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

Westminster City Council (202110420)

Back to Top

A picture containing logo Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202110420

Westminster City Council

7 June 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 response to the resident’s reports of a fault with the heating system in her property, resulting in her being over charged.

Background

  1. The resident has a secure tenancy for a two-bedroom maisonette on the sixth floor of a tower block and been a tenant of the landlord since 1995. The resident has no vulnerabilities recorded by the landlord.
  2. The resident initially complained on 29 May 2020 that she felt she was being overcharged on her electricity metered system, which is owned by the landlord and provides heat off peak for the block but is individually billed. The stage one response on 12 June 2020 said that the equipment had been checked and was working properly, but an engineer was sent to check again and a guide to regulating the resident’s energy usage was provided. The complaint was not upheld as the landlord said the resident was not overcharged. However, the landlord log dated 23 September 2020 shows that the electricity meter was replaced as ‘not working on the off peak’.
  3. The resident was then unwell and did not follow matters up until 12 April 2021 after a half yearly invoice had been received and she noted the electricity charges had increased again. She stated she was paying three times that of her neighbours and then extra to heat her home and provide hot water via her prepayment card. She was now out of work due to the pandemic and the stress was affecting her physical and mental health.
  4. The landlord advised that there would be a delay in its reply but provided its final response on 23 June 2021 reiterating its earlier points. It advised that while the engineer had found no fault, it would revisit on 28 June 2021. £30 compensation was offered for the delay in the complaint response and further advice given around budgeting.
  5. The landlord has advised this Service that the resident has the second highest weekly charge in her block and that residents can opt out of the landlord owned system, but the resident had not been advised of this (which was not routinely done), and the landlord believes it would cost the resident more. The landlord said it would send a further engineer but the outcome of this has not been advised. The resident remains concerned the heating system is not working properly and she is being over charged.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. This investigation concerns the landlord’s response to matters raised by the resident. It does not decide if electricity charges themselves are fair, which would be a matter for the Energy Ombudsman, details of which have been provided to the resident by this Service.

Assessment

  1. The tenancy agreement indicates that the landlord is responsible for all fittings and connections supplying electricity and the tenant’s handbook confirms that non urgent repairs will be resolved in 28 days. In this instance, the resident made her first complaint at the end of May 2020 and the response in June 2020 said that the meter had been checked and found to be working correctly, but another engineer would be sent. The meter was then changed in September 2020 as it was found to be faulty, but there is no further information on what effect, if any, this had on the resident’s bills.
  2. Following the next contact from the resident in April 2021, a further engineer was arranged to check the system, and in April 2022, the landlord told this Service that it would arrange for an engineer from the heating contractors to visit the property again and check the meter. Accordingly, the landlord has indicated that it has responded appropriately to the resident’s concerns about the meter and acted when there was a fault.
  3. More recently, the landlord has advised this Service that it reviewed the resident’s energy use over the past two years on a quarterly basis. The usage was higher over the winter as expected, but it also showed that the resident’s energy consumption reduced by approximately a third for each quarter in the year 2020/2021, indicating that the resident was acting to decrease the energy she used. This supports the landlord’s view that the resident’s increased bills were due to the way energy is used in the property, rather than a fault.
  4. The landlord said that the resident had not asked if she could opt out of the landlord run system, and that it would not normally advise residents that they could opt out, as it would not be cost effective to do so as the landlord believes it has negotiated a competitive rate with the supplier. However, if the resident wanted to, she could investigate an alternative energy supplier who would install a new meter in the property. This is an option the resident has, but she may wish to consider if it would be in her best interests to change.
  5. The Ombudsman notes that the landlord felt it was appropriate to reopen the complaint as the request to escalate the issue was within 12 months of the first response and finds that this was fair in the circumstances. This allowed the resident to move the matter forward without further delay.
  6. It is not clear if the further inspection mentioned by the landlord in April 2022 has yet taken place, but the Ombudsman would hope to see this undertaken, ideally with an outside/independent contractor. The landlord may also wish to ask the energy supplier to check the meter. If there are any issues found, it can then work to resolve these with the resident, including any reimbursement which may be appropriate.
  7. At this stage however, there is no evidence of an ongoing fault with the meter that has not been responded to. The landlord has expert personnel responsible for testing the systems in the property and no counter inspection has been undertaken to contradict the landlord’s findings. Given that the resident was able to reduce her electricity usage to some degree, the Ombudsman is unable to conclude that the landlord has not responded appropriately to the resident’s concerns in respect of the electricity meter.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme there was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about her electricity meter.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord liaise with the energy supplier to investigate if there is a reason for the higher electricity bills for the property, and so that any reimbursement due can be calculated.