SHAL Housing Limited (202226625)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202226625

SHAL Housing Limited

10 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about:
1. Repairs to the guttering.
2. A lack of hot water in the property.
3. Repairs to the bathroom window.
4. Damp and mould.
5. Staff conduct
6. The complaint.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. After a mutual exchange, the resident moved into the property in 2020.
The property has a solid fuel heating system and an electric immersion heater.
The landlord is aware that the resident has a mental health condition.

Hot water and repairs and damp and mould

On 8 April 2021 the resident reported that she could not get enough hot water. The landlord completed repairs in April 2021 and June 2021.
On 25 August 2021, the resident reported mould in her property and a bathroom window that did not close properly. During a visit on 18 October 2021, the landlord confirmed plans to improve the property’s Energy Performance Rating (EPC) from an ‘E’ to a ‘B’ by installing air source heating, solar panels, and wall insulation, which would address the mould and hot water issues.
On 4 July 2022, the resident submitted a further complaint regarding a lack of hot water. She expressed that she did not want the landlord to remove the solid fuel heating and replace it with electric heating as she could not afford to operate it.
The landlord asked to meet with the resident to discuss her complaint, which the resident declined.
The landlord issued a final response on 19 August 2022. It confirmed that:
1. Its contractor had completed an annual safety check on the solid fuel appliance and noted no concerns. It would no longer respond to this matter.
2. On 1 February 2022, an element of the immersion tank was replaced. The resident now had access to hot water through an electric shower.
3. It was committed to removing all solid fuel installations as part of the government’s targets to reduce carbon emissions. It planned £43,000 of energy efficiency works on the resident’s property to improve the EPC rating to B. This included installing air-source heating, solar panels and insulating the walls.
After contacting our Service, the resident submitted a further complaint regarding the hot water, bathroom window, damp, and mould in February 2023.
The landlord sent a stage 1 response on 27 February 2023 and said that:
1. It sent an email on 11 November 2022 detailing the actions taken regarding the hot water, and the resident exhausted the complaints process.
2. An operative had been scheduled to attend on 13 March 2023 to investigate the bathroom window and the mould. During the same visit, the insulation would be topped up.
The resident contacted us in February 2024 because she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. She said that she wanted the landlord to fix the repairs and compensate her for the distress she had been caused.

Staff conduct

On 27 October 2021, the resident complained about a staff member’s conduct during the inspection visit on 18 October 2021.
The landlord sent a stage 1 response on 26 November 2021 and apologised for the delay. It expressed regret that the resident felt the staff member was sexist and that he spoke over her during the visit. The landlord spoke with colleagues who had attended and was informed that the resident had been angry and aggressive. The resident requested that the complaint be escalated on the same day.
The resident remained dissatisfied with the response and contacted our Service. Following her contact, the resident submitted a further complaint regarding the same issues on 21 February 2023.
On 27 February 2023, the landlord sent a stage 1 response email saying there was no evidence that the officer was rude during the visit. The resident had not provided specific occasions, and the landlord requested more details to investigate further.
The resident contacted our Service as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response.
We asked the landlord to provide a stage 2 response by 8 June 2023.
After failing to receive a complaint response in accordance with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), we wrote to the landlord again on 4 December to request a stage 2 response.
After we had requested a final response, the landlord forwarded emails exchanged with the resident from July and August 2022.
On 12 December 2023, the landlord provided a stage 2 response and confirmed:

Hot water

The resident had a solid fuel heating system, providing heating and hot water and an electric immersion heater that supplied hot water independently of the solid fuel heat source. Due to cost considerations, it would not replace the water tank with a larger one, as this would be considered an improvement rather than a repair. The air-source heat pump would resolve any issues concerning the hot water supply.
An element in the immersion heater was replaced on 18 October 2023. An immediate appointment was not booked due to the resident’s medical commitments and holiday.
On 18 October 2023, the maintenance manager agreed with the resident that the air-source heating would be installed at the end of April 2024, as the resident had sufficient fuel for the wood burner to last until then.
It apologised for failing to respond to the resident’s hot water complaint in accordance with its policy.
It offered £175 for distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the hot water complaint.
£50 for failing to treat the resident’s dissatisfaction with the energy efficiency improvements as a complaint.
£25 for failing to treat the resident’s approach to its contractor as a complaint.
£50 for not communicating that the resident had been removed from the energy efficiency programme due to difficulty arranging appointments. It had reinstated the resident’s property to the programme.

Damp and mould

The resident expressed concerns about mould on 21 February 2023. The mould was treated on 22 March 2023, and the loft insulation was replenished. There was no record of further reports until our Service contacted the landlord in May 2023.
On 13 July 2023, a text message was sent requesting that the resident contact the landlord if she was experiencing any issues with damp or mould. The landlord did not receive any further contact from the resident. It found no failings in its handling.

Bathroom window

It had responded to repairs and completed work to the bathroom window and found no failings in its handling.

Staff conduct

It had failed to respond to the resident’s escalation request regarding staff conduct, citing that it was a particularly busy time. It felt that the resident’s reluctance to meet with the Housing Manager detracted from a fair process and delayed the stage 1 response.

Complaint handling

It apologised for the handling of the complaint and for the distress and inconvenience this caused and offered £250 compensation.

In February 2024, the resident requested an investigation into her complaint regarding incomplete repairs. She expressed concern about the cost of the new air source heating and her dissatisfaction with the treatment she received from the landlord.

Assessment and findings

Scope

The resident mentioned that she has experienced repair issues since moving into her home in 2020. We will focus our assessment on events starting from April 2021, when the resident raised repairs and concerns regarding staff behaviour, until December 2023, when the landlord issued a final response.
The resident has stated that the landlord’s handling of her complaint has worsened her mental health condition. We have considered how the landlord has responded and the distress and inconvenience the resident said she experienced. However, the courts are better suited to consider a health-related claim. The resident should seek independent advice if she believes the landlord’s actions have affected her health.

Reports of a lack of hot water in the property

The resident’s tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for repairs to the installations provided for water supply, including space and water heating.
The landlord’s repair policy divides repairs into emergency and routine repairs. Emergency repairs are responded to within 24 hours, and routine repairs are responded to within 28 days. It states that if a resident is left without heating and hot water and does not have a backup immersion heater, the landlord will respond as an emergency.
The resident reported insufficient hot water on 8 April 2021 and 1 June 2021. The records confirm that the landlord responded within eight days for the first repair and ten days for the second. The landlord’s actions aligned with its repair policy. While the hot water system was not functioning optimally, the resident had access to a backup solution during the repair period.
On 26 August 2021, the resident reported the same problem: she could not get enough hot water to run a bath. The landlord promptly contacted her the following day and confirmed that it would visit the property to assess the situation which was a swift response. However, the visit did not occur until 18 October 2021 which was a failing.
On 18 October 2021, the landlord visited and explained that the property needed significant improvements to enhance its energy performance. The planned upgrades include installing air-source heating to address the resident’s hot water supply effectively.
The records confirm that an element on the hot water cylinder was replaced on 2 February 2022. The evidence shows that the element was delayed due to difficulties gaining access to the property.
During the landlord’s contractor visit on 2 February 2022, the resident expressed concerns that she could not get enough hot water to bathe. The contractor confirmed that it could take up to an hour to heat the water once it has drained from the system, which was consistent with the performance of an unpressurised hot water system. The operative said the water tank was not big enough and should be replaced with a larger one.
In an email to the resident, the landlord confirmed that replacing the cylinder was uneconomical. It had also committed to complying with the government’s decarbonisation targets. Therefore, it intended to remove the solid fuel heating and replace it with an air-source heat pump, likely improving the resident’s hot water supply.
It may have been possible to improve the resident’s hot water supply by changing the cylinder, but it would have been expensive and not in line with the landlord’s commitment to remove all solid fuel heating. Based on this information, the landlord’s decision not to replace the cylinder was reasonable, even though it was not the desired outcome of the resident.
The landlord requested the resident’s availability to carry out insulation work during the week beginning 14 March 2022. The evidence confirms that despite its efforts, the landlord could not arrange a suitable time with the resident to complete the work. As a result, the delays in completing the improvements to enhance the property’s condition, particularly regarding the resident’s hot water supply, were beyond the landlord’s control.
On 4 July 2022, the resident expressed concerns regarding the costs of installing the new heating system. As part of the landlord’s final response, it apologised to the resident. In addition, it offered £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the resident having to continuously contact it about the issue and not responding appropriately to the complaint about the energy efficiency plans. This aligns with our remedies guidance where the landlord has identified failings that adversely impacted the resident but may not have significantly affected the overall outcome for the resident. Therefore, we have found that the landlord offered reasonable redress for its acknowledged service failures.
We understand that the landlord has installed solar panels and completed the internal wall insulation. However, the landlord has not yet been able to agree on a date with the resident to install the air-source heating. To alleviate her concerns, a recommendation has been made for the landlord to contact the resident to ensure she is fully aware of the average costs for properties in her area that utilise air-source heating.

Repairs to the bathroom window

The tenancy agreement confirms that the landlord is responsible for maintaining the structure and exterior of the premises, including the windows, in good repair.
On 25 August 2021, the resident reported that the bathroom window was not sealing properly and allowing water to enter. The landlord contacted the resident on 27 August 2021 to arrange a visit to inspect the repairs. This response was appropriate.
The landlord delayed attending. However, there is evidence that the landlord requested the resident’s availability for an inspection and the evidence shows that the resident cancelled an appointment on 27 September 2021 which likely contributed to the delays in assessing repairs.
The visit was conducted on 18 October 2021. During this visit, the resident expressed concerns about a leak in the bathroom window. The landlord promptly raised a works order on 21 October 2021 to replace the window hinges and seals as necessary. The repairs were completed by 2 November 2021, within the landlord’s 28-day response time.
After the initial repairs, the landlord identified some additional issues with the window on 12 November 2021. These repairs were finished by 10 December 2021, meeting the specified timeframe.
On 21 February 2023, the resident reported another issue with the window, stating it leaked during rain. In response, the landlord scheduled a visit for 13 March 2023. However, the resident later requested to cancel this appointment. Subsequently, the window was overhauled, and the repair was completed on 22 March 2023.
The landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s reports. We have found no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the repairs to the bathroom window.

Reports of damp and mould

The landlord’s damp and mould policy confirms that it will work to an agreed timescale to respond to a damp, mould and condensation report. It will investigate a report within 7 days and agree on an action plan. It will treat all reports within 28 days (except in severe cases, which will be treated within 7 days).
The resident reported damp in her property on 25 August 2021. The landlord inspected 54 days later, on 18 October 2021, significantly outside the landlord’s 7-day response time.
The resident and the landlord disagreed about the cause of the mould. The landlord attributed the mould to condensation, while the resident believed it was due to a leak. The landlord explained that completing the energy efficiency improvements would resolve the issues the resident was experiencing.
The landlord’s policy on damp and mould states that it will assist residents in managing humidity levels to minimise condensation within the property. There is no evidence that the resident received any help or advice regarding the property’s conditions while awaiting the necessary improvements.
Our Spotlight report on damp and mould says that landlords should provide residents with advice on managing mould, such as cleaning tips, or how to improve the ventilation, as part of a comprehensive strategy. The landlord has not provided evidence of the advice and assistance offered to the resident to manage the mould temporarily while awaiting the improvements, it did not act in accordance with its policy.
In the resident’s subsequent complaint on 21 February 2023, the resident raised an issue with mould again. The landlord responded appropriately and arranged to visit the property on 22 March 2023. The appointment was delayed at the resident’s request. The landlord attended to treat the mould and top up the loft insulation on 22 March 2023.
The evidence does not show that the resident reported any further issues with mould after this treatment. Following our involvement in May 2023, the landlord sent a text message to the resident and advised that if the resident was experiencing issues with mould, she should respond to the message. There is no evidence that the resident responded or made any further reports.
In summary, the landlord delayed in inspecting the damp and mould issues and has not demonstrated that it provided the resident with advice or temporary measures to reduce risks while she awaited improvement works. Consequently, we have identified a service failure in the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould reports and have issued an order regarding this matter.

Staff conduct

The resident raised concerns regarding staff conduct during the inspection visit on 18 October 2021. She stated that the staff member was sexist and dismissed her worries.
In its stage 1 response on 26 November 2021, the landlord apologised that the resident had felt that way. The landlord had received reports of unreasonable behaviour from the resident during the visit. As part of her escalation on 26 November 2021, the resident stated she had two independent witnesses who had heard the conversation.
In its subsequent stage 1 response on 27 February 2023, the landlord confirmed that it had investigated the complaint and found no evidence of the reported behaviour. The resident was asked to identify specific occasions and provide further details so the landlord could investigate further.
Its stage 2 response on 12 December 2023 acknowledged that, although it did not respond to the stage 2 escalation as it ought to have, this did not affect the resident. It stated that the resident failed to provide any evidence of the reports or meet with the manager as offered. The other staff member at the inspection had refuted the reports, and character evidence for the staff member was obtained from other staff. The behaviour of the resident and her husband was also taken into account.
The landlord responded appropriately to the reports by offering to meet with the resident and apologised for the resident’s feelings regarding the staff member’s behaviour. It was reasonable for the landlord to request additional information from the resident regarding specific incidents or witness details, which were not provided. As a result, the landlord was limited in its actions based on the information available.
Therefore, we have found no maladministration in handling concerns of staff conduct.

Complaint handling

The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process. It will acknowledge a stage 1 complaint within 5 working days and respond within 10 days of the acknowledgement. Stage 2 responses are responded to within 20 working days of the complaint being acknowledged.
The Code sets out our expectations for how landlords should handle complaints. This includes landlords responding to complaints and escalations within a reasonable time.
On 21 October 2021, the resident complained about a member of staff’s conduct. 36 days later, on 26 November 2021, the landlord responded at stage 1 of the complaints process. This was not in line with its complaints policy or the Code.
The landlord mentioned that the delay was due to wanting to visit the resident before addressing the complaint. While this shows a willingness on the landlord’s part, it should not have affected the time taken to respond to the complaint. Furthermore, the landlord should have provided holding responses or agreed to an extension with the resident. There is no evidence to indicate that either of these actions was taken.
On 26 November 2021, the resident requested to escalate their complaint. However, this escalation was neither acknowledged nor responded to. This lack of response did not align with the objectives of the complaints policy, which aims to facilitate early and effective resolution. As a result, the handling of the complaint was delayed, causing inconvenience and delay to the resident.
The resident submitted an additional complaint on 4 July 2022. However, there is no evidence that this complaint was acknowledged.
The landlord contacted the resident on 12 August 2022, 39 days after the complaint was submitted. Once again, the landlord attempted to arrange a visit with the resident. However, the landlord’s policy does not require a visit to be completed before responding to the complaint. While the landlord’s intentions were resolution-focused, this approach ultimately delayed the resolution of the complaints process.
The landlord provided a final response on 19 August 2022. The landlord’s policy will ensure that “a clean pair of eyes and ears review the complaint at stage 2.” The Code also stipulates that the person considering the complaint at stage 2 must not be the same individual who reviewed the complaint at stage 1.
The stage 2 response was reviewed and issued by the same person who considered the stage 1 complaint and was therefore not reviewed independently. This was not in accordance with the landlord’s policy or the Code.
The Code and the landlord’s complaints policy confirm that at stage 2 the landlord must confirm the following:
1. the complaint stage
2. the complaint definition
3. the decision on the complaint
4. the reasons for any decisions made
5. the details of any remedy offered to put things right
6. details of any outstanding actions
7. details of how to escalate the matter to the Ombudsman Service if the individual remains dissatisfied
The landlord’s response was inconsistent with the Code and cannot be viewed as a final response. As a result, the resident experienced distress and confusion about her position in the complaints process, prompting her to submit another complaint about the same issues on 21 February 2023.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint the next day. A stage 1 response was issued on 27 February 2023, indicating that a final response about the hot water issue had been provided on 11 November 2021.
The email sent on 11 November 2021 cannot be viewed as a final response since it did not comply with the landlord’s complaints policy or the Code. Consequently, this led to inconvenience and confusion for the resident concerning the stage of her complaint.
We requested a final complaint response on 17 May 2023, to which the landlord shared email threads from 4-15 July 2022 and 12-19 August 2022. However, these replies did not fulfil the requirements for a complaint response.
We requested another final response on 4 December 2023. The landlord provided a stage 2 response on 11 December 2023, 26 months after the resident raised concerns about staff behaviour in October 2021 and 17 months after addressing issues with hot water and repairs in July 2022.
The landlord acknowledged that its complaint handling had caused the resident confusion, that it had not acted in accordance with its complaints policy or the Code, and that it had failed to provide clear communication regarding the complaints process. The landlord offered £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
While this went some way to putting things right, the landlord did not fully address all that went wrong, the reasons behind the failures, nor did it provide sufficient evidence of learning. A crucial aspect of the complaints process is explaining why issues arose and outlining the steps that will be taken to prevent their recurrence. This aligns with our principles for dispute resolution.
Additionally, the landlord has not demonstrated that it considered the significant delay caused by its complaint handling in the resident bringing her complaint to our Service to seek a resolution. Consequently, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.
We have reviewed our remedies guidance and awarded an additional £100 to proportionately redress the resident for the time and trouble caused for approximately 2 years, because of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered reasonable redress in relation to its handling of the hot water.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the repairs to the bathroom window.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was a service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of concerns of staff conduct.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Pay the resident £150 compensation, comprised of:
  1. £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident because of the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould.
  2. £100 for the time and trouble caused to the resident because of the landlord’s complaint handling.
2. The compensation should be paid directly to the resident.
Within 6 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Review its handling of the damp and mould and the complaint.
2. Confirm what steps it has taken/will take to ensure that damp and mould reports are acted upon in accordance with its policy.
3. Confirm what steps it has taken/will take to improve its complaints handling, ensure complaints are dealt with as soon as possible, and that its responses are aligned with its complaints policy and the Code.
4. The landlord should share its review with us.

Recommendations

Pay the resident £550 as detailed in its stage 2 response in December 2023 if it has not already been paid.
Contact the resident and provide details on the average costs for air-source heating for a property of a similar size or direct her to an advisory service that can assist her.