Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Yorkshire Housing Limited (202407470)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202407470

Yorkshire Housing Limited

14 February 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 the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Background

  1. The resident has been an assured tenant of the landlord since September 2021. She lives in the property, a 3-bedroom house, with her family. The landlord is a housing association.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord on 15 March 2022 about damp in her property. She said one of her children had asthma and the damp was causing them to use their inhaler more frequently. The landlord inspected the property on 26 August 2022. It conducted a number of further inspections and repairs through 2022, 2023 and into 2024 after she reported ongoing issues with damp, mould and condensation.
  3. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 10 January 2023. She said that mould was present on all upstairs windows, ceilings and skirting boards. She felt that the way the landlord had dealt with the damp issues had started to affect her family’s health. She said her GP had advised the family were unwell due to the conditions in the property. She requested better communication and updates on what was happening to resolve the problems. She said the issues had taken too long for the landlord to resolve.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 23 January 2023. It said:
    1. It had requested a damp and mould inspection in May 2022. The inspection was delayed until 26 August 2022 because of staff shortages. After the inspection, the surveyor gave advice regarding ventilation and requested an inspection of the roof insulation.
    2. The resident reported further problems with condensation on 28 September 2022. The landlord arranged a specialist condensation survey on 6 October 2022. The survey recommended a Positive Input Ventilation (PIV) system. There had been a delay in the contractor installing the system due to a change in electrical requirements. It had scheduled the installation of the PIV system for 24 January 2023.
    3. It had arranged for its contractor to contact the resident to schedule a priority mould clean.
    4. The resident had reported a leak from the roof. While the leak may not have been present during the original inspection, the surveyor apologised if they had missed it.
    5. It upheld the complaint because the work needed to help resolve the issues had taken longer than expected. It apologised for the inconvenience and worry this had caused, and offered £50 in decorating vouchers.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 9 April 2024. She said that she had reported damp in her property 2 years ago, which had become worse over time. Her child’s asthma had also deteriorated, requiring more use of their inhaler and a prescription for steroids.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 15 May 2024. It apologised for the length of time the issues had been going on and for the associated impact on the resident’s family. It confirmed the resident had reported increasing dampness in the bedrooms on 21 February 2024. It visited on 18 March 2024 and cleaned the mould in the bedrooms. It conducted a further inspection on 4 April 2024 and undertook roof repairs on 30 April 2024. After she raised additional concerns on 3 May 2024, the surveyor visited again on 10 May 2024. During the inspection, the surveyor provided advice on ventilating the property and using electric heaters. They also arranged for the ceilings to be painted on 16 May 2024 and for the gutters to be cleaned on 20 May 2024. It said it was unsure if the roof repairs had been required previously or if the deterioration had been in the past 12 months. It acknowledged the resident’s frustration that additional repairs were necessary. The landlord increased its offer of compensation to £300 and £200 in decorating vouchers.
  7. The resident brought her complaint to us on 25 June 2024. As an outcome she wanted the issues with the damp resolved, further compensation, and money towards decorating. She also wanted to be rehomed as she said she no longer felt safe in the property due to the health impacts on her family.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. In the resident’s complaint, she stated that the landlord’s inaction has impacted on her and her children’s health. While we do not doubt or underestimate the resident’s concerns, we are unable to make a determination about any causal link between the landlord’s actions and the health impacts described. Instead, we will consider the overall distress and inconvenience that the landlord’s handling of the issues in this case may have caused. A finding relating to damages caused to the resident’s family’s health is more appropriate for the courts or a personal injury insurance claim, and the resident has the option to seek legal advice if she wishes to pursue this.
  2. The resident asked the Ombudsman to order the landlord to offer rehousing to her family. However, it is beyond our remit to order the landlord to offer immediate rehousing to the resident, or to prioritise her family over other applicants or tenants who need rehousing and who may be in a similar or greater need. The Ombudsman’s role is to determine whether the landlord acted in line with its legal obligations, policies and procedures, and best practice.

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

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy states that it is responsible for the structure and exterior of the building, including roofs, walls, floors, ceilings, gutters and outside pipes. The policy also includes information on the landlord’s repair timescales. It states that the landlord will respond to an emergency repair within 24 hours, an urgent repair within 7 calendar days, and a routine repair within 28 calendar days. It further states that it will take all reports of damp, mould and condensation seriously. It will employ flexible response times for such issues to assist with preventing ongoing issues of damp, mould and condensation and the impact they can have on residents and their homes.
  2. The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. A property with dampness and/or high humidity can pose threats to health from associated mould or fungal growths, resulting in the presence of a category 1 or 2 hazard. The principle underlying the HHSRS is that any residential premises should provide a safe healthy environment for any potential occupier or visitor. To satisfy this principle the landlord must ensure the dwelling is free from both unnecessary and avoidable hazards.
  3. The landlord’s compensation policy permits the payment of discretionary compensation based on the categories laid out in the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.
  4. The resident first notified the landlord about the damp and mould on 15 March 2022. It asked her to provide photographs so that its surveyors could decide how to proceed. The value of photographs to help focus an inspection is appreciated, but they should not be used to decide whether an inspection goes ahead. A person’s ability and personal circumstances can both create issues in providing photographs, resulting in delays, and in some instances this can be a barrier to progressing a case. The landlord’s repairs procedure does not include the necessity for photographs, neither was any information given to the resident on what the implications of not providing photographs would be. In the Ombudsman’s opinion this was an unnecessary hurdle, which was contrary to the landlord’s commitment to taking all reports of damp and mould seriously.
  5. The resident emailed the landlord again on 13 May 2022 to report the mould. She also attached photographs. The landlord forwarded the information internally, asking that an inspection was booked but stating there was “nothing available in target”. However, it failed to communicate the potential delay to the resident. Doing so would have helped manage her expectations. Unaware of the delay, the resident chased the landlord on 28 June 2022. Despite providing the photographs as requested, the landlord did not visit until 25 August 2022, 5 months after the resident reported the mould. This timescale was unreasonable and a failure to comply with the 28–day timeframe outlined in its repairs policy.
  6. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould outlines that “Landlords should recognise that issues can have an ongoing detrimental impact on the health and well-being of residents and should therefore be responded to in a timely manner.” It continues that “landlords should consider appropriate timescales for their responses to reflect the urgency of the case and set these out clearly to manage resident’s expectations.”
  7. During the landlord’s visit on 25 August 2022, it noted black spot mould in the bedrooms and flaking paint on the bathroom ceiling. It raised a request to inspect the loft insulation. It undertook the inspection on 21 September 2022. However, the notes from that visit are poor. They state, “push insulation into eaves”. There are no further comments on the operative’s observations of the loft area itself or what other work they completed.
  8. On 28 September 2022, the resident told the landlord that she had “constant condensation” in the property. It arranged an additional inspection on 6 October 2022 to investigate the resident’s reports. This was a positive step, but the landlord’s records do not indicate if this inspection took place, and if it did, what was inspected and what the surveyor’s findings were. Clear record keeping and management is a core function of a repairs service and are essential for evidence-based practice and informed decision-making.
  9. It is positive that the landlord arranged a specialist condensation survey of the property. It has not provided us with the findings of that survey, but we understand it subsequently approved the installation of a PIV system. This was a solution-focused course of action in the circumstances, but it is disappointing that there was further delay in the installation of this system. The landlord reports this was due to new electrical regulations. However, all the contractor required to progress the installation was a photograph of the electrical consumer unit. This would indicate a substandard inspection by the contractor. We would have expected it to identify these matters during its survey and to have collected all necessary evidence required for the installation. The additional delays caused the resident prolonged frustration and distress having to deal with the condensation.
  10. The resident contacted the landlord on 2 February 2023 to ask when the repairs would be carried out. Disappointingly, the records supplied do not indicate what repairs were outstanding or when they took place. The resident informed us that the landlord did conduct some repairs, and that it asked her to monitor the situation and to let it know after a period of time if the issues were resolved.
  11. The landlord’s records indicate that there was no further contact with the resident until a year later, on 21 February 2024, when she reported that the mould was still present in the property. The landlord visited on 18 March 2024 and found the bathroom walls “very damp”. It requested a further inspection by a surveyor, but again has not provided any records associated with the inspection. On 22 April 2024 it raised a work order to remove the plaster from the windows in all 3 bedrooms, fit new insulation, and replaster the area. The work order also related to relaying of the roof insulation, investigation of the roof and resealing of the leadwork. It is positive the landlord inspected and identified the work; however, it should have identified the repairs and completed them comprehensively after its initial survey of the roof.
  12. In the stage 1 response the landlord referred to a leak in the roof. It stated, “while the leak may not have been present at the original inspection it apologised if it had been missed”. In the stage 2 response in May 2024, it referred to further roof repairs. It said it was unsure if these repairs had been needed previously. The HHSRS requires that inspections are thorough, comprehensive, and detailed enough to gather all the necessary information on the state and condition of the property. It further states that the findings should be accurately recorded and stored for future reference. The fact that the landlord was unable to confirm that the leak and disrepair to the roof were not present at the original surveys indicates a failure to conduct thorough and comprehensive inspections and to accurately record the findings.
  13. The resident informed the landlord on a number of occasions about her child’s worsening asthma. We accept that the presence of a vulnerable group would not increase the hazard score under HHSRS, but it should be a consideration in what action the landlord takes. However, it has been unable to evidence that it recorded the vulnerability or used it in its decision making, which is a failure.
  14. On 30 May 2024, the landlord told the resident that all works were complete and that it wanted to come to the property to conduct a final inspection. The resident disputed that the work was complete. She said the contractor had informed her that it had sealed the gutters, but that the guttering should be renewed. The landlord advised it would check this at the final inspection. However, as of 9 July 2024, this inspection had not taken place. The continued delays caused further frustration, time and trouble for the resident. She advised us that the gutters were not replaced and that she still had mould appearing on her window frames.
  15. The landlord has displayed a number of failures that have led to a finding of maladministration in its handling of this case. It did not respond to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in a timely manner. There was a 5-month period of delay before the first inspection was undertaken and then delays with the works and the installation of the PIV system. The delays continued into July 2024, which caused the resident ongoing distress and inconvenience as well as concerns about her family’s health. It has also been unclear – due to poor record keeping and inspections – what repairs where necessary and the dates they were conducted. For the reasons above we have awarded further compensation to the resident.
  16. The additional amount of compensation we have ordered is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website), which sets out our approach to compensation. The remedies guidance recommends awards of this level where there has been a serious failure by the landlord, which had a significant impact on the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.


Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report the landlord must:
    1. Provide a written apology from a senior manager to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The apology must meet the criteria highlighted in the Ombudsman’s apologies guidance.
    2. Pay the resident £600 compensation. This sum is inclusive of the money already offered and in addition to the £200 decorating vouchers. The money must be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any rent arrears.
  2. Within 6 weeks from the date of this report the landlord must arrange for a comprehensive and thorough inspection of the damp affecting the resident’s property. The inspection should be undertaken by a competent surveyor independent of the previous investigations. The landlord must provide a detailed report of the findings to the resident and this service, which includes:
    1. The extent of the mould currently being experienced by the resident and to establish if any further remedial work or guidance is required.
    2. If the guttering at the resident’s property requires replacing as recommended by the contractor.
  3. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the above orders within the time limits specified.