A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202342967)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202342967
A2Dominion Housing Group Limited
20 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
- This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
- The resident’s reports that scaffolding, window design and inadequate radiators caused ventilation and heating problems and contributed to mould.
- The resident’s health and safety concerns in returning to her property from temporary accommodation.
- The resident’s concerns that exposure to dust on items returned from storage would cause an allergic reaction.
Background
- The resident is a shared ownership leaseholder under a lease commencing 3 July 2007. The property is a 3–bedroom flat on the ground and mezzanine floors of a 6-storey converted Victorian building. The landlord is a housing association which owns and manages the building.
- The resident has asthma, eczema and a severe allergy of which the landlord is aware. Letters from the resident’s GP dated 9 May 2023 and 21 June 2023 confirm this and that triggers for these conditions include damp, mould and dust.
- The complaint which is the subject of this investigation follows an earlier complaint by the resident which was determined by the Ombudsman on 28 July 2023 under complaint reference 202011791. In that complaint, the Ombudsman found that there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property. The Ombudsman made various orders and recommendations, including about outstanding repair issues.
- The present complaint concerns matters which were not the subject of that earlier investigation. Broadly, these arose after 30 June 2023 but this report makes some reference to events which happened prior to that date.
- Until 7 July 2023, the resident was living in temporary accommodation. Initially, this was arranged and paid for by her insurers while they carried out repairs to the property (for which they were responsible) caused by a leak. The landlord then continued to fund the temporary accommodation while it undertook repairs to the resident’s property consistent with what it considered to be its repair responsibilities under the lease.
- There were communications between the landlord and resident between February 2023 and July 2023 regarding her return to her property. In these communications, the resident expressed concerns regarding the condition of the property and the risk to her health of returning there due to her medical conditions. The landlord agreed to arrange a damp and mould survey to assess areas of particular concern to the resident and a report from an environmental health officer to advise if the property was habitable.
- The landlord was not prepared to continue to fund the resident’s existing temporary accommodation pending the outcome of these inspections but offered alternative temporary accommodation from its own housing stock.
- The landlord deep cleaned the alternative accommodation and re–carpeted it in preparation for the resident moving in. It declined the resident’s request that it deep clean her furniture which had been kept in storage.
- The resident moved into the alternative accommodation on 7 July 2023. On 8 July 2023 she suffered an allergic reaction which she believed was due to exposure to dust from the furniture returned from storage. She advised the landlord of this on 13 July 2023. She stated that the landlord had not given her time to deep clean the items in preparation for the move and that she considered it was taking reckless risks with her health.
- On 28 July 2023 the Ombudsman issued its determination in complaint reference 202011791.
- On 11 August 2023 the landlord notified the resident and other residents within the building in which her property was situated that it planned to carry out a range of works. These were to remedy issues with roof leaks, communal walkways and external rendering and to improve fire safety. The works were anticipated to start between autumn 2023 and spring 2024 and take 12 to 18 months to complete.
- On 23 August 2023, in compliance with the Ombudsman’s orders in complaint reference 202011791, the landlord wrote to the resident to confirm its intentions regarding the further repairs it planned to carry out. It explained that it had based the scope of the works on the recommendations of its surveyor (in a report dated 23 August 2023) and an independent legal opinion (dated 22 August 2023) which had advised that repairs to the insulation of the property were the responsibility of the resident under the lease. The landlord agreed that the resident could continue to stay in the temporary accommodation until the works were completed.
- Between 3 September 2023 and 27 November 2023 the resident expressed concerns with the landlord about the ongoing problems with damp and mould and associated matters. The main issues raised by the resident were:
- The build–up of mould outside her bedroom window which meant that she could not open it for ventilation. She considered that the mould washes applied by the landlord temporarily disguised the problem.
- The poor air flow in her property which she considered was caused, or contributed to, by the scaffolding around the building.
- The flow of water from the leaking roof to the building.
- Small windows in the ground and first floor bedroom which had been identified in a previous surveyor’s report in 2021 as falling short of minimum requirements.
- Fumes from the gas flue from her neighbour’s property.
- Due to medical reasons, she was not able to return to the property until all the building issues had been resolved and the scaffolding removed.
- In response to these concerns, the landlord explained that:
- The damp and mould within the property had been resolved by the works it had carried out.
- The mould outside her bedroom window was not caused by the scaffolding but by an issue with the walkways which affected the whole building. This would be addressed as part of the wider scope of remedial works. It would continue to mould wash the area on a regular basis until all issues were fully resolved.
- With regard to the poor ventilation to the property, it had installed additional ventilation to the bathroom and living room which was outside its responsibility to do. It would not be changing the windows as these fell within the resident’s responsibility under the lease.
- It did not deem the gas flue from her neighbour’s property to be a problem for her property. It was not in close proximity and emissions from it went straight up into the atrium of the building.
- It had reviewed the letters from her GP and did not consider that the information within them provided a reason for her not to return to the property.
- It would carry out a risk assessment of the impact on the resident and her property of the wider works when it had further information regarding these. It would then have relevant discussions with her.
- On 4 December 2023 the landlord confirmed to the resident that it had completed the works it intended to do to her property and gave her 7 weeks’ notice to move from the temporary accommodation back into her property. It recommended that she ventilate the property and ensure that the heating was on for a sufficient time before moving back in.
- On the same date the resident sought assistance from this Service. She explained that she did not wish to return to the property as she was concerned that the building issues were not resolved. The resident’s concerns were referred by this Service to the landlord which it accepted as a fresh complaint on 6 December 2023.
- The resident complained that:
- There were ongoing problems of damp and mould in her property despite the work done.
- The scaffolding on the building, design of the windows and inadequate radiators prevented her from adequately ventilating and heating her home.
- She felt pressured to move back into her flat which would be a risk to her health.
- She had an allergic reaction in July 2023 due to dust when her furniture was returned from storage.
- On 11 December 2023, the landlord provided its stage 1 response. It did not uphold the complaint. In the response, the landlord stated:
- With regard to the damp and mould in the property, it referred to the works which it had carried out to the property since the Ombudsman’s order dated 28 July 2023 and its various communications with the resident in this regard.
- It confirmed its position that it would not be making any changes to the windows and radiators within the property as these fell within the resident’s responsibility under the lease.
- The scaffolding would remain in situ until planned wider works to the building were completed. It referred to sources of information provided to residents of the building regarding these works.
- It was aware of the resident’s health concerns and had taken these into consideration through every stage of the process. It referred to its previous correspondence with her. It believed that the property was fit for habitation and had provided recommendations to support her move back into it. This included continuing to monitor her case once the wider building works commenced in 2024.
- It stated that it was sorry to hear that she had suffered an allergic reaction following return of items out of storage and referred to its previous communications with the resident about the move.
- On 12 December 2023 the complaint was escalated to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints procedure.
- On 8 January 2024 the landlord provided its stage 2 response. It reviewed the correspondence between it and the resident and the actions which it had taken. It concluded that there had been no service failure on its part.
Post-complaint events
- The resident subsequently referred her complaint to the landlord’s CEO by emails dated 8 January 2024 and 2 February 2024 to which he responded. However, the landlord’s position remained unchanged.
- On 2 March 2024 the resident referred her complaint to this Service for investigation. The outcome sought by the resident was to remain in temporary accommodation at the landlord’s cost until all the works to the building were complete. She felt that it was not safe for her to return to a building site. She also requested that the landlord replace the radiators and windows in the property; and that the landlord accept responsibility for exposing her to dust from stored furniture which triggered an allergic reaction.
- It is understood that the resident moved back into the property on 21 April 2024 but subsequently moved out again to temporary accommodation arranged by her insurers following a further leak to her bathroom.
Assessment and findings
Scope of investigation
- In parts of her complaint, the resident referred to the impact on her health of damp, mould and dust exposure.
- The Ombudsman is not able to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be more usually dealt with as a personal injury claim through the courts. The Ombudsman will not consider complaints which concern matters where we consider it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, other tribunal or procedure. Nonetheless, consideration has been given in this report to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused.
The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports that scaffolding, window design and inadequate radiators caused ventilation and heating problems and contributed to mould
- It is common ground that the resident’s property had long-standing issues with damp and mould. As noted above, the landlord’s failure properly to address these were the subject of an earlier determination of severe maladministration by the Ombudsman dated 28 July 2023. Accordingly, this investigation will focus on the new matters raised by the resident as set out above which were not investigated as part of the earlier determination.
- With regard to the scaffolding surrounding the resident’s building, it is not clear from the information available to this Service when it first went up. However, the landlord’s records show that, within the period under review, the resident expressed concerns to the landlord from (at least) 3 September 2023 that the scaffolding around the building was obstructing ventilation to her property and was a cause of the mould which was outside her bedroom window.
- The landlord responded reasonably to address the resident’s concerns, in particular by its email dated 4 December 2023. It explained that the mould outside the window was caused by a fault with the walkways rather than the scaffolding and that this would be addressed as part of the wider scope of works which were planned. Indeed, the resident reported in early 2023 that water flooding into and from communal walkways was contributing to mould growth.
- The landlord also acted appropriately in applying mould wash to treat the mould area outside the resident’s bedroom window and in undertaking to repeat the treatment on a regular basis until the issues were fully resolved. Although the resident was understandably concerned that this treatment alone would not provide a permanent solution to the problem, it was nevertheless a reasonable temporary solution for the landlord to adopt pending the completion of the major works for which the scaffolding was necessary. It is noted that both damp survey reports dated 7 June 2021 and on 6 July 2023 recommended treatment for mould in this way.
- With regard to the resident’s concerns that toxic fumes from her neighbour’s gas flue were affecting her property, the basis for this is not clear from the records available to this Service. It is noted that the landlord’s environmental health officer survey report dated 10 May 2023 reported to the landlord that the resident raised this at the time of his inspection. They advised the landlord that the flue had been extended to terminate within the atrium area of the building and found it to be in order. It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on the opinion of its professional advisors and reassure the resident in its responses on 15 November 2023 and 4 December 2023 that it did not deem the fumes from the neighbour’s flue to be a problem for her property.
- With regard to the resident’s requests of 7 November 2023 (and in her complaint) that the landlord replace the windows and radiators in the property, it is noted that the landlord’s damp survey report dated 7 June 2021 identified that the windows to the ground and first floor bedrooms fell short of minimum requirements of Building Regulations. The same report found that the radiators in the living area and mezzanine bedroom were potentially undersized. These were factors highlighted in the report as contributing to poor ventilation and condensation. The report did not state where responsibility for these issues lay.
- In its email responses to the resident and in its complaint responses, the landlord made clear that it would not be changing the windows or the radiators in the property. It considered that these were the resident’s responsibility under the terms of the lease and set out the provisions it relied on. It accepted that there were slightly conflicting provisions in the lease with regard to the windows but explained why it believed it was not responsible for replacing them.
- It was fair for the landlord to set out clearly to the resident the works that it considered it was and was not responsible for by reference to its lease obligations. This meant that it was open to the resident to obtain her own legal advice on the matter if there was disagreement as to liability.
- Overall, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports that scaffolding on the building, design of the windows and inadequate radiators in the property were preventing her from adequately ventilating and heating her home.
The landlord’s handling of the resident’s health and safety concerns in returning to her property from temporary accommodation
- The resident was vulnerable to dust, damp and mould allergens as a result of her medical condition. The landlord was aware of this from the information provided by the resident, including letters from her GP. The landlord would be expected to take her health vulnerabilities into account when arranging and carrying out works.
- In these circumstances, it was reasonable for the landlord to agree to arrange temporary accommodation for the resident while it carried out works. It appropriately extended this arrangement when it was required to undertake further repair works in compliance with the Ombudsman’s orders.
- On 4 December 2023 the landlord confirmed to the resident that it had completed all the repair works which it intended to do and gave 7 weeks’ notice for her to move back to her property. It appropriately based this decision on 2 earlier inspections that established the property was habitable.
- The resident complained to this Service and to the landlord that she felt pressured to move back to the property and that this presented a risk to her health. The resident’s concerns were natural given the nature of her medical conditions. However, the landlord’s decision that it would not continue to fund temporary accommodation until the conclusion of the wider remedial works to the building was reasonable.
- The landlord had completed all the works to the resident’s property that it intended to and deep cleaned it in preparation for the resident’s return. It also provided additional notice to the resident of 7 weeks to enable her to adequately ventilate and heat the property and take further steps to clean it as she saw fit. It had addressed her concerns regarding ventilation in the property as outlined above. Although the wider building works had not yet commenced, it was reasonable for the landlord to propose re–assessing the impact on the resident and her property of those works at the appropriate time.
- In summary, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns that her health and safety would be at risk if she moved back to the property from temporary accommodation. It appropriately considered her concerns and allowed an extended notice period for the property to be ventilated and warmed.
The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns that exposure to dust on items returned from storage would cause an allergic reaction
- As noted above, on 7 July 2023, the resident moved from the temporary accommodation arranged by her insurers to alternative temporary accommodation arranged by the landlord from its own housing stock. Unfortunately, on 8 July 2023, she suffered an allergic reaction which she believed was due to exposure to dust from the furniture returned from storage.
- The resident complained to the landlord on 13 July 2023 that it did not give her time to deep clean the items in preparation for the move and that it was taking reckless risks with her health.
- It is noted that, prior to the move, discussions had been underway for some time between the resident and the landlord regarding the arrangements. In late May 2023, the landlord confirmed to the resident that it would not be extending her stay at the accommodation arranged by her insurers which was then due to expire on 24 June 2023. After further discussions about the resident’s damp and mould concerns, the landlord agreed to a final surveyor inspection and made an offer of alternative accommodation from its own housing stock pending the outcome of this inspection.
- On 23 June 2023 the landlord confirmed that the property which it had located as alternative accommodation for the resident was not available until 30 June 2023 and agreed to extend her existing accommodation until that date. The landlord advised that the new accommodation was the only suitably sized one it had available and it was not prepared to extend the arrangement on her existing accommodation.
- On 30 June 2023, being the day of expiry of the arrangement for the resident’s existing accommodation, the resident confirmed that she would take up the landlord’s offer of alternative accommodation. On the same day, the resident asked that the landlord deep clean the items being returned from storage.
- On 4 July 2023 the landlord informed her that it was not responsible for deep cleaning her items after they had been in storage. It provided the resident with details of the storage facility so that she could make her own arrangements. It agreed to extend her existing accommodation until 7 July 2023 to facilitate the move.
- As a result of the above sequence of events, it is acknowledged that the resident ultimately had a fairly short notice period of 7 days to make arrangements for the move and cleaning of her furniture items which had been in storage.
- However, the landlord took reasonable steps to accommodate the resident’s concerns and medical vulnerabilities. This included agreeing to undertake a further damp survey to investigate her concerns, arranging alternative accommodation from its own housing stock to facilitate this, and extending the resident’s existing accommodation arrangement where circumstances required it. The landlord clearly communicated that it did not take responsibility for cleaning the resident’s items and that this was for her to arrange.
- Accordingly, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns that exposure to dust on items returned from storage would cause an allergic reaction.
Determination (decision)
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports that scaffolding, window design and inadequate radiators caused ventilation and heating problems and contributed to mould.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s health and safety concerns in returning to her property from temporary accommodation.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns that exposure to dust on items returned from storage would cause an allergic reaction.