Sovereign Network Homes (202300111)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202300111

Sovereign Network Homes

15 July 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 damp and mould in November 2022.
2. The landlord’s handling of damp and mould in September 2023.
The landlord’s complaint handling has also been investigated.

Background

The resident held a tenancy with the landlord for a 2 bedroom flat at the time of her complaint. In November 2024 she moved to a new property which is managed by the same landlord. The resident’s complaints relate to issues within her previous property.
In June 2020 the landlord carried out a mould wash within the resident’s property.
On 4 November 2022 the resident contacted the landlord and reported that she had mould in every room. She reported that it was worse than it had ever been and that she had tried to resolve it by using a mould spray but it had not worked. She informed the landlord that she had a young baby in the property and that the mould was causing him to wheeze. The landlord arranged for a damp and mould survey to be carried out by an external contractor.
On 8 November 2022 the survey was completed. The report stated that mould and excessive condensation related issues were identified throughout the property and that the location and appearance was typical of that caused by insufficient ventilation/excessive condensation. The contractor recommended that mould washes were completed, install humidistat fans in the kitchen and bathroom and install a positive input ventilation (PIV) unit within the hallway.
On 9 November 2022 the resident contacted the landlord. She said that the contractor told her that her property was the worst that they had seen. The resident again explained that she had a premature baby and was concerned about the effect the mould may have on him. She asked the landlord to contact her and acknowledge her concerns.
On 10 November 2022 the contractor sent the landlord a quote to carry out the recommended works. On 14 November the landlord raised works orders as per the quotation.
On 29 November 2022 the landlord mould washed the property’s windows, reveals and walls. The resident was advised not to return to the property for 24 hours.
On the same day the resident informed the landlord that her baby had been admitted to hospital with pneumonia the day before and she that she had seen mould on his bedding. The resident asked the landlord to contact her as soon as possible. The landlord responded to the resident and informed her that it was waiting for the quotation to be approved and that it had escalated the matter to a manager and asked them to respond.
On 2 December 2022 the resident raised a stage 1 complaint. The resident said that she was dissatisfied with the length of time she was waiting for contact from the landlord following the inspection. The resident further explained that she was concerned about the impact of damp and mould on her premature son who had been in hospital. On the same day the landlord acknowledged the complaint and that she had to dispose of her blinds and mirror and wanted them replaced.
On 9 December 2022 the landlord completed the recommended works to the property. While these were being completed the resident was advised to stay elsewhere. On her return the resident contacted the landlord and said that her freezer had been turned off. The landlord contacted the resident and followed it up with an email which said that the resident wanted to escalate her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process as she had been given incorrect advice over the past 8 years.
On 12 December 2022 the resident again asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2. The resident said that she had to throw away 4 bags of food due to her freezer being turned off and her Wi-Fi/TV was not working. She said that the PIV was costing her £1.50 a day in electricity to run and that she was unhappy with the advice she had previously been given by the landlord and that it had not done more to find the cause of the mould. The resident also said she had thrown away items that were affected by the damp and mould and her premature baby was ill with pneumonia.
On 13 December 2022 the landlord post inspected the resident’s property. It also agreed to replace her blinds and issued compensation in the form of a £60 voucher for the loss of her food. The landlord replaced the blinds on 22 December 2022.
On 7 February 2023 the landlord provided the resident with its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord provided a timeline of the events and confirmed that it had provided the resident with £60 voucher, new blinds to the value of £196 and £200 to cover expenses while the repairs were completed and she stayed elsewhere. The response also said that:
1. It had contacted the resident on 16 January 2023 and confirmed that she was happy with the works that had been carried out and the communication.
2. It acknowledged the frustrations that the resident experienced and that in recognition of the service failure, offered an additional £275 compensation, which the resident accepted.
3. It also confirmed that the landlord would be in contact in relation to condensation within the bathroom.
On 7 March 2023 the resident contacted the landlord and the Ombudsman as she was unhappy with the final complaint response. The resident said that it did not detail the actions that were agreed and that the communication, customer service and information she had received from her landlord was appalling.
On 24 September 2023 the resident contacted the landlord and reported mould within a downstairs cupboard and that all her shoes had been affected and that they had to be disposed of. The resident explained that her property had been treated last year for damp and mould and she wanted to be compensated for the loss of shoes. The landlord arranged for an inspection to be completed on 16 October 2023.
On 27 September 2023 the landlord and resident were in contact via email in relation to the resident’s request for compensation. The landlord explained that it would not compensate her and that she would need to claim on her contents insurance. The resident said she was unhappy with the response, and the landlord confirmed that the advice given was correct and asked her if she dried clothes indoors, opened her windows and whether her extractor fans worked.
On 16 October 2023 the resident raised a stage 1 complaint. The resident said that:
1. She had raised issues with damp and mould for a number of years and had always been told to clean it herself. She detailed the previous events in 2022 and said that she felt the landlord had not dealt with her complaint appropriately.
2. She had discovered mould within her hallway cupboard in September 2023 which had damaged her shoes. She had been informed that the landlord would not compensate her and was told someone would call her about this.
3. She had chased the landlord for a response but had not received one.
4. The inspection confirmed that although there was no mould within her property, there was a ventilation issue with the hallway cupboard and vents needed to be installed.
5. The resident explained that the issues with damp and mould in 2022 had impacted her and she had suffered financial losses.
6. In order to resolve her complaint, the resident wanted:
  1. The landlord to confirm whether the hallway was treated as part of the works in 2022.
  2. The landlord’ to investigate its poor communication.
  3. An apology, confirmation of when the repairs would be completed and compensation for damaged items.
On an unknown date the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response. The landlord said:
1. It had inspected and raised works within a reasonable timescale and the repairs were completed on 3 November 2023.
2. In relation to its communications, it had a 5 working day service level agreement and asked the resident to confirm who had not responded, so it could be followed up and provide feedback.
3. In relation to the resident’s request for compensation, as it had inspected the property and completed the repairs in a very quick timescale, it would not provide any compensation. It also said that it would not confirm that it would compensate her in future, as all claims are dealt with on a case by case basis.
4. It apologised for the lack of compassion the resident had experienced and had logged her feedback.
5. It also said it would ensure the damp and mould contractor sent the resident the report from November 2022.
On 29 November 2023 the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2. The resident said that she was not happy with the landlord stating it would provide feedback in relation to management and that she had spent a lot of time trying to get answers, but no one responded. The resident also wanted the landlord to revisit its decision in relation to compensation as she had disposed of a number of items, which had a financial impact.
On 6 December 2023 and 2 January 2024, the resident chased the landlord for a response to her complaint. The resident told the landlord that she felt like no one treated her like a human being.
On 4 January 2023 the landlord called the resident and verbally provided its stage 2 complaint response.
On 25 January 2024 the landlord provided a formal written stage 2 complaint response, which said:
1. In relation to the poor communication there was evidence that the resident had to regularly chase the landlord for contact. It had spoken to the specific individual and apologised for the service received.
2. In relation to repairs, it completed an inspection within 7 days and no mould was identified. Remedial works were completed on 3 November 2023.
3. In relation to the request for compensation:
  1. It confirmed that it had spoken with the resident on 13 December 2023 and that it was agreed the issues reported in 2023 had been responded to effectively.
  2. The investigation had highlighted some confusion around compensation and the surveyor who attended in October 2023 had not been aware of the compensation that was paid in February 2023.
  3. It had not considered the items which were damaged between the 2 complaints and this should have been done.
4. In relation to the resident’s request for reassurance that the landlord would cover all future losses, it confirmed that a public liability claim could be made and this should have been explained to the resident.
5. It apologised to the resident for the lack of communication and offered the resident £250 compensation.
On 28 June 2024 the resident provided the Ombudsman with an update. The resident said that as a result of the mould within her home she had no choice but to move house. She was unhappy that the landlord failed to take responsibility and that the communication from management was poor. The resident explained that as a result of having to leave her property while the mould works were being carried out in November 2022, she had been subjected to a distressing attack, and while the landlord could not have foreseen this, had it completed investigations sooner she would not have been put in that position. The resident said that she wanted an apology and compensation for the impact it had on her mental wellbeing and her family, which included her premature baby who had pneumonia.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s approach.

The Ombudsman’s role is to determine complaints by reference to what is fair in all the circumstances and decide if the landlord is responsible for maladministration or service failure.
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:
1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.
2. Put things right, and
3. Learn from outcomes.

Scope of investigation.

The Ombudsman was sorry to hear of the resident’s child’s illness and that he was hospitalised in November 2022. We acknowledge that this was a difficult time for the resident.
As part of her complaint, the resident has said that her newborn son’s health was affected by the presence of damp and mould within her home and that the presence of mould caused him to be hospitalised with pneumonia. It is widely accepted that damp and mould can be damaging to health, particularly for those who are young or vulnerable. However, it is outside the Ombudsman’s remit to establish whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions or inaction and the specific health conditions of the resident and children. Matters of liability for damage to health are better suited to a court or liability insurance process to determine. This is in line with 42f of the Scheme which says the Ombudsman may not consider matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, other tribunal or procedure.
The Ombudsman has considered any distress and inconvenience the resident and her husband experienced as a result of errors by the landlord as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her child’s health.
The purpose of the complaint process is to resolve the complaint at the earliest opportunity. Residents are encouraged to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues and reach an informed conclusion on the events which occurred. As issues become historic, it becomes increasingly difficult to unpick the events that took place and how matters were handled.
In accordance with paragraph 42c, the Ombudsman is unable to consider complaints about matters which were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising.
In this case the resident says she has been reporting issues with damp and mould for several years. The landlord’s records confirm that an issue was reported in March 2020. However, there are no records to show further issues were reported or that a formal complaint was raised with the landlord until November 2022. Furthermore, if a complaint had been raised and exhausted the internal complaint process, it had not been referred to the Ombudsman at that time. Therefore, the Ombudsman’s investigation will focus on the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in November 2022 and September 2023.

Policies and procedures

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a legal duty on landlords to make full, effective and lasting repairs once it is given notice of disrepair. They must keep in repair and working order, the installations for the supply of gas and electricity, water and sanitation and space heating and heating water.
The Housing Act 2004 ensures landlords are responsible for assessing hazards and risks within their rented homes. When assessing any such hazards and risks, the assessment should be considered in line with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Damp and mould growth are potential hazards that may require remedy. Section 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 also requires the property to be free from a hazard to be fit for human habitation.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) sets the minimum standard for housing safety. It lists 29 common hazards, the impacts these hazards can have, and the possible causes. There is advice for landlords on how to categorise the hazards as category 1 (requiring urgent repair) or category 2 (repair if needed).
The landlord has provided the Ombudsman with its damp and mould self- assessment, which details a number of changes it has made to the way it deals with reports of damp and mould. This includes details of what works well, what needs to be improved and actions for it to take forward.
The landlord also has a damp and mould policy, dated March 2023, however, this was not in place at the time of the resident’s initial complaint.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) provides recommendations for landlords, including that they should:
1. Adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions. Landlords should review their current strategy and consider whether their approach will achieve this.
2. Ensure they can identify complex cases at an early stage and have a strategy for keeping residents informed and effective resolution.
3. Ensure that they clearly and regularly communicate with their residents regarding actions taken or otherwise to resolve reports of damp and mould.
4. Identify where an independent, mutually agreed and suitably qualified surveyor should be used, and share the outcomes of all surveys and inspections with residents to help them understand the findings and be clear on the next steps. Landlords should then act on accepted survey recommendations promptly.

The landlord’s handling of damp and mould in November 2022.

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’.
When a resident reports a repair, including damp and mould, the Ombudsman expects a landlord to take prompt action and inspect the property at the earliest convenient opportunity. It is then expected that the landlord has a process in place to follow up on any repairs that have been identified and carry out further investigative work if it is needed. It is important to note that when trying to resolve issues with damp and mould, it can sometimes take time to find the right solution and different repairs may need to be attempted to fully resolve the problem.
Following the resident’s report of mould on 4 November 2022, the landlord was obligated to arrange an inspection. The records show the landlord did this and arranged for an external contractor to inspect the property and complete a survey. This was completed 4 days later and the contractor recommended a number of remedial works and provided the landlord with a quotation works 2 days later. The landlord’s repair records show that orders were raised on 14 November 2022 and were completed on 9 December 2022, 36 days after the initial report was received.
The Ombudsman acknowledges that the landlord acted quickly and that the repairs were completed within a reasonable timescale, however there is clear evidence which shows that it failed to effectively communicate with the resident.
The resident contacted the landlord on multiple occasions asking for information about what action it would take in order to resolve the issue with damp and mould. The situation was further exacerbated by the admission of her young baby into hospital for pneumonia, which the landlord was also aware of.
It is clear that the resident was deeply concerned about the health of her baby, but despite the records confirming that the landlord was taking actions, such as raising the orders for the recommended works to be completed, there was a distinct lack of responsibility from members of staff who should have updated the resident and provided her with reassurance. Her multiple requests for callbacks went answered, which was a failing and caused the resident unnecessary anguish, at what was an already distressing time.
It was not until the resident raised her formal complaint that the landlord took responsibility and the communication improved, as records show that a single member of staff took ownership and visited the resident to post inspect the works and logged her request for compensation.
In relation to the failures identified in relation to the landlord’s communication, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account 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 as well as our own guidance on remedies.
The landlord’s compensation policy, which is published on its website, confirms that it will make discretionary payments for a number of reasons, and that it will look at the severity of the service failure and a resident’s personal circumstances. The policy also states that it will not consider compensation for damage to personal possessions, home contents or personal injury and that liability claims must be made to its insurance team and are not covered by this policy.
While the policy states that it will not cover the cost of damaged possessions, a landlord is entitled to assess a resident’s request for compensation outside of its public insurance procedures and in this case, the landlord determined that it was reasonable to pay to replace the resident’s blinds. This was fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
It also provided her with a voucher for food which was damaged as a result of her freezer being switched off and £200 for the 4 nights that she was out of the house, while the works were being completed. This was also fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
In addition to this, as part of its final complaint response the landlord offered a further £275 compensation for service failure.
The Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies, which can be found on our website, states that where a landlord has acknowledged failings and made some attempt to put things right but failed to address the detriment to the resident payments of between £100 and £600 are suggested.
Although the landlord’s offer of £275 is within this bracket, it does not fairly reflect the level of detriment the resident suffered. While the landlord took prompt action and acted appropriately when the resident reported an issue with damp and mould, it did not communicate with the resident at a very worrying time.
The resident informed the landlord on multiple occasions that she had a premature baby and was worried about the impact of the damp and mould. It was further exacerbated by her baby being admitted to hospital, which the landlord was aware of. While the landlord did respond at this point, there was no acknowledgement of the seriousness of the circumstances or any sense of urgency to respond to the resident with an update for over a month prior.
The delay was unacceptable and the landlord should have ensured that the resident was communicated with sooner. In recognition of the resident’s circumstances, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £350, which includes the £275 offered within its final complaint response.
In addition to the above, the Ombudsman has acknowledged the significant events that the resident occurred during the time she spent away from her property. While the Ombudsman understands this caused the resident both emotional and physical distress, it is unable to determine a direct correlation between the landlord’s actions, or lack there of, and the events that occurred. To hold the landlord accountable for those events would be unfair and falls outside of the remit of this Service.

The landlord’s handling of damp and mould in September 2023.

When the resident reported damp and mould on 24 September 2023, the landlord appropriately arranged for an internal inspection to be completed on 16 October 2023.Remedial works were identified and repairs were completed on 3 November 2023, which was in line with its obligations.
However, the evidence shows that the landlord’s communication remained an issue. The resident informed the landlord that a number of her belongings had been damaged and that she would like the landlord to reimburse her. The evidence provided shows that a number of internal emails were exchanged and the resident was informed that the landlord would not be liable for the damaged items and that she should claim through her contents insurance.
While this advice was not wholly incorrect, it was reasonable for the resident to request compensation, especially as she had been compensated for the loss of belongings earlier in the year, and the landlord should have taken this into consideration when it provided her with its response.
It is also concerning that when the landlord responded to the resident, it asked her a number of questions about her lifestyle, which prompted the resident to respond and express her dissatisfaction at the landlord blaming her for the damage. This is not in line with the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould, namely chapter 2, which details the steps landlords should take to ensure they are not inferring blame on residents and are instead taking responsibility for resolving the damp and mould. This includes the recommendations that landlords should review, alongside residents, their initial response to reports of damp and mould to ensure it avoids automatically apportioning blame or using language that leaves residents feeling blamed.
The resident continued to chase the landlord for a response in relation to her damaged items and also raised a formal complaint. Despite there being evidence that the landlord was communicating internally in relation to the historic events, and what action it was taking to resolve the resident’s complaint, the resident’s requests for callbacks went unanswered. This was a failing and left the resident feeling unsupported due to the landlord’s lack of contact and frustrated that it had not improved its communication following her previous complaint.
It is clear from the records that there was confusion within the landlord and that staff were unaware of how the previous issue with damp and mould had been resolved and there is evidence to show that the landlord informed the resident that she should be compensated for the previous events, which had already been dealt with. This led to a further misunderstanding between the landlord and resident about what action the landlord should take in relation to her request for compensation.
As part of the final complaint response, the landlord acknowledged that there had been a lack of communication and staff had not responded within its service level agreement. It further confirmed that it gave incorrect information and should have referred her to its own public liability insurer in relation to her damaged belongings. In order to put things right, it offered the resident £250 compensation for its service failings and damaged items.
The landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with any indication how it calculated its compensation offer of £250, therefore, the Service has assumed that £150 is for service failure and £100 is for the replacement of damaged belongings.
The landlord has acknowledged that there was service failure and attempted to put things right by offering the resident compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused, which based on the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies, is considered fair and reasonable in the circumstances.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

A landlord’s complaint handling should aim to resolve issues quickly, effectively and fairly. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code sets out what good complaint handling looks like and all landlords are expected to comply with this. The Code and further guidance are available on our website
The landlord’s corporate complaints policy says that it operates a 2-stage procedure. It says that both stage 1 complaints will be acknowledged within 5 working days and responded to within 10 working days of being received. Stage 2 complaint must be escalated within 20 working days and will be responded to within 20 working days of being escalated. It does not detail how responses will be sent.
The Code stated that at the completion of each stage of the complaints process the landlord should write to the resident advising a number of details:
1. The complaint stage.
2. The outcome of the complaint.
3. The reasons for any decisions made.
4. The details of any remedy offered to put things right.
5. Details of any outstanding actions.
6. Details of how to escalate the matter if dissatisfied.
In relation to the landlord’s complaint handling in November 2022, although the records show that a member of staff took ownership of the complaint and sought to provide a resolution, the landlord did not provide the resident with a formal written stage 1 response. This was a failing and was not in line with the Code. This may have led to unnecessary confusion as to what stage the resident’s complaint was at and what steps she could then take to progress it.
At stage 2 of the process, while the landlord did provide a formal written stage 2 complaint response, it took 39 working days for it to be issued. This was a further failing and significantly outside of its published timescales. Furthermore, the landlord failed to identify its complaint handling failures at both stage 1 and 2 and therefore made no attempt to put things right.
The Ombudsman is clear that effective dispute resolution requires a process designed to resolve complaints. Where something has gone wrong a landlord should acknowledge this and set out the actions it has already taken, or intends to take, to put things right. It should also identify any learning to ensure the failings are not repeated.
In relation to the landlord’s complaint handling in October 2023, there were some further failures. The records indicate that the landlord took steps to try and resolve the complaint informally and did not provide a written response at first. It also informed her on multiple occasions that her complaint had been addressed in February 2023 and that she had exhausted the internal complaints process. This advice was incorrect.
It is positive that the landlord identified that this information was incorrect and registered the complaint at stage 1 of the process, however, it took 25 calendar days for it to do so. This was a failing and caused an unnecessary delay to the resident.
In addition to the delay, the landlord wrote to the resident and said that it would not address the following 2 points of her complaint as they had been previously dealt with:
1. The resident requested confirmation that the hallway cupboard was treated as part of the works in November 2022.
2. She also requested a copy of the works report from the external contractor following the work in November 2022.
While the resident’s request for information related to a previous complaint, it was not unreasonable for her to ask for this information given that she was experiencing further issues with damp and mould. The landlord’s decision not to investigate this was unfair in the circumstances and it should have provided her with a response.
In addition to the above, following the resident’s complaint escalation it took the landlord 24 calendar days to provide the resident with a verbal stage 2 response and a further 21 days for it to provide a formal written stage 2 complaint response.
The Ombudsman acknowledges that the landlord informed the resident it was awaiting the written response to be signed off by the leadership team, however it should have a robust procedure in place to ensure written responses are provided within its published timescales and is not an acceptable reason for a delay. This was a failing and unnecessarily delayed the resident’s ability to refer her complaint to the Ombudsman. The landlord failed to acknowledge the complaint handling failures and this demonstrates that the landlord did not adequately learn from the resident’s previous complaint.
As the landlord failed to learn from its previous outcomes, the Ombudsman has determined that there was maladministration. While the Service is content that the landlord has sought to put things right for the resident regarding the damp and mould, the adverse findings in the complaint handling should encourage future learning for the landlord.
The Ombudsman draws the landlord’s attention to section 6 of the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code, which sets out what the Ombudsman considers are the best practice principles of “putting things right” where there have been failings. Therefore, the decision to not acknowledge the failings and offer compensation was not reasonable. This now falls to the Ombudsman to determine what is fair and reasonable.
The Ombudsman has considered the distress and inconvenience suffered by the resident as a result of the delay and failures with the complaint handling. There were significant delays in providing responses in both 2022 which were repeated in 2023.
In line with the Ombudsman’s remedy guidance where there has been a failure which adversely affected a resident, payments of over £100 are recommended. In recognition of the failures identified, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £300.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in November 2022.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress in relation the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in September 2023.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Write to the resident and apologise to the resident for the failures identified within this report.
2. Pay the resident a total £900 of made up of:
  1. £350, which includes the £275 offered at stage 1, for the failures identified regarding the handling of the damp and mould in November 2022.
  2. £250 offered at stage 2 for the failures identified regarding the handling of damp and mould in September 2023.
  3. £300 for the complaint handling failures.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord:
1. Review its staff’s training needs with regard to record keeping, complaint handling and remedies, including in light of the findings of this report, the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, and our remedies guidance.
2. Arrange for staff who deal with complaints to review the Ombudsman’s learning hub and complete the e-learning modules on complaint handling.