Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (202017229)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202017229

Metropolitan Housing Trust Limited

31 March 2022


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 communal heating repairs.

Background and summary of events

Background

  1. The resident is a shared ownership leaseholder of the landlord, a housing association.
  2. Under the lease, the landlord is responsible to provide a communal heating service and to repair machinery in relation to this, while the resident is responsible for repairs of any ‘estate service media’ in her property. The landlord is not liable for any failure or interruption of estate services due to necessary repairs and causes beyond its control, and it reasonably endeavours to restore them as soon as practicable.
  3. The landlord prioritises repairs for which it is responsible and aims to complete emergency repairs within 24 hours, routine repairs within 28 days, and major routine repairs within three months. The landlord’s repairs guide for leaseholders references the ‘Right to Repair’ regulations which apply to social tenants of local authorities, and says compensation may be applicable if a repair is not completed within a specified time limit. Under ‘Right to Repair,’ social tenants are eligible for compensation if a total or partial loss of space or water heating is not restored in a ’prescribed period,’ which is 1 working day between 31 October and 1 May. Where this is applicable, this applies at a rate of £10 plus £2 for the first day the prescribed period is exceeded, and then £2 per day thereafter. The regulations advise that the prescribed period may be suspended if there are circumstances beyond the control of the landlord or its contractor which prevent the repair being carried out.
  4. The Ombudsman’s remit in relation to complaints is limited by its Scheme. Paragraph 39(e) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme advises that the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in its opinion, “were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within six months of the matters arising;” while Paragraph 39(a) of the Scheme advises that the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in its opinion, “are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint handling failure and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.”
  5. This means that the Ombudsman is unable to consider all the complaints the resident has about her landlord that she gave as reasons for dissatisfaction with the response to this complaint. These include broken car park gates; increased service charges; non-functioning fob doors; and the condition of internal and external communal areas. This investigation has therefore focused on events from October 2020, six months before the resident made a formal complaint in March 2021, up until the landlord’s final response in May 2021. Separate issues, and events that pre and post-date the complaints procedure, have therefore not been investigated here.

Summary of events

  1. In December 2020, the resident reported a loss of heating and hot water, which the landlord informed her was believed to be an issue in her property. The resident and landlord’s accounts differ slightly over when the issue was reported, however after the landlord’s first recorded report, an engineer attended the next day and found no faults with the communal heating system. The engineer then visited the resident’s property and changed the water cylinder temperature, resulting in a hot water supply, which the landlord internally noted it would not bill the resident for.
  2. Information provided then advises that, on 25 March 2021, the communal heating system pressure was affected by a leak on the estate, which led to the resident experiencing loss of heating and hot water again. The following day, the landlord updated residents by text message to apologise for the delay resolving the issue.
  3. On 29 March 2021, the resident contacted this Service to complain that there had been no hot water since 25 March 2021. She said that this was a recurring issue since 2010  and she was being affected physical and mentally by it. She was unhappy at being told to boil a kettle to wash her hands and bathe, and said that under her tenancy agreement she was entitled to temporary accommodation, which the landlord had refused. The same day, the system was brought back up and running and the landlord raised a complaint following this Service’s referral.
  4. On 8 April 2021, the landlord issued its stage one response to the complaint:
    1. It noted that the resident was unhappy with the level of service in respect to heating and hot water, and had requested individual boilers to be installed. It also acknowledged she said her physical and mental health had been affected, and it apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused.
    2. It acknowledged that there were historic service issues with a biomass boiler system which had been in place until 2017, as this would go offline when wood pellets were used up. It said that a gas powered system was installed which remedied most issues and significantly improved the service.
    3. It explained it was made aware of heating and hot water issues on 25 March 2021, which was due to a pressure drop as a result of the leak. It said that it may not always be able to complete repairs within a 24 hour period where further works are required. It said that it completed major works on 29 March 2021 to repair the leak, located underground, which restored the pressure and the heating and hot water. It said the repairs were completed in a timely manner.
    4. It noted that the resident said she had been cut off a few times when attempting to call the landlord. It explained its staff were working from home which meant it was facing additional challenges due to the Covid-19 pandemic. It said it was unable to evidence she had been disconnected, but it acknowledged this will have been frustrating, apologised, and said it had asked staff to investigate if there were any unknown faults.
  5. On 12 April 2021, the resident expressed dissatisfaction with the response. She was unhappy with the length of time the landlord took to resolve issues each time the system went down, and said a heating expert agreed there had been shoddy workmanship. The landlord responded that the most recent repair was completed in a timely manner and there was no evidence the fault was related to historic repairs. The complaint was escalated after the resident complained that issues only received temporary fixes and kept recurring, and on 6 May 2021, the landlord issued its final response:
    1. It acknowledged that the resident had said issues were reoccurring; she believed a permanent fix should be put in place; it had not addressed the length of time repairs took; and it had not addressed poor call centre service.
    2. It acknowledged that there were issues prior to 2017 and that engineer visits were higher than they should have been for the wood pellet fuelled communal heating system. It said that after this was changed to a gas system, there had been a significant drop in repairs it was responsible for, and there was no need for further repair or upgrade.
    3. It said it was satisfied that the most recent repairs were carried out in a reasonable timeframe, and said that it was unable to investigate repairs that occurred more than six months prior. It said however that it was fair to say that there was a considerable number of repairs needed for the previous biomass boiler, which was why it was replaced with an easier to maintain gas boiler.
    4. It said a review of its call centre service was inconclusive, as call monitoring was constrained due to the Covid-19 pandemic and a review of phone lines found no evidence for cut off reports. It said however that it was appropriate to give the benefit of the doubt given current circumstances, and it apologised for any poor service on its part.
    5. It said it was satisfied with the way in the complaint was handled, although it could have explained historic failings could not be considered as part of the complaints process.  It said it was partially upholding the complaint, as it felt there were failings from its customer services teams, and while it could not specifically review the previous repairs, it was clear there were issues with the previous system. It apologised for any distress and inconvenience the resident experienced because of issues raised in the complaint and awarded £150 compensation, which comprised £50 for complaints handling and £100 in recognition of time and trouble spent pursuing repairs and the complaint.
  6. The resident expressed dissatisfaction with the response and compensation to the landlord and this Service, stating there were other ongoing communal maintenance issues that had not been resolved by the landlord.

Assessment and findings

  1. In accordance with the lease and its repairs policy, the landlord is responsible to maintain the communal heating supply, while the resident is responsible for heating components that relate to her property. When there are reports that the communal heating system is causing loss of service, it is therefore obligated to take steps to investigate and resolve any issues within its repairs obligations.
  2. Following the resident’s first recorded report in December 2020, information provided advises that the landlord arranged for an engineer to inspect the communal heating system the next day and requested for the resident to be supplied with heaters in the interim. The engineer inspection found no communal system faults and found that amendment of the temperature setting on the water cylinder located in the resident’s property restored heating and hot water. This demonstrates that the landlord responded in an appropriate way to reports of loss of heating and hot water in December 2020. It arranged to supply heaters while the cause of the issue was being identified; it investigated the issue in a timely way; and it established that the cause of the loss of heating and hot water fell within the resident’s responsibility rather than its own. The landlord was also customer focused to exercise discretion and not bill for its engineer resolving the issue in the property.
  3. Following further reports in March 2021, information provided advises that the landlord took approximately four days to restore heating and hot water. This was outside the 24 hour timeframe the landlord normally aims for, however information provided advises that the repair required location of an underground leak. While this investigation understands the lack of heating and hot water will have been distressing for the resident, there is no evidence that the cause of the leak was in the landlord’s control and information provided advises the communal heating service was restored ‘as soon as practicable’ in accordance with the lease.
  4. Following the resident’s complaint, the landlord considered the resident’s concerns and provided its position that recent repairs were completed in a timely manner. The landlord considered additional concerns it noted the resident raised about customer service, and acknowledged and apologised for these, although there was no specific evidence to support the concerns. The landlord also acknowledged and apologised for historic issues, although it explained it did not investigate issues that occurred more than six months prior. The landlord awarded £150 for complaints handling and distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
  5. The above demonstrates that the landlord resolved recent repairs reports about the communal heating system in a reasonably timely manner. The evidence advises that the communal heating system was not responsible for issues in December 2020. While the March 2021 repair took four days, the leak appears to have been out of the landlord’s control and the repair was not a straightforward one. The landlord then responded to the complaint in a customer and resolution focused way, and positively exercised discretion to award reasonable compensation where it was not necessarily required to under its policies, to try to satisfactorily resolve matters for the resident.
  6. The landlord was reasonable not to investigate stated dissatisfaction with the communal heating system since 2010, because as it explained, under its complaints procedure the landlord does not investigate complaints about events more than six months old. This reflects the Ombudsman’s own approach that the longer the time goes on, the more the landlord and the Ombudsman’s ability to conduct an effective investigation is impacted.
  7. This investigation notes the resident has stated she was entitled to temporary accommodation under her tenancy agreement, was noted to request for individual boilers to be installed, and reported a heating expert had said there was shoddy workmanship. This investigation sees no evidence that the landlord would be obligated to provide temporary accommodation or install an individual boiler in the circumstances here, and also sees no evidence of the landlord being supplied expert information for it to consider allegations of shoddy workmanship.
  8. The leasehold repairs policy does evidence that the landlord may consider compensation for loss of heating and hot water in line with the ‘Right to Repair’ regulations, however this is not mandatory for housing association leaseholders, and it is not sufficiently clear that such compensation is applicable in the resident’s circumstances. This investigation notes however that such compensation would likely be less than a quarter of what the landlord awarded in this case, due to the short length of time affected and the amounts applicable in the regulations. In addition, while the landlord did not directly address the request for an individual boiler, it did confirm that communal system replacement in 2018 had significantly improved service and that recent repairs were carried out within reasonable timeframe. While this Service does not have the authority or expertise to definitively decide technical matters, if repairs to the communal heating system are currently being carried out in reasonable timeframes, replacement of the system with individual boilers would not be a proportionate course of action.
  9. Overall, the evidence shows that the landlord carried out repairs in a reasonable timeframe, considered the resident’s concerns, and although it did not respond to specific aspects such as temporary accommodation and a request for an individual boiler, it did consider salient points and set out its position on these, which is in accordance with what the Ombudsman would expect to see.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of communal heating repairs.

Reasons

  1. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, the landlord carried out repairs to the communal heating system in a reasonable timeframe, in the period considered by the investigation. There is no evidence that, in the circumstances of the case, the landlord is obliged to provide temporary accommodation or install individual boilers. The landlord exercised discretion to acknowledge and apologise for unevidenced customer service issues, and it was customer and resolution focused to award compensation.

Orders and recommendations

Recommendations

  1. The landlord to re-offer the £150 compensation if this has not been paid already.