Connexus Homes Limited (202324193)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202324193

Connexus Homes Limited

21 August 2024


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 excess cold, poor insulation, draughty windows and doors, and its communication and complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has been a tenant of the landlord of a bungalow with electric-only heating since 2015. He has multiple serious health issues and disabilities, including kidney disease that causes him to feel the cold more and that is worsened by cold environments. However, the landlord states it only has records from 2022 and 2023 that the resident is a disabled wheelchair user with a wheelchair ramp at his property.
  2. The resident’s property’s energy performance certificate (EPC) was issued in 2014 before he moved to the property and gave this an average ‘D’ rating, which was valid until May 2024. The EPC described his property as having good filled cavity wall and 200mm loft insulation and double glazed windows, estimating that 5,717 kWh per year of electricity was needed to heat the property. The landlord’s records described the resident’s property’s windows as being installed in 2009, the rear door in 2014, and the front door in 2017.
  3. The resident described repeatedly reporting cold affecting his health and costing him large amounts of electricity and money on heating at his property to the landlord after he moved there in 2015, which he also had to treat mould for. However, he referred to it as only responding by advising him to turn up the heating and put on more clothing. The landlord’s earliest record of the resident’s reports of cold at his property was when he told it in March 2022 that this was due to draughty windows and doors and a lack of insulation, so that heat escaped when he heated the property. It therefore attended to inspect the windows and doors within 8 working days in March 2022, but it did not note any follow on works for these or any action for the insulation at that time.
  4. The landlord next recorded the resident asked it to contact him in November 2022 about his property’s patio doors, roof, and windows letting out too much heat, and him seeking urgent assistance to pay his high heating bills due to his ill-health. It then confirmed after 3 working days he had all the benefits he was entitled to but he needed to keep the property warm due to his kidney and other conditions. However, the infrared survey the resident paid for showed his property losing heat to the atmosphere from particularly the roof and patio doors, suggesting poor insulation, which he agreed to send the landlord details of to discuss with him. It subsequently passed this to its contractor in December 2022 to survey his windows and cavity and loft insulation.
  5. The landlord’s contractor’s January 2023 survey found the resident’s property needed debris extracted and cavity wall and loft insulation installed. The resident chased it for these works in January 2023 and attempted to complain about these being outstanding in February 2023, before the contractor then completed the works in March 2023. He subsequently reported outstanding cold draughts from his kitchen door in May 2023, which the landlord requested be surveyed in June 2023 and replaced in 2023-24. The resident also asked to be reimbursed some of his high annual average 6,043 kWh electricity use’s £5,434 costs for heating while lacking insulation. As the landlord refused due to its works and the EPC rating, he complained again in July 2023.
  6. The resident complained that his infrared survey showed the EPC was wrong, finding loft insulation below limits and rubble and dust causing cold instead of insulation in the wall cavity, contrary to government regulations and legislation. He added that the landlord had not responded to his previous reports of cold at his property, so he had to expensively treat, heat, and get an infrared survey of the property before it took action, which he asked to be reimbursed for. Its July 2023 stage 1 complaint response apologised that the resident felt he did not receive the level of service he should have, referred to increased energy prices, and said it could only offer him £200 as a goodwill gesture, as it only received his concerns in November 2022 and its works rectified these in March 2023.
  7. The resident’s July 2023 final stage complaint declined the landlord’s offer as not addressing his heating and infrared survey costs from the cold due to the lack of insulation at his property he had reported as affecting his health since he moved in. It then replaced his rear patio doors in August 2023, and its September 2023 final stage complaint response apologised for his inconvenience, his dissatisfaction with its offer, its delay in recognising the insulation had degraded, and for only previously overhauling the doors and windows. The landlord explained elements in the EPC may have degraded over time, it could not find evidence of the resident’s reports before March 2022, and its offer was because it did not have proof of his before and after heating costs.
  8. The landlord nevertheless offered the resident another £400 for its failure and delay in resolving his issues, plus the £200 it previously offered for his heating costs. He subsequently discussed it also reimbursing his £894 infrared survey costs with it, which he and it agreed in September 2023, together with £400 compensation that he received in October 2023. The resident complained to the Ombudsman that he had reported cold at his property to the landlord for years after moving in until he paid for the infrared survey to show the lack of insulation. He explained it would not have subsequently installed this without the survey, causing him to overspend on ineffective heating affecting his health.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. It is very concerning the resident explained his multiple serious health issues and disabilities cause him to feel cold more, worsen in cold environments, and were reported with the cold and effect on his finances to the landlord since he moved to his property in 2015. His reports about this prior to March 2022 and the effect on his health and finances cannot, however, be considered by this investigation under paragraphs 42c and 42f of the Scheme. These state, respectively, that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints not brought to the landlord’s attention as a formal complaint within a reasonable period of normally within 12 months of the matters arising, or where it is quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts or other tribunal or procedure.
  2. As evidence has only been provided that the resident began attempting to formally complain about the above issues to the landlord from February 2023, this investigation is limited to considering its handling of his reports within 12 months of that date under paragraph 42c of the Scheme. It is also quicker, fairer, more reasonable, and more effective for him to seek a remedy for the effect on his health and finances through the courts or other tribunal or procedure under paragraph 42f of the Scheme. This is because the Ombudsman does not have the authority or expertise to determine liability or award damages for effects on health or finances in the way that the courts or insurers might.

Cold, insulation, windows, doors, communication, and complaint handling

  1. The resident’s tenancy agreement obliges the landlord to keep his property’s structure and exterior in repair, including the roof, walls, doors, and windows. Its repairs and maintenance policy requires it to complete routine repairs within 20 working days, and planned works to replace or renew different parts of the property at the end of their serviceable life. The landlord’s investment standard introduced after its insulation works at the resident’s property states it aims to exceed the government’s decent homes standard at its properties with a minimum of 300mm loft insulation and effective and sufficient cavity wall insulation. Its compliments and complaints procedure defines complaints as expressions of dissatisfaction with the standard of its service, actions or lack of action, which may be made in any format including via telephone, and are to be investigated and responded to within 10 working days at stage 1.
  2. The landlord initially responded to the resident’s 3 March 2022 report of cold from draughty windows and doors at his property that heat was escaping through in line with his tenancy agreement and its repairs and maintenance policy. This is because it attended to inspect the windows and doors it was responsible for repairing under the agreement on 15 March 2022, which was 8 working days later and therefore within the policy’s 20-working-day repair timescale. It is nevertheless of concern that, while the landlord later suggested it overhauled the windows and doors at that time, its records did not describe whether it did any repairs on the above date, and it did not note any follow on works for these, which was inappropriate.
  3. The fact that the resident subsequently told the landlord from 8 November 2022 that his patio doors and windows were letting out too much heat also indicated that any previous repairs to overhaul the doors and windows were either unsuccessful or incomplete, which was unsuitable. Moreover, while it may not have been practical for it to have still kept detailed records of his case prior to March 2022 due to a change in its system and the length of time that had passed in the interim, it was not appropriate that it did not do so from that date. This is because the landlord’s partial records from March 2022 showed clear repair reports from the resident to it about cold from draughty doors and windows at his property, and that it responded to him about these.
  4. The landlord’s lack of detailed records for its more recent repairs in the resident’s case was additionally contrary to the recommendations of the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management (the spotlight report). This recommended it take action including implementing a knowledge and information management strategy, key minimum data recording standards, a review of its databases’ capability and capacity to record these, and staff training on using those systems, and so it was not suitable that its lack of records suggested it did not do so. The spotlight report also recommended the landlord review its internal guidance and ensure its databases recognised and adequately recorded temporary and permanent vulnerabilities.
  5. It is therefore concerning that, despite the resident reporting his multiple serious health issues and disabilities including kidney disease that was worsened by cold from at least November 2022, the landlord only recorded he was a disabled wheelchair user, contrary to the spotlight report above. Moreover, its lack of appropriately full and detailed records may have led to it delaying replacing his rear patio doors from the above date until over 9 months later on 22 August 2023, after he again reported these were not fitted properly on 24 May 2023, which was an extremely excessive delay. It is also of concern that, while the landlord responded to the resident’s report of a draught from his rear kitchen door on the latter date by requesting this be surveyed on 9 June 2023, it only recorded this was due to be replaced in its 2023-24 planned works.
  6. This meant the landlord may have been responsible for very lengthy delays in replacing the resident’s doors, contrary to its repairs and maintenance policy’s 20-working-day routine repair timescale, as well as for not recording any window works, which was unsuitable. However, it was especially inappropriate it did not respond to his 3 March 2022 report of a lack of insulation at that time, and it took him paying for an infrared survey to show this and provide it with the outcome from 17 November 2022 before it took action for this. The landlord then arranged a contractor’s survey of the property on 4 January 2023, over 10 months after the resident’s original report, which found debris needed to be extracted and cavity wall and loft insulation installed, contrary to its investment standard’s minimum loft and effective and sufficient cavity wall insulation.
  7. The landlord subsequently further delayed arranging for its contractor to carry out the above works for the resident’s insulation until 1, 13, and 21 March 2023, which he had chased it for on 18 January 2023 and attempted to complain to it about on 7 February 2023. It therefore only addressed his lack of insulation over a year after it recorded he originally reported this, and only after he had repeatedly chased it and provided an infrared survey at his own expense, which was far from suitable. This was particularly unreasonable in light of the resident’s reports to the landlord from at least November 2023 of his kidney disease being worsened by the cold at his property, which would have caused him even more distress, inconvenience, and physical and emotional impact.
  8. The landlord’s above insulation works were therefore additionally far in excess of its repairs and maintenance policy’s 20-working-day routine repair timescale. Moreover, it is concerning that it only accepted a stage 1 complaint from the resident almost 5 months after he attempted to submit this in February 2023 on 6 July 2023, which was very inappropriate. The landlord’s compliments and complaints procedure required it to accept as a complaint his original telephone call expressing dissatisfaction with the standard of its service and lack of action, and to investigate and respond to this within 10 working days. It instead did not do so at the time, required the resident to complain to it again in writing before it accepted the complaint, and only responded to this on 27 July 2023, an unsuitably excessive over 5 months after he first attempted to complain to it.
  9. It was therefore reasonable the landlord’s complaint responses apologised that the resident did not receive the level of service he should have, for his inconvenience and dissatisfaction, and for its delay in recognising his insulation had degraded and only previously responding about his doors and windows. It was also appropriate it paid him the £1,294 compensation agreed for his £894 infrared survey costs and £400 for his increased electricity bills from paying more for ineffective heating while lacking insulation. This was in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance recommending over £1,000 for significant failures in service that had a seriously detrimental severe long-term impact on the resident, and so was proportionate to satisfactorily resolve his complaint.
  10. It is noted the landlord self-assessed itself against the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) and completed a complaint performance and service improvement report after the resident’s case. It is nevertheless of concern it delayed accepting and responding to his stage 1 complaint, so it is recommended below to review its staff’s training needs in relation to the application of its compliments and complaints procedure and the Code to avoid doing so again. The landlord’s lengthy repair delays, and its lack of full and detailed repair and vulnerability records for the resident, additionally remain concerning, so it is further recommended to review its staff’s training needs on its repairs and maintenance policy and self-assess against the spotlight report.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Review its staff’s training needs in relation to the application of its compliments and complaints procedure and the Code to ensure that it promptly accepts and responds to formal complaints in every relevant case.
    2. Review its staff’s training needs in relation to the application of its repairs and maintenance policy to ensure that it provides timely and comprehensive repairs in every relevant case.
    3. Complete a self-assessment of its compliance against the spotlight report. This is including to ensure a knowledge and information management strategy, key minimum data recording standards, a review of its databases’ capability and capacity to record these, staff are trained on using those systems, a review of its internal guidance, and temporary and permanent vulnerabilities are recognised and adequately recorded.