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

Torus62 Limited (202322048)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202322048

Torus62 Limited

28 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. The resident’s reports of repairs in her property.
    2. The resident’s reports of a data breach.
    3. Changes to the energy billing system and to the energy supplier.

Background

  1. The resident has been an assured tenant of the landlord since 23 May 2022. The property is one bedroom flat in an independent living scheme. The landlord provides support through a professional scheme manager and the scheme is linked to an emergency call centre. The landlord is a housing association.
  2. In September 2022, the landlord changed the way residents paid for their energy in keeping with the Government’s heat Network regulations 2014. From September 2022, residents had a direct relationship with the energy supplier and paid for their own energy usage. Prior to this the residents paid for their energy through a standard service charge.
  3. The landlord completed an independent assessment with the resident on 13 May 2022. It said the resident was registered disabled. The resident has COPD, arthritis and IBS. The resident said she did not require any adaptation to the property and did not need support to manage her tenancy.
  4. Between February 2022 and February 2023, the landlord communicated with the residents about the change to their energy billing. It wrote to the resident and offered face to face meetings. In August 2022, it provided a detailed explanation for the change and what it meant for the resident. It said that the change would take place on 12 September 2022. In February 2023 it offered a meeting at the scheme for any resident experiencing problem with the new billing system.
  5. Between June 2022 and December 2022, the resident made several reports that she had no heating or hot water. The landlord attended but found no issue with the heating system. It provided the resident with batteries for the thermostat and showed her how to use it. It observed that the resident found it difficult to operate the digital thermostat and on 5 December 2022, changed it to a knob control thermostat to make it easier for the resident to use.
  6. On 24 August 2022 the landlord reported an issue with the TV ariel.
  7. On 1 June 2023 the resident reported no heating but did not provide access to the landlord.
  8. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 16 June 2023. Her complaint was about its handling of the repairs to her heating system and the TV ariel. She also raised that the landlord had used the details of the previous resident to set up her utilities. 
  9. The landlord acknowledged her complaint on 23 June 2023 and provided its stage 1 response to her complaint on 30 June 2023. It did not uphold the complaint and said:
    1. Between June 2022 and December 2022, it attended several times to the resident’s reports of the heating not working. It provided batteries and instructions on how to use the heating system. On 5 December 2022 it replaced the digital thermostat with a knob control thermostat to make it easier for the resident to use. It said it found no issue with the heating system and the problem was with the digital thermostat, which was difficult to use. 
    2. The resident reported an issue with the TV ariel on 24 August 2022 and again on 12 October 2022. It addressed and resolved the problems but could not provide the dates of when the repairs took place.
    3. It followed the correct process for changing the previous resident’s details with the energy supplier.
  10. On 26 July 2023 the resident reported an issue with the TV ariel. The landlord fixed the issue the following day.
  11. The resident raised a stage 2 complaint on 14 July 2023. She disputed the landlord’s findings and said she wanted to move. The landlord provided a detailed stage 2 response on 9 August 2023. It reiterated its findings at stage 1 and shared detailed account of the issues raised by the resident and the actions it took:
    1. It reiterated that between June 2022 and December 2022, it found not fault with the heating system. It concluded the issue was with the digital thermostat, which was difficult for the resident to use and it changed it to meet her needs. No further issue arose.
    2. It resolved the issue with the TV ariel on 27 July 2023.
    3. It provided a detailed explanation of how it informed the energy supplier when the previous resident’s tenancy ended. It recognised that the resident said that the energy supplier was sending her bills in the former resident’s name. It advised her to liaise with the energy supplier about it.
    4. It provided the resident with advice and support on moving.
    5. Between January 2022 and September 2022, it consulted with the residents at the scheme about the change to the energy billing system. It also explained the reason for the change and that it was mandatory.
    6. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint.

Events after the landlord’s internal complaint process

  1. On 11 September 2023 the resident said she did not have any heating but would not provide access to the landlord to inspect the issue.
  2. On 19 September 2023 the landlord shared with the resident its findings into its investigation of a possible data breach. It said it found no evidence that it had shared the resident’s address with her relative.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. We understand the resident reported a data breach to the landlord in September 2023. This was approximately 2 months after the landlord issued its stage 2 response to her complaint and was not part of the original complaint. The resident said that the landlord had shared her address with one of her relatives. Whilst the landlord investigated the matter and responded to the resident, the resident did not raise the problem as a formal complaint. She informed us that she was not satisfied with its response and raised the issue with us.
  2. However, we saw no evidence that the resident raised its handling of the alleged data breach as a formal complaint with the landlord. In keeping with the Scheme, we will not consider this element in our investigation. In the interest of fairness, we limit the scope of this investigation to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to the involvement of this Service. The resident should bring any new issues that have not exhausted the landlord’s complaint process to its attention to address through its complaints process.
  3. Additionally, data breach would be an issue for the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and the resident may wish to refer this element of the complaint to them. In keeping with the Scheme, we cannot investigate complaints which fall within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator or complaint-handling body, this includes the ICO.

The resident’s reports of repairs in her property.

  1. We understand that the resident reported having no heating or hot water several times between June 2022 and June 2023. There is no doubt that having no heating or hot water would have been inconvenient for the resident. However, we also recognise that a heating system breaking down, does not automatically amount to a service failure by the landlord. Our role is to determine whether the landlord responded to the resident’s reports by acting fairly and in keeping with its responsive repairs and maintenance policy.
  2. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 says that the landlord must keep in repair and working order, the installations for the supply of heating and hot water. It also states that the landlord must carry out repairs within a reasonable period of time once it knows about the problem. However, there is no statutory definition of reasonable time. Therefore, in this case, the Ombudsman will determine whether the landlord’s responses to the resident’s reports were in keeping with its responsive repairs and maintenance policy.
  3. The landlord responsive repairs and maintenance policy says that it will attend to an emergency repair within 4 hours of a report and will make the area safe. If possible, it will then resolve the problem within 24 hours. It says that it will aim to resolve routine repairs within 20 days. It describes how it will consider the resident’s vulnerabilities and individual needs when addressing the repair. 
  4. In this case, the evidence shows that between June 2022 and December 2022, the resident made approximately 4 reports to the landlord about issues with the heating and hot water. The landlord treated all the reports as emergency repairs and attended on the same day. For example, the resident reported no heating on 12 October 2022, the landlord attended on the same day and resolved the issue.  Those were reasonable actions by the landlord. Once the resident reported no heating in the property, it consistently acted with a sense of urgency and resolved the problem quickly. It addressed the problem in keeping with its responsive and maintenance policy.
  5. We understand that when attending to repair the heating system, the landlord found no fault. It observed that the thermostat did not have any batteries and replaced them. It also showed the resident how to use the thermostat. The landlord did this 3 times between June 2022 and October 2022. This was reasonable from the landlord. Although the heating was working, it took the time to understand the underlying problem and took actions to address it. This was reasonable from the landlord.
  6. Additionally, the evidence shows that when the resident reported the same issues 4 times, the landlord reviewed the situation. After speaking to the resident and reviewing its operative recommendation, on 5 December 2022, it replaced the digital thermostat with a knob operated thermostat. It explained that this was easier for the resident to operate because she was visually impaired. Those were reasonable actions from the landlord, it was proactive in understanding the underlying problem and took prompt action to resolve it. It demonstrated that it considered the resident’s needs and in keeping with its policy it made reasonable adjustments to meet those. 
  7. On 1 June 2023 and 11 September 2023, the resident made further reports of having no heating. The landlord attended to her reports as an emergency repairs, but the resident refused access. Those were reasonable actions from the landlord, it responded to the resident’s reports in keeping with its responsive repairs and maintenance policy. It is unclear if the issue with the heating is ongoing. However, if it is an ongoing problem, we encourage the resident to work with the landlord to resolve the problem.
  8. On 24 August 2022 and on 12 October 2022, the resident reported an issue with the TV ariel. She explained that she could only receive some TV channels and not others. The landlord said that whilst it could not provide the dates when it repaired the ariel, It had resolved the problem quickly. We acknowledge the landlord could not say when the repairs took place. However, there were no further reports of an issue with the ariel for approximately 9 months. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that in August 2022 and October 2022 the landlord resolved the issue. This was reasonable from the landlord and in keeping with its obligations. However, without evidence, we cannot determine the landlord failed to respond within it published timeframe.
  9. The resident reported an issue with the TV reception in July 2023 and the landlord repaired the ariel the following day. This was reasonable from the landlord. It acted quickly once it knew about the problem and completed the repair within its published timeframe.
  10. After considering the evidence of the case, we determine there was no service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s repairs requests. The evidence shows that it acted on the resident’s reports in keeping with its obligations and responsive repairs and maintenance policy.

The resident’s reports of a data breach.

  1. The landlord privacy policy sets out how it collects and processes residents’ data. It explains its role as a data controller and when it would share the resident’s data with third parties such as service providers.
  2. The landlord describes the process for informing the energy supplier when a tenancy ends and a new resident moves in. We understand that the resident believes the landlord provided the energy supplier with the former resident’s details. She said the energy supplier sent her letters in the former resident’s name. We understand this was upsetting for the resident, however, in keeping with the scheme our role is not to determine whether there was a data breach. This is because it is not in our remit, this would be an issue for the ICO and the resident may wish to refer this element of the complaint to them.
  3. Nevertheless, we can consider how the landlord responded to her concerns. The resident reported her concerns in June 2023, when she complained to the landlord. She said that it had used the details of a deceased resident in setting up her utilities account. The landlord provided detailed explanations to the resident in June 2023 and August 2023. It described the process for changing resident’s details with the energy supplier once a tenancy ended. The landlord explained that it updated the energy supplier with the outgoing resident’s details to close the account, in keeping with the process. The resident confirmed that she had contacted the energy supplier with her details when she started the tenancy.
  4. It is unclear why the resident received letters from the energy supplier in the former resident’s name. However, the evidence shows that the landlord investigated the allegations and provided detailed explanations on how it processed residents’ data between tenancies. It also correctly advised the resident to discuss the issue with the energy supplier.
  5. After reviewing the evidence of the case, we determine there was no service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about a data breach. It logged the resident’s concerns, investigated the matter and provided a detailed response to resident including the outcome of its investigation.

Changes to the energy billing system and to the energy supplier

  1. The Government’s heat network regulations 2014 (which came into effect 2015), require operators of heat networks such as the communal heating system in the scheme where the resident lives, to bill residents directly for their personal heating and hot water. In 2022 the landlord updated the communal heating system and made the requested adjustments to comply with the heat network regulations. It appointed a billing provider, which can read remotely the residents’ meters and bill them for their own use of energy. The landlord explained that this was not a change of supplier, but a change of how the residents paid for their energy bills.
  2. We understand that in September 2022 that the landlord moved to the new billing system. The evidence shows that prior to implementing the change, it had communicated with the residents about it. It wrote to the resident in August 2022, explaining the changes. It provided a detailed explanation of the reasons for the change, what it meant for the resident, what was the plan for the handover, and how the resident could access support. In February 2023, it also offered face to face meetings with the billing provider to answer any queries or issues residents may have. Those were reasonable actions from the landlord.
  3. We understand that in July 2023, the resident complained to the landlord that it had changed the energy supplier without her consent and she was forced into signing up to the billing provider. In Its stage 2 response the landlord explained the reasons for the change to the billing system and the process it followed prior to proceeding. The resident acknowledges that she has been in direct contact with the billing provider. Whilst we understand the resident is unhappy with the new billing system, the landlord took reasonable steps to effectively communicate the change to the resident. Additionally, it clarified that it did not change the energy supplier. Its actions were reasonable.
  4. Therefore, we determine there was no service failure by the landlord in its handling of the change of energy supplier. We understand that there was no change to the energy supplier and that it was the change to the billing system that caused the resident to complain. The landlord showed that it communicated effectively with the resident about the change to the billing system.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of repairs in her property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a data breach.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of changes to the energy billing system and to the energy supplier.