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

Stonewater Limited (202334959)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202334959

Stonewater Limited

16 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. repairs to the heating, windows and loft insulation at the property.
    2. the complaint.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s record keeping.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. He has lived in the property since July 2023. The landlord told us it has recorded mental health vulnerabilities for the resident. However, he has also told us he has arthritis.
  2. On 26 October 2023 the resident complained to the landlord. He said:
    1. he had reported having no heating on 17 October 2023. He was told a repairs contractor would attend as an emergency. However, the landlord’s contractor did not contact him until 20 October 2023.
    2. the contractor arranged an appointment for 25 October 2023, but no one attended.
    3. after he called the contractor on 25 October 2023, it said it was having issues with its computer systems.
    4. he requested callbacks, but these did not happen.
    5. he wanted his central heating issues resolved and for the landlord to compensate him for 10 days he spent without heating.
  3. The resident made further contact with the landlord in November 2023. He told it on 6 November 2023 that he was still without heating and had slept at his friend’s house for 3 days due to the cold. He also raised concerns that he was waiting for work to resolve draughty windows and to replace loft insulation he understood had been removed a year before. He said he wanted these issues resolved as well as a “decent” level of compensation.
  4. The landlord issued it stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 15 November 2023. It apologised for the delays he had experienced, which it agreed were “not acceptable”. It noted the resident said its contractor had further delayed attending, which had left him without heating for several weeks. The landlord said:
    1. following the resident’s contact on 17 October 2023, its contractor had arranged to attend on 25 October 2023, which was within its 28-day service level agreement.
    2. its contractor’s job management system failed on 25 October 2023, so it attended on 27 October 2023.
    3. follow on work was recommended that required 2 engineers. This was scheduled for 2 November 2023, but the appointment was cancelled.
    4. repair work went ahead on 7 November 2023.
  5. The landlord apologised for the delays in work. It said it should have set the work order up correctly at the outset and would look at improvements to prevent this happening again. It offered the resident compensation of £370 made up of:
    1. £250 for unreasonable delays.
    2. £25 for the cancelled appointment.
    3. £50 for poor communication.
    4. £45 for loss of heating.
  6. The resident escalated his complaint on 17 November 2023. He said he was still waiting for the landlord to resolve heating issues, the draught from windows and for loft insulation to be put back in place. He said:
    1. the heating issue had not been repaired on 7 November 2023 and was only partially resolved on 13 November 2023 after he called and emailed several times.
    2. he wanted “substantial” financial compensation.
  7. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 27 December 2023. It noted that:
    1. the resident had reported a draught from his window on 20 September 2023.
    2. it attended on 20 November 2023 to repair the window but found it needed replacing.
    3. loft insulation was removed to allow its contractor to progress air vents work.
    4. its contractors reported on 7 November 2023 that the resident’s central heating was working efficiently, and it was sorry this was not the case.
    5. its contractor had confirmed the heating was partially restored on 13 November 2023 after 3 no access appointments.
    6. it had now raised further work to resolved remaining heating issues.
  8. The landlord said the resident had encountered delays in the response to his complaint. It added contractors had not communicated clearly with the landlord about the resolution required. It said:
    1. it did not consider there had been a failing in its service in respect of the draughty window, but communication had been poor and it apologised for this
    2. the service and communication the resident had received had not been “good enough”.
  9. The landlord offered increased compensation of £520, made up of:
    1. £370 awarded at stage 1.
    2. £25 for the delay providing a response within its timeframes.
    3. £75 for missed appointments.
    4. £50 for poor complaint handling.
  10. In January 2024 the resident responded to the landlord. He raised concerns about inaccuracies in the stage 2 complaint response. He said the insulation had been removed to capture rodents, rather than to install air vents. He said:
    1. radiators in his bathroom and bedroom were faulty and now did not warm properly.
    2. he wanted his heating bills reimbursed.
  11. On 25 January 2024 the landlord responded to the resident. It said it would compensate him for his bills and awarded £237.77.
  12. On 3 June 2024 the landlord wrote to the resident again. It said that it had reviewed the case after his complaint had been referred to the Ombudsman for investigation. It offered him increased compensation. It said that this was partly because it had not addressed some issues sufficiently within the complaint response. It said that although insulation had now been installed, there was a miscommunication about this. It said there were also delays in work to the resident’s heaters and staff did not always attend in line with its policies and expectations. It awarded additional compensation of £725, made up of:
    1. £350 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in resolving heating issues.
    2. £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its poor complaint handling.
    3. £100 for poor complaint handling and incorrect information provided.
    4. £25 for failing to follow its repairs policy.

Assessment and findings

  1. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy outlines timescales for responding to repair reports. It says it aims to respond to emergency repairs, which are those that pose a risk to residents or homes, within 24 hours. It aims to respond to non-emergency repairs within 28 days. It says it will maintain clear communication with residents to ensure they know when a repair will be completed.
  2. The landlord’s compensation policy sets out the basis for its compensation awards. It says it may consider discretionary compensation payments in a number of circumstances. These include delays in providing a service and poor complaint handling. It will also consider compensation for quantifiable loss, including increased heating bills. The landlord has a 2 stage complaints process. It aims to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and to those at stage 2 within 20 working days.

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident raised concerns about the time taken by the landlord to replace all the radiators at his property. He also said that decorative repairs following radiator replacement remain outstanding.
  2. The action to replace low surface temperature radiators was agreed by the landlord in January 2024 after it inspected the resident’s concerns about how radiators were warming. However, radiator replacement was not identified or addressed during the course of the resident’s complaint. As such, should the resident have outstanding concerns about this issue, it would be appropriate for him to raise it as a new complaint. Should he remain unhappy with the response he receives from the landlord, he can then refer the matter back to the Ombudsman for consideration.
  3. While the investigation has not covered this issue, the landlord told us it had not previously committed to decorative work around the new radiators. However, it said it would now contact the resident to complete this work. We have therefore included a recommendation that it take this action.
  4. The resident raised concerns that the landlord had not moved him to a ground floor flat or to a bungalow following the managed move it arranged in July 2023. He said that he now wanted it to offer to move him to a ground floor flat or put a stairlift into his property at no cost. While the resident’s desire for a move is acknowledged, this is not a matter that can be considered as part of this investigation. He should contact the landlord directly to discuss any ongoing concerns he has about the suitability of his property.

Repairs to the heating, windows and loft insulation

Heating repairs

  1. The resident said in his complaint to the landlord that he had reported having no heating on 17 October 2023. However, at this time the landlord recorded that 1 radiator was not working. In its subsequent response to the resident’s complaint it acknowledged that it should have set up the initial work order correctly. This would have allowed the landlord’s contractor to prioritise the appointment accordingly, taking into account the extent of issues. It was not until 20 October 2023 that this information was corrected, and the resident was then provided with an appointment date. The landlord should have accurately recorded the heating issues he was experiencing in the first instance. Not doing so was a failing, and the landlord appropriately acknowledged this when responding to the resident’s complaint.
  2. It is unfortunate that system issues experienced by the landlord’s contactor delayed the appointment booked for 25 October 2023. The landlord also appropriately acknowledged this in its complaint response of 15 November 2023. At this time, it apologised for the delays and inconvenience caused by the system failure.
  3. The landlord’s contractor attended on 27 October 2023 and identified that material was needed to complete the repair. While this delay to resolve issues may have been unavoidable, there is no evidence the landlord or its contractor offered the resident temporary heating at this time. It should reasonably have done so given the ongoing issue with heating. Its own compensation policy says that it will do so. That there is no evidence the landlord considered doing so until 7 November 2023 is a failing. The resident told the landlord on 6 November 2023 that he had slept at a friend’s house for 3 days due to the cold. He said this caused him “hassle and aggravation”. Had the landlord taken appropriate steps to ensure temporary heaters were offered to the resident, the need for him to stay with a friend could have been avoided.
  4. Further work to the resident’s heating was booked for 2 November 2023. However, the resident said that he was told that day by the contractor that work could not go ahead as it was a 2-man job. He later questioned why this had not been apparent at an earlier stage. It would have been reasonable for the landlord’s contractor to appropriately plan this work and account for the resources needed. That it did not do so was a failing which further delayed repair work. The resident and the landlord’s contractor confirmed that work was completed on 7 November 2023. However, the resident said the contractor failed to check heating issues were resolved after completing work.  The contractor should reasonably have checked that heating was working properly following the repairs. That there is no evidence it did so is a failing. The landlord appropriately apologised to the resident for this in its subsequently stage 2 complaint response, and for the inconvenience the resident experienced as a result.
  5. As a result of ongoing issues, the resident made further contact with the landlord on 7 November 2023. The landlord’s contractor noted 3 no access appointments between 8 and 10 November 2023. However, the resident set out in his emails to the landlord on 9 and 10 November 2023 a number of communication issues he experienced where he was given inadequate notice of these appointments. He explained that as he was staying with a friend, he needed notice of the appointments to allow for travel time. The resident said that despite contacting the landlord to inform it of this, he arrived home to find a no access card had been left.  He also questioned whether the appointment of 9 November 2023 had been attempted as he said he was home at the time the contractor said it had attempted access.
  6. The landlord should have responded to the concerns the resident raised about the no access appointments when it provided its stage 2 complaint response. Instead, it simply said that its contactor had recorded no access between these dates. The landlord and its contractor were aware the resident was staying away from home due to the heating issues. Given this, it would have been reasonable for it to take this into account when arranging the appointments. Fully considering the resident’s concerns about this was also an opportunity for the landlord to explore learning or feedback it could provide to the contractor about this.  As well as causing the resident frustration, time and petrol costs, these unsuccessful appointments delayed work to resolve heating issues. While the landlord awarded the resident £75 for missed appointments, it did not set out whether this was to recognise the issues he had experienced with the appointments between 8 and 10 November 2023. The landlord should reasonably have done so to be transparent and clear about the basis for its compensation award.
  7. The landlord noted in its stage 2 complaint response that heating issues had been partially resolved on 13 November 2023 when its contractor attended. It noted that its contractor had recommended follow on work to fit air vents on distribution pipework as engineers believed airlocks were affecting the circulation of heating.
  8. The landlord said in its stage 2 complaint response that it had raised work to install air vents on 30 November 2023. However, it is clear it had inadequate records of the work completed and outstanding at the property. Records show it chased its contractor in January 2024 regarding the completion of work to fit air vents. It was told then that this work had in fact been completed on 7 November 2023. Repairs records we have seen also do not adequately detail what work was identified or completed by its contractor during other attendances. For instance, while its contractor attended on 13 November 2023, it is unclear what repairs were completed or were outstanding at this time. The landlord identified in its stage 2 complaint response that heating issues had only been partially fixed on 13 November 2023. However, it failed to identify what work was outstanding. That was a failing
  9. Records show that on 7 December 2023 the landlord recorded the resident’s reports that a radiator was too hot, and that he could not turn off radiators in his bathroom and bedroom. But it failed to review or check any work that was outstanding in respect of this when issuing its stage 2 complaint response on 27 December 2023. It should reasonably have done. The resident had raised these concerns in his escalation request. Its records do not detail any response to this repair report. That was a further record keeping failing which means it is unclear when this issue was attended or resolved. It is also further evidence that the landlord was not maintaining a firm grasp of what repair issues were outstanding. Without doing so it also cannot adequately demonstrate that it was responding to the repair issues in line with its obligations. As such we have ordered that the landlord review processes and guidance it has in place for maintaining accurate records of work completed by its contractors.
  10. The landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property again in January 2024, and that it subsequently agreed work to replace low surface temperature radiators at the property. This was following the resident’s report that some radiators were now not warming sufficiently. As noted earlier, the work to replace the low radiators is not being considered as part of this investigation. However, the landlord failed to make accurate records of the heating repairs needed or communicate effectively with the resident about this. It is clear this had an impact on how effectively it managed the heating issues. This caused the resident unnecessary frustration and concern. The landlord has told us that all heating related work has been completed. However, in light of the record keeping failings we have identified, we have ordered that it contact the resident to ensure that he has no outstanding concerns about this.

Window repairs and loft insulation

  1. The resident raised window repairs on 20 September 2023. In line with its repairs policy the landlord should have responded to this within 28 days. Instead, it did not do so until 20 November 2023. That was a failing. It is clear this caused him frustration and concern. When he sent an email to the landlord about his ongoing heating issues on 6 November 2023, he questioned why he was still waiting for this work. Despite this, the landlord failed to address or update the resident about window repairs when it provided its stage 1 complaint response on 15 November 2023. That was a further failing which meant he had to raise the issue again in his escalation request.
  2. After the landlord’s contractor attended on 20 November 2023 it detailed work it had completed to fit a gasket and adjust windows. It noted then that the repair was “not great” and provided a quote for a new window. It is acknowledged that it would take time for the landlord to arrange a window replacement. But there is no evidence it communicated effectively with the resident about this.  While the landlord said in its stage 2 complaint response that it had raised an order for a new window in early December 2023, there is no evidence it told the resident it had done this. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out the importance of communicating with residents about when repairs will be completed. But the landlord did not provide any information about the window replacement work until its stage 2 complaint response at the end of December 2023. That was a further failing.
  3. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord acknowledged communication between itself, and the resident had been poor. But it did not accept there had been a failing in its service. It should have done so. Its initial attendance at the repair was a month outside its service standard, and it made no attempt to communicate with the resident to explain this. That was a clear failing. Records show that window replacement work was completed in February 2024. We acknowledge that the time taken to manufacture the window was beyond the landlord’s control. But we have found failings in its delay in attending the repair report and its subsequent communication with the resident about follow on work needed.

 

Loft insulation

  1. The resident queried with the landlord what was being done to replace loft insulation, which he understood had been removed a year before. But the landlord failed to address this concern appropriately. It should reasonably have established why insulation had been removed and then confirmed what steps it was taking to resolve issues. Instead, it failed to respond to this point at all in its stage 1 response of 15 November 2023. This meant the resident had to spend more time and trouble raising the issue again in his escalation request. In this request the resident set out his understanding that insulation had been removed due to a rodent infestation a year earlier. Yet, instead of investigating this issue properly, the landlord provided incorrect information about why loft insulation had been removed. It said that this was to allow for the work to install air vents. The landlord subsequently acknowledged that was incorrect. Insulation had been removed to address an earlier squirrel infestation. As a result, the landlord did not appropriately consider or respond to the resident’s concerns about this.
  2. The landlord said in its stage 2 complaint response that work to replace loft insulation had been raised and was due to be completed on 10 January 2024. But while records show that loft insulation work was raised on 11 December 2023, they do not detail when this work was completed. That was a further record keeping failing. The landlord stated in its letter to the resident in June 2024 that loft insulation work was been complete. The resident also confirmed that to be the case. The landlord should have kept appropriate records of completion of this work. It was a further record keeping failing.

The compensation award

  1. When it responded to his concerns at stage 1 and stage 2 of its complaints process, the landlord awarded the resident £445 for the heating issues and £75 for delays in its handling of the complaint. Subsequently, after the resident referred the complaint to the Ombudsman, the landlord offered him a further £725. This was to recognise its failure to follow its repair policy, the distress caused due to it not resolving heating and the time and trouble he had spent pursing the matter. Part of this award was to recognise distress caused by its poor complaint handling and the incorrect information it provided. Therefore, the landlord has made a total award of £1,245.  In addition to this, it paid the resident £237.77 for increased heating bills in January 2024.
  2. With consideration to all the circumstances of the case, and to the distress and inconvenience the resident has outlined, we consider this to be an appropriate award. It is clear he experienced inconvenience and discomfort due to heating issues and we acknowledge that he spent several nights staying with a friend during November 2023 due to the cold temperature of his home.  It is also clear that he has expended time and trouble resolving issues and that he experienced frustration because of the poor communication by the landlord.
  3. The financial remedy provided by the landlord is an appropriate level of redress and is in accordance with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance. However, we have identified failings by the landlord during its handling of issues which meant it did not adequately or accurately address his concerns during its complaints process. Therefore, the landlord’s increased compensation award, which was made after the resident approached us, cannot be considered reasonable redress. We will not be ordering additional redress, for the reasons stated above. But we have made a finding of maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to heating, windows and loft insulation.
  4. The landlord made an award to the resident in respect of increased heating bills in January 2024. However, it is unclear when loft insulation work was completed. In light of this, we have ordered that the landlord contact the resident to offer to consider evidence of any further increased heating bills up to the point loft insulation work was complete.

The complaint.

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will respond to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. But it delayed in its response to the resident by approximately 2 weeks. It appropriately apologised for this. But in line with the Ombudsman’s complaint handling code (the Code), it should reasonably have agreed any extension with the resident in advance. That it did not do so was a failing.  
  2. As outlined above, there were a number of other failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. It failed to address all the points raised by the resident when providing its stage 1 response.  In addition, it incorrectly stated in that response that repairs had resolved heating issues. This was despite the resident having reported ongoing problems. Further, it failed to establish what heating repairs were outstanding when providing its stage 2 response. Nor did it provide correct information about why loft insulation had been removed. However, we consider the landlord’s increased award in June 2024 provides appropriate compensation to recognise the impact on the resident of these failings. In light of the failings identified, we have ordered that the landlord remind complaint handling staff of the importance of identifying the up-to-date and accurate position in respect of repairs prior to issues complaint responses. It should also remind staff of the importance of agreeing complaint response extensions in advance.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was:
    1. maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to heating, loft insulation and windows.
    2. maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.
    3. maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord should:
    1. write to apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. if it has not done so already it should pay the resident compensation of £1,245 previously awarded to him.
    3. if it has not done so already, it should pay the resident £237.77 awarded in respect of increased bills.
    4. contact the resident to offer to consider increased heating costs up to the point loft insulation work was complete.
    5. contact the resident to ensure that he has no outstanding concerns about his heating.
    6. remind complaint handling staff of the importance of identifying an up-to-date and accurate position in respect of repairs prior to issues complaint responses. It should also remind staff of the importance of agreeing complaint response extensions in advance.
  2. Within 6 weeks of the date of this report the landlord should review processes and guidance it has in place for recording work completed by its contractors.

Recommendations

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord should contact the resident to:
    1. arrange to complete decorative repairs around his new radiators.
    2. confirm vulnerabilities that should be recorded for him.