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

Amplius Living (202336556)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202336556

Amplius Living

8 April 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 resident’s property;
  2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident occupies a 3–bedroom house under an assured shorthold tenancy from the landlord. The landlord has recorded that the resident’s child has asthma.
  2. On 30 October 2023, the landlord received a complaint about its handling of damp and mould from the resident. She advised that her complaint was regarding her report of the same issue on 27 June 2023. A surveyor attended the resident’s property on 31 July 2023 however no work was carried out. The resident informed the landlord that mould in her child’s bedroom was so bad they were unable to sleep in the room. The resident also made the landlord aware that the damp and mould repairs had been ongoing before 2020.
  3. The landlord received the contractor’s quote for the damp and mould repair work on 31 October 2023, which was approved, and an appointment was scheduled for 15 November 2023. The repairs were carried out. The landlord advised the resident that the contractor would continue to monitor the damp and attend her property on a weekly basis. This did not happen. On 1 November 2023, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s 30 October 2023 stage 1 complaint. The resident emailed the landlord advising the reasons for her complaint in the landlord’s correspondence were not accurate,  as she had to constantly chase the reoccurring historical repairs on multiple occasions. On 11 January 2024, the resident escalated the matter to stage 2.
  4. On 17 January 2024, the landlord’s stage 1 response advised that it had limited access to historical records, however several damp and mould repairs were previously raised and cancelled. Following the 27 June 2023 inspection, the above repairs were scheduled, but further repairs raised after another inspection on 14 December 2023 were not allocated yet. The landlord therefore apologised for its damp and mould repair, communication, and stage 2 complaint escalation delays. It agreed to fully investigate and compensate the resident for these at stage 2, including for any dehumidifier running costs from the above works.
  5.  After being chased by the Ombudsman and making 2 extension requests, in its stage 2 complaint response on 18 March 2024, the landlord:
    1. Acknowledged its above failures, which resulted in the resident experiencing delays with the repairs being completed.
    2. Acknowledged its service failures in its complaint handling, as it failed to resolve the stage 1 and 2 complaints within the agreed timeframe.
    3. Offered total compensation of £1,148.36, which was broken down into: £50 for its failure to resolve the resident’s stage 1 complaint, £150 for its failure to resolve the resident’s stage 2 complaint within its agreed timeframe, £198.36 reimbursement for the cost of using one dehumidifier, £50 for failing to follow the resident’s communication preferences, £200 for the delay in the damp and mould works being completed, and £500 for the upset and inconvenience caused due to the delays.
  6. On 21 March 2024, the resident emailed the Ombudsman stating the landlord advised in the stage 2 letter that the complaint was resolved when there were outstanding repairs. She also advised us the landlord made no mention of the other issues affecting the property. The resident told us she was therefore unhappy with the above compensation offer, including due to being unable to use her child’s bedroom for 5 months due to the health risk of mould. Although the landlord then paid her its compensation offer.
  7. Between March and April 2024, there were several emails between the resident and the landlord regarding appointment chasers, rearrangements, and general delays. On 11 April 2024, the resident emailed the Ombudsman advising that the issue was not resolved and she had emailed the landlord numerous times regarding the outstanding work and the health of her child, who had asthma. She also advised that emails were not answered and the contact person for this matter was never available to speak to. On 17 April 2024, the resident emailed the Ombudsman again, as she still had not received a response from the landlord to her latest emails.
  8. On 9 May 2024, the landlord’s contractor advised it that, as far as they were aware, all of the repairs were now complete at the resident’s property. However, an inspection on the same date found further works. On 16 May 2024, the landlord’s contractor advised that the resident was unavailable within the target date of the works order and requested they attend out of target. On 31 May 2024, the landlord’s contractor advised it of the works they would carry out however they would not be able to do any ceiling work until the resident removed wallpaper. On 7 June 2024, the landlord’s contractor advising that the resident refused access for the second time and the works order had to be placed on hold. The contractor reported being unable to get access again on 2 and 16 July 2024 before attending an appointment on 29 July 2024, when the landlord recorded the works were finished.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has explained she is unhappy with the landlord’s handling of historical damp and mould at her property since at least 2018, and with its handling of this after its final response to her complaint in 2024. However, this investigation is only able to consider the landlord’s handling of damp and mould at the resident’s property from the 12 months before her stage 1 complaint in October 2023 until its final response in March 2024. This is in line with the Scheme.
  2. Paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme says we may not consider complaints not brought to the landlord’s attention as a formal complaint within a reasonable period of the matters arising of normally 12 months. Paragraph 42.a. of the Scheme says we may not consider complaints made before exhausting the landlord’s complaints procedure. Therefore, historical issues from more than 12 months before the stage 1 complaint, and events that occurred after the final response that have not exhausted the complaints procedure yet, are outside the scope of this investigation to consider.

Mould and damp

  1. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states that mould is classified as appointed routine repairs. The policy defines appointed routine repairs as being defects or faults which do not put customers at risk or cause harm to structures that they can reasonably live with for a period of time. Appointed routine repairs will be completed within 28 calendar days maximum.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord of a persistent mould and damp problem on 30 October 2023, as she did not get a response to her reports of the damp and mould on 27 June 2023. Despite an appointment being booked on 15 November 2023, and the repairs being carried out, the landlord acknowledged its contractor failed to monitor the damp as promised on a weekly basis. This resulted in the issue reoccurring. A further appointment was raised for 14 December 2023 and from the evidence supplied, it appears that no appointment was booked for these repairs, as was later acknowledged by the landlord.
  3. The resident contacted the landlord on numerous occasions via email and telephone between June 2023 and March 2024, as repair appointments were either missed, not attended, or had to be rescheduled. The evidence indicates delays in the repairs, and that the landlord consistently failed in its duty to deal with the mould and damp in a timely manner, as it later acknowledged. This was contrary to its obligation in the resident’s tenancy agreement to keep her property’s structure and exterior in repair, as well as its repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day maximum timescale for repairs such as mould.
  4. Under sections 9A and 10(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and section 1(4) of the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation Act) 2018, the landlord has the following obligations. It has a legal duty to make sure the property is fit for human habitation throughout the tenancy, which it will not be if it is not reasonably suitable to occupy due to damp and mould It is therefore particularly concerning that the resident reported she was unable to use her child’s bedroom for 5 months due to health risk of the mould there for her child’s asthma, which the landlord was aware of.
  5. The landlord instead took 141 calendar days from 27 June to 15 November 2023 to carry out the repairs for the resident’s initial damp and mould report, which was very inappropriate. This followed its 31 July 2023 surveyor’s inspection of the property, which was itself 34 calendar days after her 27 June 2023 report, and so this too was already later than its repairs and maintenance policy’s 28-calendar-day timescale. The resident was then required to have a dehumidifier at her property from 16 November to 11 December 2023. Moreover, it was unreasonable that, after the landlord inspected and raised further damp and mould works at the property on 12 and 14 December 2023, it did not complete these at the time. It was still unable to confirm a timescale for the works 97 calendar days later in its 18 March 2024 final response, and it failed to communicate with the resident about this on time or according to her preferences, which was also inappropriate.
  6. Following communication and access issues after the final response, the landlord recorded the damp and mould works as completed at the resident’s property on 29 July 2024, after which she told us damp was starting to return in different places. This and the resident’s report that the landlord’s surveyor in 2018 suggested blown render on the property’s exterior caused damp to come in from the outside are not within the scope of this investigation to consider. However, these reports are concerning, especially given the resident’s child’s asthma, and so we have recommended the landlord instruct a specialist to identify the root cause of the reoccurring damp and mould to try and resolve these concerns for the resident.
  7. It is recognised that the landlord’s complaint responses acknowledged and apologised for its above failures and, on 18 March 2024, it awarded the resident £948.36 for its handling of the damp and mould works at the resident’s property. This was made up of £198.36 for the cost to her of using one dehumidifier from 16 November to 11 December 2023, £50 for failing to following her communication preferences, £200 for the delay in the damp and mould works being completed, and £500 for the upset and inconvenience caused to her due to these delays.
  8. The landlord’s above compensation offer was in line with its compensation procedure and our remedies guidance.  This is because this was in the range of compensation recommended by its procedure and our guidance for when such failure have a significant long-term effect on the resident, there has been the loss of a room, and there have been increased electricity costs. The resident told us she was unhappy with the landlord’s offer, including because of the health risk for her child’s asthma and her costs for redecorating her child’s bedroom again after the landlord’s further works. As we do not have the authority or expertise to determine liability for health risks or necessary all of the resident’s costs in the way a court or insurer might, we have recommended the landlord give her its liability insurance details so she can claim for these items.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints process, and its complaints policy says it is to provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days of a complaint being raised, and to provide a stage 2 response within 20 working days of the complaint being escalated. This is in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
  2. The resident raised a formal complaint on 30 October 2023. Therefore, the landlord should have provided its stage 1 response no later than 13 November 2023 under its complaints policy. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 1 November 2023 and advised it would provide a response on 29 November 2023, falling outside of the policy’s 10 working days. It instead only responded to the complaint 54 working days after it was made on 17 January 2024, which was inappropriate.
  3. The landlord failed to progress the repairs in relation to the damp and mould and therefore the resident escalated the matter and made a stage 2 complaint on 11 January 2024. The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 complaint on 6 February 2024 and advised it would provide the resident with an outcome by 22 February 2024. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 18 March 2024, causing a further delay to the complaints process of 47 working days, contrary to its policy’s 20 working days.
  4. It is additionally concerning that the landlord did not follow its own requested extensions to its complaint responses with the resident. These included its above stage 2 acknowledgement and its further 21 February 2024 stage 2 extension to 13 March 2024. The landlord also did not keep the resident updated on its complaint handling delays, contrary to its complaints policy’s requirements for it to do so. This caused her unnecessary additional time and trouble from having to contact the Ombudsman to get a response. We then chased the landlord on 11 March 2024 to ask it to send her a stage 2 response within 5 working days, which it then did on 18 March 2024.
  5. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint at stage 1 and stage 2 was therefore inappropriate. The Ombudsman expects landlords to be able to identify and respond to complaints without the involvement of the service. This was a significant complaint handling failure by the landlord. The landlord therefore offered the resident £50 for its failure to resolve her stage 1 complaint, and £150 for its failure to resolve her stage 2 complaint within its agreed timeframe. This was in line with the landlord’s compensation procedure’s and our remedies guidance’s recommended range of compensation for such failures that adversely affected the resident and so was proportionate to put its poor complaint handling right.
  6. The Ombudsman previously ordered the landlord to carry out a review of its policy and practice in relation to responding to and keeping records of repairs, managing its contractors, and handling formal complaints. Some of the issues identified in this case are similar to the cases already determined. The landlord has demonstrated compliance with our previous wider orders, so we have not made any orders or recommendations as part of this case that would duplicate those already made to 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 53.b. of the Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of damp and mould in the resident’s property satisfactorily.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its handling of the associated complaint satisfactorily.

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
    1. Instruct a specialist to identify the root cause of the reoccurring damp and mould at the resident’s property.
    2. Give the resident details to allow her to make a claim on its liability insurance for the risk to her child’s asthma and the increased redecorating costs she reported.