The complaint about the landlord's handling of hot water pressure was not investigated because the Ombudsman had already issued a determination on the same complaint under a prior reference, placing it outside jurisdiction.
Findings by complaint head
Handling of hot water pressure
Outside jurisdiction
The complaint was not investigated because the Ombudsman had already issued a determination on the same complaint under reference 202407299, and cannot investigate complaints on which a decision has already been issued.
The full determination
Decision Case ID 202408423 Decision type Jurisdiction Landlord Southwark Council Landlord type Local Authority / ALMO or TMO Occupancy Secure Tenancy Date 26 March 2026 Background The resident lives in a first-floor bedsit. He is unhappy with the hot water pressure in the property. What the complaint is about The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the hot water pressure. Our decision (determination) We have not investigated the resident’s complaint because it is outside of jurisdiction. Reasons We cannot investigate complaints on which we have already issued a decision. We have already issued a determination of the resident’s complaint under reference number 202407299.
This is a structured summary of a published determination. The official decision is the
authoritative record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Similar decisions
Other determinations involving Southwark Council or the same complaint category.
Service failure was found in the landlord's handling of the resident's reports of damp and mould because the inspection was completed 7 working days beyond its repair timescale and no risk assessment was carried out to…
Maladministration was found in the landlord's handling of reports of a communal waste stack leak, which took 13 months to repair, significantly outside its policy timeframe, and in its complaint handling, where the…
Maladministration was found in the landlord's response to a leak affecting the resident's electrics, due to failures to monitor the TMO's repair performance under the RTM, record keeping failures, and unreasonable…
The Ombudsman found reasonable redress in the landlord's response to reports of a draughty front door (which it ultimately replaced), service failure in its unclear response to the bathroom and kitchen renewal request…
The landlord took around 7 months to resolve a leak and associated repairs, exceeding its target timescales, but its total offer of £1,190 compensation was found to be reasonable redress. The landlord's complaint…
The Ombudsman found service failure in the landlord's handling of the resident's reports of a leak (delayed repair, missed policy timescales, poor communication) and in its complaint handling (delayed stage 1 and stage…
We use privacy-friendly analytics.
With your consent we set a Google Analytics cookie to understand how the site is used.
No advertising or cross-site tracking. You can change your mind any time.