Optivo (now Southern Housing) (202219051)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202219051

Optivo (now Southern Housing)

24 October 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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of reports of issues with the boiler.
    2. The level of compensation awarded.
    3. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of a 3 bedroom house. The resident lives in the property with her 2 children, one of which is disabled.
  2. The resident was moved into the property through a management transfer on 11 November 2022. At the time of moving in, there were warning stickers on the boiler stating that the boiler had not been commissioned and was not safe to use.
  3. An engineer attended on 14 November 2022. They did not commission the boiler as they stated a part was required. The resident contacted the landlord several times between 18 November 2022 and 1 December 2022 to advise there was no hot water or heating. The landlord advised it was waiting on a part, but it could not give a timescale as to when this would arrive. On 1 December 2022 the contractor sent out a supervisor who was able to commission the boiler.
  4. The resident formally complained on 18 November 2022. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 9 December 2022. It stated that the boiler was not condemned but was not safe to use until an engineer commissioned it. It advised that the engineer should have been able to resolve the issue during the first visit on 14 November 2022. The landlord offered an apology for the service the resident received.  It offered a total of £133 compensation. This was made up of £2 per day for two temporary heaters which it had provided over 17 days, £15 for repeat visits to resolve the issue, and £50 for the distress and inconvenience.
  5. The resident was not happy with the response at stage 1 and requested that the complaint be escalated on the 20 December 2022. The landlord provided the stage 2 response on 19 January 2023. The landlord confirmed that the boiler was now safe to use and had been checked by a gas safe engineer. It also arranged for an independent inspection by heating consultants to provide further peace of mind to the resident. The landlord felt the compensation provided at stage 1 was correct. It noted that it had taken learning from this case in relation to void properties. It stated that it saw an advantage to having live supplies in void properties so that it can test appliances before residents move in. It confirmed it would work with its void team to review the procedure.
  6. The resident remains unhappy with the landlord’s response, in particular in relation to the compensation awarded. The resident states she was without hot water and heating and that she should not have been moved into the property.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of reports of issues with the boiler.

  1. The landlord moved the resident in to the property on 11 November 2022. In accordance with its empty homes policy the landlord should have uploaded a gas safety certificate before marking the property as ready to let. This Service cannot see that a gas safety certificate was provided until the 1 December 2022, when the resident’s boiler was commissioned. The landlord failed to ensure the property was ready to let in accordance with its own procedure, leaving the resident without a working boiler for 20 days. This caused unnecessary distress and inconvenience for the resident.
  2. The landlord sent an engineer on 14 November 2022. This Service cannot see that the resident reported the boiler as not working to the landlord, before this date. The landlord acted correctly in arranging for an engineer to go out as soon as it was notified of the issue.
  3. The engineer that attended on 14 November 2022 stated that a part was needed for the boiler to be fixed. The landlord’s breakdown and repair policy states that every engineer should have a stock of spare parts so that repairs can be fixed on the first visit. If the repair cannot be completed a further appointment must be made within 24 hours. The landlord did not fix the boiler on the first visit and this Service has not seen any evidence which supports that a further appointment was made to fix the boiler. This left the resident unclear of when the issue would be resolved.
  4. The breakdown and repair policy states that if the heating cannot be fixed, temporary heating should be given. The landlord provided 2 heaters. However, its policy states that for the resident’s 3 bedroom property, 4 heaters should have been given. The landlord did not act in accordance with its own policy and left the resident with insufficient temporary heating.
  5. The resident stated that they had no hot water or heating when speaking to the landlord on 18, 22, and 24 November 2022. The landlord has advised this Service that the resident had an immersion heater and was not without hot water. It would be reasonable, given the resident reported a lack of hot water on several occasions, for the landlord to have ensured that the resident knew how to use the immersion heater and to confirm the resident could access hot water. This Service has not seen evidence that the landlord communicated with the resident on how to access hot water, resulting in the resident being without this facility until the boiler was fixed on 1 December 2022.
  6. The landlord should have communicated with the resident while the repair was outstanding. This Service can see that the landlord contacted the resident on 21 November 2022 but was unable to give any timescales for the repair. The landlord also contacted the resident on 24 November 2022 and advised it was chasing the contractor for the parts to fix the boiler. Although some contact is noted from the landlord to the resident, the communication was insufficient in providing any clarity on when and how the issue with the boiler would be resolved.
  7. The landlord received a notification on 28 November 2022 from the Gas Safe Register that it wanted to complete an inspection, following concerns raised by the resident. The landlord contacted the contractor, who sent a senior engineer to the resident’s property on 1 December 2022. The landlord acted appropriately by ensuring that the contractor went out to inspect the property, given concerns of gas safety.
  8. On 1 December 2022, the senior engineer was able to restore the supply by commissioning the boiler without the need for any repairs to take place. Given the repeated reports from the resident that they were without hot water and heating, and the vulnerability of the residents, this Service considers that it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have arranged for a senior engineer to visit prior to this date.
  9. The total amount of time without a working boiler was 20 days. Although this is not an extensive amount of time, these were the winter months. The resident had 2 young children in the property. The landlord failed to provide adequate temporary heating and failed to ensure the resident had access to hot water. The landlord did not appear to complete its void checks before moving the resident into the property. It did not take all reasonable actions to keep the resident informed and to resolve the boiler issue in a timely manner. This caused significant distress and inconvenience to the resident. This service considers there to be maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of reports of issues with the boiler.

The level of compensation awarded

  1. There were 2 temporary heaters provided to the resident between 14 November 2022 and 1 December 2022. The landlord offered £68 compensation for the increase in energy costs, which was calculated as £2 per day per heater. The landlord has calculated the compensation for additional energy costs in line with its policy.
  2. The landlord did not make any award for leaving the resident without hot water. Although the landlord stated that there was hot water through the immersion heater, this Service has not seen evidence that the resident was able to access hot water. The landlord’s policy states that 10% of the net rent per day should be awarded where residents have been left without hot water. The landlord should have considered compensation for failing to ensure the resident had access to hot water.
  3. The landlord offered £50 for the distress and inconvenience the situation caused. The landlord has offered this in line with its compensation matrix which states that for low impact issues that last for 0-3 months £50 will be offered. For medium impact issues that last for 0-3 months the starting award is £250. This Service considers that there was medium impact on the resident. This is due to there being 2 young children in the property, one of which is disabled, during winter months. The landlord left the family without sufficient alternative heating and without ensuring the resident could access hot water.
  4. The landlord offered £15 for repeat visits to resolve the issue. This is in line with the landlord’s compensation matrix.
  5. The landlord failed to apply its full compensation policy to the resident’s complaint. It failed to appropriately consider the resident’s circumstances and child’s vulnerability. This Service finds there was maladministration in awarding the correct level of compensation.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The resident raised the complaint on 18 November 2022. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 21 November 2022 and responded at stage 1 on 9 December 2022. There was a total of 15 working days between the resident raising the complaint and the landlord issuing its response. The landlord’s policy states that it will acknowledge any complaint within 3 working days and will provide a formal response within 10 working days. The landlord acknowledged the complaint within its timescales. There was a small delay in issuing the stage 1 response, however this Service does not consider the delay to be unreasonable.
  2. The resident escalated the complaint to stage 2 on 20 December 2022. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 3 January 2023 and issued its stage 2 response on 19 January 2023. There was a total of 19 working days between the resident escalating the complaint to stage 2 and the landlord issuing its response. This Service does not consider the response times to be unreasonable.
  3. The landlord’s complaint policy states that in its response to residents’ complaints it will acknowledge where things have gone wrong, apologise, provide an explanation, and provide a financial remedy if appropriate. The landlord did provide an apology, an offer of compensation, and explained that the initial engineer who attended incorrectly failed to commission the boiler. As such, it followed its complaints procedure.
  4. In its stage 2 response, the landlord gave the resident assurance that the boiler was safe by confirming that it had been checked by a gas safe engineer. It also provided further assurance by arranging for an independent inspection by heating consultants. This was a positive step from the landlord to provide reassurance to the resident regarding the gas safety concerns.
  5. The landlord also noted that it had learned lessons from the complaint. It recognised the advantage in void properties having a live supply so appliances can be tested before moving a resident in. The landlord has stated it will review its policy. This Service recognises that the landlord has demonstrated good practice to learn from complaints and take action to prevent the situation happening again.
  6. The landlord has followed its complaint procedure and has taken reasonable action to provide additional assurance to the resident that her boiler is safe. This Service finds there was no maladministration in relation to complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of issues with the boiler.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the level of compensation awarded.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is to provide a further apology to the resident within 4 weeks of the date of this report for:
    1. Not following its policy before letting out a void property, resulting in the resident being moved into a property without a working boiler.
    2. Unnecessary delays in commissioning the boiler.
    3. The failure to ensure that adequate alternatives for hot water and heating were provided to the resident while the boiler was not working.
  2. The landlord is to pay the resident, within 4 weeks of the date of this report, a total of £360 in compensation made up of:
    1. £68 previously offered for additional energy costs if it has not already been paid.
    2. £15 previously offered for repeat visits to resolve the issue if it has not already been paid.
    3. £27 which is based on 10% of the rent charge for 17 days without hot water. Although the landlord confirmed to this Service that there was an immersion heater, this Service has not seen any evidence that the landlord discussed this with the resident. The calculation is made in line with the landlord’s compensation policy for a resident not having access to hot water.
    4. £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident, in line with the landlord’s compensation policy for medium impact. This is due to the landlord not providing sufficient heating and hot water alternatives to a family with two young children, one of which is disabled, during winter months.

Recommendation

  1. It is recommended that the landlord takes the action it has noted in its complaint response to reviewing its void policy to ensure this situation does not arise again.
  2. It is also recommended that the landlord ensure all staff are aware of the requirements to provide adequate heating and hot water alternatives where the landlord cannot provide an immediate repair to a boiler fault.