From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new cases by email. Please use our online webform to submit your complaint. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Call us on 0300 111 3000

Sovereign Network Group (202418190)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202418190

Sovereign Network Group

1 May 2025


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 the landlord’s handling of:
    1. The resident’s reports of damp and mould at his property.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord. The resident lives at the property with his partner and children. There are health issues within the family including respiratory conditions, which the landlord is aware of. Both the resident and his partner have had contact with the landlord in relation to reporting damp and mould and raising the complaint. For ease of reference both the resident and his partner will be referred to as “the resident” in this assessment.
  2. In April 2017, the landlord replaced cavity wall insulation at the resident’s property.
  3. The landlord arranged an appointment for 1 December 2022, to install insulated plasterboard in one of the bedrooms at the resident’s property to remedy damp and mould. The landlord cancelled the appointment on the day at short notice.
  4. The landlord’s repair records of 6 December 2022 state that the damp and mould membrane at the resident’s property was starting to break up. The records state that joints in the brick work were either missing or crumbling away. The records also state that there was water sitting on the concrete path that ran between the resident’s and the next-door property.             
  5. On 15 December 2022, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord. He said there had been damp and mould in the property since he moved in, 15 years previously. He said the issue had affected him and his family physically, mentally and financially. He said he had had to spend money on heaters and dehumidifiers and frequently had to air out the property. He said he often had to wear masks and move furniture to clean away black mould spores. He said the landlord’s contractor had told him that the walls of the property needed to be taken back to the brickwork. The landlord’s notes of 15 December 2022, show that the resident also told it he had had to throw away bags of mouldy clothes.
  6. On 15 December 2022, the landlord asked its contractor to provide a quote for repairing the damp proof course (DPC) at the resident’s property. It also raised works to install extractor fans and a positive input ventilation (PIV) unit. The landlord contacted the resident to advise him of the steps it was taking and arranged an appointment to carry out a mould wash at the property on 22 December 2022. The landlord’s records show that the resident called the landlord the same day to cancel this appointment. The landlord offered to reschedule the appointment for 3 or 5 January 2023. The resident said he was not available on those dates due to a family member needing to attend hospital appointments and asked that the appointment be rescheduled after 14 January 2023.
  7. On 6 January 2023, the landlord completed the work to install insulated plasterboard in one of the bedrooms. In March 2023, the landlord repaired the DPC and installed a French drain and air bricks at the resident’s property.
  8. The landlord’s records of 27 March 2023 show that it put on hold the works to install extractor fans and the PIV unit.
  9. The landlord contacted the resident via email on 28 April 2023 and via phone on 12 May 2023 to try to arrange for its surveyor to carry out an inspection of the damp and mould at the property. The landlord’s records of 11 May 2023, show that it was unable to gain access to the property to carry-out a mould wash.
  10. On 26 May 2023, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It confirmed it had replaced the cavity wall installation and installed a French drain, as well as carrying out repairs to the DPC and installing air bricks. It said it had raised works to install a PIV unit and extractor fans. It said it had carried out all works thus far within its timescales for doing so. However, it accepted that the resident was still having issues with damp and mould. It said it had therefore arranged to meet with him.
  11. The landlord’s repair records of 26 May 2023, show that its surveyor had tried to visit the resident’s property to inspect the damp and mould but was not able to gain access. The resident called the landlord the same day to apologise for not being able to attend the appointment. The landlord’s records show that on 1 June 2023, it rearranged the appointment with the resident for 3–3.30pm on 5 July 2023. Its records state that the surveyor attended at 1.50pm and was not able to gain access.
  12. The landlord’s records of 25 July 2023, state that the resident contacted it to request that an appointment to install the PIV unit and the extractor fans be rearranged for October 2023.
  13. The landlord’s records of 9 October 2023, state that it tried to contact the resident several times to install the PIV unit but had not been successful.
  14. The landlord’s records of 22 February 2024, show that the resident raised the issue of damp and mould again. The landlord’s records of 7 March 2024, state that the landlord was not able to gain access to the property to complete works as the resident was not at home.
  15. The resident escalated the complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure on 13 March 2024. He said the landlord:
    1. Had not installed the extractor fans or PIV unit.
    2. Had said it would attend the property with one of its contractors, but this had not happened. It had also told him it would offer him compensation which it had not done. He had had to continually chase the landlord.
    3. Had not given him sufficient advance notice of appointments. He said the landlord had advised him on 6 March 2023, that it was due to carry out an inspection of the property the following day, but he had not been able to take the time off work.
    4. He wanted compensation for the time he had to take off work as he was self-employed and for damage to his possessions and furniture caused by the damp and mould.
  16. On 19 June 2024, the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said:
    1. It had made several attempts to install the PIV unit and the extractor fans but had not been able to do so as it had not been able to agree an appointment date with the resident.
    2. Its surveyor had tried to visit on 26 May 2023 but had not been able to gain access. The surveyor had waited an hour and had called the resident on both numbers listed but there was no facility to leave a voicemail.
    3. The resident had told it about an occasion when he had tried to contact it after 5pm. It said that its office hours were 8am–4.30pm. It said if the resident was finding it difficult to call between these times, he could text or email.
    4. It had not made any formal offer of compensation in its stage 1 complaint response.
    5. It had not responded to his stage 2 complaint within its timescales for doing so of 20 working days. It offered him £150 compensation for this delay.
  17. The resident complained to the Ombudsman on 6 August 2024. He said he had had to take time off work to attend repair appointments and wanted compensation for this. He said the mould had caused damage to his belongings including to his children’s car seats. He said the damp and mould had affected his family’s health. He said that the landlord had said it would arrange to treat the property with anti-mould paint in October 2024, however its contractors had previously recommended that the walls needed to be stripped back to the brickwork.
  18. On 13 November 2024, the resident submitted a further complaint about the damp and mould to the landlord.
  19. The resident told the Ombudsman on 3 February 2025 that the PIV unit the landlord had installed was noisy and caused his family to have dry mouths, sore throats and breathing problems.
  20. On 25 February 2025, the landlord contacted the resident. It said it would try and move works to carry out a mould wash and paint walls with anti-mould paint to a date requested by the resident. It said it had arranged for its contractor to carry out a full damp and mould survey of the resident’s property. It said when it received the survey report it would act on some of the contractor’s recommendations.
  21. The resident told the Ombudsman on 23 April 2025 that there was still damp and mould in his children’s bedroom.

Assessment

Scope of investigation

  1. In his stage 1 complaint, the resident told the landlord he had complained about the damp and mould in his property for over 15 years. The Ombudsman would usually expect such issues to be brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within 12 months of the matters arising. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner, so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’, and whilst the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events which occurred. As the substantive issues become historic it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as the Ombudsman, to conduct an effective review of the actions taken to address those issues. Therefore, this investigation focuses on the landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint about damp and mould of 15 December 2022.
  2. The resident mentioned in his complaint that his family’s health was affected by the landlord’s handling of the repairs. The Ombudsman acknowledges the resident’s comments about his family’s health. It is widely accepted that damp and mould can pose a risk to health, particularly for those with respiratory conditions. We can consider the general risk; however, it is beyond the Ombudsman’s remit to consider whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions or inaction and the resident’s family’s health. We can consider any distress and inconvenience caused by any errors by the landlord as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about his family’s health.
  3. The resident has said that he is seeking compensation for loss of earnings. However, we will not generally propose a remedy of compensation to reimburse a resident for their time off work, loss of wages or loss of employment whilst repairs are carried out. Whilst such works will inevitably cause some inconvenience to residents, their occupancy agreement will require them to give access for repairs to be carried out as needed, and it would not be fair or reasonable for the Ombudsman to order a landlord to pay a resident reimbursement for loss of earnings for routine appointments. However, we can consider time, trouble and inconvenience caused where repair appointments are repeatedly missed or fail to resolve the repair issue.
  4. The resident has told the Ombudsman that there is still mould in his children’s bedroom and that the PIV unit is noisy and causing health issues for his family. This further report of mould and the resident’s concerns about the PIV unit have not formed part of this assessment and these issues are noted in the background for context only. This is because the Ombudsman is not able to consider complaints that are made prior to having exhausted a landlord’s complaint procedure. This is so that landlords have the opportunity to respond to complaints and resolve issues before the Ombudsman becomes formally involved. The resident submitted a further complaint to the landlord about damp and mould at his property on 13 November 2024. If the resident remains dissatisfied once this new complaint has exhausted the landlord’s complaint procedure, he may be able to refer it to the Ombudsman for a separate investigation.
  5. As noted above, on 25 February 2025, the landlord told the resident it had arranged for its contractor to carry out a full damp and mould survey of his property. It is recommended that the landlord write to the resident to set out whether it will carry out any further works to remedy the damp and mould in his property, following this survey.

Policies and procedures

  1. Under the terms of the resident’s tenancy agreement the landlord is responsible for repairs to the structure and exterior of the resident’s property.
  2. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states that it will complete non-emergency repairs within 38 days of the repair being first reported. The policy states that the landlord must give the resident 24 hours’ notice of repair appointments. The policy states that the resident must allow the landlord and its operatives access to the property to carry out inspections and repairs.
  3. The landlord’s complaints policy in operation at the time of the resident’s complaint stated that it would respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
  4. The Ombudsman’s complaint handling code (The Code), published on our website, sets out our expectations for landlords’ complaint handling. The Code states that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law and good practice where appropriate.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould

  1. It should be noted that it can take landlords more than one attempt to resolve issues such as damp and mould as it can be difficult to identify the cause of the issue at the outset and in some cases different repairs may need to be attempted before the matter is resolved. This would not necessarily mean there was a service failure by the landlord, provided it was making reasonable efforts to identify the cause and carry out repairs.
  2. The landlord cancelled an appointment arranged for 1 December 2022, to install insulated plasterboard in one of the bedrooms, at short notice. It is accepted that this can happen for a variety of reasons outside of the landlord’s control, such as staff sickness. However, the landlord’s repair records state that the appointment was cancelled due to it having booked the wrong tradespeople. This was a failing which could have been avoided, and which will have likely caused the resident time, trouble and inconvenience as he had had to book time off work only for the appointment not to go ahead.
  3. It was appropriate that on receiving the resident’s complaint of 15 December 2022, the landlord asked its contractors to provide a quote for repairing the DPC and raised works to install extractor fans and a PIV unit. It was also reasonable that it arranged an appointment to carry out a mould wash at the resident’s property. This demonstrates that it took the resident’s concerns about damp and mould seriously.
  4. The resident contacted the landlord on 15 December 2022 to say he would not be available for appointments until after 14 January 2023. Whilst it is understandable that residents may not be able to allow access for repairs for legitimate reasons such as hospital appointments, the landlord would not be responsible for any delays this caused.
  5. The resident complained to the landlord that it had contacted him on 6 March 2023 to arrange an appointment for the following day. He said he was not able to take the day off work as he had not been given sufficient notice of this appointment. Whilst the landlord was entitled to give the resident 24 hours’ notice under its repairs policy; for non-emergency appointments, it is considered good practice for landlords to liaise with residents in advance where possible to ensure they will be available to provide its operatives access.
  6. As noted above, the resident had told the landlord he would not be able to grant access to his property until 14 January 2023. In March 2023, the landlord repaired the DPC, installed a French drain and airbricks. This was in line with its repairs and maintenance policy, set out above, which states that it will complete routine repairs within 38 days.
  7. The landlord’s records show that it carried out a survey on 15 March 2023 to see if it could install extractor fans and a PIV unit at the resident’s property. Its records show that the works to install the fans and the PIV unit were placed on hold on 27 March 2023. However, the records do not state what the reasons for this were. This is a failing. Where works are put on hold, it is important that landlords’ records provide an explanation as to why. Without detailed records, it is not possible for the Ombudsman to determine whether this delay was reasonable. It is recommended that the landlord reviews its record-keeping systems to include explanations as to why any works are put on hold, when this happens. The landlord’s records of 24 July 2023, show that an appointment to install a PIV unit was rebooked for October 2023 at the resident’s request. The landlord’s records of 9 October show that it attempted to book in this appointment but did not hear back from the resident. In its stage 2 complaint response of 19 June 2024, the landlord said it had attempted to book appointments to install a PIV unit and the extractor fans on 5 occasions. The landlord installed a PIV unit at the resident’s property on 13 January 2025. The Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord made reasonable attempts from 24 July 2023 onwards, to install the PIV unit and extractor fans.
  8. On 28 April 2023 and 12 May 2023, the landlord’s records show that it attempted to contact the resident to arrange a visit from its surveyor to discuss any further issues with damp and mould. Its records show that it did not hear back from the resident. The landlord’s repair records suggest that this visit was rebooked with the resident for 26 May 2023 as the records show that the resident called the landlord later that day to apologise that he had been unable to attend the appointment. The landlord cannot be held responsible for the delays to this inspection as there is evidence to show that it made reasonable attempts to arrange this, including contacting the resident via phone and email.
  9. The landlord’s records show that the surveyor’s inspection was rearranged for 5 July 2023 at 3.30pm as the resident told the landlord he would be at work before that time. However, the surveyor arrived at 1.50pm. This was a failure by the landlord. It should not have informed the resident that it would attend at the time he requested, if it was not able to do so. This will have likely caused the resident frustration as well as time, trouble and inconvenience.
  10. In his stage 2 complaint, the resident told the landlord belongings and furniture had been damaged by the damp and mould. He had previously told it that this included clothes which he had had to throw away. The resident told the Ombudsman that there was damage to his children’s car seats. The landlord did not respond to this aspect of his complaint. The Ombudsman’s complaint handling code, set out above, states that landlords must address all points raised in a resident’s complaint. The fact that the landlord did not do so was a failing. It is recommended that the landlord pass on its insurer’s details (if it has one) to the resident now, or assesses the claim internally, so he can make a claim if he wants to, for the damage to his belongings. If the landlord’s insurer is a separate organisation from the landlord, we would not comment on its insurer or the likely outcome of an insurance claim if one is made, as the Ombudsman cannot look at the actions of insurers, only at the actions of the landlord.
  11. Overall, the landlord’s errors in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould, amount to maladministration. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, published on our website, sets out our approach to compensation. The remedies guidance states that where we identify maladministration, compensation of £100 and above should be considered. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £150 for the trouble and inconvenience its errors in its handling of his reports of damp and mould will have likely caused him.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The resident submitted his stage 1 complaint on 15 December 2022. The landlord did not issue its stage 1 complaint response until 26 May 2023. This was nearly 5 months outside of the landlord’s timescales of 10 working days to respond to stage 1 complaints. This was a significant failing as the resident was kept waiting for a response to his complaint for far longer than he should have been.
  2. The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure on 13 March 2024. The landlord did not respond to this complaint until 19 June 2024. This was 2 months outside of the landlord’s timescales for responding to stage 2 complaints of 20 working days. The landlord has apologised for this and has offered the resident £150 compensation to recognise the time and trouble this will have caused him.
  3. We will not award increased compensation for the delay in the landlord issuing its stage 1 complaint response, as the overall compensation it offered at stage 2 was proportionate and fair. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to punish or fine landlords and we do not award set amounts of compensation for each error a landlord makes. Rather, it is our approach to assess what a reasonable amount of compensation would be in total, considering the cumulative impact of the delays on the resident.
  4. Therefore, the landlord does not need to do anything further in this regard, as its offer is in line with what the Ombudsman would have awarded had the landlord not already made an offer and it is appropriate redress for the landlord’s errors in its handling of the associated complaint.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould at his property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of the associated complaint satisfactorily.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £150 compensation for the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused by its errors in its handling of his reports of damp and mould, within 4 weeks of the date of this report ensuring that it provides the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance by the same date. This is in addition to the £150 compensation it offered the resident through its complaints process, which should also be paid if it has not been paid already.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Writes to the resident to set out whether the damp and mould survey it arranged in February 2025 recommended any further works to remedy the damp and mould at his property. It should complete any necessary works in line with the timescales in its repairs policy.
    2. Reviews its record-keeping systems to include explanations as to why any works are put on hold.
    3. Passes on its liability insurer’s details (if it has one) to the resident or assesses a claim itself, so he can make a claim if he wants to, for the damage to his belongings.