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

The Guinness Partnership Limited (202340005)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202340005

The Guinness Partnership Limited

27 August 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. Concerns about gas safety.
    2. Reports of no heating and hot water.

Background

  1. The resident has lived in the property as an assured tenant since November 2021. The property is a 2-bedroom bungalow.
  2. On 18 October 2023, the resident told the landlord that his property had no heating or hot water. The landlord said it attempted to carry out repairs on 18, 20 and 24 October 2023, but was unable to contact the resident. On 30 October 2023, the landlord asked the resident to provide a suitable day and time to repair the boiler.
  3. On 12 December 2023, the resident complained about the gas safety check. He said the boiler had been deemed unsafe in 2022 but the most recent gas safety check had showed no concerns. He said the landlord had falsely issued a safety certificate and because of this had invalidated his insurance.
  4. In its complaint response on 2 January 2024, the landlord said there was nothing about the gas installation that was incorrect or dangerous when it was inspected in 2022. It said it carried out a further gas safety check in September 2023, and there was no evidence the gas safety checks had been issued falsely. On the heating and hot water, the landlord said it had tried to carry out work but there had been no access. It said it would contact the resident to arrange an appointment at a time and date that suited him.
  5. The resident escalated his complaint on 2 January 2024. He said he had provided evidence from 2022, which showed the flue was unsafe. He said he had made no appointments, and the landlord was required to give notice before coming to his property.
  6. In its final response on 17 January 2024, the landlord said the certificate the resident provided from 2022 was not from its contractor but from an independent installer. It said its contractors met strict qualification requirements and it would not accept reports from unapproved contractors. The landlord apologised that some information about appointments in its stage 1 response had been incorrect and a visit had not been confirmed prior to attendance. It offered £25 compensation, which comprised of £15 for incorrect information and £10 for inconvenience caused by an appointment not being confirmed.
  7. The resident escalated his complaint to the Ombudsman as he said the landlord had not done anything about an unsafe boiler and flue. He said the safety checks were false and left his home uninsured.
  8. Following further contact from the resident on 31 January 2024, the landlord arranged a further gas inspection to give the resident reassurance. 

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The Ombudsman previously determined a complaint from the resident (202312730) in November 2023, which related to a fault with the boiler. That investigation covered events up to the end of December 2022. Because of this, the Ombudsman will not reinvestigate reports of faults with the boiler that were made before January 2023.

The landlord’s handling of concerns about gas safety

  1. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to determine whether the gas installation in the property met legal requirements. This can only be determined by a gas safe registered engineer at the time of the inspection. However, the Ombudsman can assess whether the landlord acted reasonably in response to the resident’s concerns about gas safety.
  2. The landlord’s gas management policy says it will ensure the safe maintenance of gas appliances and will annually check appliances in line with the Gas Safety (Installation & Use) Regulations 1998, as amended. It says the annual safety check will be done following the manufacturer’s instructions, and a copy of the Landlord’s Gas Safety Record (LGSR) will be issued to the resident within 28 days of the date of the check.
  3. Records provided by the landlord show a gas safety inspection was carried out before the resident moved to the property in November 2021. This showed the gas installations were safe to use. The next annual inspection took place on 17 October 2022 and again showed the gas installations were safe to use. A further inspection took place on 22 September 2023. The Ombudsman has found that the landlord met its legal obligation to carry out annual inspections of gas installations.
  4. On 12 December 2023, the resident complained that the boiler had been identified as unsafe in 2022 but the landlord’s most recent gas safety check identified no concerns. The resident said the landlord had done nothing to rectify a fault identified in 2022 and had now falsely issued a safety certificate and invalidated his insurance. The resident said he wanted the landlord to measure the distance between the flue and the guttering to confirm whether it was compliant with gas safety regulations.
  5. Records provided by the landlord include a communication from the contractor to the landlord on 22 December 2023. This said an advisory on the flue noted it was “not to current standards”, but there was no obligation to list this on the certificate as it posed no risk and there was nothing about the installation that was incorrect or dangerous.
  6. In its complaint response on 2 January 2024, the landlord said the contractor had reviewed the resident’s concerns and said there was no need to report the flue on the certificate as it posed no risk. It said it relied on the contractor’s advice, and there was no evidence the gas safety certificate had been issued falsely.
  7. In his escalation, the resident said he had provided the landlord with a notice issued in 2022, which said the flue was unsafe. He also said it was not reasonable to rely on contractors who carried out the safety check to investigate the matter. The Ombudsman has not seen a copy of the notice the resident provided to the landlord, and because of this cannot comment on it. However, the Ombudsman has found that it was reasonable for the landlord to rely on advice from its contractors, as they are qualified to assess the safety of gas installations.
  8. In its final response on 17 January 2024, the landlord said it had reviewed all gas safety checks from 2022, and the safety certificate provided by the resident was not issued by one of its contractors but by an independent installer. The landlord said its contractors met strict approval requirements, which ensured the engineers were fully qualified, and it would not accept findings from unapproved contractors. It said the gas installation did not pose a risk, the boiler was safe, the safety certificates it provided were correct, and his insurance was not invalidated.
  9. The Ombudsman has found the landlord’s final response gave reassurance. It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on its contractors’ advice and not use a report from an independent inspection that it had not commissioned. The landlord could have done more to reassure the resident about the qualifications of the engineers and the independence of inspection process in its first complaint response. However, the landlord had no evidence of any faults with the gas installation at that time and the response overall was reasonable.
  10. There was no obligation on the landlord to arrange a further inspection. However, following further contact from the resident about the flue, the landlord arranged a further inspection in February 2024 to provide additional reassurance, as it said it wanted the resident to feel safe in his home. The Ombudsman has found that the landlord went beyond its obligations in arranging this, and it was positive practice by the landlord to provide this further reassurance.
  11. The inspection was carried out on 16 February 2024 and found the warning notice the resident had provided was issued by a meter installer company. The gas engineer carrying out the inspection on 16 February 2024 explained the engineer from the meter installation company had provided wrong information. A note from the inspection says the resident was reassured by this.
  12. The Ombudsman has found there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of the way it handled the resident’s concerns about gas safety. Records show the landlord carried out regular gas safety checks and issued relevant documentation. It responded to the resident’s concerns in a timely manner and explained why the gas installation was safe. It could have provided more assurance in its first complaint response, but it went beyond its obligations and arranged a further inspection.

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

  1. Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord is responsible for keeping in repair and proper working order the installations for water and space heating. This means the landlord has a general obligation to repair and maintain boilers and central heating systems. This is confirmed in the occupancy agreement, which says the landlord must keep in repair and proper working order any installations it provides for heating and water heating within the home. The landlord accepted it was responsible for the repairs.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy says emergency repairs are those that pose an immediate health and safety risk. For these repairs, it says it will either complete a repair or carry out a temporary repair to make the situation safe within 24 hours of the repair being reported. It says emergency repairs include reports of no heating or hot water during the winter.
  3. On 18 October 2023, the resident told the landlord he had no hot water or heating. The Ombudsman has not seen a record of the landlord’s repairs records but in its final complaint response the landlord said it arranged an emergency appointment following the resident’s report. It said a contractor left a voicemail advising it would attend that day, and an engineer attended at 3:27pm but there was no answer.
  4. On 20 October 2023, the resident emailed the landlord and said he had no heating or hot water. In response, the landlord visited the property the same day and left a card asking the resident to call. The landlord’s records show a contractor attended on 24 October 2023 but had no access. Its records say it attended and knocked on the door twice and waited for 2 minutes but the resident did not answer the door.
  5. On 26 October 2023, the landlord emailed the resident and said it was concerned about his report of no heating and hot water. It asked the resident to let it know a suitable day and time for an appointment. The landlord contacted the resident again on 30 October 2023 to attempt to arrange an appointment. Records show there was concerns over the resident’s welfare at this time. On 22 December 2023, the landlord’s notes say the repair is still outstanding. It is unclear from the records provided when the boiler was repaired.
  6. The Ombudsman has not seen a record of the resident complaining specifically about a lack of heating and hot water. However, in its complaint response on 2 January 2024, the landlord referred to the resident’s contact on 20 October 2023 about not having any heating or hot water. In its response it said it had attended within its expected timeframes to repair the boiler but had not been able to carry out any works due to the resident not allowing access. It said it would contact the resident to schedule an appointment for a time and date that suited him.
  7. In his complaint escalation on 2 January 2024, the resident said he had made no appointments with the contractors and the landlord was required to give notice before coming to his property. He wanted proof of the time and date of appointments.
  8. In its final complaint response on 17 January 2024, the landlord set out the events following the resident’s report on 18 October 2023. It said it arranged an emergency appointment following the resident’s report and a contractor left a voicemail in the morning advising it would attend that day. It said the engineer attended at 3:27pm but there was no answer. It apologised that it had not made it clear that when an emergency appointment was arranged, residents were expected to be available for the next 24 hours. It said the resident again reported no heating or hot water on 20 October 2023, and on 24 October 2023 at 6:14 pm, an engineer attended but had no access. It apologised that the visit had not been confirmed with the resident prior to attendance. It said it had attempted to schedule an appointment to install a new heating system following his previous complaint, but the resident had said he did not wish for this to be installed until he was well enough, and he would contact the landlord when he was ready.
  9. The landlord said it should have confirmed the second appointment and offered compensation because it failed to do this. It also said feedback had been given to the contractor to ensure it confirmed appointments with residents prior to attendance.
  10. The Ombudsman has found the landlord acted reasonably in trying to arrange the repairs when the fault with the boiler was first reported. It made several attempts to attend to carry out repairs, but records show there were difficulties contacting the resident. This was compounded by a communication error from the landlord, as it did not confirm an appointment. The landlord apologised for this in its complaint response and offered compensation, which the Ombudsman has found was sufficient in the circumstances. This is because the inconvenience caused was minor, and records show the landlord made further attempts to contact the resident to arrange to repair the boiler. The landlord also said that it had learnt from the complaint and had given feedback to its contractors.
  11. The Ombudsman has noted that the landlord offered to replace the boiler following the earlier complaint, but this had been refused by the resident. Although the Ombudsman cannot determine whether this would have prevented the fault occurring in October 2023, on balance of probabilities it would have reduced the risk. Taking everything into account, the Ombudsman has found there was reasonable redress in the way the landlord handled the reports of no heating and hot water.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of the way it handled concerns about gas safety.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord in respect of the way it handled reports of no heating and hot water.

Recommendation

  1. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord reoffers the £25 compensation offered in its final response, if it has not already been paid to the resident.