Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited (202120508)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202120508

Shepherds Bush Housing Association Limited

27 July 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 is about the landlord’s:
1. Handling of the works to remedy the faults found to the gas supply serving the block.
2. Handling of the hot water cylinder installation to the resident’s flat.
3. Response to the resident’s request to install an electric hob.
4. Response to the resident’s queries regarding buy back.
5. Communication to the gas supplier following the isolation of the block’s gas supply.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident has been a shared owner of their property, a one bedroom flat, since 2008. The flat is within a multi storey block which has 69 flats in total. The landlord is the freeholder of the block.
In April 2020, the landlord’s gas auditor found issues with the block’s gas supply. The issues were found to be caused by unsupported gas pipes, some of which were found to have collapsed under their own weight. As a result, the landlord was issued with an ‘At Risk’ notice. In gas safety, this classification of notice is given where faults have been identified that could constitute a danger to life or property without further faults developing.
As a result of the notice, recommendations were made for the landlord. One of which, included testing the pipework regularly. The recommended testing started in May 2020 and the landlord following this, began exploring its options to resolve the gas supply issue.
In March 2021, the landlord suggested the installation of a Heat Interface Unit (HIU) as an alternative to provide heating and hot water while the gas supply issues were being investigated. The residents of the block opposed this, so the landlord instructed a technical specialist to appraise the options it had to address the gas supply issue in the long term.

Summary of events

The technical specialist attended in June 2021 and found several defects with the gas supply. The landlord was issued another At Risk notice as a result. The specialist recommended that the landlord immediately isolate the block’s gas supply and explore temporary remedial works, ahead of the longer term work to address the faults.
The specialist gave the landlord details of the faults found and provided five options for a longer term solution to the issues. The options provided required extensive work to the block and the individual flats.
The landlord received the specialist’s report on the evening of 3 June 2021 and wrote to all residents in the block the following day. When writing, it informed that the gas supply to the block would be isolated from 1pm as recommended. It offered all residents the option to either stay in their flats or, said it would arrange a temporary move for those who did not wish to stay. The residents who stayed, including the resident of this complaint, were offered an allowance of £500 per household in recognition of the loss off amenities. The landlord’s letter confirmed that the allowance could be used for food or, electrical cooking equipment and would cover the loss of amenities from the day of the isolation until 8 June 2021. The landlord’s letter also provided the residents with contact information for support and it confirmed that an update on the temporary solution to restore the amenities (heating, hot water and cooking facilities) would be confirmed by 7 June 2021. It also reassured that it was simultaneously working on a longer term resolution.
The landlord provided the update on the temporary solutions it would provide, as agreed, on 7 June 2021. It provided all flats an electric hot plate for cooking and two oil radiators for heating. For hot water, it agreed to install hot water cylinders to all the flats. The landlord advised residents that to accommodate the cylinders, it would remove their gas boilers and store them, until the gas supply was switched back on. It also advised that the cupboard the cylinder was going to be installed in may need to be adjusted to fit the cylinder.
Ahead of the installation, it provided a leaflet detailing the cylinder being installed. It aimed to complete the installation of the cylinders by 18 June 2021, and agreed to pay a further allowance per week, per flat or a temporary move, until residents had amenities fully restored via the temporary measures.
In its communication to the residents on 7 June 2021, the landlord informed that the longer term remedial work would likely take a number of months to complete. It explained that it was considering the solutions the specialists proposed but had discounted one option to install a HIU, due to the resident’s previous opposition to this. In response to queries it received about the buy back of the flats, the landlord said it did not have a policy in place for this. It agreed to consider the viability of buying back the flats as part of its assessment into the long term solutions but said that it was unlikely it could offer to do this.
For the remainder of June 2021 and throughout July 2021, the landlord met with residents of the block and committed to delivering resident’s weekly updates, via letter, on the progress of the temporary solutions, the long term solutions and the support it was able to offer residents. One of the ways the landlord offered to support residents was to provide a letter to their gas suppliers, asking for an exemption from charges while the gas supply was off. The landlord told residents that the letters for the suppliers would be provided by 4 July 2021.
The resident contacted the landlord on 10 June 2021 and asked that it provide the measurements and manual for the cylinder before she agreed a date for the installation. She informed that having this would help her to understand how the cylinder operated and what alterations may be made to the cupboard to accommodate the cylinder. Before the resident received a response, she was contacted regarding the installation and agreed an installation date for 16 June 2021. She emailed the landlord again on 11 June 2021, with concerns that the cylinder would not fit in the existing cupboard and would result in a loss of storage space within the cupboard. The resident indicated that she wanted the landlord to consider installing an alternative cylinder that would fit in the existing space. The landlord did not respond. This Service is aware that the resident subsequently signed a petition against the installation of the cylinder. A copy of the petition has not been provided.
On 15 June 2021, the resident emailed the leasehold team and asked who was dealing with the resales of the flats. The leasehold team forwarded her email to the resales team however, no response was provided.
As a result of the petition the resident signed against the hot water cylinder installation, the landlord placed the appointment booked for 16 June 2021 on hold. The installation was later rescheduled by the resident for 28 June 2021. This second appointment was missed, due to operatives running late. When informing the landlord of the missed appointment, the resident said she wanted £100 for her loss of earnings. The landlord apologised, rescheduled the installation for 30 June 2021 and, assured that the resident would be notified if there were any delays on the day of the appointment.
The resident also emailed the landlord separately, on 28 June 2021, to request permission to install an electric hob. She explained that the landlord had provided a single hot plate that was unsuitable as a cooking facility for her family of three and was affecting their mental and physical health. She said that the landlord had not been responsive to her concerns about this prior and asked the landlord to promptly respond to her request.
The cylinder installation was rescheduled to 30 June 2021. On the day of the installation, the operatives ran late and the resident contacted the landlord to notify of this before they arrived. When the operative arrived, they completed the installation. The day after, the resident contacted the landlord with dates she was available for it to attend and box the cylinder in. She also requested a receipt for her boiler that was removed. The landlord agreed to attend on 9 July 2021, to start the work and provide the receipt.
The resident submitted a formal complaint to the landlord on 5 July 2021 and complained that:
1. The booking of the cylinder installation had not been coordinated properly and she had to chase the landlord about missed appointments and late attendance by its operatives.
2. She had spent several hours trying to arrange a follow up appointment for work to box in the cylinder but could not get through via phone to the landlord.
3. The landlord had not responded to her request for the measurements and manual for the cylinder and as a result, she agreed to have the cylinder installed under protest.
4. The service she received did not reflect the management fee the landlord charged. She asked for the landlord’s service standards for responses to emails and call wait times and compensation for the service she had received.
5. The cooking facilities the landlord provided were unsuitable and the landlord had not responded to her request to install a hob. As well permission she wanted the landlord to explain why it took over a week to respond to the request.
6. It took three weeks for the landlord to acknowledge the residents of the block’s queries about the buy back of the flats. She said that she was promised a call from the landlord regarding the surrender of her flat but the call was not received and her email regarding this on 15 June 2021 was not responded to. She asked the landlord to confirm its position on whether it would buy back the flat and call her as it promised.
7. The landlord had changed its position on buying back and previously offered the option to surrender properties but had changed to not offering this option of buy back. She said she wanted to know what caused the landlord to change its position on this.
8. The landlord had not sent the letters to the gas suppliers by 4 July 2021 as agreed, as a result she had been charged for a full month by her gas supplier.
9. She had not received a further allowance payment of £500 she was expecting, due to the failed installation appointment on 28 June 2021 and the time she spent rearranging this. In addition, she advised that she wanted £100 compensation for arranging time off work to accommodate the missed installation appointment.
The resident added further points to the complaint on 9 July 2021, including that the landlord missed the appointment for the follow on work appointment that day.
The resident chased the landlord on 12 July 2021 to reschedule the missed appointment but received no response until 27 July 2021, when an appointment for 30 July 2021 was agreed.
On 13 July 2021, the landlord provided the letter for the gas supplier which asked suppliers to remove the existing standing charges until the supply was restored.
The landlord provided its stage one response to the complaint on 19 July 2021. It advised that the initial installation date of 16 June 2021, had been placed on hold after the resident signed a petition. It acknowledged that the appointment booked for 28 June 2021 was missed and that it attended late on the day of the installation. Regarding the follow on works scheduled for the 9 July 2021, the landlord stated this had been completed. The landlord confirmed that it had written the letter for the gas suppliers on 13 July 2021 and apologised for the delay in providing this.
The landlord apologised for the time it took to respond to the resident’s request to install an electric hob and declined permission for this. It explained the reason was because the facilities it had provided were considered appropriate and if electric hobs were permitted, it could exceed the building’s supply capacity. In relation to the query concerning the buy back of the flats, it said it would provide information on this the following week but reiterated that it was unlikely it would be able to offer it. In respect of the allowance the resident noted she was expecting, the landlord said that it had resolved all the issues regarding the payments and no further payments were being made. It did not clarify whether the resident was entitled to a further weekly payment, or not.
In response to the request for its service standards, the landlord provided links to its customer handbook and its customer charter. It apologised for the issues the resident experienced with its communication and said that it would ensure that future correspondence was responded to in a timely and detailed manner. It confirmed that it would also continue to update residents weekly. The landlord concluded that there had been failures due to the missed appointments and a lack of responsiveness to the resident’s communication. It apologised and offered the resident £25 compensation for the missed appointment on 28 June 2021. In addition, it offered the resident £25 for the failure found in its communication.
The resident requested an escalation of the complaint on 22 July 2021because she found that the response only partially addressed her complaint and contained incorrect information. With the request, the resident provided a copy of heremail of 9 July 2021, images confirming that the follow on work to box in the cylinder had not been completed and an image of the single hot plate the landlord provided.
Within a weekly update it provided residents of the block on 29 July 2021, the landlord indicated that it was still considering the option of buyback although reiterated that it was unlikely it could do so. It said in the meantime, it would offer residents who wanted to market their properties, the following support:
1. Allowing them to source their own independent property valuation. It recommended that residents ensure valuations were completed by a RICS surveyor.
2. Enabling them to market the property independently or jointly with the landlord.
3. Providing a ‘letter of comfort’ to prospective buyers, confirming that the gas supply issue is short term and that fire remediation work was already within the current fire safety programme.
4. Waive restrictions around subletting.
On 18 August 2021, the landlord provided its final response to the complaint. It recognised that it had not responded to the resident’s requests for information about the cylinder ahead of the installation. It said that in future, it would acknowledge correspondence within 24 hours and respond within its service standard. It explained the appointment on 16 June 2021 was not classed as having been missed because the resident petitioned against the installation. But it recognised that it did not inform her it would not attend the appointment on 16 June 2021, until the day of. It also recognised that after the missed appointment on 28 June 2021, the resident experienced difficulty reaching it via phone to reschedule. It explained that it was in receipt of a high volume of calls at the time which affected the wait.
The landlord stated that since 9 July 2021, it had scheduled a further three appointments for the cylinder follow on work, all of which were not attended to. It advised that as works were still required, the resident would be contacted to arrange a completion date. It accepted that the repairs and communication, could have been managed more effectively and the issues identified, should have been addressed within the stage one response. It advised that it had raised this with the team who responded to the stage one complaint.
The landlord upheld its decision regarding the resident’s request to install an electric hob. It said about the allowance payment, that any deficit would be added to the resident’s allowance issued in September 2021. It did not advice what the deficit was. Regarding the buy back, the landlord advised that a full response on its position would be given at the end of August 2021. It reiterated the support it offered those who wished to market their properties, as provided in its update of 29 July 2021.
The landlord reiterated its stage one agreement to improve its responsiveness to correspondence and it reiterated its apology for the delay in providing the letters for the gas suppliers. It advised that it could draft a personalised letter to the resident’s supplier if she required. The landlord offered the resident £150 in total. £100 of which was for what it classed as missed appointments on 28, 30 June 2021 and 9 and 30 July 2021. £50 was for the service failure in its communication.

Post complaints process

From August until October 2021, the resident and landlord remained in contact. The resident purchased her own double hotplate, provided the invoice for this to the landlord and asked if it would reimburse her the cost. The landlord responded that the weekly allowance it provided residents, should be used to cover the purchase. The resident also continued to pursue the landlord for the receipt for her boiler that it removed and has informed that to date, she has not received this.
The follow on work to box in the cylinder was completed on 3 September 2021. Prior to the appointment, the landlord booked to attend on 27 August 2021 but as no materials were not on site, the appointment was cancelled on the day.
The landlord continued to provide residents with updates on its consideration of the options for the long term solution to the gas supply issue. On 22 October 2021, it confirmed that the buy back of the flats was not an option and reiterated the support it could offer those who wished to market their properties.
In March 2021, the residents were made aware that the landlord anticipated to complete the work to the gas supply in March 2023. However, in May 2023, the landlord informed that the works were more complex than originally thought and would likely to take more than four years from start to finish. As a result, the landlord changed its position regarding the buy back of the flats and proposed to buy back all the flats in the block. The landlord suggested a three month consultation period with the leaseholders, so that it could work with those who wished to take up this route. At the time of writing this report, the consultation period is ongoing.

Assessment and findings

The handling of works to remedy the faults to the gas supply.

In accordance with the resident’s lease agreement, the landlord is responsible for the maintenance and repair of the gas apparatus in, under, and upon the building. Except that which exclusively serve individual flats in the building or belong to third party companies.
The landlord in accordance with this, took responsibility to address the issues with the gas supply to the block.
On receipt of the specialist’s report on 3 June 2021, the landlord promptly followed the recommendations and within 24 hours, it isolated the gas supply. It was clear to residents from the start what they could expect from it in regard to providing temporary facilities. And before the temporary measures were put in place, it offered appropriate support as it gave residents the choice to either stay and receive an allowance to purchase facilities of their own or, have temporary accommodation arranged for them.
The landlord has provided this Service with copies of its weekly correspondence with residents throughout June and July 2021. As well as consistency, the updates show that the landlord was clear on the actions it was taking at the time and when it expected to deliver specific outcomes to the residents of the block, relating to both the temporary measures and the long term work to remedy the issue.
With the long term remedial work specifically, the landlord has shown its willingness to engage with the residents of the block about this. This Service has seen from the communication it sent to the residents, that it suggested the formation of a resident’s panel and consulted with the resident’s before doing so. Although the panel was initially opposed by many, the landlord’s effort to form one, suggests that it placed an importance on having meaningful communication and engagement with the residents of the block regarding the longer term works and any associated concerns the residents may have had.
The landlord within its updates, made the information regarding the long term solutions accessible to its residents and provided its summary of all the options it was given. With this, it specified those options it considered more or less favourably and why. This Service has seen that alongside the landlord’s own summary of the options available to it, it provided the residents with the full report from the specialist’s visit.
The Ombudsman’s spotlight report, which explored landlord’s handling complex issues involving building safety among other matters, provides insight into what is considered good practice in the landlord’s communication with residents where there are wider issues that affect several residents including leaseholders and shareholders, as is in the resident’s case. While the spotlight report does not specifically reference gas supply issues as those in this case, the expectations on the landlord in how it deals with the resident are similar.
The Ombudsman’s spotlight report recommends that landlords give clear information about its plans to address works required and consider the impact of its plans on its residents.
In this case, from the time the gas was isolated in June 2021, the landlord’s communication with the residents about the remedial work was effective and thorough. It shared the relevant information it relied on to decide on the remedy options it was in favour of and encouraged the resident’s involvement in its consideration of the long term works. It recognised the impact of the isolation on its residents and took prompt steps to confirm the action it was taking to alleviate the inconvenience to its residents as a result of the isolated supply.
While this investigation has found no fault in the landlord’s handling of the remedial work to the gas supply to the block, during the period considered in this investigation, it is recognised that to date the work remains outstanding. Understandably this is likely to be very frustrating for the residents, who as a result of the matter may have felt uncertainty, disruption and inconvenience.
This Service is also ware that the landlord has now informed that the works will take several years before they will be completed. Given this, the Ombudsman recommends that the landlord continues to deliver timely and consistent updates on the progress of the works while simultaneously working with residents to explore their options regarding the sale of their properties.
It is noted that the landlord has offered the residents of the block, the option for it to buy back their flats due to how long the works will take. As the landlord’s response to the resident’s prior queries about it buying back the property was raised as part of the complaint, its recent change in position on buy back will be considered separately as part of that complaint.

The handling of the hot water cylinder installation

The landlord advised the residents of the block that it would aim to install the cylinders to all the flats by 18 June 2021. In the resident’s case, the hot water cylinder was not installed until 12 days later.
This Service accepts that the resident had initially signed a petition against the installation of the cylinder therefore, it was reasonable for the landlord to place the appointment on hold on this basis. Signing a petition against the installation of the cylinder would indicate an unwillingness to go ahead with the appointment.
It is accepted that prior to the resident agreeing to the appointment, she asked the landlord for information about the cylinder to better understand how it would fit in the property. The landlord’s lack of response to the resident was not acceptable and would have been frustrating for the resident.
But there was no obligation on the landlord to provide an alternative cylinder. This Service has seen evidence that on receipt of the petition against the cylinder installation, the landlord wrote to all the residents of the block confirming that it would not install an alternative cylinder but residents could install an alternative at their own cost if they wished to. When writing, the landlord made it clear the weekly allowance it was offering would not be available after 18 June 2021.
The landlord did not specifically address the resident’s queries about the cylinder although made it clear in its correspondence to the block, that no alternative would be offered and the option residents had if they did not want the cylinder it proposed. The landlord’s stage two complaint appropriately apologised for its failure to respond to the resident’s direct communication with it and explained that it would improve its responsiveness. The landlord also appropriately explained why the appointment on 16 June 2021 was not deemed a missed appointment but recognised that it did not give her advance notice that it would not attend on this basis.
After the cylinder was installed, it took the landlord another two months to complete the follow on work to box the cylinder in. The resident actively pursued the landlord to complete this work and did so as soon as the installation was completed. This Service has seen that when trying to arrange the work, the resident stated that a child was in the property and that around the cylinder, cables were exposed and the floor was uneven.
The landlord promptly booked a date for the work but then failed to attend several appointments to complete the work between 9 July and 27 August 2021. The stage one response incorrectly stated that the work had been completed on 9 July 2021, despite the resident confirming otherwise. At stage two, the landlord confirmed the missed appointment. It also noted there was another missed appointment on 30 July 2021 however, the evidence from the resident confirms that it attended that day to measure for the boxing. The landlord acknowledged there was a third appointment that did not go ahead on 6 August 2021. The record of this appointment shows that the resident was notified on the day that the appointment had to be cancelled. In line with the landlord’s policy, this would be considered a missed appointment as the resident was not given at least 24 hours’ notice of the cancellation.
The landlord’s offered the resident £100 in total for the four missed appointments it identified. Its compensation policy, states that it will offer £25 for every missed appointment. Therefore, it has offered compensation for the missed appointments it has recognised, in line with its policy.
The landlord also offered the resident £50 total for its communication. However, the level of compensation it has offered is not reflective of the experience the resident had as a result of its service failures throughout its handling of the initial cylinder installation and the follow up works. When trying to coordinate both the installation of the cylinder and the follow on works, the resident had to make the landlord aware that operatives had not turned up on time and had missed appointments. She also had to pursue the landlord to get appointments rescheduled. After the first missed appointment on 28 June 2021, the landlord agreed to keep her informed of any delays in the operatives’ attendance going forward, but it did not do so. The resident also highlighted health and safety concerns while the cylinder was exposed. The landlord has not recognised that it did not offer the resident any reassurance or act with efficiency to complete the work to box on the cylinder. The fact that the resident had several missed appointments demonstrates that the landlord did not take steps to improve its service delivery after clear shortcomings and agreements to do better in communicating about appointments.
This Service has seen that there was a further missed appointment by the landlord for the follow on work on 27 August 2021. This missed appointment post complaints procedure, highlights the concern that the landlord has failed to apply learnings from the complaint.
At the time of the cylinder installation, the resident asked the landlord for a receipt for her boiler that it removed. The correspondence between the parties, shows that the landlord, on at least three occasions, promised to provide this receipt. The landlord’s complaint response did not recognise its failure to follow through on this agreement and it did not provide assurance about when the receipt would be provided. This Services notes that after the complaint process, the landlord repeated that it would provide the receipt but the resident has not received this to date.
In recognition of the issues the resident encountered as a result of the landlord’s poor handling in the arrangement of cylinder installation and follow on work, including that to provide the receipt for the resident’s boiler, an additional order of compensation will be ordered.

Response to the resident’s request to install a hob.

The resident informs that she did not find the single hot plate that the landlord provided, sufficient for her household of three people.
As a way to address the issue she had with the hot plate, the resident requested permission from the landlord to install an electric hob, as required by the lease.
The landlord’s apology in the complaint response, recognised that it did not respond promptly to the request. The apology was necessary as it took the landlord three weeks to respond. When the landlord provided its decision to the request, it explained its reasons why and it relied on specialist advice to justify the decision.
Specifically, the specialist advice relied on, was an electric survey the landlord commissioned to the block in July 2021. This confirmed that it was not likely that the building could withstand the demand for electricity if four ring hobs were installed to all the flats. In the interests of consistency and fairness among residents, it is understandable that the landlord made the decision not to grant permission to the resident.
However, the landlord has not realised that it left the resident’s concerns about the single hot plate it provided, unanswered when it responded to the complaint. It did not offer any resolution or advice to the resident about what options she had to improve her cooking facilities. In this case, it could have reiterated that the resident was able to purchase a double hob with the allowance it provided. It informed the resident of this after the complaints process finalised but, missed the opportunity to provide clarity on this earlier, to minimise the inconvenience to the resident and her family.

Response to the resident’s buy back queries.

This service is aware that the landlord has since changed its position and has agreed to buy back the properties, due to the realisation of how complex and time consuming the completion of long term works will take. This investigation has considered the landlord’s response to the resident’s queries concerning buy back during the period the complaint was in relation to.
The landlord took steps from 7 June 2021, to manage all residents’ expectations on its position regarding buying back the properties before it eventually confirmed its position. It agreed to review the possibility of buying back the flats but consistently said with this that it was an unlikely possibility. It explained the alternative options the residents had to sell their properties and how it would support with this. It also waived the limitations on residents who wished to sublet, which was reasonable as an alternative to selling.
While it is evident that the landlord managed expectations of the residents, this Service has found a service failure because it has not recognised in its investigation of the complaint that it was not responsive to the resident’s communication with it regarding this.
The residents experience with the landlord’s poor communication relating to her buy back query is worsened by the fact that at the same time, she was experiencing issues with communication from the landlord regarding other matters associated with the isolation of gas supply issue to the block.
This Service notes that the landlord has expressed that it does not have a buy back policy. It is recommended that the landlord, in keeping with good practice, develops a policy on buy back which provides clarity on its position.

Communication to the gas supplier.

There was a delay of 9 days in the landlord providing the gas supplier letter. In addition to providing the letter on 13 July 2021, the landlord has offered an appropriate apology for the delay.
The resident in her complaint, noted that due to the delay in the landlord providing the letter, she was charged for a full month of gas. Having seen the letter, the landlord provided for the gas suppliers, this confirmed the date the supply was isolated. Given this, the resident may have grounds to challenge the charge in question, with her supplier on this basis. Moreover, the landlord offered to send a personalised letter to the resident’s supplier if this was required. Though this Service has not seen evidence that the resident took up on this offer at the time.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the of works to remedy the faults to the block’s gas supply.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the hot water cylinder installation.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was a service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request to install an electric hob.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was a service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s queries concerning buy back.
In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Scheme, the landlord has offered reasonable redress for its communication to the gas suppliers.

Reasons

The landlord provided consistent and thorough communication to residents about the long term remediation work and actively sought to engage with residents about this work.
The landlord recognised some, but not all of the shortcomings in its handling of the hot water cylinder works. The level of compensation it has offered the resident is not reflective of the time and trouble she spent pursuing the landlord as a result of the shortcomings in its service.
When responding to the resident’s request to install an electric hob, the landlord recognised the delay in its response to the request and provided a justified decision. But it failed to acknowledge or address the concerns the resident raised about the suitability of the hot plate it provided. It missed the opportunity to clarify to the resident that the allowance it paid, could have been used to buy her own hot plate.
The landlord has not recognised or apologised, for not responding to the resident’s attempt in to contact it in relation to the buy back in June 2021. It also has not acknowledged that the resident was expecting a call about this and did not receive it.
The landlord offered an apology for the delay in providing the gas supplier letter.

Orders

In recognition of the above findings of maladministration (including service failure), it is ordered that the landlord pay the resident £425 compensation, comprising:
1. £150 offered in the complaints procedure.
2. £200 for the maladministration found in the handling of the hot water cylinder installation.
3. £50 for the service failure found in the response to the request to install an electric hob.
4. £25 for the service failure found in the response to the resident’s queries to the landlord relating to the buy back of the flat.
The landlord is pay the compensation to the resident within four weeks of this report. Once paid, it is to provide confirmation to this Service.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the landlord consider developing a policy which clarifies its position on buy back, including how and when it may apply discretion to do so.