Home Group Limited (202207913)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202207913

Home Group Limited

28 April 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

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for it to replace her heating system.
2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident is a tenant of the landlord. The property is a flat. The landlord has no recorded vulnerabilities for her or her household.
4. The resident first raised concerns over her storage heaters to the landlord in March 2022. She reported that they were inefficient and sought for them to be upgraded. She chased the landlord in April 2022, and was informed by it on 24 April 2022 that it would not replace the heaters until 2024, as part of planned maintenance.
5. The resident complained to the landlord on 3 May 2022 because she was dissatisfied that the landlord would not replace her storage heaters and sought for it to install heaters that she could control the timing of, as a resolution.
6. The landlord’s operative visited the resident’s property on 6 June 2022 to review her heaters and take photos of the current heating system. She advised them that the system worked but she had no control over when the heating turned on at 4 a.m. and the property would be cold by 4 p.m. when she wanted the heating on. She also reported that the heaters were not cost efficient and that she had a health condition which required her to keep warm, but the heat did not last all day.
7. The landlord’s stage one complaint response of 24 June 2022 did not uphold the complaint on the basis that it was unable to move the planned maintenance schedule forward.
8. She reported that she escalated her complaint on 23 June 2022. However, the landlord’s records do not show when she did. She remained dissatisfied with its decision that it would not upgrade her storage heaters before 2024. She had also reported that she had previously been told by a senior staff member that her heaters would be replaced.
9. The landlord’s final stage complaint response of 12 July 2022 upheld its stage one decision. It explained that it had investigated her reports that she had previously been informed that it would replace her storage heaters and found no evidence to confirm this. It stated that it had explored all necessary actions to ensure that the current heating system was working and did not need to be replaced at that time.
10. The resident subsequently referred her complaint to this Service because she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s decision to not replace her heating system. She explained that she and a member of her household had health and mobility problems and requested assistance from this Service. She also stated that the landlord had previously upgraded a neighbour’s heating system, which was now more cost effective.

Assessment and findings

11. It is not disputed that the landlord is responsible for the repair and maintenance of the resident’s heating system, as outlined in her tenancy agreement. The landlord’s property management policy outlines that planned maintenance refers to organised and controlled repairs and maintenance carried out to a pre-determined procedure. It also states that it shall consider the needs of customers when planning individual property improvements and make adjustments where reasonable.
12. As social landlords have limited budgets to use for the benefit of all residents, it can be reasonable for a landlord to carry out works to replace elements of the property, such as a heating system, as part of a planned programme of works rather than on an ad-hoc basis. This is because it may be more practical and more economical to do so. This is unless the item in question is not in repair and poses an immediate risk to the resident.
13. The resident had initially reported her concerns about the heating in her property in March 2022. The landlord acted appropriately by confirming with the resident that the storage heater was not currently broken, making internal queries and finding out whether it was able to replace this for her. In this case, the landlord determined that the resident’s heating system upgrade would be carried out as part of the major works cycle in 2024-26.
14. As this decision was based on its staff and contractor’s inspections of 6 June 2022, and alongside discussions with managers from several teams, it was appropriate for it to rely on their expertise and experience when determining this, in the absence of any other expert evidence to the contrary. It is also reasonable that it informed her of this on 24 April 2022 following its internal queries, as this managed her expectations, and allowed her to raise a complaint.
15. It is noted that, despite the resident describing her health conditions throughout the complaint to the landlord, it does not have any recorded vulnerabilities for her or her household. It would be appropriate for the landlord to have this information available on its system for it to refer to when considering whether planned maintenance, such as an upgrade to a resident’s heating system, requires reasonable adjustment.
16. While the Ombudsman is unable to evaluate medical evidence, we will consider whether the landlord took this into account when considering the resident’s circumstances. The Ombudsman recognises that some of our residents’ circumstances mean that they are more affected by landlords’ actions or inactions than others. Consideration of any aggravating factors (such as a resident’s health condition) could justify the landlord bringing the date of the planned maintenance forward or offering a heating system upgrade outside of its schedule, as outlined in its property management policy.
17. The landlord’s stage one complaint response acknowledged the resident’s concerns regarding her need to keep warm due to medical conditions. While it acknowledged this, it did not offer a solution to the resident, or explain why this did not impact its decision to not bring the system upgrade forwards or offer her an upgrade outside of the planned maintenance programme.
18. It has therefore been recommended below to invite the resident to submit details and evidence of her health conditions and vulnerabilities to it, for it to consider and respond to in relation to her reports and the impact on her medical conditions.
19. The landlord’s information on its website about complaints, outlines that a stage one complaint should receive a response within ten working days, and final stage complaints should be responded to within 20 working days. Furthermore, the website outlines that, if these timescales cannot be met, an explanation and expected date for the response should be provided to the resident.
20. The landlord provided a stage one complaint response on 24 June 2022, which was 36 working days after the resident complained on 3 May 2022. This was contrary to its published timescale of 10 working days, and what is more, there is no evidence to suggest that the landlord informed the resident of the delay. While it was appropriate that it had previously explained its position on the substantive issue thus managing her expectation, this delay would have caused her further inconvenience, as she waited for its response and explanation.
21. This amounted to a failure on the landlord’s part, which it did not appropriately address in its complaint responses to the resident or provide a remedy to her for. It has therefore been ordered below to pay her £50 compensation, in recognition of its poor stage one complaint handling in her case. The landlord has also been recommended below to review its staff’s training needs regarding their application of its complaints procedure, and of this Service’s complaint handling code, to seek to ensure that the delay in its handling of the resident’s complaint does not occur again in the future.

Determination

22. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s request for it to replace her heating system.
23. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Order and Recommendations

24. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident compensation totalling £50 within four weeks, in recognition of its service failures in its stage one complaint handling.
25. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Contact the resident to confirm its records in relation to her medical conditions and determine if any of her vulnerabilities need to be recorded by it.
    2. Review its staff’s training needs regarding their application of its complaints procedure, and of this Service’s complaint handling code, to seek to ensure that the failings in its complaint handling does not occur again in the future.
26. The landlord should contact this Service to confirm it has complied the above order, and whether it will follow the above recommendations, within four weeks.