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

Southern Housing (202339149)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202339149

Southern Housing

6 March 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.

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to:
    1. Concerns regarding insufficient heating in the property and delays to heating repairs.
    2. Reports of damp and mould in the property.
    3. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured shorthold tenancy with the landlord. He has lived in the 1 bed ground floor flat since 15 November 2010. The landlord advised there were no vulnerabilities recorded.
  2. There was no evidence of any repairs being raised until 2 October 2023 when a damp specialist (referred to as ‘C3’) was asked to inspect the property – this was completed on 19 October 2023 and the report was provided to the landlord. On 19 December 2023, the resident reported a radiator which he said leaked when the heating was on. A contractor (referred to as ‘C1’) attended several times before the repairs were completed on 22 December 2023.
  3. The resident submitted a complaint on 19 December 2023. It related to the service received from C1, poor communication, ongoing damp, and delays with the heating repairs and the efficiency of the heating system. He wanted the heating problems resolved, compensation, a heat loss calculation to be conducted, and for the landlord to consider the position of C1 as a contractor.
  4. The landlord responded to the complaint on 5 January 2024. It outlined the actions of C1 regarding to the heating repairs and confirmed C1 had completed the repairs to restore heating and hot water. It confirmed it would request a heat loss calculation from a heating specialist (referred to as ‘C2’). The landlord informed the resident that the damp issues had been passed to a contractor (referred to as ‘C3’). It acknowledged the lack of progress with the damp issue and confirmed it had chased C3. The landlord told the resident it would continue to work with C1 and was committed to improving the service provided. The landlord offered £122.51 compensation for the lack of heating and hot water and the inconvenience caused by the delay with the damp issues.
  5. It is not known when the complaint escalation was requested by the resident. The landlord’s final complaint response stated the resident’s escalation was due to the level of compensation, a lack of explanation in the initial response, no acknowledgement of previous service failures, the lack of action and communication regarding the mould and heating, and no clear action plan.
  6. The final complaint response was provided on 16 February 2024. It explained a misdiagnosis led to the delay with the heating repairs and the heating and hot water being reinstated. It confirmed a replacement of the boiler and 2 radiators had been recommended by C2. It said it did not have a record of the recommendation for a heat loss calculation. The landlord advised it would only review the service failures relating to the current complaint. It provided the resident with an action plan of work and named 2 officers to oversee the work. The landlord upheld the complaint and increased the total compensation offer to £482.57 to reflect the service failures highlighted.

Post completion of the complaint process

  1. As part of the evidence requested, the landlord confirmed further quotes were obtained for the damp work and this was assigned to a contractor (referred to as ‘C4’). The landlord has told this Service no work has been completed as the resident refused C4 access. It confirmed the property needs major works and although it had discussed this with the resident several times, he said he did not want the work to proceed and wanted a permanent move.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has referred to the impact the property condition and ongoing issues have had on his health. While we do not doubt this, the Ombudsman is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. If the resident wishes to pursue this issue, he should seek legal advice. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused. 
  2. The resident has referred to the length of time he has been reporting repairs issues to the landlord. In accordance with paragraph 42.c. of the Housing Ombudsman’s Scheme (in place at the time of the complaint), the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 6 months of the matter arising. As such, this investigation will focus on events from June 2023 (6 months before the complaint was made) up to the final complaint response of 16 February 2024.

Repairs

  1. The Ombudsman expects landlords to maintain a robust record of contacts and repairs. This is because clear, accurate, and easily accessible records provide an audit trail and enhance landlords’ ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise. It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the landlord has failed to maintain adequate records, which has impacted this Service’s ability to conduct a thorough investigation, as highlighted at various points throughout this report. This was a failure by the landlord and contributed to other failures identified in this report.

Insufficient heating and heating repairs

  1. On 19 December 2023, the resident reported a leaking radiator. C1 attended the same day – this was reasonable and in line with the landlord’s repair obligations. The repair records which were provided as evidence confirmed the operative could not complete the repair as there were lots of items in the way and access to the valves was restricted. The records confirmed the operative told the resident a plumber would be needed because as soon as the system was pressurised it would leak again as the valves needed to be isolated.
  2. C1 returned to the property on 20 December 2023 and the records confirmed the radiator valves were isolated and parts were ordered. The records did not confirm what the problem was and what parts were needed, therefore a diagnosis was not clear. The landlord should consider including this level of detail on job tickets as it would provide clearer diagnostic information and provide historical detail that may be needed for follow up visits, or analysis of repeat visits. While there was nothing on the records to suggest a wider problem with the heating or hot water, the resident contacted the landlord the same day to confirm he had no heating or hot water and the leak continued.
  3. There was no evidence of the landlord responding to the resident’s report of no heating or hot water until 22 December 2023 – this was unreasonable considering the time of the year. The landlord asked C1 to return to complete the repair – C1 attended the same day and repaired the pipework. The repair was completed in full and the heating and hot water was restored. No further repairs were reported therefore it must be assumed the repair was successful.
  4. In terms of the heat loss calculation, while the resident said C1 had recommended this exercise, the landlord confirmed this had not been passed back to it to arrange. The landlord has overall accountability for the failing of any contractor that is carrying out work on its behalf. This is therefore a failure of the landlord who should directly address this with the C1 as part of the improvement plan that was developed.
  5. The landlord arranged for C2 to complete the heat loss calculation on 25 January 2024. Recommendations were made to replace the boiler and 2 undersized radiators, and the landlord also agreed to conduct a full powerflush of the system at the same time. While this work could have been completed with the resident in situ, to avoid further disruption to him, it was appropriate of the landlord to suggest completing this work while he was decanted as part of the wider damp and mould work.
  6. In acknowledgement of the delays, repeat visits, loss of heating and hot water and C1’s failure to follow procedure, it offered the resident £67.67 compensation at the final stage of its complaints process. This was an appropriate offer and was in line with the remedies guidance of this Service for a service failure of this nature. Furthermore, the landlord demonstrated it had taken the service delivery on board and had confirmed the implementation of an improvement plan with C1. Overall, the Ombudsman finds reasonable redress in relation to the landlord’s response to concerns regarding insufficient heating in the property and delays to heating repairs.

Damp and mould

  1. Considering the timeframe of the scope of this assessment, there was no evidence of reports from the resident regarding damp and mould until late 2023. There is evidence of a damp inspection by C3 on 19 October 2023 and so it is assumed there was some contact prior to this date. The lack of evidence is a record keeping concern. The report included recommendations and findings. However, there is no evidence that the landlord acted on these or gave C3 approval to complete any work. Due to the lack of evidence provided by the landlord, the Ombudsman is unable to conclude that it acted in line with its obligations or satisfactorily managed the resident’s expectations at the time. This is likely to have caused frustration and inconvenience to the resident.
  2. There was a gap in the timeline from October to December 2023, and a lack of progress and communication with the resident who, as a result, submitted a complaint on 19 December 2023. The landlord acknowledged the lack of progress as a service failure within its complaint response and confirmed it had chased C3. There was however no commitment from the landlord as to when it would provide an update. This is likely to have caused frustration for the resident who, despite making a complaint, was still unclear as to what the next steps were. The landlord offered £50 for the delay in the damp survey which was an appropriate offer at that time.
  3. Following the stage 1 complaint response, the landlord requested a further quote for the damp work. This was appropriate due to the extent of the work and the need to obtain more than 1 quote. On 29 January 2024, C4 was given approval to commence with the repairs, but there was no evidence of this being confirmed to the resident. This was poor communication from the landlord who was already managing a complaint review due to the lack of communication. Additionally, by now, the landlord was aware that major work was needed to rectify the damp problems, and despite the resident making the landlord aware of his health conditions, it did not complete an assessment to address the potential vulnerable situation. The Ombudsman finds this unreasonable.
  4. By the time that the final complaint response was provided, there was still no evidence of any meaningful communication regarding the repairs. This was unreasonable albeit this was a failing that was acknowledged by the landlord in its final complaint response. The landlord included an action plan within the response. However, the resident had to be decanted from the property, therefore the work could not be scheduled until this had been completed.
  5. The resident has apparently told the landlord that he wants a permanent move and, as such, there has not been any progress with the repairs. As these events occurred after the completion of the complaint process, we have not assessed this. In recognition of its failures, the landlord increased the compensation offer to £365 for the delays and the inconvenience caused. The landlord identified its failings and attempted to put things right for the resident. The offer made was proportionate and in line with the remedies guidance of this Service which recommends compensation within this range where there have been failings that have adversely affected a resident.
  6. In summary, the Ombudsman finds reasonable redress in relation to the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould in the property. There was evidence of poor record keeping, a lack of communication with the resident and delays in repairs. The landlord however recognised the service failures by way of redress. It implemented an action plan of work (albeit this was delayed due to the resident requesting a permanent move) and it confirmed the development of an improvement plan in relation to the service provided. It therefore demonstrated its commitment to applying the Dispute Resolution Principles of this Service: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.

The associated complaint

  1. Evidence shows that the complaint was initially logged on 20 December 2023, following a telephone call on 19 December 2023. The resident was contacted by the landlord on the same day and the stage one complaint acknowledgement email was sent on 20 December 2023. This was within its 5 days acknowledgement timescale.
     
    The stage one complaint was responded to on 5 January 2024, which was within the complaint timescales as detailed within its complaint handling policy. 
  2. The landlord addressed the issues raised by the resident, but in the Ombudsman’s opinion, it did not provide a response that was detailed enough to demonstrate a thorough investigation. For example, it acknowledged a service failure in relation to the damp and advised it had been chased, but it did not allude to how and when it would follow this up with the resident. The response lacked any resolution-focused outcomes that would bring the matters to a close for the resident. The lack of explanation and communication likely contributed to the resident’s escalation of the complaint.
  3. Evidence provided shows that the resident requested to escalate his complaint over the telephone on 12 January 2024. An acknowledgement of the escalation request was sent the same day. 
  4. The stage two was responded to on 16 February 2024. While the final response was sent outside of the 20–working day timeframe, the landlord acknowledged the delay within the final response and offered the resident £50.
  5. The landlord’s final complaint response provided more detail to explain the delays with the repairs and the reinstatement of the heating. It confirmed the matter had been raised directly with C1 and provided redress by way of compensation. It provided an action plan of work to the property albeit the start date would be determined by the decanting of the resident.
  6. Based on the evidence available, the landlord had offered reasonable redress with respect to the delay in issuing the stage two response. However, the Ombudsman finds service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of the complaint. The landlord’s initial response lacked detail which contributed to the escalation of the complaint. The landlord acknowledged the unsatisfactory handling of the complaint and offered £50 compensation but did not recognise all of the failures highlighted in this report or any learning taken as a result. It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the compensation offer did not meet the level of what is expected for the service failures identified. As a result, an order has been made to increase the level of compensation for the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds reasonable redress in relation to the landlord’s response to concerns regarding insufficient heating in the property and delays to heating repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds reasonable redress in relation to the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould in the property.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds service failure in relation to the landlord’s response to the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord should:
    1. Write a letter of apology to the resident for the service failures identified.
    2. If it has not already done so, pay the resident £50 as offered in the final complaint response for the poor complaint handling.
    3. Pay an additional £50 for the service failure identified with the complaint handling. The additional compensation should be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any debt that may be owed.
  2. The landlord should provide this Service with evidence to confirm it has complied with the orders above within the required timescale.

Recommendations

  1. If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £432.67 that was offered in the final complaint response. The Ombudsman’s findings of reasonable redress for the failures in the landlord’s response to concerns regarding the insufficient heating and associated repairs with the heating, and its response to reports of damp and mould, are made on the basis that this compensation is paid.
  2. Following the recommendations from the Ombudsman Paragraph 49 special report into the landlord, it has confirmed it is working with its contractors to ensure that performance monitoring is in place, including how any arising issues or patterns of service failure will be identified and managed. The landlord should take this case into consideration while progressing with this recommendation.
  3. As part of the recommendations from the Ombudsman Paragraph 49 special report into the landlord, it has confirmed its intentions to revise its record keeping practices to ensure that accurate and timely records of inspections and repairs are available to all relevant staff, including complaint handlers. This recommendation will therefore not be repeated.
  4. This Service is aware that as part of the recommendations from the Paragraph 49 special report, it is rolling out a complaint handling training programme to all staff and contractors. This recommendation will therefore not be repeated.
  5. The landlord should contact the resident to discuss the current decant options and what repairs it can do while a move is pending.