Together Housing Association Limited (202301176)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202301176

Together Housing Association Limited

6 March 2024

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 handling of reports of damp and mould in the property.
2. The landlord’s handling of reports of issues with drainage to the front and back gardens of the property.
3. The associated complaint handling.

Background

The resident holds a joint assured shorthold tenancy which started on 26 January 2009. The property is a 3-bedroom house with its own garden.
The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 30 December 2022. She said that she had damp and mould in the property which had occurred for periods since 2009. She said that the landlord had previously completed a mould wash of the property in June 2022, but that the mould had returned, and she noted that the windows may need to be replaced to help with airflow. She said that her husband had asthma and sleep apnoea which was impacted by the mould. She added that she had to redecorate the property and treat the mould as best she could herself. She also noted concerns with flooding to the front and back garden, including the landlord’s attempts to remove the patio area in the back garden which had not been fully completed.
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 11 January 2023. It said:
1. It had inspected the property on 10 January 2023 and found a lot of mould with small damp patches.
2. It noted that the resident said the windows caused a draught and it reported that the windows had mould on them.
3. The back garden was not level which caused standing water at the bottom.
4. The front garden was not intended to be used as a driveway, and that by the resident parking on the soil, it had become compressed which created pools of water. It advised her not to park her car on the garden for this reason.
5. It identified 7 repairs that were required at the property and said that it would contact her to book these in.
6. It would offer decorating vouchers once the work had been completed.
The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 15 June 2023. She said that she was unhappy with the handling of repairs, that she had to chase the landlord for any updates, and that it had outstanding works at the property. She said that she had previously been told that the damp and mould was caused by her not opening windows or using the radiators. She said that the mould continued to impact her husband’s health. She asked for compensation towards heating the house because of the lack of insulation in the loft. She said that its offer of £200 decorating vouchers given to her in recognition of any inconvenience was an insult.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 31 July 2023. It said it had visited the resident on 12 July 2023 and following her report of the living room wall being wet, it completed a damp survey on 22 July 2023. It said that it would complete any recommendations from the damp survey in a timely manner. It said it had failed to repair the property in a reasonable timeframe and apologised for its delay in completing the required works. It said it had reviewed its repair records and found that she had reported damp and mould in 2017 and it completed remedial works, and that the next report of damp and mould was in February 2022. It offered £850 compensation for the time taken, inconvenience and impact over 17 months.
On 31 July 2023, the resident told the landlord that she was unhappy with the level of compensation offered. It said it would review the offer, and on 5 September 2023, it increased its offer to £1,200. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s offer of compensation and handling of repairs and escalated her complaint to this Service. The complaint became one we could investigate on 21 August 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident has said that the issues related to damp and mould have been ongoing since at least 2015. The Ombudsman cannot consider complaints which relate to historical events because the quality and availability of any evidence that may have existed at the time may not be present now. The focus of this investigation will therefore be from when the damp and mould issues were reported, in February 2022, up until the landlord’s final complaint response, in July 2023. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(b) of the Scheme.
It is evident that the resident is currently experiencing issues which have occurred after the landlord’s final complaint response. These relate to the repairs to the back garden not being effective, and the quality of the works completed following the damp survey report from 10 August 2023. The Ombudsman cannot investigate matters that did not go through the landlord’s internal complaint process. The resident may wish to log a new complaint for the landlord to investigate her current concerns and have the opportunity to put things right. She may then bring that complaint to the Ombudsman as a new case to be investigated were she to be unhappy with the landlord’s response. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme.
The resident stated in her complaint that her husband’s health had been affected by the damp and mould in the property. While this Service does not doubt the resident’s comments about her husband’s health, it is outside our remit to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(f) of the Scheme. This Service has considered the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident and her household.

The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the property

The landlord’s online repairs priorities information has 3 categories and priorities of repairs. Its priority 2 category is for repairs that do not pose an immediate health or safety risk and can be carried out by appointment. It will complete these repairs within 28 days of them being reported. Its priority 3 category is for repairs that usually take a day or more to complete and may involve more than 1 trade. It will complete these repairs within 63 days of them being reported. It is understood that these are calendar days, not working days.
The resident initially reported damp and mould in the property on 9 February 2022. The landlord inspected the property on the following day and identified several repairs required. Its records show that these repairs were raised on 17 February 2022, 6 working days after the inspection. It is unclear why there was a delay in raising the works which would have added to the overall delay of any works being completed.
The repair jobs raised on 17 February 2022 were not completed within the landlord’s published priority timescales for repairs. A mould wash was logged as a priority 2 repair, but was not completed until 27 May 2022, which was 99 calendar days after being reported. An inspection of the drainage of the property was logged as a priority 3 repair, and was completed on 23 June 2022. This was 126 calendar days after being reported. Jobs to clear the front and rear gutters, inspect the chimney because of a dripping sound heard in the living room, and to check under the panels for pigeons nesting were also raised. An appointment was scheduled for 21 October 2022, but it is unclear when, or if, this had been completed from the landlord’s records.
It is unclear why these delays occurred and why the landlord did not fulfil its repair priority timescales. The delays would have added distress and inconvenience to the resident who reported that she was living in a property which had damp and mould which was getting worse. There is no evidence provided to suggest that the landlord updated the resident regarding any delays, which would have understandably caused frustration to her. The landlord similarly did not fulfil its published repairs priority timeframe for a repair to remove the patio which it had identified was causing damp in the property. This repair was raised as a priority 3 repair on 23 June 2022. It was completed on 6 December 2022, which was 166 days after it was raised. The delays in completing the repairs were neither reasonable nor appropriate.
The landlord did try to take reasonable steps to address the damp and mould. It should be noted that the landlord identified that it needed to install a radiator in the upstairs toilet, which it completed within its priority timeframe. However, its efforts did not resolve the issues and it was evident that further investigation and repairs were needed.
The resident’s stage 1 complaint noted the resident’s concerns with the quality of repairs and the outstanding issue of damp and mould in the property, which impacted on her husband’s health conditions. It was appropriate for the landlord to inspect the property in response to the complaint, which it did on 10 January 2023. This was completed 6 working days after the complaint was made, on 30 December 2022. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, provided the following day, outlined various repairs that it would complete to resolve the damp and mould concerns.
The resident contacted the landlord on 24 January 2023 as she had not had any communication regarding the repairs that it identified in the stage 1 complaint response. There were 4 repairs identified during the inspection which related to the damp and mould, but only 2 were raised on the date of the inspection. The day after the resident’s email the landlord raised further works for the remaining 2 repairs relating to the damp and mould. It is unclear why the landlord did not raise the works sooner, and its lack of communication understandably added further distress to the resident.
A damp survey was requested on 10 January 2023 as a priority 3 repair. It was completed on 19 April 2023 – this was 99 calendar days after it was raised, which was in excess of the landlord’s priority timeframe. It was not reasonable for the landlord to have given this job such a low priority, given that it was aware of the resident’s husband’s medical needs which were potentially impacted by the reported damp and mould. Similarly, a mould wash was raised on the same date, as a priority 3 repair. This was completed on 14 May 2023, which was 124 calendar days after it was logged as a repair. It is evident that the landlord did not learn from the complaint at stage 1 because it continued to fail to meet its published timescales for repairs.
It is apparent that the mould wash took so long to be completed because the landlord was unaware that its contractors had not completed the second stage of the mould wash treatment. The resident had to contact the landlord on 20 April 2023 to ask when it planned to return to complete this repair, which the landlord then arranged for 14 May 2023. The landlord is responsible for its contractors and should have ensured there was clear communication and record keeping. This would have ensured that the landlord knew of any delays, or of the need to reschedule the repair, and could have limited any impact on the resident.
The landlord was notified of the health of the resident’s husband being impacted by the mould in her stage 1 complaint, but it continued to unreasonably delay the completion of repairs. This would have added further distress and inconvenience to the resident. The landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with a copy of the damp survey that it completed on 19 April 2023. It is therefore unclear whether this survey found any further repairs that were required to resolve the damp and mould at the property.
The landlord had said in its stage 1 complaint response that the windows had mould and the resident reported they caused a draught, but it did not raise any works in response. On 26 January 2023, she again told the landlord that the property would not heat properly and that a draught was coming from the windows. The landlord raised a job, on 8 February 2023, to inspect the windows but it is unclear when, or if, it did so. Between 14 February 2023 and 25 April 2023, the resident contacted the landlord on 3 occasions about the windows being replaced or repaired. On 26 April 2023, it raised a job to replace all the windows at the property, which it completed on 12 June 2023.
The time taken between identifying an issue with the windows on 10 January 2023 and the replacement on 12 June 2023 was unreasonable. While there can be delays with manufacturing windows which would be outside of the landlord’s control, it is evident that it was responsible for a delay in raising a repair job. It was not proactive in its communication to the resident and missed an opportunity to reassure her of its intended action to resolve the issues.
There is a continued theme of repairs taking longer than the landlord’s published timeframes for its repair priorities. This included the other 2 repairs related to damp and mould as listed in the stage 1 complaint response. These repairs were to check the guttering and bottom layer of roof felting, and to inspect the loft insulation and install new insulation where required.
While these repairs were reported on 25 January 2023, the landlord did not raise a job with its contractors to complete these until 27 April 2023. This was despite the resident contacting the landlord for an update on these repairs on 11 April 2023. This delay was unacceptable and would have caused further detriment to the resident. The landlord’s actions do not reflect appropriate consideration of the reported impact on the health of the resident’s husband.
From the landlord’s repair records, on 24 April 2023, it raised a repair job to inspect the chimney stack which could be heard dripping in the living room. The repair records show that it completed this inspection on 16 May 2023. At the same time, on 27 April 2023, it instructed the contractor to include the removal of the chimney stack, along with the renewal of the first course of felt on the roof and the installation of loft insulation. The repairs records show that this was logged as a priority 3 repair, but it again exceeded its target timescales.
The resident remained unhappy with the progress of the repairs and escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 15 June 2023. Her complaint escalation referred to the loft insulation repair which had not yet been completed. She also said that she had been told previously that the damp and mould were caused by her actions. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence to confirm this during the period of time investigated. The complaint escalation also reminded the landlord of her husband’s health conditions which she said was being impacted by the damp and mould in the property. She said that the mould had worsened.
The landlord contacted her on 22 June 2023, and it apologised for its lack of contact regarding the outstanding repairs. It said that its contractor for the loft, roof and chimney works had been delayed and it would update her when it could. It said that it would ask its contractors to contact her to arrange a mould wash. This was later completed on 13 July 2023. The resident reported further mould growth in the toilet and bedrooms on 3 July 2023 and the landlord ensured that this was also addressed during the mould clean works. This was an appropriate step for the landlord to take to ensure the mould was attended to.
After the landlord said it would keep the resident updated, it is evident that it failed to do so. It did not provide proactive updates and the resident had to chase it on 27 July 2023. The landlord failed to improve and missed opportunities to learn from its complaints after it had already identified that its communication was not appropriate.
In response to the resident’s complaint escalation, the landlord visited the property on 12 July 2023 to inspect and discuss any outstanding repairs. On 14 July 2023, the landlord raised a works order for a damp survey to be completed at the property. The survey was completed on 22 July 2023, but the report was not provided to the landlord until 10 August 2023.
In the landlord’s final complaint response, on 31 July 2023, it said that it would wait to receive the report from the damp survey and would complete any recommendations in a timely manner. It provided an update on its works to the roof and loft and said that this was due to start imminently following some delays with arranging the removal of solar panels. It apologised for not completing the repairs within a timely manner. It also outlined steps to try to prevent similar issues in the future, such as improving communications plus ensuring timely appointments are made and that repairs meet the landlord’s standards.
The landlord’s repair records showed that the 3 repairs, for the loft, roof and chimney works, were completed on 9 August 2023. This was 104 calendar days after the job was raised. However, it is unclear whether this is correct because the resident and landlord exchanged emails as late as November 2023 regarding the loft insulation still not being installed. In addition, the landlord confirmed to this Service that it completed the works to re-felt the roof in September 2023, yet the resident has advised this Service that the works to re-felt the roof and to also check the guttering remains outstanding. Given this discrepancy between the landlord’s repairs records and the resident’s report to this Service, the landlord is ordered to confirm to the resident and this Service of the date that it intends to attend and complete the works for the re-felting of the roof and check the guttering, if this has not already been completed.
The landlord has advised that the works to the roof and loft area at the property was delayed because of a pest problem which needed to be resolved prior to works. While it is noted that works that involve multiple contractors can be problematic, the overall delay in completing the works was not reasonable and it resulted in further distress and inconvenience to the resident.
Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to assess whether the redress offered by it put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In investigating this, the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
In the final complaint response, the landlord offered £850 compensation for the delay of its repairs relating to damp. It said that this was in relation to 17 months of time taken, impact and inconvenience. It is the Ombudsman’s view that given the overall delays of 17 months, this amount of compensation was not sufficient to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident, as well as the time and trouble experienced. Following the resident’s dissatisfaction with the offer of compensation, the landlord increased its offer, on 5 September 2023, to £1,200.
An internal email sent during the discussion of the increased compensation offer explained that it calculated the £850 compensation at £50 per month for the 17-month delay. It is unclear why the landlord did not include its calculation in the stage 2 complaint response. It would be good practice to do so in order to be transparent and offer assurance as to how the compensation was considered. In internal emails, it said that its increased offer of £1,200 compensation was awarded at £70 per month for the 17-month delay.
The landlord was aware of the reported household health needs being impacted by the damp and mould from at least 30 December 2022. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have responded to this report of the household’s health being impacted by damp and mould by ensuring its repairs were timely and effective, but there were still delays with completing the required repairs. The landlord has not provided evidence of the damp report from 19 April 2023 and the Ombudsman is therefore unable to assess whether the landlord actioned the repairs it needed to and whether it could have prevented the issues worsening. The landlord continued to fail to learn lessons relating to delays in completing repairs and communicating proactively with the resident. It also remains unclear how, or if, it considered this in its calculation of the compensation.
Considering these aggravating factors, the landlord is ordered to pay £1,925 compensation in recognition of its handling of reports of damp and mould in the property. This replaces the landlord’s offer of £1,200. This has been calculated in consideration of the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance and similar determinations. It consists of £25 per week for distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident for a period of 77 weeks. This is from the date the damp and mould was reported on 9 February 2022, to the date of the landlord’s final complaint response on 31 July 2023.
The resident has told this Service that a desired outcome of this investigation would be for the landlord to pay compensation towards her increased costs of energy due to the lack of loft insulation in half of the roof. This would date back from the start of her tenancy, up until the date that the loft insulation was installed. As this was not raised in the resident’s complaint to the landlord, this Service is unable to make such an order. The landlord is recommended to contact the resident and discuss any compensation towards increased energy costs from the lack of loft insulation.
This investigation will not be able to consider whether the landlord actioned the recommendations from the damp survey report on 10 August 2023. This is because the report was not available at the point when the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It is therefore not appropriate or possible to assess the landlord’s commitment to putting things right from its final complaint response, in relation to the damp survey recommendations. It is understood that the resident has continued to experience concerns with damp and mould. The landlord is therefore recommended to complete a further damp survey to assess the cause of the damp and mould, and to complete an action plan of the dates that it will intend to complete any repairs that may be required.
The landlord is also recommended to self-assess against the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management. This is to help ensure consistency and accuracy in its record keeping relating to repairs.

The landlord’s handling of reports of issues with drainage to the front and back gardens of the property

In the resident’s stage 1 complaint, on 30 December 2022, she said that the landlord had removed the patio area to help with the damp and mould issues, but that this had impacted the garden. She said that the work caused further flooding issues in the back garden and that the patio had been left half-completed. She asked the landlord to remove the remaining paving and install a drainage system to rectify the flooding issues. She also said that the front garden flooded when it rained.
The landlord inspected the property on 10 January 2023 and identified repairs were required to help resolve flooding issues in the back garden. In its stage 1 complaint response, issued the following day, it said that the back garden was not level and had a lot of standing water at the bottom. It said that it would raise works, for the back garden, to install a drainage ‘soak away’ system by the living room wall and would rebuild the patio area. It also said it would install a drainage system underneath a play swing in the back garden to assist with the flooding issues.
On 25 January 2023, the 2 jobs were raised on the landlord’s repair logs. It is unclear why there was a delay between the inspection identifying the need for the repairs, and the repairs being raised. This delay would have understandably caused further inconvenience to the resident. Both jobs were raised as a priority 3 repair to be completed within 63 calendar days but both far exceeded the landlord’s published timeframes. The drainage system and rebuild of the patio area was completed on 28 April 2023, which was 93 days after the repair was raised. The drainage system underneath the play swing was completed on 2 May 2023, which was 97 days after the repair was raised.
The landlord told the resident in its stage 1 complaint response that the drainage issues to the front garden were caused by the resident using the garden as a driveway. It said that the soil had compressed which caused pools of water and to avoid parking on it as it was not intended to be used as a driveway. This was a fair response following the landlord’s inspection the day before. To resolve the standing water issues, it said it would raise works to remove any paving and level out the garden using topsoil. It said it would then lay new paving for access to the bins.
The job to the front garden was raised on 25 January 2023, and it is again unclear of why there was a delay between the inspection and raising the job. It was logged as a priority 3 repair, but the landlord did not fulfil its target timeframe. The job was completed on 5 May 2023, 100 days after it was raised as a repair. The landlord has not provided any evidence of why the delay occurred.
On 5 May 2023, the resident contacted the landlord to ask questions about the work to the garden and it said it would call her back to discuss this. It is unclear from the landlord’s records as to what it said to the resident, however, its records state that it completed the call back on 9 May 2023. On 22 May 2023, the resident contacted the landlord to say that the drainage issues in both the front and back gardens were now resolved.
The landlord did not address the drainage issues to the front and back gardens in its stage 2 complaint response issued on 31 July 2023. This was not appropriate given that the resident included this issue in her complaint escalation. It did not offer any apology or other attempt at redress given the delays, time taken, or inconvenience caused to the resident. It focused its redress solely towards the handling of the damp and mould issues. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge that these repairs were not addressed in line with its published repair priority timeframes. Considering this, the landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident for its delays in completing the repairs to the drainage of the front and back garden. It is also ordered to pay £150 compensation in light of the 3 jobs being delayed which would have understandably caused distress and inconvenience to the resident.
After the landlord’s final complaint response, the resident contacted the landlord and said that the back garden had flooded again and that its drainage system had not worked effectively. The landlord is therefore recommended to complete a further inspection of the back garden and complete any repairs that are needed to try and resolve this issue.

The associated complaint handling

The landlord’s complaints and compliments policy states that it will acknowledge a stage 1 complaint within 5 working days of the complaint being made. It will then investigate the complaint within 10 working days from the date of the acknowledgement being sent. For stage 2 complaints, its policy states that it will acknowledge a stage 2 escalation request within 5 working days of it being received. It will then investigate the complaint within 20 working days of escalating the complaint. It is unclear whether the date of escalating the complaint is the date the resident has submitted an escalation request or the date of the landlord providing an acknowledgement of the escalation request.
The resident made her stage 1 complaint on 30 December 2022. This was sent from the resident’s own email address to the landlord. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on the same day and said that she should receive a response within 5 working days. On 8 January 2023, the landlord provided a further acknowledgement of the complaint and said it would provide a response within 10 working days. It is unclear why the landlord provided 2 acknowledgements with different timeframes for its stage 1 complaint response. This is not in accordance with its policy and is also not compliant with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 11 January 2023, which was 7 working days after the complaint was made by the resident. However, the landlord provided its complaint response to the resident’s husband’s email address, and not to the resident’s email address where the complaint was sent from. It later became evident that the resident’s husband did not actively use or check his account. This error by the landlord meant that the resident did not receive the stage 1 complaint response when it was sent.
On 22 May 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and asked for an update on the complaint as she had not received any contact from the landlord to her email address. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to respond to the resident and advise of the complaint response being sent on 11 January 2023, and provide a copy again. There is no evidence provided to the Ombudsman to suggest that it did so. The resident asked the landlord again, on 15 June 2023, for a response to her complaint. It sent her an email on the same day with the letter and it said it had sent the response to the resident’s husband’s email address instead of her own. The resident was understandably frustrated that the response was issued some 5 months prior.
On 15 June 2023, the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2. Part of her complaint escalation referred to her being unhappy with the stage 1 complaint response not being provided to her originally and when she chased the landlord for this. She asked why the landlord did not provide the response to her own email address where the complaint was made from.
The landlord did not immediately recognise that the resident’s email on 15 June 2023 was a request to escalate her complaint. She contacted the landlord on 2 July 2023 and asked for a response to her stage 2 complaint. It replied the following day and explained how she could escalate her complaint, which she had already done. It was inappropriate for the landlord to not recognise where an expression of dissatisfaction was a request to escalate her complaint. The landlord’s failure to recognise the complaint escalation meant that the resident spent time and trouble in trying to progress her complaint. This was not appropriate.
In response to the landlord’s email on 3 July 2023, the resident replied on the same day with the same content of the escalation request sent on 15 June 2023. It then provided an acknowledgement of the stage 2 complaint on 3 July 2023. It said it would provide a response on or before 31 July 2023. The landlord’s acknowledgement of the stage 2 complaint was not in line with the landlord’s policy, as it was provided 12 working days after the resident made the complaint escalation. This delay would have added further distress and inconvenience to the resident at a time when repairs to the substantive issue were ongoing.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 31 July 2023. The response was addressed to the resident’s husband, rather than the resident who had made the complaint. The resident’s concern that the stage 1 complaint response was sent to the wrong email address was not fully addressed in the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response. Its response said that it could remove her husband’s email address if this was not used which was a reasonable solution. However, it remains unclear why the response was sent to the resident’s husband instead of the resident herself.
The stage 2 complaint response included an offer of compensation towards the substantive issue of damp and mould. It did not offer any redress of an apology for sending the response to the wrong email address and the delay this caused in the resident receiving the complaint response. It also did not offer any compensation towards the time and trouble this had caused the resident in chasing the complaint response.
Considering this, the landlord is ordered to include an apology for its complaint handling failures. The landlord is also ordered to pay £100 compensation for its delay and missed opportunities in providing the stage 1 complaint response to the correct email address. The landlord is recommended to review its procedures on how it responds to complaints to ensure that these are sent to the resident who made the complaint. In addition, the Ombudsman has a new Code which comes into effect from 1 April 2024. The landlord is ordered to confirm to this Service when it plans to self-assess against the new Code.
It is also noted that the landlord’s communication regarding its offer of compensation for the substantive issue was not appropriate. In its stage 2 complaint response, it said that “any compensation that we pay comes directly through the rent paid by our other tenants and whilst it will be paid fairly, we need to understand the impact this could have on the funding and delivery of future services for everyone.” The landlord should be mindful of its wording when awarding compensation to ensure that it does not set a tone that the award is paid through other tenants. This could be considered dismissive of the reason for the compensation being awarded, which was due to the landlord’s own failings. It also had potential to impact the relationship between the landlord and the resident.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of issues with drainage to the front and back gardens of the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the associated complaint handling.

Orders

Within 28 calendar days of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Pay the resident compensation of £2,175. This should be paid directly to the resident and not the rent account. It is made up as follows:
  1. £1,925 for the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the property. This replaces the landlord’s previous offer of £1,200, if this has not already been paid. If it has been paid, the landlord is ordered to pay an additional £725.
  2. £150 for the landlord’s handling of reports of issues with drainage to the front and back gardens of the property.
  3. £100 for the associated complaint handling.
2. Apologise to the resident for its delays in completing the repairs to the drainage of the front and back garden. It should also include an apology for its complaint handling failures for sending the response to the wrong email address and its missed opportunities to provide the response when the resident later chased this.
3. Confirm to the resident and this Service the date that it intends to attend and complete the works to re-felt the roof and check the guttering, if this has not already been completed.
4. Confirm to this Service when it plans to self-assess against the new Code. It should provide a date of when it aims to complete its self-assessment.
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescale set out above.

Recommendations

The landlord is recommended to complete a further damp survey of the property to assess the cause of any ongoing damp and mould. It should then produce an action plan, including what works are required and the date it intends to complete any repairs. This is in relation to the current issues that the resident has stated she is experiencing, which are not investigated in this report.
The landlord is recommended to complete a further inspection of the back garden following the resident’s reports of ongoing drainage issues. It should complete any repairs that are needed to try and resolve this issue.
The landlord is recommended to review its procedures on how it responds to complaints to ensure that its complaint responses are sent to the resident who made the complaint.
The landlord is recommended to contact the resident and discuss any compensation towards increased energy costs from the lack of loft insulation.
The landlord is recommended to self-assess against the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management.