Thames Valley Housing Association Limited (202016194)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202016194

Thames Valley Housing Association Limited

29 December 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:
   1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of no heating or hot water in February 2021.
   2. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports that his radiators were not working in April 2021.
   3. The impact the period of having no heating or hot water had on the resident and his family’s health.

Jurisdiction

2. What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.

Health concerns

3. Under paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman will not consider complaints which “concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure”.
4. In the resident’s complaint to this Service, he has raised concerns that being without heating and hot water impacted his and his family’s health. The Ombudsman cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be more usually dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts. The courts can call on medical experts and make legally binding judgements. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

Background and summary of events

5. The resident is a tenant of the landlord.
6. On 18 February 2021 the resident reported that he had no heating or hot water. A contractor attended that day and recommended follow-on work.
7. The resident raised a stage one complaint to the landlord on 6 March 2021, stating that his partner was pregnant, and he had a young child. He said when he reported the repair on 18 February 2021, a contractor attended that day but said a builder and engineer would need to reattend to resolve the issue. The appointment was rearranged for 24 February 2021, then cancelled on the day. He called the landlord that day and it said its contractor would attend on 1 March 2021. A builder attended on 1 March 2021 and asked him to remove cooking utensils from a cupboard located under the boiler. The builder then cut a hole in the back of the cupboard to give the engineer access to the boiler, but the engineer did not attend that day. He reported his concerns to the landlord the next day, and another contractor attended and ordered parts for the repair. He requested an update from the landlord, on 5 March 2021. The landlord said his issue had not been resolved due to boiler surveys being carried out in the area. He said he had ordered takeaways due to his lack of access to his cooker (this is understood to be due to the cooking utensils being removed from the cupboard).
8. The landlord called the resident to discuss his complaint on 9 March 2021. Its records show that the resident explained he was using a temporary heater, and his electricity costs had increased.
9. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response on 26 March 2021. It said it had attended on 11 March 2021 but needed to reattend for further work. It had ordered parts, but they had not yet arrived. It stated that it would chase the issue. It had made the decision to escalate the resident’s complaint to stage two to ensure he was “travelling through the correct complaint escalation pathway”. It upheld his complaint, and apologised for its poor communication, and the outstanding repair. It offered the resident £336 compensation which comprised:
   1. £50 for missed appointments
   2. £50 for poor complaint handling
   3. £50 for time and trouble
   4. £50 for service delay
   5. £80 reimbursement whilst unable to use cooker
   6. £56 reimbursement for electricity costs
10. The landlord’s records show that contractors attended on 22 March 2021 and installed a wrong part. They reattended on 30 March 2021, and “left all operational”.
11. On 9 April 2021 the resident advised the landlord that two of his radiators were not heating up. He said he was using his temporary heaters. Contractors attended on 16 April 2021, it is understood they found the kitchen, and bathroom radiators were not heating up. They recommended follow–on work.
12. The landlord issued its stage two complaint response on 28 April 2021, acknowledging that in its stage one response it said it would contact him for a follow up appointment, but failed to do so. It said it reinstated the heating on 30 March 2021. Regarding the resident’s reports about his radiators, it said it had attended on 21 April 2021 and would reattend on 4 May 2021 to complete all work. It said it compensated the resident in its stage one complaint response for its delayed response. It would reimburse him for the use of the temporary heaters from 9 April 2021 until 4 May 2021 (when it hoped the issue would be resolved). Regarding the resident’s assertions that he was unable to cook, the landlord said the resident could have moved the utensils elsewhere, so he had full use of his cooker. It offered him an additional £30 for service failure, and £56 for the cost of running his temporary heaters. It concluded by explaining how the resident could refer his complaint to this Service if he remained dissatisfied.
13. The landlord’s records show it attended on 4 May 2021 and repaired the hole in the cupboard. It reattended on 18 May 2021 and was unable to fix the radiators. It ordered new parts, and reattended on 7 June 2021. It noted that the resident was reluctant for it to replace the radiators. It reattended on 15 and 18 June 2021, but recommended follow-on work. Its records show that as of 22 June 2021 it was awaiting confirmation for a new appointment.
14. This Service asked the landlord for further information relating to the outstanding radiator repairs. It said it had not attended since June 2021. It reattended on 10 December 2021 and arranged a follow up appointment for 15 December 2021. It remains unclear whether the issue has been resolved.

Assessment and findings

Heating and hot water issues

15. The landlord’s compensation guidance sets out that it can offer £50 for a service failure when it has caused a minor inconvenience to the resident. It can offer £50 for time and trouble when here has been minimal effort from the resident to resolve the issue. It can offer up to £150 for poor complaint handling (depending on the severity of the failure). It will offer £10 per missed appointment. The landlord’s repairs guide classes the total loss of heating as an emergency repair. It will provide temporary heating within 24 hours, and if it needs to carry out further work to resolve the repair it can take up to a further seven days. The landlord’s complaint policy states it will issue its stage one complaint response within ten working days.
16. The resident was without heating and hot water from 18 February 2021 to 30 March 2021. It is understood that he had temporary heaters, but it is unclear from the landlord’s records when it provided them. It would have been expected to provide them following its first appointment on 18 February 2021 upon realising that further work was required, in line with its repairs guidance. Nonetheless, the resident did have heaters, and the landlord compensated him for excess costs incurred to run them in its stage one and two complaint response. This was a reasonable attempt from the landlord to put the resident back in the same position had the issue not occurred.
17. The landlord offered the resident £50 compensation for its missed appointments in its stage one complaint response. Its records indicate there were two missed appointments (24 February, and 1 March 2021). As such, its offer exceeded what its compensation policy deemed suitable, and was a reasonable amount. It also offered the £50 for poor complaint handling. It later explained that this was because its stage one complaint response was delayed. The landlord took ten working days to issue its stage one complaint response which was in line with its policy. It is therefore unclear why it compensated the resident for this.
18. The resident said he was unable to use his cooker whilst the repair was ongoing. The landlord acknowledged his concern and offered £80 compensation. This was a reasonable amount given that the resident had explained he was unable to use the cooker as there were utensils placed on it, not because there was a repair issue meaning the cooker would not work. It also offered the resident £50 for his time and trouble, and £80 for service failure. These amounts were in line with the landlord’s compensation guidance (as explained above), as although the landlord did not immediately restore the heating and hot water, there was not a significant delay, and the landlord was actively taking steps to resolve the issue.
19. It is understandable that the situation would have been frustrating and inconvenient for the resident and his family. Nonetheless, the landlord provided temporary heaters, attended on multiple occasions, and first attended within its target timeframe of 24 hours for an emergency repair. Therefore, its total offer of £442 compensation was reasonable in the circumstances of the complaint. Its offer was also in line with the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance (found on our website) as although there were failings on the landlord’s behalf, no evidence has been provided for this investigation to show there was a permanent or adverse impact on the resident.

Radiators not working

20. Although the resident did not raise his concerns with the radiators as part of his stage one complaint, he raised them before the landlord issued its stage two complaint response. The landlord then mentioned the radiators in this response and referred the resident to this Service if he remained dissatisfied. As such, we are able to investigate its handling of the radiator repairs.
21. On 9 April 2021 the resident reported that two radiators were not heating up which meant he was using temporary heaters. In the landlord’s stage two complaint response it said it would fix the radiators on 4 May 2021, but this did not happen. On 14 December 2021 the landlord confirmed it had attended on 10 December 2021, but work was still outstanding.
22. The evidence shows that the landlord attended multiple times in May and June 2021 in order to investigate and repair the radiators. The landlord did not then reattend until December 2021, six months later. Although it is unclear whether the resident continued to report the issue during the period, the landlord should not have left the repair outstanding for such a significant period of time. Especially when considering that the resident was without fully functioning radiators in winter months.
23. In the landlord’s stage two complaint response, it compensated the resident for excess electricity costs with the expectation that the radiators would be fixed by 4 May 2021. As the landlord failed to complete the repair when it said it would, it will be ordered by this Service to reconsider its offer, taking into account the actual length of time it took to repair the radiators.

Determination (decision)

24. In accordance with paragraph 55 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme), the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation for its handling of the resident’s reports of no heating or hot water in February 2021 which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint satisfactorily.
25. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports that his radiators were not working in April 2021.
26. In accordance with paragraph 39(i) of the Scheme, the resident’s complaint about the health impact of the issue is outside the jurisdiction of this Service to consider.

Reasons

27. The landlord offered a reasonable amount of compensation for its failings in terms of the resident’s reports of no heating or hot water. However, despite it taking reasonable steps to repair the radiators in May and June 2021, it failed to reattend until December 2021. This was a significant delay which spanned over winter months.

Orders and recommendations

28. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £150 for the inconvenience and delay experienced as a result of the service failure identified with its handling of the resident’s reports that his radiators were not working.
    2. Reconsider its offer of compensation for excess electricity costs taking into consideration the length of time it has taken to complete the radiator repairs.

These payments should be made within four weeks of the date of this report. The landlord should update this Service when the payments have been made.