High Peak Borough Council (202219918)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202219918

High Peak Borough Council

1 December 2023

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

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s request to install a solid fuel heating system and a pizza oven with associated covering structure.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord and has been in residence since October 2020. The property is a 3-bedroom house which she occupies with her 3 dependent children.
On 20 September 2022, the resident submitted a ‘tenant alterations form’ requesting permission to install a solid fuel burner in the living room utilising the existing chimney, and a pizza oven outside the property with associated fire-retardant brickwork. She also asked for consent for a wooden structure over the rear door of the property to create a covered area between the property and the outbuilding. This structure would enable her to cook outside using the pizza oven without being restricted by the weather. As part of this request the resident provided pictures of the proposed equipment with safety ratings and a plan for installation and maintenance at her cost. She confirmed she would retain all safety paperwork for inspection and included details of potential tradesmen.
Due to the cost-of-living increase, particularly energy costs, the resident felt that the best way to minimise her outgoings would be to switch to solid fuel as she had been struggling with a sharp rise in costs. She said she could not afford to leave her boiler on for long enough to heat the property, and her children were suffering as a result. She had also noticed damp and mould and felt that the new heating system would help minimise this as she could heat the house for longer.
The landlord denied her request on 29 September 2022 and the resident made a complaint on 4 October 2022. She said that due to the effect the damp, mould and cold conditions were having on her and her children, she felt that the solid fuel appliances were the best option. In its stage 1 response dated 7 October 2022 the landlord said that solid fuel appliances were restricted items and referred the resident to her tenancy agreement. It did not directly address the requests for the pizza oven and external structure. The resident remained dissatisfied with this decision and escalated the complaint to stage 2 in addition to contacting her MP for support.
On 25 November 2022, the landlord attended the property for a ‘health check’ and identified a number of improvements aimed at improving the overall conditions in the property. It also provided a stage 2 response to the resident confirming refusal of the alterations request and highlighting the works it would complete to reduce the chances of damp and mould occurring.
The resident approached the Service on 29 November 2022 as she remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s position on her requested alterations.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman notes that the resident made a separate complaint in February 2023 about the time taken to complete works relating to damp and mould. Any reference to damp and mould works in this report are in the context of the landlord’s efforts to improve the condition of the property with the aim of supporting the resident with her cost-of-living concerns. If the resident wishes the Ombudsman to investigate the landlord’s handling of damp and mould, and this separate complaint has exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure, she may refer the complaint to the Service.

Response to request to install solid fuel heating system, pizza oven and external structure

The tenancy agreement states:
1. “2.9a We will not unreasonably refuse to give you permission to carry out alterations or improvements. However, we will not give you permission to make alterations that, for example, will make it harder for us to maintain the property, will adversely affect your neighbours or may make your property unsafe, or if you owe us any money under clause 2.2 of this agreement.

Examples of alterations and improvements we would not allow are:

anything that makes the property more vulnerable to fire, such as installing a log burner or other solid-fuel appliance.”

In the associated tenancy booklet, the landlord confirms that if properties already have solid fuel appliances installed, it will attend at 6 monthly intervals to sweep the chimney however the maintenance and repair of these appliances is the responsibility of the resident. It would however, shut down the appliance if faults were detected in the interest of safety.
The Ombudsman notes that the tenancy booklet may be confusing as it forbids the installation of solid fuel appliances, but in a separate section advises of the servicing requirements if one is installed. However, the tenancy agreement explicitly states that installation of these appliances will not be permitted, and this is what both parties are bound by.
The landlord has a 2 stage complaints procedure. At stage 1, a manager will respond to the complaint within 10 working days. At stage 2, the director for the service area will review the complaint and respond within 20 working days. Residents who are unhappy with the stage 2 response are directed to the Housing Ombudsman Service for assistance.
The Ombudsman notes that the landlord’s website contains outdated information, namely that residents must ask a designated person to support their complaint or wait 8 weeks following the stage 2 decision. The Ombudsman will make a recommendation at the end of this report for the landlord to address this.
When the resident first made the application, the landlord informed her that the request for the solid fuel burner was refused but did not give any explanation about its decision. There should have been a clear explanation of the reason for the refusal to reassure the resident that her request had been considered. The landlord did not respond to the requests for the pizza oven or the wooden structure.
In the stage 1 complaint response, the landlord provided a more detailed explanation of its reasons for refusing the solid fuel burner, namely that the tenancy agreement states that it would not permit installation of solid fuel appliances due to increased fire risk. Again, there was no mention of the pizza oven or wooden structure.
In the time between stage 1 and stage 2 of the complaint the resident contacted her local MP for support, whose office in turn contacted the landlord. In the response, the landlord said it had been its policy since 2016 not to allow log burners for “multiple reasons”. It also confirmed the matter was being appealed by the resident. While the landlord does not have to provide as much detail to third parties as it would to its resident, a more detailed explanation would have been helpful as the MP could have then shared this with the resident.
It also told the MP that it had not seen a request for a pizza oven. This contradicts both the original alterations request and internal correspondence where the pizza oven had been mentioned. There were errors in the landlord’s record keeping and a recommendation has been made at the end of this report.
The resident was unhappy with the complaint response and escalated the complaint to stage 2 on 17 November 2022. The landlord responded on 25 November 2022 with further reasoning for its refusal of the alterations, summarised below:
1. the responsibility for servicing and maintenance of any heating systems cannot be legally passed to the resident. The Ombudsman has made a recommendation in relation to this point, following the issues highlighted earlier in this report.
2. the policy decision to refuse solid fuel installation was taken in 2016, considering safety, financial implications, and environmental factors.
3. the landlord completed a benchmarking exercise with other local authorities across the county to determine whether their proposed policy was inconsistent with others. It stated that 100% of respondents had the same policy at the time of writing the complaint response.
4. the Housing Act 1996 s97-99 supports the landlord’s right to refuse alterations when additional costs would be incurred by alterations.
5. the landlord signposted the resident to government cost of living support, including a disability cost of living payment.
Following the ‘property health check’ on 25 November 2022, works were identified by the landlord to improve the condition of the property, namely
1. an additional radiator in the living room.
2. re-sealing of the PVC front door.
3. renewed loft insulation.
4. installation of a positive input ventilation (PIV) unit in the loft.
5. assess the viability of cavity wall insulation on the gable end.
We understand that these works have been completed.
The Ombudsman finds that there was no service failure in the handling of the request for a pizza oven and external structure, despite the note-keeping errors. The landlord should have given responses to all three requests and clearly stated its reasons for any refusal. While it was frustrating for the resident that the landlord did not respond to her application for a pizza oven, there was no significant impact on the resident. There was no evidence that the resident pursued this aspect of the application however the Ombudsman will make a recommendation that the landlord considers the request on its own merit.
The tenancy agreement was clear in stating that solid fuel appliances would not be permitted, and this was available to the resident when she signed the agreement. It is reasonable for the landlord to follow the tenancy agreement, and there is no obligation to agree to requests for alterations. While the resident can expect all requests to be considered on an individual basis, the landlord’s decision to consider fire safety as paramount is an appropriate one given their responsibility for the resident’s safety and that of the wider community. It is also reasonable for a landlord to take budget into consideration when making such decisions. Taking on additional financial responsibilities, such as servicing non-standard equipment, could reduce the money available to fund vital services and delay cyclical improvements to its properties.
The Service recognises that the resident was struggling with sharp increases in energy costs and would be looking for alternative ways of maximising her income. It would, however, be unfair to hold the landlord responsible for affordability issues which are related to costs outside of its control. The landlord signposted to ‘Gov.uk’ for information about disability cost of living payments but there is no evidence it provided any further cost of living advice. We would expect the landlord to offer a reasonable level of support to its residents, particularly when a resident highlights that they are experiencing difficulty. On its website, it has a “support with the cost of living” leaflet which provides signposting to a wide range of services, some of which specifically relate to energy and grants which may help clear arrears. This should have been provided to the resident in addition to the advice given. It has, however, explored ways to further insulate the property and increase its energy efficiency.
Although the original communication with the resident was not sufficiently detailed, the Ombudsman finds no service failure in the landlord’s decision to refuse the resident’s alterations request. There is evidence that the landlord considered the request, has researched the views of the sector in its local area and provided a reasonable explanation for the refusal. It has also looked at ways to reduce the resident’s underlying concerns about cost of living and has completed a number of improvements to the property.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request to install a solid fuel heating system and a pizza oven with associated covering structure.

Recommendations

The landlord should contact the resident and:
1. if she wishes to proceed with the applications for the pizza oven and external wooden structure, it should assess them and provide a clear response.
2. provide her with the “support with the cost of living” leaflet, and assist her with accessing all appropriate grants, such as the ‘British Gas Energy Support Fund.’
The landlord should amend the complaints section of its website to reflect the current process for residents approaching the Housing Ombudsman Service.
The landlord should review its record keeping for ‘tenant alteration requests’ and ensure:
1. all individual requests are documented, considered and responded to, particularly if multiple requests are submitted on one form
2. the wording of its initial responses should be clear and highlight its reasons for approval or refusal. This provides residents with clarity and reassurance that their request has been considered.
The landlord should update its tenancy booklet to ensure there is a clear message about solid fuel appliances. Adding context about the policy implemented in 2016 would make it clearer that service arrangements may be different for residents with existing appliances.
The landlord should confirm its intentions regarding the above recommendations to the Service within 5 weeks of the date of this report.