Camden Council (202233157)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202233157

Camden Council

30 January 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

The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s:
1. Response to the resident’s reports of faults with the heating and hot water system;
2. Handling of the associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident holds a secure tenancy for a one bedroom flat, which began in 2014.
The landlord’s guide for tenants explains it is responsible for the maintenance of the heating system and appliances, under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act (1985).
The landlord’s repairs policy specifies that a loss of heating or hot water in winter will be treated as an emergency, and attended within 24 hours.
The landlord’s guidance on remedies sets out the typical compensation it will pay for a loss of both heating and hot water as £3.80 per day, £2.50 where heating is lost, and £1.00 where hot water is lost.
The landlord has a two-stage internal complaints process. It aims to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. Its complaints policy commits to making reasonable adjustments for those who need them.
The resident has advised that she has hearing difficulties, and does not communicate over the phone.
The Equality Act (2020) sets out the landlord’s responsibility to ensure it does not treat the resident less favourably because of a protected characteristic, including a disability as defined by the Act. This means it must ensure that the resident is not disadvantaged because of hearing loss.

Summary of Events

The landlord’s contractor attended to carry out a repair to the resident’s heating system on 30 November 2022. On 16 December 2022 the resident reported to the landlord that her hot water worked only intermittently, as it sputtered then trickled from the taps before stopping. She explained she could not do her washing up.
The landlord logged a stage 1 complaint from the resident on 28 December 2022. She explained that her thermostat had stopped working on 30 November 2022, and had not been repaired. On 16 December 2022, she had reported that her boiler valve had stopped working and that she had no hot water, which had been raised as an emergency. The resident had reported this again on 28 December 2022 as an emergency. The resident asked the landlord for a new thermostat, to repair the boiler so that she had running hot water, and for compensation for the inconvenience she had been caused.
On 6 January 2023 the landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response to the resident. It:
1. Told the resident it did not uphold her complaint, as it could not “find any failure to provide [her] with a good service”;
2. Said its contractor had attended on 30 November 2022 and found the thermostat was not working. It did not categorise this as an emergency, because there was heat coming from the radiators and “hot water was not an issue when the engineer attended”;
3. It had no record of a works order raised on 16 December 2022. It did have record that the resident contacted it on 28 December 2022 and reported the boiler and thermostat had not worked since 30 November 2022;
4. Its engineer had attended on 28 December 2022, and found that the heating system worked, however the thermostat needed new batteries;
5. It had booked an appointment for 9 January 2023, to “fully resolve any repair matters”;
6. The resident could “search for [the landlord’s] heating rebate and fill in the online form” if she wanted it to consider whether she was due any compensation;
7. Advised the resident how to escalate the complaint to stage 2 if she remained dissatisfied.
The landlord escalated the resident’s complaint to stage 2, after she contacted it on 12 January 2023. She had explained that the hot water flow to her kitchen and bathroom taps had reduced to a trickle, which shut off after a few seconds.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 19 January 2023 and explained the repair was still outstanding, and its contractor had not attended appointments it had made for 17 and 18 January 2023.
The resident wrote again on 25 January 2023 and told the landlord that the “disruption” to the hot water supply for her bathroom and kitchen was still ongoing. She explained it had been assigned as a “priority” repair by the landlord, and that she had been told that a faulty valve on the boiler needed to be replaced.
The resident explained to the landlord that she had emptied the contents of the boiler cupboard in preparation for the repair to the boiler, and she had put them on her bed and floor. She was sleeping on her sofa, which was affecting her injured hip.
On 17 February 2023 the resident emailed the landlord and reiterated her dissatisfaction with the delays to the repair. She said three appointments had been missed, and asked for the landlord to confirm the exact date and time it would repair the hot water supply. She asked for her complaint to be escalated to a “third stage”, and advised the landlord her preferred method of contact was email, as she did not take calls due to hearing loss.
The landlord emailed the resident on 20 February 2023 and confirmed her stage 2 complaint was in a queue, and there was a “lengthy delay” in responding to cases due to the “large volume” of complaints it had received. It advised the resident she could contact its repairs team in the meantime, and signposted her to its website which had various contact options, including a live chat option.
On 21 February 2023 the resident responded to the landlord and explained she needed assistance to contact its repairs team due to hearing loss. She said she could not be expected to wait until its complaints team investigate her complaint for the repair to be completed.
The landlord sent a brief email the next day, 22 February 2023, in which it told the resident its stage 2 complaint review would seek to establish whether her complaint was handled correctly at stage 1.
The resident replied that afternoon, and reiterated that she had hearing loss and needed the complaints team to contact the repairs team. She explained that she needed the repair sorted, and then the landlord could investigate her complaint at its “earliest convenience”. She provided details of her social worker.
The landlord sent another brief response the next morning, and advised the resident she could report a repair through an online account, text message or web chat on its website. The resident replied in the afternoon, on 23 February 2023, and asked again for the landlord to contact its repairs team.
On 24 February 2023, the landlord advised the resident that its complaints team was “not able to make appointments”, and that its “remit” was to “process complaints”. It explained that appointments could only be made by its repairs team, and it had “informed” the resident of how she could contact the team without using a voice telephone. It confirmed it understood that appointments had been missed, and it would address this in its stage 2 complaint response.
On 27 February 2023 the resident contacted the landlord and explained that she had been unable to use the live chat on its website because heating and hot water repairs fall under the landlord’s “priority” repair category and must be phoned in. The resident pointed out that the landlord had told her it had no record of a works order being raised on 16 December 2022, and questioned why it was not concerned that a plumber had attended twice on that date claiming to work for the landlord. She asked again when the repair would be completed, and when the investigation into her complaint would begin.
On 10 March 2023 the resident contacted the landlord and provided six dates between 16 December 2022 and 7 March 2023 that the landlord had missed appointments on. The resident explained that a plumber had attended earlier that day and confirmed that the issue was a faulty valve. The landlord’s contractor had then attended, and had ordered a valve but had left her with no hot water in her kitchen or bathroom after they had carried out checks. She asked the landlord how much longer she would need to wait for the repair.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 24 March 2023. It:
1. Summarised the history of the repairs:
  1. It explained it had raised a repair on 30 November 2022, and another on 3 December 2022, and these had been attended on 16 December 2022;
  2. It had then booked an appointment for the heating programmer to be replaced, scheduled initially for 9 January 2023 and completed on 24 January 2023;
  3. The resident had reported five missed appointments between January and March 2023;
  4. On 9 March 2023 the landlord had established that all the radiators in the property worked, except in the living room. It returned on 10 March 2023 and identified that the problem was with a pipe and valve, and ordered replacement parts. An appointment had been booked in for the repair on 30 March 2023;
2. Advised it upheld the resident’s complaint, and apologised for the delays and missed appointments she had experienced;
3. Advised it had referred the repair to its contractor on several occasions. The stage 2 complaint handler would bring the resident’s complaint to the attention of senior managers in its repairs team, “in an effort to improve future performance for residents”;
4. Advised its complaints team would ensure the appointment booked for the end of March would go ahead, and then it would contact the resident to complete a heating rebate form for the period without hot water she had experienced since 16 December 2022;
5. Apologised for the delay in investigating the resident’s stage 2 complaint, which it confirmed was due to a “high volume” of complaints it had received;
6. Offered the resident £100 compensation for her time and trouble, £100 for her distress and inconvenience, and £100 for the delays and missed appointments;
7. Signposted the resident to the Housing Ombudsman if she remained dissatisfied.
On 30 March 2023 the resident contacted the landlord again, and explained an appointment had been set for the contractor to complete the repair that day. However, the landlord had sent its own plumber who had been unable to carry out the repair, and had raised an emergency repair instead. The resident told the landlord this was the third emergency repair that it had failed to attend.
The landlord arranged another appointment for its contractor on 31 March 2023, which the resident again reported as having been missed.
On 3 April 2023 the resident emailed the landlord and set out the impact the events had on her. She told the landlord nine appointments had been missed by then. She suffered chronic pain which was made worse by not being able to exercise when she waited in for the repair. She was stressed and angry that the landlord had not sorted the issue.
The landlord chased the repair with its contractor the next day, and the contractor advised it had not attended the most recent appointment “due to an admin error”. The contractor told the landlord it had since then left the resident an answerphone message and had tried to knock on her door but had not had an answer, and it would try to “cold call” that day.
Later on 4 April 2023, the contractor confirmed to the landlord that it had replaced a valve in the boiler, and that it found the cylinder coil blocked due to limescale. It had left the resident an answerphone message to set up a provisional appointment to install a thermal store on 6 April 2023.
The resident has explained that in mid-April 2023 the landlord’s contractor had attended with a replacement cylinder, but it was “too big” and would have required the removal of shelves in the cupboard to fit. She asked for a smaller cylinder, and told the contractor she was prepared to wait the two to three weeks it had told her it would take for one to be delivered, because she needed the shelves. The contractor had then decided to fit a “slightly smaller” cylinder, and had removed one shelf from the cupboard, which the resident was “far from satisfied with”.
The resident has confirmed that this restored the hot water supply.
On 17 April 2023 the resident asked the landlord to pay the compensation it had offered to her by cheque.
The resident subsequently approached her local Citizens’ Advice for assistance with a separate complaint, and asked it to help her with the outstanding compensation payment from the landlord. Citizens’ Advice contacted the landlord on 13 June 2023 and asked when payment would be made.
The resident emailed the landlord on 25 July 2023 and explained she did not want to send her bank details by email, as it was not secure. She asked if it could send her a “barcoded letter” which she could cash at the Post Office. She reminded the landlord that she had hearing loss, and did not take calls, and asked it to reply by email or post.
The landlord responded the same day, by email, and its complaint handler told the resident “I am afraid we only send by bank transfer. I can contact you directly and you can give it verbally to me and I can process it in that way”.
The landlord has advised that it carried out a repair to the communal heating system on 7 August 2023, and there are no repairs currently outstanding in relation to the problem with the resident’s heating and hot water.
The resident replied to the landlord’s email regarding the compensation payment on 12 September 2023, and explained again that she had hearing loss and did not make calls. She asked it again for a cheque or “barcoded letter”.
On 15 September 2023 the landlord emailed the resident and explained the previous complaint handler no longer worked for it, and asked her to email her bank details. It said compensation payment was only paid by electronic transfer and that it is a “safe and secure” method.
The resident has explained to us that she felt the landlord had “taken advantage” of the fact she had hearing loss and could not phone it. She found the period without hot water very stressful, and could not “sleep at night for worry about when and how long” it would be before the landlord carried out the necessary repairs. She had to wash and clean in cold water or boil a kettle for several months.

Assessment and findings

Response to the reports of faults with the heating and hot water system

The resident was left without a working supply of hot water for roughly four months after she reported the issue on 16 December 2022.
The resident first reported issues with her heating and thermostat at the end of November 2022. The landlord’s first repair appeared to be partial, with it identifying that a new valve was needed. That valve was not ordered until 10 March 2023, and it was fitted on 4 April 2023 in addition to a new cylinder. The thermostat had been in need of new batteries, which the landlord identified and resolved at the end of December 2022.
It is troubling that, although the loss of heating or hot water over winter are classified as emergency repairs by the landlord, it left the issues unresolved for so long.
This is compounded by the fact the landlord did not step in to offer reasonable adjustments when the resident explained the trouble she had in requesting an emergency repair in February 2023. The resident advised the landlord that she had to sleep on her sofa after removing items from her boiler cupboard to prepare for the repair, and that this caused her pain due to a hip injury. The resident told the landlord she had a social worker and provided their details. The landlord had identified that the resident’s age made her more vulnerable to cold. Lastly, she explained the impact of having to wait in multiple times for missed repairs and unnecessary appointments instead of being able to go out and exercise, which also affected her ability to manage chronic pain.
It is not clear whether the contractor had been told by the landlord that the resident had hearing loss, but its actions suggest it was not aware. This may explain why it was unable to gain access to the resident’s property on some occasions, as it told the landlord it had knocked the door and left voice messages on the resident’s phone.
The resident was very distressed by the landlord’s lack of assistance. She thought it had used the fact she could not call in to avoid having to respond to the repair quicker.
The landlord failed to demonstrate it had met its responsibilities to the resident under the Equality Act (2010), which requires that it does not disadvantage anyone with a disability. It did not show it had provided the resident with appropriate avenues to report repairs or for the arrangement of the associated appointments. It did not appear to adjust its service after the resident told it about the impact on her physical health whilst she awaited an appointment.
The landlord’s offer of £300 compensation, for the distress, inconvenience, and time and trouble it had caused the resident, is some mitigation for what would otherwise be maladministration. However, its offer of redress did not recognise its failures in relation to the Equality Act and the need to make reasonable adjustments, which had been a significant compounding factor in the resident’s distress. Its redress was therefore not sufficient to put things right, and taken altogether there was service failure in the landlord’s response.

Handling of the associated complaint

As discussed above, the landlord was inflexible in its approach to the resident whilst she awaited its stage 2 complaint investigation. It is concerning that its complaints team did not consider whether it would be appropriate to contact the repairs team and assist the resident with logging the long-overdue repair before it had completed its investigation into her escalated complaint. This failure appears to have arisen at least in part because it did not take sufficient action to ensure that the actions it had promised in its stage 1 response had been completed. It also demonstrated a failure to focus on the needs of the customer and lack of a proactive approach to putting matters right.
Landlords should prioritise putting things right at the earliest opportunity, and should not rely on the use of an offer of redress at the end of a long and difficult process.
The landlord’s inflexibility was repeated when it came to the payment of compensation. The landlord did not accommodate the resident’s reasonable request not to have to send her bank details by email, and acted inappropriately when it told her she could phone instead. The landlord has advised us that it has now paid £300 to the resident.
It is not clear why the landlord could not pro-actively consider compensation for the period the resident was without hot water and heating (especially to her living room) as part of its calculated remedies at stage 2. It introduced a complicating step when it told the resident it would contact her to help her submit a claim through its heating rebate process. It failed to do this, and the resident has not been appropriately compensated to date.
The landlord told the resident that the delay in responding to her stage 2 complaint was due to high complaint volumes.
Whilst it did recognise it had failed to respond appropriately to the resident’s reports that her heating system was broken, the landlord did not demonstrate that it had used its complaint process to sufficiently draw out and identify the necessary learning from the resident’s case. This included the missed opportunity to ensure it considered and put reasonable adjustments in place.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a faults with the heating and hot water system.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Reasons

The landlord took just under four months to restore a working hot water supply, and just over four months to repair the heating system. This was over winter, and the resident’s circumstances meant she was caused significant distress. The landlord failed to demonstrate it had put reasonable adjustments in place to ensure that it met its responsibilities under the Equality Act (2010), and its level of redress was not sufficient to fully recognise the failings in this case.
The landlord did not ensure its promised actions were completed after it issued its complaint responses. The landlord recognised in its complaint responses that it had failed to deliver a good service, but did not show that it had fully understood what had gone wrong or how it could prevent this happening in future cases.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within three weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must apologise to the resident for the distress caused by its failings, including its failure to make adjustments to meet her needs. It should provide us with a copy once completed.
Within three weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should confirm it has recorded the resident’s communication needs on its systems, and made sure this will be conveyed to its contractors as appropriate.
Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must compensate the resident a total of £700. The landlord should consider the different options available to it to do this, if the resident does wish to email her bank details. These might include it visiting her, or it allowing her to visit it, so these can be provided in person, the use of vouchers, or giving her the option of a rent credit, for example. The compensation is to be made up of:
1. £300 it previously offered, if not already paid;
2. £250 for the inconvenience the resident was caused during the period without hot water and an operational heating system (with reference to the landlord’s published compensation guidance and adjusted to take its previous offer into account). This should replace the landlord’s offer to consider a claim from the resident through its rebate process;
3. £150 for the distress caused by the landlord’s failure to make reasonable adjustments for the resident’s needs.
Within six weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should review the liaison arrangements between its repairs and complaints teams, to ensure that its complaints team can log or request repairs if needed. This review should include consideration of whether its complaints team has an adequate triage process to identify outstanding repairs that fall into its emergency category. It should also ensure there is clarity as to who is responsible for monitoring the progress of repairs associated with a complaint and for updating the resident. It should confirm to us what it has decided, and any action it intends to take as a result.
Within six weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should consider whether its complaints procedure provides sufficient clarity for its staff as to who is responsible for monitoring the actions its promises in stage 1 and 2 complaint responses, to ensure they are completed on time and to a good standard. It should confirm to us what it has decided, and any action it intends to take as a result.
Within four weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should use its contract monitoring process to formally review the actions of its heating contractor in this case, and consider whether it fulfilled its expectations regarding the service delivered. It is recommended that this includes consideration of the appointments the contractor missed, the standard of the repairs completed (including the removal of the cupboard shelf) and the methods the contractor used to communicate with the resident. It should clearly set out any expected improvements in performance it identifies. The landlord should advise us of the outcome of this review once completed.