Westward Housing Group Limited (202212521)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202212521

Westward Housing Group Limited

30 November 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:
1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the temperature of the water and the water pressure.
2. The associated complaint.

Background

The resident had an assured shorthold tenancy dated 25 January 2022. This changed to an assured tenancy after 12 months. The resident’s property was a new build property, and the defect period ran between 26 November 2021 to 25 November 2022.
The resident has fibromyalgia and states that she needs hot water to shower to help her cope with past trauma.
On 13 April 2022 the resident’s son complained to the landlord on behalf of his mother about the water temperature and pressure at the property. He specifically complained about the communication between the developer and landlord. He alleged they failed to resolve the issue within a reasonable time. The developer’s plumber visited the resident’s property on this day and recorded the hot water temperature as 40 degrees Celsius.
The developer’s plumber visited the resident’s property again on 25 April 2022 and noted the water and boiler pressure were lower than the ideal. The developer’s plumber concluded it could not increase the pressure and bath mixer tap water flow rate. The developer’s plumber replaced the bath mixer tap and concluded there was no defect with the boiler.
The landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaint process on 11 May 2022 and stated:
1. When the resident reported low water pressure and temperature in February 2022 the developer’s plumber found no issue with the pressure.
2. The developer in March 2022 reported the water pressure and temperature were as high as they could be and there was no defect. It replaced a fitting to see if this might help.
3. The measured temperature was 40 degrees Celsius and the water flow rate from the bath was 10 litres per minute which were both acceptable.
4. The developer and contractor should have identified this earlier but they both responded within their contracted timescales.
5. The developer did not have to improve the water temperature or flow rate at the property, but it apologised for any inconvenience caused.
The resident disputed the water temperature and flow rate the developer recorded and requested an escalation to stage 2.
The landlord arranged an inspection of the property on 27 May 2022 by an independent surveyor. The surveyor produced a report stating:
1. It had fitted pressure reducers above the stop cock where water enters the property.
2. The flow rate of the bath mixer tap was 10.5 to 11 litres per minute.
3. The recorded water temperature was on the maximum setting of 44 to 45 degrees Celsius.
4. The taps in the kitchen and bathroom sinks had a slower water rate of six litres per minute and a higher temperature of 65 to 66 degrees Celsius.
5. It had fitted a second mixer tap.
The landlord responded at stage 2 on 17 June 2022 and stated:
1. It had asked the developer to visit the resident’s property in April 2022 following the resident’s complaint as the property was still in the defect period and under the developer’s warranty.
2. It apologised for the missed appointments from the developer’s sub-contractors.
3. The developer’s plumber changed the bath mixer tap and measured a water temperature of 40 degrees Celsius in April 2022 and a flow rate of 10 litres per minute at 8am.
4. An independent inspection measured the water temperature and flow rate on 27 May 2022 at 1.30pm. The contractor recorded temperature was between 44 to 45 degrees Celsius and the flow rate was 10.5 to 11 litres per minute.
5. The resident had not raised her need for a hotter temperature at the time the landlord let the property to her, and it was sorry that she had experienced these issues.
6. The property meets the building regulations standards, and it was unable to adjust the water temperature on the estate. It accepted that the property’s water pressure and temperature would not meet her expectations.
7. It would work with her to move her to a property at her expense and would signpost her for financial assistance.
8. It was reviewing its procedures at the point of letting properties to see if residents have any specific requirements and it would learn from this experience.
The resident expressed dissatisfaction with the landlord’s lack of explanation of why it could not increase the hot water temperature to 48 degrees Celsius.
She told her landlord that she was unable to shower because the water temperature was too low. The resident alleged that her landlord had not acknowledged the stress and impact that this issue was having on her.
The landlord told the resident on 27 July 2022 that:
1. Water pressure on housing developments varies according to demand and at times of lower demand the water pressure is higher. This would result in higher temperatures.
2. The temperatures recorded varied but came close to the maximum temperature allowed under building regulations for bathing facilities.
3. The resident had not raised her need for above-average hot water at the time of the letting.
4. It was unable to increase the water temperature across the site.
5. It had offered a hardship grant of £150 and identified additional income entitlement under Universal Credit.
6. It had offered her alternative accommodation.
The resident felt that the landlord’s offer of other accommodation was not viable as she could not afford to move. The resident disputed the temperatures the landlord recorded were compliant with building regulations. She also told her landlord that she did not qualify for additional income from benefits and had not received any financial assistance.

Assessment and findings

The legal context and landlord’s policies

Part G of schedule 1 of the Building Regulations 2000 introduced provisions for all new homes that restrict the hot water of any bath. This restricts the hot water temperature to a maximum of 48 degrees Celsius for baths.
Under regulation 10(1) of the Water Supply and Sewerage Services (Customer Service Standards) Regulations 2008 water companies must maintain a fixed standard of water pressure. This is set as seven metres static from the water mains for domestic properties unless there is a drought or there is a need for an operative to conduct certain work.
The Thermostatic Mixing Valve Manufacturers Association has guidance on safe water temperatures. This suggests that a safe hot water temperature for a shower is 41 degrees Celsius. It suggests most users would expect bath water to be between 41 to 44 degrees Celsius. The UK trade association for manufacturers and providers of energy infrastructure and technologies (BEAMA) has also provided guidance. It suggests the safe water temperature for showers is 41 to 44 degrees Celsius and generally no more than 44 degrees Celsius for baths.
Section 11(1)(c) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places an obligation on landlords of tenancies to keep in proper working order the installations for heating water. Section B5 of the resident’s tenancy agreement also requires the landlord to keep in proper working order the bath and water heater.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System requires landlords to assess the sanitation and water supply to a property for threats to health, including mental health.
Sections 20, 36, and Schedule 4 of the Equality Act 2010 place an obligation on landlords to take such steps as are reasonable to provide aid to remove a substantial disadvantage a disabled person experiences. This is compared with a non-disabled person who does not need the aid.
The landlord’s complaint policy requires it to resolve complaints at stage 1 within 10 working days and at stage 2 within 20 working days. The landlord’s compensation policy allows it to award compensation of up to £100. The landlord does not have to pay compensation where the matter being complained of is outside its control or the landlord has acted reasonably and in accordance with its policies, procedures, and the law.
The landlord’s allocations and lettings policy (section 4.7) states it must make reasonable effort to adapt a property to suit the needs of a resident with a disability. This requires the landlord to work with occupational therapists.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about water temperature and pressure

The landlord acted promptly in dealing with the resident’s complaint about the water temperature and pressure on 13 April 2022. It arranged for the developer’s plumber to attend on the same day. This was prompt and appropriate as the resident’s property was still in the defect period. It was therefore the developer’s responsibility to investigate any defects. The plumber recorded the temperature of the hot water as 40 degrees Celsius however the plumber did not check the water pressure.
The developer appropriately re-inspected the resident’s property again on 26 April 2022 to look at the water pressure. The landlord was aware in April 2022 that the boiler pressure and the bath and shower mixer water flow rate were less than they should have been. The evidence suggested that the heating system was therefore not working as it should and was not ideally pressurised. The landlord was under a legal duty to ensure the heating system was in proper working order.
It was therefore appropriate for the landlord to continue its investigations by arranging for another inspection of water pressure and temperature in May 2022. These investigations concluded that there was no issue with the water temperature and flow rate. The report suggested that the estate the resident’s property is on was working to a temperature of 44 to 45 degrees Celsius for hot water.
However, the Service notes that the previously recorded temperature from April 2022 was only 40 degrees Celsius. Previous reports from inspections referred to the boiler pressure and water flow rate as being lower than expected. It would therefore have been appropriate for the landlord to have continued to monitor these. This is because the evidence shows the temperatures fluctuated and it was under a legal duty to keep the heating system in working order. The temperatures achieved were at times below the industry-recommended standard of at least 41 degrees Celsius for showers.
Low water pressure can result in lower water temperatures. However, the Ombudsman has not seen evidence of inquiries the landlord made with the local water company to check on the pressure of the water supply. We have also not seen evidence that the landlord checked with other residents to see if water pressure or temperature issues affected them. These would have been reasonable and proportionate steps for the landlord to take to help inform its decisions.
The Ombudsman considers that, in the absence of more extensive inquiry and extended monitoring, the landlord did not have all the information needed to make fully informed decisions. The landlord’s failure to make more extensive inquiries and monitoring was a service failure.
The water pressure and temperature issues were affecting the resident’s enjoyment of her property and use of bathing facilities. It would therefore have also been appropriate for the landlord to consider if there was any duty to make reasonable adjustments within the resident’s property to help. The landlord would be bound by this duty if the resident had a disability and suffered a substantial disadvantage. The resident disclosed to her landlord she experienced past trauma that affected her mental health. It was therefore the landlord’s responsibility to consider if she had a disability and whether the reasonable adjustment duty applied.
The landlord’s allocations and lettings policy allow it to work with occupational therapists to establish if a resident needs any adaptations where a resident has a disability. This could include assessing if the landlord could use any aids to help improve the temperature or water pressure. The landlord however has not demonstrated that it considered this or had any input from occupational therapy.
The Service cannot determine whether there was a duty to make a reasonable adjustment or indeed whether one was possible if such a duty existed. This declaration would be the role of the court to make after considering expert evidence. However, we can assess the reasonableness of the landlord’s actions having regard to its policies and what the law says.
The landlord replaced the mixer tap twice by May 2022 after inspecting the property. Whilst this was an acceptable step to take it fell short of the steps anticipated by the landlord’s allocations and letting policy and equality law. These both required a wider and more ongoing assessment to determine whether the resident has a disability that would benefit from a reasonable adjustment to her property. It is therefore not possible for the Service to conclude that the landlord followed its policy or the law.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord should have responded to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 within 10 working days. However, it took 17 working days for it to issue a response. This was a short delay for which the landlord apologised for at stage 2, and which did not cause any detriment. The landlord responded to the resident at stage 2 within 20 working days which was in line with the resident’s complaint policy.
The landlord apologised at stage 1 and stage 2 for the actions of the developer and its plumbing contractor, specifically in missing appointments. It explained in its stage 2 response that the contractor missed appointments because of their covid-19 procedures. The landlord went on to explain to the resident the actions it took and its findings following its investigations in April and May 2022.
The landlord also explained to the resident that it could not make the adjustments needed to increase the water temperature and pressure at the property without explaining why. The Ombudsman considers that a more detailed explanation would have been more appropriate to allow the resident to understand the basis of what it was saying. The landlord offered to help her move property and signpost her for financial assistance which was a reasonable proposal to make.
The landlord in suggesting alternative accommodation demonstrated a genuine attempt to resolve the issue. The resident expressed dissatisfaction with this proposal as she maintained that she could not afford to move and did not qualify for additional income from Universal Credit.
However, the resident’s challenge to the viability of this offer does not detract from the efforts the landlord made to offer alternative accommodation. The landlord also explained how it would learn from the complaint by checking what vulnerable residents’ specific housing needs are. The offer of alternative accommodation and explanation satisfied two of the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles, namely putting things right and learning from outcomes.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was a service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the temperature and pressure of the water.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The Ombudsman orders that within 28 days of the date of this determination the landlord must pay the resident the sum of £300 comprised of:
1. £200 for the service failures in its inquiry and monitoring.
2. £100 for failure to consider if a reasonable adjustment duty applied.
Within 28 days of the date of this determination the landlord should contact the local water company to check the water mains supply pressure to the resident’s property.
Within 28 days of the date of this determination the landlord must arrange for a suitably qualified engineer to visit the resident’s property. They should advise on if there are any modifications or equipment that would either increase the water pressure to the property or the water temperature. The landlord should provide the resident with a copy of their findings.
The landlord must provide the Ombudsman evidence of compliance with the above orders within 28 days of the date of this determination.
Within 56 days of the date of this determination the landlord should, with the resident’s agreement, contact adult social care within Devon County Council to request an assessment by an occupational therapist. This is to see if the resident would qualify for any aid or reasonable adjustment and is subject to her agreement.

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
1. Consider any reasonable adjustments recommended by the occupational therapist. The landlord should explain the reasons for not following any recommendations to the resident giving a right of referral to the Ombudsman.
2. Consider whether it can make a payment from its moving home fund to support the resident moving.