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

TBG Open Door Limited (202302665)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202302665

TBG Open Door Limited

19 September 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 the resident’s concerns regarding:
    1. the repair condition of her temporary accommodation.
    2. her report of road noise at her current property.
    3. a lack of heating and hot water at her current property at the time her tenancy started.
  2. The Service has also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Jurisdiction

  1. What the Ombudsman can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Scheme. When a complaint is brought to this service, the Ombudsman must consider all the circumstances of the case, as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
  2. Prior to the resident’s tenancy, the London Borough of Barnet (the council) had accepted a homelessness duty towards her and had placed her in temporary accommodation on 12 May 2022. The temporary accommodation was provided and managed by an external temporary accommodation provider. On 18 October 2022 the council accepted that the temporary accommodation was not suitable on the basis that it was not reasonable for continued occupation and decided to offer her suitable alternative temporary accommodation.
  3. The resident’s complaint included her dissatisfaction that the temporary accommodation had no proper water, damp, mould and defective radiators, which impacted her health and breathing. In its stage 2 response to the resident’s complaint the landlord offered compensation based on the resident’s extra heating costs. The compensation only covered the months of the year when it offered compensation for loss of heating and up to the point when it considered all repairs had been completed.
  4. Paragraph 42(j) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that “the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator or complaint-handling body”. The landlord has confirmed to the Service that it offered temporary accommodation under s193 of the Housing Act 1996, Part 7, in line with its statutory obligation to process homelessness applications. Applications for assistance under the homelessness legislation fall under the remit of Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO).  Therefore, in accordance with paragraph 42(j) of the Scheme, the resident’s complaint about the repair condition of her temporary accommodation is outside the jurisdiction of the Service to determine. 

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The Barnet Group is a local authority trading company wholly owned by the London Borough of Barnet. It is the parent company to Barnet Homes which is an Arms Length Management Organisation. The resident is an assured tenant of Open Door Homes (the landlord) which is a subsidiary of Barnet Homes.
  2. The resident is an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord. Her property is a one-bedroom ground floor flat with double glazing. Her tenancy commenced on 17 April 2023.  The property was offered under part 6 of Housing Act 1996 on 6 April 2023.
  3. The resident’s tenancy agreement, in line with the landlord’s statutory repair obligation, states that the landlord “will keep in good repair and proper working order the fittings for heating rooms and water that we supply”.
  4. The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will attend to and make safe emergency repairs within 4 hours and complete the repair within 24 hours.  This includes cases where there is a “total loss of services”.
  5. The landlord’s compensation policy states that in cases where there is a total loss of heating for over 24 hours, it will offer compensation of 10% of the weekly rent charge.  No reasonable substitute must have been provided or offered. In cases of loss of water heating it will offer compensation of 10% of the weekly rent charge provided no reasonable substitute was provided or offered. If a contractor fails to attend a pre-arranged repair appointment or fails to provide 24 hours’ notice when rescheduling a repair appointment, the resident can claim £10 per missed appointment.
  6. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint procedure. At stage 1 it will acknowledge the complaint within 5 days and send the response within 10 days. At stage 2, it will send the response within 20 working days.

Summary of Events

  1. The landlord’s repair records note that on 21 April 2023 it raised a repair for its gas contractor to TOAT (Turn on and Test) the resident’s heating and hot water system in line with its obligation to complete a Landlord Gas Safety Record (LGSR). On 21 April 2023 the landlord agreed that one week’s rent should be credited to the resident’s rent account from 17 April 2023 for the delay in arranging the Turn on and Test to enable hot water access. It confirmed an engineer would be attending the following day.
  2. On 24 April 2023 the resident advised the landlord that the engineer had not attended on 22 April 2023. The landlord’s repair records note that that the contractor completed the work on 24 April 2023.  On 25 April 2023 the resident advised the Service that the landlord had uncapped her gas, so she had heating and hot water, but she wanted to pursue the matter for compensation to cover expenses incurred.
  3. On 3 May 2023 the resident complained about the condition of her temporary accommodation and requested compensation for the impact on her and costs incurred. She also stated that she was left to wait 8 days with no heating and hot water in her current property. On 16 May 2023 the resident asked the landlord to also address the fact that there was loud noise coming from the highway next to her flat. She advised this was disturbing her sleep.  The resident stated that she had tried buying good quality noise cancelling ear plugs and also have temporary blinds up.
  4. On 24 May 2023 the landlord sent the Stage 1 response.
    1. It apologised for the delay in the Turn on and Test to enable her to access hot water and heating at her new property. It noted that it had agreed one week’s rent would be credited to her rent account from 17 April 2023, therefore did not uphold the complaint.
    2. It noted that residential buildings were often close to highways in cities, such as London.  It noted that the property met the recommendations of her medical assessment which was up to the first floor without lifts and within reasonable travelling distance of support networks.  It advised that it was the resident’s responsibility to take personal measures to reduce traffic noise such as installing double or triple glazing, using soundproof curtains or blinds and using ear plugs.
  5. On 25 May 2023 the resident advised the Service that she was unhappy with the stage 1 response. On the same day the Service wrote to the landlord stating that the resident wished to escalate her complaint. We understood that the resident was complaining that:
    1. her previous temporary accommodation had no proper water, damp, and defective radiators after she moved in
    2. she was left to wait 8 days with no hot water and heating in her current accommodation and wanted reimbursement of her rent.
    3. the current accommodation was very close to a busy highway and the noise during the night was causing sleeping issues.
  6. On 26 May 2023, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint, which had been referred by this Service
  7. On 27 May 2023 the resident advised the Service that she had more than 8 days without heating and hot water at her current address. She advised a plumber restored her hot water on 19 May 2023, informing her that the blending valve was faulty and taking photos. She stated that she was waiting for the heating to be looked into. The resident stated, “it is clear they did not bother investigating my complaint properly”.
  8. On 26 June 2023 the landlord sent the stage 2 response to the resident’s complaint.  Aside from the resident’s complaint about her temporary accommodation:
    1. the landlord considered the resident’s complaint that she was left to wait for 8 days with no hot water and heating in her current accommodation. It noted that it had already agreed in its email of 21 April 2023 that one week’s rent would be credited to her rent account.
    2. the landlord considered the resident’s complaint that her current accommodation was very close to a busy highway and the noise during the night was causing sleeping issues. It reiterated that residential buildings were often close to highways in cities. Taking into account that there were no specific recommendations regarding distance from roads and the fact that the property had double-glazed windows, it was satisfied that the property met her needs.

Assessment and findings

The resident’s report of road noise at her current property

  1. In assessing this complaint, the Service has noted that the landlord’s complaint responses stated that the property details met her assessed medical need. In assessing this complaint, the Service has not sought to assess the suitability of the resident’s current property.  This is because the property is a housing allocation that was made under the Housing Act 1996 Part 6.  The Act concerns applications for rehousing that meet the reasonable preference criteria, dealt with by the local housing authority.  Complaints about the assessment of rehousing applications and the suitability of accommodation offered under the Housing Act 1996 Part 6 fall under the LGSCO.
  2. The resident asked the landlord to advise her of the best outcome.  The landlord did not have an obligation to improve the property, for instance by improving soundproofing, nor did the resident report any defect or repair to the landlord. The landlord did not receive recommendations from other professionals regarding the resident’s susceptibility to noise or property adaptations. It also has no control over noise from vehicles.  It was therefore appropriate that the landlord advised the resident that she should explore measures to reduce the impact of noise, for instance, by using ear plugs and using furnishings such as curtains that may dampen noise.
  3. The stage 1 response was inaccurate as it stated that the resident was also responsible for installing double or triple glazing windows to prevent noise; however, the installation of windows fall under the landlord’s repair responsibilities.  Nonetheless, the property already had double glazing windows.  The landlord pointed this out in the stage 2 response, thereby making clear it considered that the property already had suitable windows which prevented excess noise being audible in the property.

A lack of heating and hot water at her current property at the time the resident’s tenancy started

  1. The resident raised a complaint that it took 8 days from the start of her tenancy before she had heating and hot water.  The landlord had an obligation to ensure that the heating and hot water system in the resident’s property was working at the time her tenancy started.  The parties do not dispute that it took 8 days for the Turn on and Test and for the gas supply to be uncapped.
  2. In identifying whether there has been maladministration the Ombudsman considers both the events which initially prompted a complaint and the landlord’s response to those events through the operation of its complaints procedure. The extent to which a landlord has recognised and addressed any shortcomings and the appropriateness of any steps taken to offer redress are therefore as relevant as the original mistake or service failure. The Ombudsman will not make a finding of maladministration where the landlord has fully acknowledged any failings and taken reasonable steps to resolve them.
  3. In this case, the landlord offered compensation equivalent to a week’s rent.  This exceeds the amount provided for by the landlord’s compensation policy which is 10% of the rent for the loss of heating for 7 days and 10% of the rent for the loss of hot water for 7 days.  Generally, it was more than reasonable that the landlord reimbursed the rent in full as the resident still had use of her property.  As such, the landlord offered redress for the lack of heating and hot water at the start of the resident’s property that reasonably resolved this complaint.  This finding does not mean the Ombudsman thinks the landlord’s handling of this issue or impact on the resident was ‘reasonable.’ The finding reflects that there was a failing by the landlord, which its compensation offer acknowledges and compensated for in line with the Ombudsman’s approach.
  4. The Service notes that the landlord under its compensation policy should have offered £10 compensation for the missed appointment of 22 April 2023.  However, the compensation paid by the landlord for no heating and water exceeded the amount provided for the compensation policy by more than £10. As such, the landlord’s omission to recognise the missed appointment of 22 April 2023 does not affect the determination on this complaint.

Complaint Handling

  1. With regards to the landlord’s complaint handling, its stage 1 response was sent after 15 working days. This was 5 days outside the timeframe for responding to stage 1 complaints. The stage 2 complaint response was sent 20 working days from receipt of the resident’s escalated complaint and therefore in line with the complaints procedure.
  2. The landlord in responding to the resident’s complaint about a lack of heating and hot water focused on the time it took to complete the Turn on and Test. However, the resident indicated in her email of 16 May 2024 that she wished to expand her complaint.  She indicated that she did not have hot water throughout the property and stated specifically the shower did not have a hot water supply. The landlord took appropriate action in respect of the substantive issue by raising a repair. However, it neither sought to confirm its understanding of the resident’s complaint nor addressed the matter of no hot water in the shower/bathroom within its complaints process. This was unreasonable as the landlord advised that its complaint handler would consider the report. Moreover, the Service’s Complaint handling Code in effect at the time stated, “If residents raise additional complaints during the investigation, these should be incorporated into the stage one response as long as they are relevant and the stage one response has not been issued”.
  3. The Service acknowledges that the resident did not clarify to the landlord directly when escalating her complaint that she could not have a hot shower until May 2024. This mitigates the failing of the landlord. Nonetheless, she had raised the issue during the stage 1 process.  The Complaint Handling Code stated, “If any aspect of the complaint is unclear, the resident must be asked for clarification and the full definition agreed between both parties.” Ultimately the landlord overlooked that the resident was unhappy that she did not have hot water in her shower/bathroom even after the Turn on and Test.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of the resident’s report of road noise at her current property
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered reasonable redress to the resident in respect of her complaint about a lack of heating and hot water at her current property at the time her tenancy started.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Reasons

  1. It was appropriate that the landlord advised the resident that she should explore measures to reduce the impact of noise.
  2. It was more than reasonable that the landlord reimbursed the resident her rent in full for the lack of heating and hot water at the start of her tenancy.
  3. The landlord did not send the stage 1 response within the required timeframe.  It omitted to consider an aspect of the resident’s complaint, in particular the lack of hot water to the shower.

Orders and recommendations

  1. The landlord is ordered within the next 4 weeks to:
    1. send an apology to the resident for the complaint handling failures identified in this report
    2. pay the resident £50 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling.
    3. contact the resident to confirm details of her complaint about a lack of hot water to the shower. If the resident wishes to pursue this complaint, the landlord should then register a new complaint and advise the resident when it will be responding by.