Together Housing Association Limited (202411431)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202411431

Together Housing Association Limited

28 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 damp and mould repairs in the resident’s property.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. Her tenancy started in 2020. She lives in the property with her 10-year-old grandson. The property is a 3-bedroom house. Both the resident and her grandson are disabled. The resident has several health conditions including fibromyalgia, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS) and asthma. She has described how her hands “seize up” when she overexerts herself. She is also diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism. She has post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Her grandson has multiple complex disabilities, he is also autoimmune compromised.
3. In December 2022, the resident reported damp and mould in the property which she said had damaged her possessions, which included beds and carpets. The landlord inspected the property on 12 January 2023 and recommended an independent damp survey. This went ahead on 13 March 2023 and concluded in a report dated 18 April 2023 that the issue was likely to be condensation rather than rising or penetrating damp. It recommended an inspection of the guttering. The landlord arranged a mould wash on 24 May 2023.
4. In June 2023, following further reports of damp from the resident, the landlord arranged for a roofer to attend who found that the roof felt had perished and this was causing water penetration. Contractors completed the works to the roof on 23 August 2023.
5. The resident reported further damp and water ingress on 22 January 2024. The landlord asked the resident to remove the wallpaper so that it could undertake further investigations. She raised a complaint the same day in which she said:
   1. There had been a significant delay in the landlord identifying the cause of the damp in her property.
   2. The ongoing damp issue had damaged her possessions and furniture.
   3. She is disabled and she cannot physically remove the wallpaper, so she would have to pay someone privately to do this.
   4. While the landlord had arranged an inspection for 7 February, she was not confident that the repairs would be raised thereafter.
6. The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 14 February 2024. It said that:
   1. It had called the resident to discuss her complaint with her.
   2. It had visited the property and raised the necessary works which included roof repairs because of a deteriorated membrane and replastering, which it had arranged to go ahead between 22 February and 21 March 2024.
   3. Regarding the resident’s request that the landlord remove wallpaper, it would look at its policies and procedures to see if it had followed them, however this may not be a service that the landlord would normally provide.
   4. It apologised for the delays and for the inconvenience they had caused the resident.
7. The landlord scheduled the works for completion in February and March 2024, however the resident asked for works to begin in May 2024 instead when the weather was warmer. This was because both her and her grandson had health conditions that were made worse by the cold.
8. On 17 June 2024, the resident asked that the landlord escalate her complaint. She said that:
   1. its actions to date had not resolved the damp, and she was frustrated that several surveyors had inspected her home and had reached different conclusions as to the cause of the problem.
   2. She did not feel that inspectors had listened to her, and she felt they were condescending and dismissive of her concerns.
   3. She had asked the landlord for reasonable adjustments, as on account of her disability, but it had not responded to her request.
   4. The landlord had said it did not have capacity to complete works before September 2024.
9. The landlord acknowledged her complaint on 20 June 2024 and said that it would provide a written response within 20 working days. It asked for an extension on 18 July 2024. On 22 July 2024 it issued its stage 2 response. It said:
   1. It had contacted the resident on 28 June to discuss the agreed works, and had arranged for another contractor to start works to remove and fit radiators, make sockets safe, hack off damaged plaster and inject new damp proof course before replastering and refitting skirting boards.
   2. It contacted the resident after contractors had completed the works and she had said that she was satisfied with the works that it had completed, although some items were outstanding. It was due to complete these works on 23 July 2024 and it would arrange a post inspection on 26 July 2024.
   3. It apologised for the inconvenience caused to her.

Post complaint

10. The resident wrote to the landlord on 2 August 2024 to say that while it had completed most of the works, some items were either outstanding or unfinished. She referenced a radiator in the hallway and ill-fitting carpets. She said she was not happy with the outcome of the complaint as it did not address the frustration and effort she had spent in repeatedly raising concerns about damp and mould only to be told that the problem was condensation. She said she had to repeatedly chase for works and she had to purchase dehumidifiers, buy extra insulation for under her carpets and replace bedding and furniture damaged by damp and mould.
11. In response, the landlord visited the resident to discuss these points further on 27 August 2024. It issued a new stage 2 complaint response the same day. It said that while most of the works were carried out within its service standards, it had completed one of the repairs 42 days outside of its target response timescales. It apologised for this service failure and offered her £60 for the delay and £60 to compensate her for her effort and frustration. It also asked that she provide details of costs that she had incurred so that it could look at reimbursing her for these.
12. In October 2024, the landlord contacted the resident again to offer her £800 compensation for her inconvenience as it accepted that the issue had been ongoing for a long time and there had been delays in resolving it. The amount included a contribution towards decoration costs and the purchase of a dehumidifier. It outlined some other works it had agreed to do.
13. In February 2025, the landlord arranged for to replace the resident’s lounge carpet. It also provided her with a hygrometer so that she could continue to measure the temperature and humidity levels in the home. The resident has since reported to this Service that there is mould growth in her bathroom, toilet and on the wall in the upstairs landing.

Assessment and findings

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

14. It is an implied term of every tenancy that the landlord must keep in good repair the structure and exterior of a property, which includes drains, gutters, external pipes, the roof, walls, doors, windowsills and frames, internal walls, and chimneys.
15. Social landlords must ensure that their homes meet the Decent Homes Standard. Section 5 of the Standard says that landlords must ensure that their properties are free of category one hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Damp and mould and excess cold are listed as potential hazards.
16. The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation policy outlines the approach it will take to addressing damp and mould in its properties. It commits to inspecting properties promptly following reports of damp and mould and says that it will deal with repairs in accordance with its repairs and maintenance policy. This says that it will attend to emergency repairs within 24 hours and complete routine repairs within 28 days. Where works require bespoke materials or equipment, it will complete them within 63 days.
17. When the resident first reported damp and mould in her home, it was reasonable for the landlord to promptly arrange for a specialist damp and mould inspection. The inspection concluded that the issue was condensation rather than structural repairs and recommended that the landlord raise works to inspect the guttering and roof. Although later investigations showed that the issue was related to water ingress due to a deteriorated roof membrane, it was reasonable for the landlord to rely on the investigations of its specialist contractors, and it would not have reason to believe, at this time, that the report’s findings were inaccurate.
18. The landlord took proper action following the report by scheduling a mould wash, which it completed within its target response timescales. When the issue remained unresolved, the landlord arranged for a roofer to check gutters and flashing following which it concluded that the problem was due to perished roof felt. It completed these works within 2 months, which was within the landlord’s published response timescales given that the landlord needed to arrange for scaffolding to be erected to access the roof.
19. The landlord’s reasonable adjustments policy says that it should take steps to prevent barriers to resident’s accessing its services, particularly where a resident makes a request for adjustments and has a condition or disability that affects how it may interact with its services. It also commits to making reasonable adjustments when applying its damp, mould, and condensation policy where it says that it will consider any household vulnerabilities and “manage the issues appropriately, expediating our response appropriately.”
20. When the resident reported further damp in the property, in January 2024, the landlord told her that she would need to remove wallpaper before it could assess the damp. She asked for help with removing wallpaper as she said that her disability meant that she was not physically capable of doing this. The landlord did not provide this assistance, and the resident had to pay someone to do this for her.
21. The landlord should have considered the resident’s request for a reasonable adjustment, following its policies, and then informed her of the outcome. If it considered that it was not able to make the adjustment, it should have outlined the reasons for this in its response. It would also be good practice for the landlord to have signposted the resident to any charitable organisation that could help. There is no evidence that it followed its policy by doing this, which was unsatisfactory. Neither did the landlord address this in its complaints response, which was a missed opportunity to rebuild the landlord and tenant relationship.
22. Notwithstanding this, there were occasions when the landlord did make reasonable adjustments to remove barriers to its services. The landlord acted fairly and per its policy by arranging for a housing officer to support the resident during appointments, as she had said that she found it difficult for strangers to be in her home, because of her neurodiversity and PTSD.
23. The landlord also agreed to the resident’s request that it arrange works for later that year (in May 2024) when the weather would be warmer, considering her and her grandson’s disabilities that were aggravated by the cold. However, there was a miscommunication, with the resident expecting that the landlord would rearrange the works, and the landlord waiting for the resident to rebook the works.
24. There was also evidence that the landlord did not accurately record the outcome of inspections and agreed works. The resident reported that when a new officer was allocated her repairs case, they raised a new inspection as they did not have a record of the repair works the last officer had agreed with the resident. This pushed the works start date back. The new officer also raised different repairs to what had previously been agreed, which caused the resident frustration, and she described a loss of confidence in the landlord.
25. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) says “the failings to create and record information accurately results in landlords not taking appropriate and timely action, missing opportunities to identify that actions were wrong or inadequate, and contributing to inadequate communication and redress.”
26. We acknowledge that it is not always possible for a repair to be resolved at first inspection; sometimes there needs to be further investigation of the issues, particularly where there is complexity, or an expert opinion is needed.
27. Sometimes the cause of a problem needs to be identified through a process of elimination when other interventions have not been successful. However, in this case there was no evidence of a systemic, investigative approach to the works, rather inspections were repeated and different works raised, because of ineffective record-keeping.
28. When the landlord noted that it did not have the capacity to undertake the works prior to September 2024, it took steps to find other contractors who could complete the works sooner, which was reasonable. It also replaced the resident’s carpet and has provided the resident with a hygrometer so that she can monitor moisture levels in the home going forward.
29. The resident has reported to this Service that, since her complaint, there has been further mould growth in the bathroom, toilet, and upstairs landing. We have therefore included a recommendation with this report that the landlord undertakes a comprehensive risk assessment, in line with its damp and mould policy, to explore what other steps it can take to reduce moisture levels in the home.
30. The resident had described in correspondence with the landlord that she felt patronised and dismissed by some of its inspectors. She said that as she is autistic, she finds it easier to communicate with staff where they use direct and precise language, explaining technical terms to her. Although she named staff who she said were patient and receptive, she described other staff as being condescending.
31. The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation policy says, “we treat residents reporting damp, mould and condensation with empathy and respect and not prejudge the reason for any issue.” This was not the resident’s experience, and although she raised this in her complaints correspondence, there was no evidence that the landlord had conducted a meaningful investigation into this aspect of the resident’s complaint, which was a failing.
32. When a resident raises concerns about the conduct of a landlord’s staff, or contractors, the landlord should conduct a fair and objective investigation. This should include interviewing the resident to get an understanding of her concerns. Even if the landlord were unable to make a finding due to conflicting accounts or lack of evidence, it could have provided assurances that it would review customer service and offer training where it felt that this was needed. It did not do so, neither did it address this aspect of the resident’s complaint in its complaints responses, which was a failing.
33. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Attitude, Rights and Respect (January 2024) stresses the importance of listening to residents’ feedback and complaints. Landlords should accept when service standards have fallen short and acknowledge accountability as well as show a willingness to rectify these and prevent further recurrence. This is particularly relevant where there is an overlap with the landlord’s reasonable adjustments and diversity policies. The landlord should be receptive to the needs of its residents especially where, for example, the resident is neurodivergent and may need or prefer to have information shared in a particular way, which is more accessible to them.
34. In its correspondence with the resident dated October 2024 the landlord reviewed its compensation offer and increased it significantly. The new award of £800 considered both the delays which it accepted had caused her frustration, and the added expenditure she had incurred due an incorrect assessment of the cause of the problem. It had also offered to reimburse her for the cost of wallpaper removal and redecorating.
35. The resident has provided evidence to this Service that she spent £300 on a dehumidifier and paid someone £275 to remove her wallpaper. Taking into consideration the resident’s actual financial loss, which the landlord had offered to reimburse, the Ombudsman does not consider that the landlord’s offer of compensation was proportionate to the detriment to the resident because of the failings found in this report.
36. Overall, the landlord did not address all the points raised by the resident in her complaints about how it responded to her reports of damp and mould. Although, it may have responded to her repair reports within its target response timescales, it did not apply its policies consistently and for this reason we find service failure.

Determination

37. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property.

Orders and recommendations

38. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Write to the resident to apologise for the failings found in this report.
    2. Pay the resident compensation of £975 which includes of:
       1. £800 offered at the completion of its internal complaints procedure if it has not paid this already.
       2. £175 for her distress and inconvenience due to the landlord’s handling of her reports about staff conduct and its failure to apply its reasonable adjustments policy.
    3. Provide the resident with details of its insurers, should she wish to pursue a claim for damage to her belongings.

Recommendations

39. The landlord should undertake a comprehensive risk assessment, in line with its damp and mould policy, to explore what other steps it can take to reduce moisture levels in the resident’s home.
40. The landlord should consider providing updated training for staff on complaints handling.