The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

South Liverpool Homes Limited (202207567)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202207567

South Liverpool Homes Limited

18 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

  1. The complaint is about:
    1. the resident’s report of a lack of benefit from the landlord’s solar panels, and;
    2. the level of compensation offered to remedy this situation.

Background

  1. The resident has been an assured tenant of a two-bedroom property since 2004.
  2. The landlord promoted its solar panel scheme by advertising residents would benefit from free electricity when the sun shone. The resident’s property was suitable for solar panels and on 19 October 2015 both the landlord and resident signed a variation agreement to allow for this provision.
  3. In December 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to advise his energy supplier said his usage had been constant since 2013. The resident understood this meant he has not benefitted from any free electricity since the solar panel installation in 2015.
  4. The landlord provided an informal complaint response which did not adequately address the resident’s query. The resident requested the landlord remove the solar panels, which the landlord did. The resident made a formal complaint which resulted in the landlord recognising its poor complaint handling and the impact the situation had on the resident. The landlord offered £250 as a goodwill gesture. The resident was not satisfied and brought his complaint to this Service, he would like a written apology and compensation by way of resolution.

Assessment and findings

  1. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only three principles driving effective dispute resolution:

a.         Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes;

b.         put things right, and;

c.         learn from outcomes.

  1. The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.

The resident’s report of a lack of benefit from the landlord’s solar panels.

  1. The landlord promoted its solar panel scheme by stating that residents would benefit from free electricity. Prior to installation, both parties signed a variation agreement. The agreement specified that the landlord and resident accepted the amount of free electricity may vary and the landlord is not liable to compensate the resident for this.
  2. The landlord estimated the average resident would benefit from electricity worth £82-120 per year (2015 figures). The resident had reason to believe he would benefit from free electricity; this Service has not seen any evidence to prove whether this happened or not. This Service has seen evidence the landlord believed residents were benefitting from free electricity. In 2017, it advised residents on ways to maximise the supply of this including how to ensure the meter and isolator were working correctly.
  3. This Service seeks to establish whether there has been a failure by the landlord. A consideration for this is whether it is a prerequisite for residents with solar panels to inform their energy suppliers to benefit from free electricity. If this was a prerequisite the landlord should have clearly communicated this to the resident. The landlord did not advise the resident on this matter, and this Service has not seen any evidence of the necessity for this. This Service has seen evidence the landlord has updated its guidance to residents with solar panels.
  4. This Service has not been provided with complete information relating to the start of the informal complaint. It is understood that contact began when the resident directly telephoned a senior member of staff. The resident has consistently referred to a member of staff being rude to him during a telephone call. This allegation was not disputed by the landlord. and it apologised for the poor complaint handling in the informal complaint.
  5. The formal complaint handling was managed within timescales set out by the landlord and this Service. The landlord apologised for the unsatisfactory response to the informal complaint and acknowledged the stress this caused the resident, offering him £250 as a goodwill gesture. The landlord also advised it will carry out a review of the benefits of solar panels.
  6. This Service finds throughout the whole complaints process the landlord did not refer to the covenants in the variation agreement, this may have resolved the dispute in a timelier fashion.
  7. This Service is required to address whether there has been detriment to the resident, where there has been a failure by the landlord. The resident did not have a right to free electricity as per the variation agreement, therefore the lack of this cannot be a detriment to the resident. However, it is clear the resident has lost confidence in his landlord and has suffered because of this. The landlord recognised this in the provision of the goodwill gesture of £250 which the resident accepted.
  8. For the reasons set out above and in accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Scheme, the landlord has, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, offered reasonable redress to the resident. Had the landlord not recognised its failings and taken steps to put this right, the Ombudsman would have made a finding of maladministration.

The level of compensation offered to remedy this situation.

  1. The landlord’s compensation policy allows it to offer up to £500 during the stage 1 complaint. The landlord made an offer of £250 through its complaints handling process. This was as a goodwill gesture for the stressful situation and poor complaint handling.
  2. The landlord and resident signed the variation agreement which stated the landlord is not liable to compensate the resident for a lack of free electricity. This Service finds the landlord acted reasonably and fairly by offering a goodwill gesture.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, this Service finds there was no maladministration by the landlord in relation to the level of compensation offered.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Scheme, this Service finds the landlord has provided reasonable redress in relation to the resident’s report of a lack of benefit from the landlord’s solar panels.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, this Service finds there was no maladministration by the landlord in relation to the level of compensation offered.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should consider offering the resident paper copies of any reports commissioned as a result of this complaint.