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

Southern Housing Group Limited (202003355)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202003355

Southern Housing Group Limited

30 April 2021


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 a repair issue with the resident’s boiler.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident has had an assured tenancy with the landlord since 9 August 1999. She lives in the property with her son who has a vulnerability that the landlord is aware of.
  2. On 21 January 2020 the resident contacted the landlord to report that the boiler had broken down. The following day, 22 January 2020, the landlord’s contractor attended the property and diagnosed the problem and what they believed to be the parts necessary for the repair. The boiler was left not working, but the resident was left with two temporary heaters.
  3. On 23 January 2020 contractors attended again but were unable to carry out the repair. The resident’s son’s carer conveyed to the contractor the importance of prioritising the repair given the son had a severe disability and the resident was working full time.
  4. The resident was away from her property with her son between 24 January 2020 and 2 February 2020. She advised the landlord that she would be away in a telephone call on 24 January 2020 and requested again that the issue be resolved during this period. An appointment was booked for 31 January 2020 but the contractor did not attend, stating that an earlier job had overrun when the resident contacted him later in the day. Having returned to the property, on 3 February 2020 the resident called the landlord and again noted that she remained without heating and hot water, requested an update and described the significant impact the repair issue was having on her vulnerable son.
  5. On that day 3 February 2020, and then again on 6 February 2020 and 7 February 2020, contractors attended the property to fit parts and investigate what repair work remained outstanding. The repair was not resolved at any of these appointments. Following the latter appointment, the contractors contacted the manufacturers of the boiler who advised that it would be best for them to attend to inspect the issue.
  6. On 11 February 2020 the boiler manufacturers attended the property to inspect the issue, advising that the problem appeared to be an external wiring fault. On 14 February 2020 contractors attended with electricians who confirmed that there was no external wiring fault after examining the boiler and controls “wire by wire”. The resident requested that she be temporarily moved from the property until the repairs were carried out. On 13 February 2020 the resident was moved into temporary hotel accommodation.
  7. On 25 February 2020 repairs were completed to the boiler with new parts fitted and it was left working. On or around 26 February 2020, the resident moved back into the property.
  8. On 27 February 2020 the resident raised a complaint with the landlord regarding the repair of her boiler which she stated had left her without heating and hot water for over a month.
  9. On 10 March 2020 the landlord wrote to the resident with an offer of £150 compensation in light of its service failure. On the same day, the resident replied that she was unhappy with the level of compensation offered and requested the complaint be escalated. This request was acknowledged by the landlord on 13 March 2020.
  10. On 12 March 2020 contractors again attended the property to fit trunking to the boiler to make it more aesthetically pleasing.
  11. On 27 April 2020 the resident sought an update on the progress of the review, and the landlord replied the same day noting it would likely contact her that day with an update.
  12. On 28 May 2020 the resident again sought an update from the landlord, noting that the delay was contributing to the stress she had already incurred as a result of the substantive issue.
  13. The landlord’s internal emails on 3 June 2020 noted that an additional £150 should be added to the original offer to provide compensation for:
    1. Three missed appointments compensated at £25 each for a total of £75.
    2. The immense stress caused to the resident and very vulnerable son as a result of having no heating and hot water, which the landlord considered to warrant a discretionary payment of £100.
  14. On 2 July 2020 the landlord contacted the resident with its final complaint response, providing an offer of £300 compensation to resolve the complaint. On 6 July 2020 the landlord set out the breakdown of the total figure, noting that it comprised of:
    1. £75 for 3 missed appointments at £25 each
    2. £100 as a discretionary payment
    3. £50 for the impact of 35 days of no hot water
    4. £50 for the impact of 35 days of no heating
    5. £25 as a good will gesture.

Policy and Procedures

  1. At the time of the substantive repair issue and the complaint, the landlord did not have a repairs policy. It has now implemented this.
  2. The resident’s tenancy agreement notes that the landlord is responsible for keeping in good repair and working order any installations it provides for space heating, water heating and sanitation and installations for the supply of water, gas and electricity.
  3. The resident’s handbook sets out that the landlord will try to prioritise repairs for disabled or vulnerable residents and respond to requests more quickly than usual. It notes that emergency repairs include a lack of heating between 1 October and 1 May if a resident is elderly, disabled or has a young baby. In these situations a contractor will attend the property within 24 hours with the aim of completing the repair on the first visit, to the best possible standard.
  4. The landlord’s compensation policy sets out that the landlord will make a payment of compensation when there is evidence that there has been a service failure that it is responsible for, that has caused loss, damage or inconvenience, and has been recorded onto its case management system as either a service dissatisfaction or as a complaint. It notes that service failures falling under this category include:
    1. Missed or failed appointments
    2. Not delivering services in line with published standards
    3. Not following policies and procedures
    4. Failure and delays in undertaking repairs
    5. Quality of repair
  5. It notes that the landlord will consider making an award when a resident loses the use of amenity, such as a bedroom, heating or hot water, or a customer incurs cost or financial loss.
  6. The landlord’s compensation form notes that payments for no heating and no hot water can be made up to a maximum amount of £50 for each issue.

Assessment and findings

  1. The repair issue was first raised with the landlord on 21 January 2020 and resolved on 25 February 2020 which meant that it was outstanding for 35 days. The means that the landlord failed to meet its repair obligations as set out in the resident’s handbook which notes that a lack of heating in the winter period for an elderly or disabled resident is classified as an emergency repair. Though an attendance was carried out within 24 hours as per the requirements of the policy, it is also noted that the landlord aims to complete such repairs on the first visit to the best possible standard. Despite multiple attendances by staff and various contractors, the issue remained outstanding for five weeks. As a result of this, the resident experienced distress and inconvenience which was aggravated by her need to regularly contact the landlord during the repair period to convey the impact of the issue and request it be resolved.
  2. The landlord undertook some appropriate steps in attempting to mitigate the impact of the outstanding repairs. It provided two temporary heaters to the resident and after three weeks arranged for her and her son to be moved to a hotel. It carried out six attendances at the property within the three weeks following the report of the issue and attempted to fit different parts to the boiler to resolve the problem with various approaches. These various attendances demonstrated that it was attempting to find a solution, even though they were not successful for a number of weeks. When it was unable to resolve the issue despite multiple contractor attendances, it took a different approach and contacted the boiler’s manufacturers to seek advice and arranged for them to attend in an attempt to find a solution to the issue.
  3. The length of time that the repair issue was outstanding caused a significant impact on the resident who was required to regularly chase the landlord for updates and had to manage the impact on herself and her vulnerable son during the winter period. While there were multiple appointments booked and attended by the contractor, the resident was left without hot water and full heating in the meantime while the emergency repair went unresolved.  The evidence indicates that the landlord missed a number of appointments, though it has recognised this fact and offered compensation of £25 to the resident for each of these.
  4. The resident was also temporarily decanted to hotel accommodation after three weeks, which was an appropriate step for the landlord to take given it had been unable to resolve the repair issue up until that point. As a result, the resident was directly impacted by the outstanding repair issue from 21 January to 24 January when she and her son travelled away from the property, and then further from 3 February 2020 to 13 February 2020 at which point they were decanted. While the resident has expressed that she was experiencing distress and inconvenience over the entire period the repair issue remained outstanding, the landlord eventually took steps to mitigate the impact of the length of time the repair was outstanding by decanting her to a hotel. The resident had made plans to be away from the property for a time which also meant she was not directly affected by the heating and hot water issues at the time. However, it is recognised that the resident had to chase the landlord and it took an unreasonable length of time to resolve the repair issues.
  5. The landlord offered compensation to the resident which was appropriate as a recognition of the distress she experienced as a result of the boiler fault. In total, it offered £300 including the payment of £75 for missed appointments, as well as £50 each for the interruption to both her heating and hot water supplies which was the maximum amount payable under the landlord’s policy. The remaining part of the offer was £125 as a discretionary/good will payment. As set out in the landlord’s internal emails, it is noted that it was necessary to offer such a discretionary payment in light of the impact of the delay on the resident and her vulnerable son. Though the landlord’s compensation policy does not set out specific amounts or ranges for discretionary payments, the evidence indicates it calculated this element of the offer with due regard to the impact the repair issue and its service failure had on the resident.
  6. The landlord offered compensation to the resident for each of the service failure elements that arose in line with its compensation policy. Considering the above factors, the offer was reasonable in the circumstances.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress by the landlord regarding the complaint about the landlord’s response to reports of a fault with the resident’s boiler.

Reasons

  1. The landlord failed to meet its repair obligations in response to the report made by the resident of the boiler fault. Though there is evidence it was undertaking steps in an attempt to find a resolution to the problem, the length of time the fault remained unresolved went well beyond the required repair timeframes of the landlord’s policy. The landlord however took some appropriate steps to mitigate the impact on the resident and acted appropriately in making an offer of compensation to her.

Recommendation

  1. I make the following recommendation:
    1. The landlord, within the next four weeks, to pay to the resident the sum of £300 that it previously offered to her for the distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to resolve the boiler repair issue. The finding of reasonable redress is conditional on the above compensation being paid.