East Midlands Housing Group Limited (202121983)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202121983

East Midlands Housing Group Limited

13 June 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 the Ombudsman has considered is about:

  1. Delays in replacing radiators at the resident’s home which meant he was unable to heat his home adequately.
  2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy of a two-bedroom bungalow owned by the landlord. The tenancy started on 10 June 2013. The resident has mobility issues and is a wheelchair user.
  2. The resident’s boiler was replaced in 2019 and the resident believes that the radiators should have been replaced at the same time. He has explained that the radiators at the property were not sufficiently large to heat the property. The radiators were finally replaced in January 2022. The resident is seeking compensation for the delays in the landlord taking action, the time and trouble he had to take in pursuing the complaint and for the winters he spent unable to fully heat his home.
  3. The resident has stated they first reported the problem with the radiators to the landlord on 31 October 2019, following the replacement of the resident’s boiler. This is corroborated by the landlord’s internal emails it has provided which acknowledges the issue was reported to the landlord by the resident in 2019. As such, this investigation will work on the basis that this issue was reported 31 October 2019, as stated by the resident. 
  4. It should be noted that the landlord provided temporary heaters for a time between Christmas Eve 2018 and when the boiler was replaced in 2019. The evidence suggests the resident was hesitant to accept temporary heaters because of the additional cost to use this type of heating. In response, the landlord informed them they may be able to claim back any additional costs incurred from using the heaters.
  5. The landlord initially sent its operatives who had reported that the radiators were working as intended. However, the Ombudsman has not seen any evidence of when this inspection took place, or the outcome of any inspection conducted. The Ombudsman has also not had sight of evidence to suggest that any tests were conducted to assess the temperature the resident’s home could be heated to. 
  6. Following a telephone call on 12 February 2021 it offered to resend them to inspect again. The resident was not happy with this suggestion and asked that new radiators were installed.
  7. On the same day (12 February 2021) the landlord raised a work order for its operative to attend the property and undertake a heat loss calculation to confirm whether the radiators were the correct size or not. It noted that some of its properties that were adapted for disabled residents had low surface temperature radiators that were not hot to the touch. It asked that action was taken to ascertain whether this may be the source of the problem.
  8. A formal complaint was made by the resident on 7 June 2021. The resident telephoned after being informed by the contractor they were waiting for approval from the landlord before they could go ahead with any works to the radiators. The telephone record stated that the resident ‘was stressed by the length of time this had been outstanding.’
  9. The landlord responded at stage one of the complaints process on 16 June 2021. It confirmed that a heat loss calculation had been conducted and the lounge radiator would be replaced as a result. The letter stated that the other radiators were found to be the correct size, but the thermostatic radiator valves and other valves required replacement. The landlord apologised for the time it had taken to approve these works.
  10. There was a missed appointment in July relating to the replacement of the valves meaning that, despite a telephone call to the landlord, the resident stayed home all day for no reason. He requested that the complaint be escalated to stage two of the complaints process on 21 July 2021.
  11. Having had no response from the landlord a further complaint was made on 22 August 2021. This provided photographs of text messages that dated back to November 2020 to show how long the issue had been outstanding. The resident explained that the thermostat components for the radiators had been difficult to obtain and the contactor attended with the wrong parts. He explained that he was disabled and a wheelchair user and did not want another cold winter. He was very happy with the new radiator but did not believe that that the remaining radiators were the correct size to heat the rooms and therefore replacing the thermostat valves was not going to resolve the problem. He asked for an immediate response and some form of compensation for the delays and poor communication.
  12. The stage two response was issued on 22 October 2021, three months after the initial escalation request. The panel accepted that there had been unnecessary delays. It apologised, offered £50 compensation, and set out the steps it had put in place to improve communication with its contractors and avoid any reoccurrences.
  13. The resident remained dissatisfied and referred the complaint to the Ombudsman. He also contacted his MP for help who contacted the landlord and again reported that the resident was unable to sufficiently heat his home.
  14. On 19 January 2022, the landlord’s contractor undertook a heat energy survey which confirmed that the resident was correct, and the radiators were undersized for the room size. The radiators were replaced in February 2022.
  15. The matter was referred to the Housing Ombudsman. As part of our mediation role the Ombudsman asked the landlord to review its compensation offer. As a result, the landlord confirmed an increase in its offer of compensation from £50 to £500. The resident did not accept this.

Assessment and findings

  1. The tenancy and legislation set out that the landlord must keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the home for space heating and heating water.
  2. The landlord must also ensure that the homes it provides meet the Decent Homes Standard. For a home to be considered ‘decent’ it must:
    1. Meet the current statutory minimum standard for housing
    2. Be in a reasonable state of repair
    3. Have reasonably modern facilities and services, and
    4. Provide a reasonable degree of thermal comfort.
  3. This final criterion requires dwellings to have both effective insulation and efficient heating.
  4. The Government’s Met Office website states: Ideally you should heat your home to a temperature of at least 18 °C. This is particularly important if you have reduced mobility, are 65 or over, or have a health condition, such as heart or lung disease. Having room temperatures slightly over 18 °C could be good for your health… Overnight, people who are 65 and over or who have pre-existing health conditions may find bedroom temperatures of at least 18 °C are good for their health.
  5. It is not known to what temperature the property could be heated. The first heat assessment (March 2021) confirmed that the radiators were not sufficient to heat the living room and the second heat assessment (January 2022) confirmed that both bedrooms, the kitchen, toilet, and hallway needed larger radiators to sufficiently heat the space.
  6. It is noted that the landlord was entitled to seek a remedy through repairs before considering full replacement. It was therefore appropriate for it to investigate whether repairing the valves would increase the heat output of the radiators. However once aware that these did not resolve the issue the landlord should have taken prompt action to ensure that the property had adequate heating, particularly given the limited mobility of the resident.
  7. The landlord missed the opportunity to manage the situation fairly when conducting the first heat assessment and no explanation has been provided as to why the results were inaccurate and/or differed from the second assessment. As a result, the resident was left with insufficient heating for a further 11 months (March 2021-Feb 2022), and for a minimum of 24 months in total (October 2019–February 2022).
  8. It is not disputed that the landlord failed to remedy the heating problem within the time span of the complaint. This was a failing.
  9. There were also delays in issuing a stage two response and in the landlord undertaking the action promised in its final response. Further action was needed by the resident, who referred the matter to this service and to his MP. It was only following this further intervention that the landlord delivered the action promised in its final response. This was not appropriate and constitutes a further failing on the part of the landlord.
  10. The landlord’s offer of £500 fails to fully recognise the potential significant and long-term effect on the resident of the delays in providing adequate heating, given his limited mobility. Nor did it fully recognise the extent of its complaint handling failures and the level of action the resident was required to take in order to get the landlord to take action.
  11. Although no finding has been made in relation to the landlord’s offer of temporary heating, it is noted that it informed the resident they may be able to claim the cost of using temporary heaters back from the landlord. Due to the passage of time, it is unlikely that an exact calculation can be made at this stage regarding any extra charges the resident may have been subject to. As such, it is appropriate to make a recommendation that the landlord offer a further amount in compensation as a goodwill gesture. This would be in recognition that the resident likely spent more on heating during the time temporary heaters were in use.

Determination (decision)

  1. Having carefully considered the evidence, it was determined that in accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme), there was:
  2. Maladministration by the landlord in relation to delays in replacing radiators at his home which meant the resident was unable to heat his home adequately.
  3. Maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaints handling.

Reasons

  1. The compensation offered by the landlord failed to fully acknowledge the following factors:
    1. the potential impact on the resident in light of his limited mobility,
    2. the length of time he was without adequate heating,
    3. the time and trouble that he was required to take in order to get the landlord to fully investigate the issue and to undertake the actions promised in its complaint response and
    4. the distress and inconvenience caused by the mishandling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and Recommendations

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of the date of this decision, the landlord should:
  1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified by this investigation.
  2. Pay the resident a total of £2000, comprised of:
  1. £1300 for the length of time he was without adequate heating, further impacted by his vulnerabilities including limited mobility (this includes the £500 offered by the landlord, if not previously accepted).
  2. £600 for the time and time trouble caused to the resident.
  3. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in the complaint handling.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord consider making a further payment of £100 as a goodwill gesture to the resident. This would be to cover any additional costs incurred by them as a result of having to use temporary heaters