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

Amplius Living (202416520)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202416520

Amplius Living

12 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:
    1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould and subsequent remedial repairs.
    2. This Service has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has been an assured tenant of a 2-bedroom house since 2003. The property is owned and managed by the landlord. The resident lives in the property with 4 children and one of them has a heart condition.
  2. The resident reported to the landlord that there was an issue of damp and mould in the property on 6 April 2023. A survey was carried out on 13 April 2023. The resident reported the issue again on 19 June 2023 and the landlord arranged a damp and mould appointment. The resident contacted the landlord on 19 October 2023 and 15 November 2023 to chase up the subsequent remedial repairs to resolve the damp and mould issue.
  3. On 14 December 2023 the resident raised a formal complaint stating that she had repeatedly chased up repairs concerning damp and mould. She noted that she had called the landlord about this issue 5 times in 6 months and no remedial work had yet been completed.
  4. The landlord contacted the resident on 30 January 2024 to discuss the complaint, and it requested an extension to the stage 1 response deadline. The resident declined an extension and asked that the complaint be escalated to stage 2.
  5. The landlord’s stage 2 response was sent 4 months later. It admitted there was a service failure in the length of time taken to complete works at the property and apologised for any distress and inconvenience. It offered the resident £950 in compensation, which included £200 for complaint handling.
  6. In bringing the matter to this Service, the resident stated that she wanted the damp and mould issue to be resolved by the landlord completing the necessary repairs. She also wanted to be adequately compensated for the distress and inconvenience, time and trouble caused to her by the long-standing issue, and consideration given for damage to personal belongings.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation.

  1. Throughout the complaint and in communication with this Service, the resident said this situation had a detrimental impact on the health and wellbeing of the family. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. This is largely because independent medical experts are appointed to give evidence. They have a duty to the court to provide unbiased insights on the diagnosis, prognosis, and cause of any illness or injury. When disputes arise over the cause of an injury, oral testimony can be examined in court. While the Ombudsman cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced because of any service failure by the landlord.
  2. This investigation will focus on the landlord’s handling of damp and mould that the resident complained about on 14 December 2023. That complaint exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 12 June 2024. However, in the interests of fairness, we will consider the way that the landlord has handled the same remedial repairs since its final complaint response.
  3. There is evidence that the resident and landlord were in communication about a damp and mould issue in March and April 2022. There is no further communication until April 2023. The Scheme states that “the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period.” We believe it is important that complaints are raised as quickly as possible. It becomes more difficult for both parties to present information and recall events accurately as more time passes since the issue occurred. For this reason, the investigation will not consider the matters raised prior to April 2023.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould and subsequent remedial repairs.

  1. The landlord was required by section 11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to keep in repair the structure of the property. It was also responsible for making sure the property was fit for human habitation under s.9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The existence of any hazard as defined by the Housing Health and Safety Rating System was a relevant factor to assessing fitness for human habitation. Related repair or other remedial action was required within a reasonable period.
  2. The landlord’s repair policy states that damp and mould is considered a routine repair, which should be attended to within 28 days.
  3. On 6 April 2023 the resident reported to the landlord that no one was able to sleep in one of the bedrooms because the walls were wet, the bed was mouldy and there was black mould from ceiling to floor. The plastering had been damaged through damp, and there was paint peeling and wallpaper bubbling. The bathroom was also damp and had visible mould growth. There is evidence that a surveyor visited the property a week later. However, despite the job notes requesting that a source of the damp and mould should be found, there was no follow-up work booked in to resolve it.
  4. The resident contacted the landlord again on 19 June 2023 to raise the same issue. She added that there was a strong smell of damp. An appointment was made for the following month to treat the damp and mould with a mould wash.
  5. On 19 October 2023 and 15 November 2023, the resident contacted the landlord to advise that the mould wash had not resolved the issue and she was concerned the damp might be the result of a leak. She described how her bath was cracked and could be leaking, and that she believed water might be coming in from the roof above the bedroom and bathroom. On 15 December 2023 the resident raised a formal complaint because no repairs had been carried out. Therefore, the Ombudsman has seen no evidence that the landlord carried out sufficient remedial repairs to address the damp and mould within the time stated in its repairs policy.
  6. The landlord’s repair policy states that consideration will be made to all disabilities and health conditions to see if the priority that is given to the repair can be adjusted, and that its staff should seek to understand how the resident’s circumstances are affected by the repair need.
  7. The resident has disclosed to this Service that living in a damp and mouldy environment has had a detrimental impact on her son’s breathing due to his heart condition. The landlord did not have this vulnerability listed on its records. However, the landlord was aware that there were several children in the household and the property has 2 bedrooms. When the resident reported that at least 1 of these bedrooms was unliveable due to severe damp and mould, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have asked about the circumstances of the household and therefore whether it should give greater priority to repair the issue under its policy.
  8. During the landlord’s complaints process, an internal request was raised for a housing officer to carry out a welfare check on the resident to check on the household’s living conditions. Although there has been no evidence provided about this subsequent visit, the landlord acted appropriately when it recommended this. However, this was 10 months after the resident had described the situation of extensive black mould in the bedroom.
  9. The landlord’s stage 1 response letter on 31 January 2024 outlined the resident’s complaint and explained that following its survey of the property on 13 July 2023, several repairs were raised with contractors that did not take place. It acknowledged that this was a failing.
  10. Between the issuing of the stage 1 and 2 complaint responses, the landlord followed up on the works that had been recommended. It found that the contractor which it had instructed had not completed the works that had been raised, but they had been marked as completed on its records.
  11. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould published in October 2021 states that landlords should have appropriate processes in place to ensure that jobs are not marked as completed in error. In this case, the landlord had not maintained adequate oversight of its contactor’s repair records, which impacted upon the awareness of outstanding work in the property.
  12. The Spotlight report suggests that a follow-up call after a job is marked as complete will identify any outstanding issues that the resident otherwise would have been left to chase. It also recommends that landlords schedule follow up visits, at set periods, for at least a year after works are completed to ensure that the issue has not reoccurred. In the evidence seen by this Service, the landlord made no follow-up calls to the resident to check on the completion of works raised or to make sure that the issue had not reoccurred. Had the landlord considered the recommendations of the Spotlight report, it may have avoided service failings in those areas.
  13. The landlord’s stage 2 letter stated that all outstanding works had been completed during April and May 2024. However, in February 2025, the landlord’s repair log recorded that 6 out of 10 remedial works identified to address the damp and mould had not been completed. The resident has advised that 3 of these repairs are still outstanding (relating to roofing, insulation and guttering) and the issue of damp and mould is on-going. The landlord’s final complaint response was a missed opportunity to put in place a timeline of follow-up contacts to ensure that the issue was completely resolved and all necessary work completed.
  14. The resident informed this Service that some of her personal belongings were damaged and discarded due to the damp and mould. This included clothing, mattresses, a bed, a rug and other household items. During a telephone call to discuss the complaint, the landlord requested that the resident send photographs and receipts of damaged items if she had them. This was not followed up in writing in the complaint response, and there is no evidence from either party that the resident provided the necessary information.
  15. It is unlikely that the resident would have a receipt for every item that has been damaged in a property. However, it would be reasonable for the landlord to request photographs of damage to personal items before they were discarded, or at least a comprehensive list of the items affected to be able to calculate costs. If the resident were to make a claim on the landlord’s liability insurance, it would be expected that she would need to supply this information.
  16. Therefore, the landlord acted reasonably to request further evidence of damaged belongings. However, it would have been good practice for the landlord to set out in writing as part of the complaint response, the process the resident needed to follow, and the evidence required, to make a claim for reimbursement.
  17. In its stage 2 response the landlord concluded that there had been a service failure with the time taken to complete works and apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused by this. It paid the resident compensation of:
    1. £250 for delays in completing repairs.
    2. £500 for distress and inconvenience.
  18. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, this Service will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles of: be fair (follow fair processes and recognise what went wrong), put things right, and learn from outcomes.
  19. The landlord’s mishandling of the damp and mould has been significant. There has been a longstanding delay in carrying out the repairs identified. The landlord has failed to act with appropriate urgency, and its record keeping and communication with contractors has caused further difficulty in completing repairs. Throughout this it has failed to maintain a reasonable level of communication with the resident. This has understandably had a significant detrimental impact on the resident, particularly given the vulnerabilities in the household.
  20. The landlord’s compensation procedure advises that it may offer an increased payment calculated as a percentage of the rent where a service failure of the landlord has greatly affected the use of part of their home. Although it offered compensation for delays to repairs and distress and inconvenience, it did not offer compensation for the loss of use of the bedroom, or for the restricted use of the kitchen and bathroom. As the landlord was aware that the damp and mould was greatly affecting the household’s normal daily living arrangements, it was inappropriate that it did not offer compensation for loss of use of part of the property.
  21. Therefore, we consider it would have been proportionate for the landlord to have also awarded compensation of £1710, which is equal to 30% of the rent for the period of 6 April 2023 to 1 May 2024 (when the landlord carried out a mould wash in the bedroom, kitchen and bathroom). We have therefore ordered that the landlord pay the resident an additional £1710 in compensation. The rent and period of time are only indicative and used as a guidance.
  22. We also order the landlord to book in the outstanding repairs and to arrange for a damp and mould specialist to survey the property. It must provide the resident and this Service with a copy of the survey report and complete any work recommended in it.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that stage 1 complaints will be responded to within 10 working days. The landlord telephoned the resident 25 working days after sending the stage 1 acknowledgement to request a 10-day escalation to the stage 1 deadline. The resident was unhappy with this response and therefore requested that the complaint was escalated to stage 2.
  2. The landlord’s complaints policy states that stage 2 complaints will be responded to within 20 working days. The landlord sent its stage 2 response letter 4 months after its stage 2 response acknowledgement, which was a significant delay.
  3. Between issuing the stage 1 and 2 response letters, the landlord chased up the outstanding repairs. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord was able to outline the repairs that had been raised and completed during that time. However, this Service’s Complaint Handling Code requires that a complaint response be provided to the resident when the answer to the complaint is known, not when the outstanding actions required to address the issue are completed. 
  4. The landlord did not apologise for the delay to its complaints handling in its stage 2 response letter. However, it offered the resident compensation of £200 in total for the delays at stage 1 and 2.
  5. The landlord’s compensation guidance procedure states that redress will be considered where there is evidence that a complaint has not been handled in accordance with its policy and procedures. It recommends that payments of up to £250 may be made in recognition of time, trouble, and inconvenience of a service failure. The compensation awarded was in line with its policy and proportionate to the impact on the resident. Therefore, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould and subsequent remedial repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1.  Within 4 weeks the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident compensation of £1710 for the impact of the damp and mould on the resident’s daily living arrangements as a result of the landlord’s repair response.
    2. Contact the resident to confirm the start date of the outstanding repairs to guttering, roofing work and insulation to the loft.
    3. Instruct a specialist damp and mould expert to carry out a damp and mould survey, and to provide a copy of the report to the resident and to this Service.
    4. Contact the resident to advise how she can make a claim for damaged personal possessions on the landlord’s insurance and confirm the information that she will need to supply.
  2. Within 2 weeks of receiving the report from the damp and mould specialist, the landlord is ordered to book in any work recommended by the report.
  3. The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescale set out above.