Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

The Riverside Group Limited (202101133)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202101133

The Riverside Group Limited

7 September 2021


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 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 concerns the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s heating system.

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord.
  2. The property is a two-bedroom terraced house.

Summary of events

  1. The landlord’s records indicate that the resident contacted it to report an issue with the property’s lounge radiator on 1 February 2021, and to make a request for a smaller one to be fitted, which was then installed on 26 February 2021. This was followed up by further visits carried out on 2 March 2021, when the pipework was flushed, and on 4 March 2021, when a new pump was fitted to the boiler.
  2. The landlord attended the property again on 19 and 30 March 2021 to carry out further works to the lounge radiator. This was followed by a further report, made by the resident, regarding the functionality of her heating system, on 31 March 2021. The landlord noted that it attended the property on 13 April 2021, but that it could not identify any faults with the system, and that she did not permit it to explain to her how to operate this.
  3. The exact date as to when the resident requested for a stage one complaint to be logged about outstanding radiator replacement works at her property for two months was not confirmed to this Service, however the landlord issued her with a stage one complaint response for this on 14 April 2021. In the stage one complaint response, it advised that it had decided to close her complaint because, following its two visits to the property by expert inspectors above, it had found that no further works needed to be arranged there.
  4. On 18 April 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to report that she did not have any heating or hot water, and to request temporary heaters from it for this. It then attended the property on:
    1. 19 April 2021 to replace the lock shield valve of the lounge radiator, and to inspect the radiator in the rear bedroom, which was then found to be corroded.
    2. 28 April 2021 to “remove the kitchen radiator to facilitate remedial works”; carry out a gas compliance inspection to ensure that the system was safe, functional, and that there were no gas leaks, which involved the uncapping and recapping of the resident’s meter; and advise the resident that her heating system was set at a certain temperature, and that in order to obtain a higher one, she would need to adjust the settings of the system.
    3. 30 April 2021 to replace a gas valve, uncap the gas supply, and carry out a tightness test, which led to the reinstatement of the resident’s boiler, and therefore the heating and hot water supply. During this visit, the landlord identified a water leak around the main heat exchanger.
    4. 7 May 2021 to drain and replace the main heat exchanger. During this visit the landlord noted that the rear bedroom radiator was yet to be replaced.
  5. In the meantime, the resident’s complaint was escalated to the final stage of the landlord’s complaints procedure. It then issued a final stage complaint response to her on 12 May 2021, comprised of the following:
    1. A confirmation that it had enclosed copies of the gas and electrical reports, and its repairs policy.
    2. An acknowledgement that the resident was unhappy with her heating system and the landlord’s decision to not replace her pipework but that this had not been logged by it because this was not a requirement.
    3. A confirmation that all of the required parts were replaced, and that her heating system had passed all safety tests, with a replacement boiler part and components fitted as a precautionary measure and no service failures occurring for any of its repair or emergency call out appointments for this.
    4. Advice on how to proceed with her complaint to its tenant panel, another designated person and/or this Service if she was unhappy with its final stage complaint response.
  6. The resident contacted the landlord again on 17 May 2021, and requested for her complaint to be re-opened by it due to health and safety issues. It then re-attended her property on 17 June 2021 to inspect both the gas meter and the boiler there. No faults or gas leaks were identified during this visit, however the resident requested for her gas meter to remain capped.
  7. The resident contacted this Service on 22 June 2021 to advise she was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of “boiler and pipework problems”, and that she wished for it to renew the pipework in her property. Additionally, she noted that she had first reported the above issues to it in December 2020.
  8. On 7 July 2021, the landlord wrote to the resident to address the visit that it conducted to her property on the same day. It advised that it had attended to uncap her gas meter, and it offered to carry out “another assessment” of her central heating system for reassurance, but she refused this and requested for her meter to be left capped. Furthermore, the landlord advised that:
    1. It had reviewed the report issued by the gas distributor, which stated that the gas supply was capped because the resident advised that she could smell gas, and not because a gas leak was identified.
    2. Following the tests and inspections carried out above, it could not identify any gas leaks at the property
    3. The gas supply remained capped because the resident had requested this, and not because of a gas leak.
  9. The resident contacted this Service again on 7 July 2021 to advise that she was considering legal action against the landlord “for failing to provide safe and habitable property”.
  10. On 8 July 2021, the landlord wrote to the resident to advise that it intended to attend the property on 9 July 2021 to “change [her] radiators and pipework”, and it requested confirmation from her as to whether she agreed to allow the uncapping of the gas meter by it.
  11. Further communication subsequently also took place between the landlord and resident after the above date, in respect of other works to be carried out to her property and her dissatisfaction with its and its contractor’s lack of communication and competency.


Assessment and findings

The resident’s tenancy agreement

  1. The tenancy agreement’s terms state that it is the landlord’s responsibility to “keep in repair and working order the installations for room heating, water heating and…for the supply of…gas”.

The landlord’s responsive repairs policy

  1. The responsive repairs policy states that the landlord “aims to” resolve issues during the first visit, if possible, be cost effective and provide value for money, and to be responsive to customer needs and expectations.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s heating system

  1. While the resident further communicated with the landlord in respect of other works to be carried out to her property, a lack of communication and its and its contractor’s competency, these matters are outside of the scope of this investigation. This is because this Service cannot consider complaints made prior to the exhaustion of the landlord’s complaints procedure, as it needs to be provided with the opportunity to investigate and respond to these, and there is no evidence that a complaint from the resident about the above issues has exhausted the procedure yet.
  2. Therefore, this investigation is focused on the matters and events investigated in the resident’s initial complaint, concerning the landlord’s handling of repairs to her heating system.
  3. As per the above information provided to this Service, the resident was first recorded as having contacted the landlord on 1 February 2021 to report issues with her lounge radiator. This was followed up by ten visits by the landlord, between 26 February and 7 May 2021, to replace various heating system parts, and to conduct multiple tests, to ensure that her heating system was safe and functional.
  4. It is noted that the resident’s gas supply was capped during the above months, leaving her without heating and hot water. However, the landlord was not responsible for this, as it complied with the terms set out in her tenancy agreement, detailed above at paragraph 15, by replacing a number of parts in her heating system, and carrying out multiple tests to reassure her that there was no gas leak from this. This demonstrated that it took appropriate steps to keep the system in repair and working order, as required by the tenancy agreement, while the resident confirmed to it from 17 June 2021 onwards that she requested that the gas supply remain capped.
  5. In its final stage complaint response of 12 May 2021, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s dissatisfaction with its decision to not replace the pipework in her property. On 17 May 2021, she requested for her complaint to be re-opened by it due to health and safety issues. This Service appreciates the resident’s dissatisfaction and the inconvenience caused by this experience. However, the landlord was permitted to act upon the advice of its qualified staff, based on their above inspections and works at her property, when deciding the works/extent of works it would carry out, in the absence of any other expert evidence to the contrary.
  6. Therefore, by taking this into account, along with the requirements of the landlord’s responsive repairs policy, detailed above at paragraph 16, it acted reasonably in declining the resident’s request for further pipework replacement works after its above repairs to her heating system. This is because it kept her needs in mind, by replacing the parts required, while keeping its commitment to be cost effective and to provide value for money by declining the further works, in accordance with the policy.
  7. To conclude, this Service appreciates the resident’s concerns, however in this instance there was no maladministration by the landlord because it complied with the terms of her tenancy agreement and its responsive repairs policy. It did so by carrying out an extensive number of visits to her property to replace various parts and to conduct numerous tests to ensure that her heating system was safe and functional.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the resident’s heating system.

Reasons

  1. The landlord acted in a reasonable manner because it completed repairs deemed necessary by its inspections of the heating system, and so it complied with the terms of the resident’s tenancy agreement and its responsive repairs policy.