023, however, it is not clear the reasons for this as the resident did not report the roof leak was ongoing until 19 June 2023. This recall caused confusion for the resident and made her feel that the landlord did not know what it was doing.
  7. After the resident reported the ongoing leak on 19 June 2023, she asked the landlord to use a different contractor as she had lost faith in the initial contractor used, due to the leak reoccurring on 2 occasions. The landlord agreed this request, which was appropriate and showed it took the resident’s concerns seriously.
  8. A further works order was raised to a new contractor on 26 June 2023, and works were completed 12 days later, on 7 July 2023; which was within the 90 day target timescale for major repairs. Similarly, when a secondary roof leak was reported 4 days later, on 11 July 2022, a works order was raised and works completed 46 days later, on 25 August 2023. This was again within the target timescale of 90 days for major repairs.
  9. Roof leaks can present challenges for landlord’s as once works are completed, it is reliant on rain to test that these have fully resolved the issues. In June 2023, the resident asked the landlord to spray the roof with water to test it was watertight, but it declined to do so. This was reasonable as it would not be a reliable, or safe, way to test that the roof was watertight.
  10. After works were completed in February and May 2023, the leak continued, which resulted in further works being required. This meant that the resident was left with a recurring roof leak for a period of 7 months between December 2022 and July 2023, which she had to repeatedly report. While this was a challenging situation for the landlord, this leak went on for too long and works should have been completed sooner to resolve this issue.
  11. The roof leaks caused internal damage to the resident’s property, including the walls, ceilings and floors. Considering this damage was a result of the roof leak, it was appropriate that the landlord took responsibility to repair this. The landlord told the resident it would not complete works to address the damage until it had resolved the roof leak, which was reasonable as further damage would likely occur if the roof leak was ongoing. As there were delays in the landlord completing the roof repairs, this meant the internal damage was made worse and left for many months before it was finally addressed. This was upsetting for the resident.
  12. Works orders were raised in relation to the making good works, in March and May 2023. The records indicate that at least 4 visits were carried out to assess the works required, and on at least 3 of these occasions, the operatives noted  that no works were carried out as the leak was ongoing. While understandable that it adopted this approach, the repeated visits with no action caused frustration for the resident, as she had to take time off work to give access for no works to be carried out.
  13. Once all roof repairs were fully completed in August 2023, the landlord raised a works order for the making good repairs on 4 September 2023. This was completed 24 days later, on 27 September 2023, which was within the landlord’s 28 day target timescale for routine repairs, set out on its website.
  14. The landlord acknowledged failures in its handling of this issue as part of its complaints process and apologised. It was sensible of the landlord to suggest waiting until the repairs were fully complete before it offered compensation. Ultimately, the landlord offered a total of £1,210 compensation for its handling of this issue, as well as reimbursement of £146.68 decorating costs. Considering the full circumstances of this matter and in consultation with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, this amount is reasonable.
  15. Therefore, the landlord has offered reasonable redress to the resident for its handling of roof leaks affecting her property. A recommendation has been made below for the landlord to pay the resident the £1,210 compensation and £146.68 reimbursement already offered, if not done so already. The reasonable redress finding is made on the basis of these sums being paid to the resident, as they recognised genuine elements of service failure by the landlord.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord acknowledged the stage 1 complaint in 5 working days, on 20 January 2023 and the stage 2 complaint in 4 working days, on 22 February 2023. Both of these were within the committed timescale of 5 working days set out in the landlord’s complaints policy at the time.
  2. The landlord provided its stage 1 response in 10 working days and its stage 2 response in 19 working days. Both of these responses were provided in line with its committed response times of 10 and 20 working days, set out in its complaints policy at the time.
  3. While the landlord’s responses were issued on time, the quality is a cause for concern, particularly the stage 2 response, which only addressed the roof repairs and not the heating and hot water repairs. The landlord has been unable to provide a record of the resident’s escalation request so the reasons for this are unclear. However, she replied to the stage 2 response the following day and highlighted areas that had been missed. Despite the landlord acknowledging this communication on 17 March 2023 and promising to respond by 22 March 2023, there is no record that it ever did.
  4. The resident told this Service in June 2023 that the landlord had agreed to put a hold on the compensation offer regarding the roof repairs until after works were completed, which was sensible. Works were completed in September 2023, but the landlord did not make the compensation offer until more than 7 weeks later, on 16 November 2023, and only after the resident had chased this up on at least 2 occasions.
  5. Even when the landlord made its offer of compensation, this still did not include all issues and the resident had to highlight what had been missed in a further email of the same date. This was frustrating for her and made her lose faith in the landlord.
  6. The landlord acknowledged there had been failures in its complaint handling and offered the resident £270 compensation. Considering the full circumstances of the case and in consultation with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, this amount is considered reasonable. Therefore, the landlord has offered reasonable redress to the resident for its handling of her formal complaint.
  7. A recommendation has been made below for the landlord to pay the resident the £270 compensation already offered, if not done so already. The reasonable redress finding is made on the basis of this sum being paid to the resident, as it recognised genuine elements of service failure by the landlord.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of heating and hot water repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, the landlord has made offers of redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaints about its handling of:
    1.  Roof leaks affecting her property.
    2. The formal complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 6 weeks, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £300 compensation for its handling of heating and hot water repairs, inclusive of the £70 already offered, if not done so already. Evidence of compliance to be provided to this Service, within 6 weeks.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 54.g of the Scheme, within 10 weeks, the landlord is ordered to provide staff guidance on the process for and importance of noting the reasons why a works order is cancelled. Evidence of compliance to be provided to this Service, within 10 weeks.

Recommendations

  1. Pay the resident £1626.68 compensation already offered, made up of £1,210 for its handling of roof leaks affecting her property, £146.68 reimbursement for decorating costs and £270 for its complaint handling, if not done so already. The reasonable redress findings are made on the basis of these sums being paid to the resident, as they recognised genuine elements of service failure by the landlord. The landlord to update this Service on its intentions regarding this recommendation within 6 weeks.