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

Accent Housing Limited (202313384)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202313384

Accent Housing Limited

10 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:
    1. Damp and mould in the kitchen.
    2. Kitchen leaks and associated repairs.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured shorthold tenancy of a 3-bedroom semi-detached house, which started on 30 January 2012. The resident has no recorded vulnerabilities.
  2. Between 2020 to 2023, the resident experienced different leaks affecting her kitchen sink and stop tap, boiler, and bathroom cold water tap, which she reported to the landlord. This included a report of damp and mould behind the washing machine on 27 January 2022. These leaks damaged the resident’s kitchen cupboards and floor, which led to the landlord raising an order on 10 March 2023 to:
    1. renew the sink base unit and renew the plinths;
    2. secure the boiler back panel;
    3. overhaul all the kitchen units and secure their loose doors and reseal kitchen worktops;
    4. stain block above the resident’s cooker.
  3. The landlord sought to complete these jobs between April 2023 to 1 June 2023. The resident complained to the landlord on 20 June 2023 about outstanding jobs and the behaviour of the contractor who attended on 1 June 2023. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 27 June 2023 and said:
    1. it apologised that the resident was dissatisfied with the contractor who attended on 1 June 2023;
    2. while it completed most of the work it agreed to do, it needed to reattend to fit a non-standard corner post which it needed to order, and it had raised an order and agreed to fit this within 28 days.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint after getting the stage 1 response, and the landlord provided its stage 2 response on 11 July 2023 and said:
    1. it completed works to a leaking kitchen stop tap on 16 February 2022, when it identified damp and mould behind the washing machine, which it treated on 4 April 2022;
    2. it replaced the resident’s boiler on 9 February 2023, as it identified this was the source of the leak, and it did further work on 25 April 2023 to deal with the damage to the resident’s kitchen;
    3. on 12 May 2023, the landlord repaired the cupboard door front to the right of the cooker, and it agreed several repair/replacement items (including a colour of filler and corner posts);
    4. when it attended again on 1 June 2023, it completed much of the works but needed to order a non-standard sized additional corner post, and the resident no longer wanted it to repair her kitchen;
    5. it apologised that there were items outstanding from the surveyor’s report (one corner post for the wall cupboard and plinths which needed sealing);
    6. the delay in obtaining a corner post was because it had to order it, and it asked the resident if she still wanted this;
    7. it fedback to its contractors on the service she received to prevent this from happening again.
  5. The resident told the Ombudsman that she would like compensation for an injury she said her child experienced from a door falling on them as part of the repair relating to the leaks. While the resident said the landlord had resolved the leaks, she wanted compensation for delays in resolving these and the related mould. This was in addition to the cost of replacing flooring (£1,500) which the resident said she had to do twice because of water damage from the leaks.

 

 

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The Ombudsman recognises the resident experienced leaks in the kitchen dating back to 2020. While there were long standing issues with leaks at the property, the Ombudsman notes that the resident did not formally complain to the landlord about them until 20 June 2023. In accordance with paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider a complaint which was not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable time. This would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising. This means this investigation will focus on the landlord’s actions in response to the resident’s report from June 2022 up until the landlord’s final response, this being 12 months from when the resident made the complaint.
  2. The Ombudsman has seen evidence that the resident told the landlord that the damp and mould caused her breathing problems. The resident also alleged the damage to the kitchen caused by the leaks resulted in personal injury. When this type of dispute arises, the courts rely on expert evidence in the form of a report from an independent medical professional. This will give an expert opinion on the cause of any injury or decline in health. A court will also allow examination of witnesses and allow the evidence to be tested. This process helps the court determine whether the landlord’s actions or inactions have harmed a resident.
  3. Therefore, this question would be better for the courts to decide, as a court will have the benefit of expert evidence and be able to allow examination of witnesses. This investigation will not consider the issue of personal injury because we do not have the authority or expertise to do so in the way a court might, in line with paragraph 42.f. of the Scheme. This says we may not consider complaints where it would be quicker, fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts or other tribunal or procedure. The Ombudsman will consider any distress an inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould, kitchen leak, and repairs.

The landlord’s handling of damp and mould

  1. Based on the available evidence, the resident told the landlord on 8 March 2023 that damp and mould had caused her “breathing problems”, with no evidence of any other reports about damp and mould being provided since June 2022. The landlord inspected the property on 10 March 2023 and noted the kitchen was in good condition but went on to agree a mould wash and treatment on 13 April 2023, which it completed on 25 April 2023. While this was a reasonable step to take to deal with mould, neither the resident or landlord have provided any evidence about the nature and extent of any mould.
  2. When the resident escalated her complaint on either 27 or 28 June 2023, she told the landlord that there was damp and mould in her kitchen causing it to smell. A landlord must make sure that any property it lets is fit for human habitation and free from hazards, including those caused by mould, under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, sections 9A and 10. According to the landlord’s damp and mould procedure, it was required to arrange a damp inspection and complete a full property report, including damp readings where a resident reports ongoing damp.
  3. Landlords need to make sure their homes are safe, warm, and free from hazards. When a resident reports a risk, the landlord should quickly inspect the property to check for hazards. It must determine if the home is safe and fit to live in. Ignoring hazards can lead to serious consequences for everyone involved.
  4. The landlord’s evidence is that it raised a job for a damp inspection on 29 October 2024, which it completed the next day with work to “address damp on back window wall”. As this was 16 months after the resident reported the damp smell, the landlord did not act reasonably in meeting its legal obligations to make sure the property was fit for human habitation by being free from hazards caused by damp and mould. The landlord’s actions were also not in line with the expectations in the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould (published October 2021). This requires landlords to deal with damp and mould in a timely way and to take a zero-tolerance approach. For these reasons the Ombudsman has found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould.
  5. As the landlord’s handling of damp and mould caused the resident distress over a prolonged period, the Ombudsman has awarded compensation to reflect this in line with our remedies guidance. This allows for compensation payments of up to £600 where a landlord’s failures have adversely affected the resident but where there is no evidence of any permanent impact.

The landlord’s handling of leaks and associated kitchen repairs

  1. The landlord’s repair records show that it was aware of a report of a leaking pipe under the resident’s sink on 12 July 2022. The records state it replaced a syphon and filler valve on 26 July 2022 and refixed an overflow pipe from the sink on 12 August 2022. The landlord was responsible for repairs to waste pipes, toilets, and boilers under the resident’s tenancy agreement. Its responsive repairs and voids policy required it to complete routine repairs within 28 days where there is no immediate health and safety risk to a resident. The landlord must complete emergency repairs in 24 hours where such a risk exists. As leaks may cause a risk to the structure of a property or possessions, the landlord ought to treat repairs to leaks as urgent. In the absence of evidence to explain the length of time it took the landlord to deal with this leak, it did not complete this within a reasonable time.
  2. The resident reported leaks coming from her boiler on 6 October 2022 and 8 February 2023, which the landlord’s repair records show that it dealt with on 7 October 2022 and 9 February 2023, respectively. This was reasonable as the landlord’s response was in line with its responsive repairs and voids policy. This required it to resolve emergency leaks within 24 hours and, as a leak affecting a gas appliance could be an immediate risk to the safety of a resident, this was appropriate.
  3. The landlord was aware of reports that the leaks had damaged the resident’s floors and kitchen cupboards on 8 March 2023. Given the issue, it was reasonable of the landlord to inspect the resident’s property on 10 March 2023 and agree the works to repair the kitchen units it raised on 10 March 2023. The landlord attended to complete these (11 April 2023) outside the timescale in its repairs policy but there is no evidence of any detriment to the resident by this. The Ombudsman cannot fault the landlord for not completing the work then because the resident refused to allow it to, based on the available evidence. This was because she wanted the kitchen worktops and boiler boxing replaced and was unhappy at the landlord’s colour match.
  4. The landlord was able to complete the works on 25 April 2023, which the Ombudsman considers was a reasonable time from when the resident agreed to allow the landlord to do so (13 April 2023). This is because the landlord responded within the 28-day timeframe for completing routine repairs from that date contained in its responsive repairs and voids policy. The evidence shows that the landlord was aware at the end of April 2023 that the work its contractor completed was not to a good standard with the following faults:
    1. uneven and damaged kitchen worktops with one side having dropped;
    2. unsealed areas around the edges of the kitchen sink cut out;
    3. kitchen doors not balanced or refixed;
    4. plinths fitted incorrectly.
  5. On 19 May 2023, the landlord raised the following jobs to deal with these faults:
    1. replacement of the kitchen worktop;
    2. removal and refitting the kitchen sink;
    3. refitting kitchen plinths;
    4. fitting two new base corner posts and a new filler to a wall side unit of the boiler.
  6. The landlord said that it completed these jobs on 1 June 2023, apart from being unable to fit one corner post that could not fit and which it would need to order. The landlord raised the jobs (19 May 2023) within a reasonable period of it becoming aware of the faults referred to above (end of April 2023). Furthermore, the landlord visited the resident to complete the jobs (1 June 2023) within a reasonable period of it raising the jobs (19 May 2023). This is because it attended within 28 days, which is the timeframe referred to in the landlord’s responsive repairs and voids policy.
  7. Neither the landlord nor the resident dispute that the landlord did not complete all the agreed jobs on 1 June 2023. The resident confirmed that she asked the landlord’s contractor to leave on 1 June 2023 because she alleged they had been rude. While the Ombudsman cannot establish, based on the available evidence, the circumstances surrounding this, the resident acknowledged that the landlord’s contractor could not complete the work because she asked the contractor to leave. After the resident complained again on 20 June 2023, the landlord agreed to attend to install a new made to measure corner post within 28 days of 27 June 2023. The landlord’s repair records show that it cancelled this job on 29 June 2023, as it recorded the resident did not want this.
  8. Therefore, the landlord acted reasonably because it agreed to reschedule the repair within a reasonable time after the resident asked its contractor to leave (1 June 2023) and she complained (20 June 2023). The landlord, based on the available evidence, was unable to complete the repair earlier because the resident told it she did not want it to and therefore the Ombudsman cannot fault the landlord for failing to complete the works in June to July 2023.
  9. While the landlord’s repair records show it raised a job to reseal the kitchen worktops, replace a corner post, and stain block a wall on 22 March 2024, this was not completed until 18 April 2024. This was 9 months after the complaint process ended in July 2023. It is also noted that the landlord replaced the resident’s kitchen, sink, and flooring on 23 September 2024, and installed a new socket and fan grill on 3 October 2024. Overall, it did not take reasonable steps to complete the work within a reasonable time because of the lack of evidence or explanation for the delays.
  10. While the evidence shows the resident contributed significantly to the delays in the work, the landlord has not shown it completed the work as quickly as it could have after it provided the resident with its final complaint response, and this caused the resident distress. Therefore, the Ombudsman has made an award of compensation to reflect the service failure and distress it caused the resident in line with our remedies guidance. This recommends awarding up to £100 to recognise service failure by landlords resulting in delays getting matters resolved causing distress and inconvenience to the resident.
  11. The resident has told the Ombudsman she had to pay for the replacement of 2 floors because the leaks damaged them. While this is noted, we have not seen evidence of this or evidence that the resident raised this with the landlord during the complaint process. The landlord said that it replaced the kitchen flooring in September 2024 and October 2024. There was therefore no failure in the landlord’s response to the flooring based on the available evidence for these reasons.
  12. The Ombudsman previously ordered the landlord to carry out a review of its procedures and record keeping systems in relation to responding to requests for repairs. Some of the issues identified in this case are similar to cases already determined. The landlord has demonstrated compliance with our previous wider order, so we have not made any orders or recommendations as part of this case that would duplicate those already made to the landlord. The landlord itself should consider whether there are any additional issues arising from this later case that require further action.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould in the kitchen.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of kitchen repairs associated with leaks.

Orders

  1. Within 28 days of the date of this determination the landlord must pay the resident directly £700 made up of:
    1. £600 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of damp and mould.
    2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the leak and kitchen repairs.
  2. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance within 28 days of the date of this determination.