Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Sussex Housing and Care (202203070)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202203070

Sussex Housing and Care

22 May 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 landlord’s response to issues with heating the property.
    2. The landlord’s complaint handling and communication.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The property is a ground floor flat. The resident suffers with psoriasis.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord about the cost of electricity for heating properties at the block due to lack of insulation.
  3. The landlord provided its stage one complaint response which sets out that it had carried out surveys and samples on the properties with a view to provide insulation in the future. The landlord advised that it was in the early consultation stages and that it planned to engage with its tenants when it had a definite plan in place. The landlord did not uphold the complaint and advised the resident that the complaint did not meet the criteria for escalation.
  4. The resident escalated the complaint. He complained about issues surrounding the insulation to the property, electricity costs, damp and mould, the landlord’s staff conduct and communication. He was also unhappy about the complaint process.
  5. In its stage two complaint response, the landlord provided a draft action plan for its energy plans, which included resident surveys and engagement on energy advice, short term solutions and repairs, surveys, and long-term plans for funding and the maintenance works. The landlord did not uphold the complaint.
  6. The resident advised this Service that he has been living in cold and damp conditions because of the lack of insulation at the property. He advised that he pays an increased cost for heating due to a lack of insulation. He was not happy that the landlord has not provided information that he requested. As a resolution he wants a reduction in rent and a rent holiday of one-year, long term and budgeted solutions for the insulation and heating issues, and a public apology from the landlord.

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 landlord’s response to issues with heating the property

  1. The tenancy agreement confirms that the landlord is responsible for repairs required to the structure of the property, including internal and external walls and windows. It is also responsible for repairs to any installation of space heating in the property. The landlord’s responsive repair policy states that it will carry out non-emergency repairs within 7 working days or 20 working days depending on the urgency.
  2. When the resident first made a complaint to the landlord, he stated that he was writing on behalf of all the tenants in the block. For clarity, this report will refer to the collective residents in the block as the landlord’s tenants. There is no evidence that the resident had consent from other tenants in the block to write on their behalf. This investigation will only focus on how the landlord responded to the resident and consider any impact that the landlord’s actions had on the resident.
  3. Between 14 August 2019 and December 2020, the resident wrote to the landlord on behalf of the tenants in the block. He complained about the lack of insulation in the block and the cost of electricity to heat the properties. The resident also enquired if the landlord had plans to carry out work on the insulation and if it had applied for funding.
  4. The landlord responded and advised it was currently surveying the block to assess insulation requirements and advised it intended to engage with its tenants when they had a plan for insulation of the block. The landlord emailed the resident with an update on how it could assist its tenants in claiming benefits for fuel costs and signposting them to other organisations that can assist. The landlord encouraged its tenants to make contact if their fuel costs are too high as they could assist in dealing with electricity providers. The landlord gave an update on its investments in the hot water systems and advised they were in an early consultation stage with an energy company with regards insulation. The landlord also instructed a contractor to inspect the resident’s storage heaters. These were fair and reasonable responses to the resident’s complaint and enquiries.
  5. In October and December 2020, the resident emailed the landlord on behalf of all tenants in the block. The resident advised that they had consulted with an energy advice company who reported that several flats were not properly insulated. The lack of insulation in the block was causing damp and black mould and affecting the health of its tenants. The resident also advised that the cost of heating the flats is considerably higher than the local average due to the lack of insulation.
  6. The landlord responded that they had not received any reports of damp and advised that its tenants should report it for them to address. The landlord confirmed that they had engaged with its tenants to access extra benefits for energy bills and assisted with switching providers. The landlord advised they were open to discuss with the company that its tenants had consulted with if it could be of mutual benefit. These were reasonable responses to the concerns raised.
  7. In January 2021, the landlord contacted the resident and requested information on which of its tenants were having difficulties with heating. It conducted a phone survey with all the tenants within the block to identify potential issues with door draughts and mould. At the same time, it provided further information on their plans for insulating the properties. This was a good proactive approach by the landlord after it received unspecified reports of cold and damp in the block.
  8. In February 2021, the landlord asked the resident if he required assistance with his own energy bills and asked for information on his energy supplier. The resident responded that he does need help with his energy bills, however, he was not entitled to benefits. He further advised that every room in his flat was cold as there was a draught from windows and there was a lack of insulation. The landlord asked the resident if he had a smart meter, (to track his electricity usage), raised a repair order for the balcony door and windows, and booked a thermal improvement survey. The resident did not provide the landlord with details of his electricity charges. The landlord provided advice on what utility companies are legally allowed to charge and referred the resident to their allocated energy champion. These were good, reasonable measures for the landlord to take.
  9. The thermal improvement survey recommended replacing the balcony doors and replacing the existing storage heaters. The landlord replaced the balcony doors. The resident refused replacement of the storage heaters, as he felt they were less efficient and more costly to run. The landlord advised the resident that the new heaters were more energy efficient and that the offer of replacing the heaters remained open. This was a fair and reasonable response to the resident’s issues with heating the property.
  10. On 03 March 2022, the landlord asked if the resident would like to view a flat in another block, as the resident had previously expressed interest. The resident rejected this offer as he did not want to move from the block. Although the resident was not obliged to move, this demonstrates that the landlord was open to offering an alternative solution for the resident’s issues with heating in the property.
  11. On 11 March 2022, the resident emailed the landlord images of mould in his property. On 14 March 2022, the landlord carried out a mould and condensation survey and on 20 March 2022, it carried out an external building survey. On 24 March 2022, the landlord emailed the resident and confirmed it had provided advice on how to resolve the issue of condensation. The landlord advised that it would install an extractor fan and towel rail in the bathroom and carry out sealing of windows and repointing of external brickwork. The landlord also advised it would install mechanical ventilation to assist with airflow. These were good and reasonable responses to the resident’s report of damp and mould in his property. The resident refused the landlord’s offer of the extractor fan and towel rail.
  12. This Service has received information since the landlord’s final complaint response on 24 March 2022, and will assess it for completeness. In November and December 2022, the resident requested a dehumidifier as he reported high moisture levels in his flat. In December 2022, the landlord instructed an independent surveyor to assess the ventilation. The surveyor reported that the flat was not adequately heated. It recommended installation of extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom. In January 2023, the landlord’s surveyor assessed the property and recommended replacing the storage heaters, installing extractor fans, carrying out a mould wash and providing advice to the resident. The landlord carried out the mould wash and emailed a copy of both surveys to the resident on 8 February 2023. It offered to carry out all recommendations from the surveys. The resident refused the offer of new storage heaters and extractor fans but accepted the offer of a towel rail in the bathroom.
  13. This Service finds that there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to issues with heating the property. This is because the landlord reasonably responded to reports of damp and cold conditions within its timeframes, appropriately investigated the issues through surveys, and offered the resident all recommended improvements. It also provided advice and offered assistance with the resident’s energy bills and provided updates on its plans for insulating the block.

The landlord’s complaint handling and communication

  1. The landlord operates a two stage complaints policy. It should acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days. At stage one, the landlord must respond to the complaint within 20 working days. If the complaint is not resolved at stage one, the resident can escalate it to stage two. If the landlord refuses to escalate the complaint, it should provide a clear and valid reason, and provide information to refer the complaint to the relevant ombudsman. At stage two, a different complaint manager will review the stage one investigation, consider any new evidence, and provide a response within 20 working days. If the resident remains unsatisfied, they can escalate the complaint to the relevant ombudsman.
  2. On 14 August 2019, the resident raised a formal complaint on behalf of all the landlord’s tenants in the block about the insulation and the cost of heating.
  3. On 26 September 2019, the landlord provided its stage one complaint response. It did not uphold the complaint. The landlord advised the resident in this correspondence, that the complaint did not meet the criteria to escalate to stage two.
  4. The landlord did not adhere to its complaints policy in its stage one complaint response. It did not respond to the resident within 20 working days. Furthermore, it should not have advised the resident, in this correspondence, that the complaint did not meet the criteria for escalation to stage two. The landlord should only make this decision if the resident requests a stage two escalation. The same person who considered the complaint at stage one should not decide if the complaint can be escalated. The landlord also failed to signpost the resident to this Service when it advised that the complaint did not meet the criteria for escalation.
  5. On 10 January 2022, the resident requested a complaint escalation. In addition to the original complaint, he complained of damp and mould throughout the properties in the block, and about the complaint process.
  6. On 24 March 2022, the landlord provided its stage two complaint response. It did not uphold the complaint. It addressed the issues raised by the resident at stage one and the further issues raised at stage two. It provided an appropriate and comprehensive response to each issue. However, the landlord failed to respond to the complaint escalation within 20 working days, in line with its policy. This was unfair to the resident.
  7. This Service acknowledges that the communications by the landlord were very good. The landlord outlined its short-term and long-term plans for insulating the block. The landlord also provided information to its tenants, through its website and newsletters on what it has done to assist with controlling heating costs and provided advice on claiming benefits and dealing with energy suppliers to reduce costs.
  8. This Service finds that there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. This is because it did not follow its complaint processes, and it should have. It failed to follow its timelines and its process for escalating the complaint.
  9. This Service orders that the landlord pay £50 compensation to the resident for time and trouble caused by failures in its complaint handling.
  10. This Service recommends that the landlord review the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code and trains its staff to comply with complaint timescales and that it escalates complaints when appropriate.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to issues with heating the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure with the landlord’s complaint handling and communication.

Orders and recommendations

  1. It is ordered that the landlord pay the resident compensation of £50 for the time and trouble caused by the failure in its complaint handling.
  2. If it has not already done so, it is recommended that the landlord review the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code and train its staff to comply with timescales and escalate the complaint when appropriate.