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

Warwickshire Rural Housing Association Limited (202314335)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202314335

Warwickshire Rural Housing Association Limited

6 March 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 repairs to a faulty boiler.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord, which began on 13 June 2022. The landlord is a housing association. The resident lives in a 2-bedroom house with one child. The resident has no known vulnerabilities.
  2. On 14 and 16 June 2023, the resident complained to the landlord about having no hot water following a contractor visit on 26 May 2023. The resident:
    1. Said the landlord had not carried out repairs to a malfunctioning boiler within an acceptable timescale.
    2. Explained that the boiler stopped working after a contractor damaged it when repairing the kitchen cabinets.
    3. Said she had a young child and that it was, therefore, a welfare issue that the landlord had not fixed the boiler.
    4. Said the lack of hot water had caused significant inconvenience, discomfort, potential health risks and stress.
    5. Requested compensation for the period during which the resident said the property ‘had been rendered unusable’.
  3. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 16 June 2023 and issued a stage 1 complaint response on 30 June 2023. The landlord:
    1. Apologised for the dissatisfaction with the service received regarding the boiler repair.
    2. Acknowledged that the resident phoned on 30 May 2023 to report that they did not have hot water.
    3. Confirmed a contractor attended on 7 June 2023, which was one day outside of target, and offered £12 which the landlord said was in line with its compensation policy. It explained that the boiler required parts that it had expected the contractor to source and fit within 7 days.
    4. Explained that the contractor returned to fix the boiler on 15 June 2023 but then diagnosed that the flow sensor and flow turbine were faulty. The landlord said it was previously unable to diagnose this because the boiler needed the other parts to function.
    5. Said the contractor offered to attend on 23 June 2023 but this was not convenient for the resident, so it booked a repair for 30 June 2023. The landlord offered £56 compensation for the delay, which it said was in line with its compensation policy.
    6. Explained it had learned from the complaint by discussing this with the contractor, who agreed that it needed to provide better communication and attendance to complete repairs. The landlord said it would continue to monitor and meet with the contractor to discuss any outstanding repairs.
    7. Apologised for the ‘unacceptable’ service experienced regarding the repair, and the impact and inconvenience caused. It offered £50 as a gesture of goodwill (£118 overall).
    8. Explained it had since repaired the kitchen cupboards following a leaking pipe and said this did not appear to have caused any issues with the boiler.
  4. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and asked to escalate the complaint to stage 2 on 30 June 2023. In summary, the resident:
    1. Said a new contractor attended on 30 June 2023 and identified that the boiler problems stemmed from the initial contractor connecting pipework incorrectly when attending to fix the kitchen cabinets. The resident said the new contractor confirmed someone would visit to rectify the issue later that day.
    2. Said £118 compensation was not enough to address the severity and duration of the situation. The resident said the extended period during which the boiler was not working, compounded by ‘erroneous work’ carried out by the initial contractor, had caused significant distress, inconvenience, and hardship for her and her child.
    3. Insisted on minimum compensation of £500, equivalent to 5 weeks’ rent for hardships due to the lack of hot water, subsequent inconvenience and additional distress caused by the incorrect pipework connection.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the escalation request on 30 June 2023 and issued a stage 2 response on 7 July 2023. In summary, the landlord:
    1. Acknowledged the resident’s dissatisfaction with the length of time taken to repair the faulty boiler and their request for higher compensation.
    2. Said the contractor initially attended one day outside target on 7 June 2023 and identified a further issue with the boiler when attending to fit parts on 15 June 2023.
    3. Explained it asked another contractor to complete the work to try to resolve the issue as soon as possible. It said the new contractor tried to visit on 23 June 2023 but this was not suitable for the resident so it arranged to visit on 30 June 2023. The landlord confirmed it had previously offered compensation of £12 and £56 for services being outside of target.
    4. Said it would continue to work closely and meet regularly with the initial contractor to ensure it met repair service targets.
    5. Apologised for the unacceptable service received regarding the repair.
    6. Increased its goodwill offer from £50 to £100 (£168 overall).
    7. Confirmed the resident could contact the Ombudsman if they remained unhappy.
  6. The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman on 20 July 2023 because she feels the landlord should offer more compensation. The complaint became one that we could consider on 10 May 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The Ombudsman’s compensation awards are not intended to be punitive and we do not offer damages in the way that a court might. In assessing an appropriate level of compensation, we consider a range of factors including distress and inconvenience caused by the issues, the amount of time and effort spent pursuing the matter with the landlord and the level of detriment caused by the landlord’s actions. Furthermore, the Ombudsman’s awards are generally moderate, considering the landlord’s need to make the most effective use of its limited resources as a social landlord for the benefit of all its residents.

Policies and procedures

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy says it will complete urgent repairs within 7 days.
  2. The landlord’s compensation policy says it will provide £10 compensation for not completing a repair by the target date and £2 for every day thereafter until it completes the repair.
  3. The landlord’s compensation policy includes an example of providing additional compensation of £100 for a resident being without hot water for 2 weeks resulting in them having to take children to relatives’ to bathe.

The landlord’s handling of repairs of a faulty boiler

  1. The landlord does not dispute that there were failings in its handling of the resident’s reports. Where the landlord admits failings, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the landlord resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances and offered appropriate redress. In considering this, the Service assesses whether the landlord’s actions were in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  2. The resident says a contractor damaged the boiler during a visit to repair kitchen cupboards on 26 May 2023. The landlord became aware of a problem when the resident informed it on 30 May 2023 that they had no hot water.
  3. The landlord raised a job to repair the boiler, which a contractor attended on 30 May 2023. The contractor identified that it needed parts to fix the boiler but did not order these until after the landlord contacted it on 6 June 2023 due to the resident phoning to chase the repair. The contractor then visited on 7 June 2023. The landlord acknowledged this was 1 day outside its 7-day timeframe for urgent repairs. However, the contractor was not able to repair the boiler and noted that it needed a diverter valve and motor.
  4. On 14 June 2023, the resident complained that the contractor had still not fixed the boiler. The landlord chased the contractor, which confirmed it would fit the parts on 15 June 2023. However, upon returning, the contractor identified another issue that required more parts – a new flow turbine and flow sensor – which it reported it could not have diagnosed until after it had resolved the initial problem.
  5. Although unforeseen, we note that the additional delay in fixing the boiler likely caused distress as well as further inconvenience due to the resident and her child continuing to be without hot water and having to travel to bathe elsewhere.
  6. Upon receiving the resident’s complaint on 16 June 2023, the landlord chased a response from the contractor. The landlord noted:
    1. There was a delay in the initial attempt to repair the boiler.
    2. The contractor had then failed to order parts.
    3. After ordering further parts following another visit, the contractor then did not have the correct parts when attending to repair the boiler on 22 June 2023.
  7. It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on its contractors’ assessments of the reported issue. However, we consider that the contractor’s failings, as outlined above, adversely impacted the resident and her daughter and meant the resident had to contact the landlord on several occasions to chase the repair of the boiler.
  8. On 23 June 2023, the landlord instructed a new contractor to fix the boiler as soon as possible. We consider the landlord acted reasonably by appointing a new contractor to try to speed up the repair due to the delays and problems already experienced.
  9. While this was a reasonable approach for the landlord to take, it remained the case that the landlord’s earlier failures had led to an unreasonable delay in the resident having her hot water restored. The landlord demonstrated it had learned from this by arranging regular contact to monitor the initial contractor’s repair times and communication with residents. Therefore, we have not made an order to address this.
  10. The new contractor tried to contact the resident on 23 June 2023. It then spoke to the resident on 26 June 2023 and booked an appointment for 30 June 2023. The resident says the new contractor identified pipework fitted incorrectly during the kitchen works visit on 26 May 2023 as the cause of the boiler issues. There is no evidence that the contractor informed the landlord of this. Regardless of why the boiler stopped working, this investigation has focused on the landlord’s handling of the boiler repair.
  11. The resident says she was without hot water until 3 July 2023. The landlord has provided contractor records that include a post inspection visit on 7 July 2023 to confirm it had fixed the boiler but there is no evidence of any boiler repair work after 30 June 2023, which likely shows an issue with the landlord’s record keeping.
  12. The landlord became aware that the resident had no hot water on 30 May 2023. Its records confirm it repaired the boiler 31 days later, on 30 June 2023, which was outside its 7-day timeframe for urgent repairs. In line with its compensation policy, the landlord was required to provide compensation totalling £58, comprising £10 plus a further £48 for the 24-day delay. Therefore, although in the resident’s favour, it is unclear how the landlord calculated the £68 compensation that it offered for the delayed boiler repair.
  13. The landlord’s compensation policy also includes an example of providing £100 compensation where a resident has been without hot water for 2 weeks and had to take their children to relatives to bathe. Therefore, as the resident had been without hot water for a month and had to take her child to relatives to bathe, it would have been in line with its own compensation policy for the landlord to have offered the resident a further £200 compensation.
  14. The landlord acted to resolve problems where they occurred but did not keep an overview of the issue, which meant the resident had to keep chasing the repair. This, alongside the landlord’s failure to offer compensation in line with its compensation policy, constitutes maladministration and an order has been made below for remedy in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of repairs of a faulty boiler.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Provide a written apology for the failings identified.
    2. Pay compensation totalling £368, comprised as follows:
      1. The £12 and £56 offered for services being out of target, if it has not already done so.
      2. The £100 offered as a gesture of goodwill, if it has not already done so.
      3. Additional compensation of £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
  2. The landlord is to confirm compliance with these orders within the timeframes set out above.