Clarion Housing Association Limited (202233485)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202233485

Clarion Housing Association Limited

31 January 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
The Ombudsman will also investigate the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy for a 1 bed flat, which is within a converted building.
The landlord is a housing association.
The resident reported damp and mould to the landlord in his bedroom and living room on 14 November 2022.
On 6 March 2023 the resident made a complaint to the landlord. He said the damp and mould was being caused by a leak in the roof which had been on-going for 3 months. He said the landlord had not done anything to try to resolve the leak.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 22 March 2023. It upheld the complaint. In its response it said:
1. Due to system issues, there was no record of when the resident first reported the damp and mould issues.
2. It carried out an inspection on 2 March 2023. Scaffolding was erected on 14 March 2023, and it carried out repairs to the roof.
3. Its area manager would contact the resident to arrange any further necessary works.
4. It was sorry for the delay in the repairs being carried out and the inconvenience this caused the resident. It awarded £250 compensation for its failure to follow process, repeated visits and the fact the resident had to chase updates.
The resident escalated his complaint on 23 March 2023. He said:
1. The stage 1 response was incorrect as the landlord had not carried out any repairs. The roofing contractor told him on 21 March 2023 that the scaffolding needed to be extended in order to carry out the roof repairs.
2. There were water marks and damp and mould on the main walls in his flat. Water was also leaking from his skirting boards.
3. The compensation offered by the landlord did not reflect the stress and anxiety caused to him.
4. His furniture and curtains were being affected by the damp and mould.
5. He wanted to know when the leak would be resolved or whether he needed to move to another property.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 16 May 2023. In its response it:
1. Apologised for the delay in providing its stage 2 response.
2. Said it had raised a job on 14 November 2022 and inspected the roof on 30 December 2022. However, it failed to progress the recommended works from this inspection.
3. Said the scaffolding that was erecting in March 2023 was not sufficient to carry out the roof repairs. Its contractor advised a separate scaffolding was needed; however, it failed to arrange this.
4. Said its leak, condensation, damp and mould (LCDM) team attended the resident’s flat on 11 April 2023 and said further roof inspections were needed. It failed to arrange this.
5. Confirmed its contractors will erect scaffolding on or around 26 May 2023. It will carry out an inspection of the roof on 1 June 2023 and discuss the repairs with the resident face to face.
6. Explained the resident could claim on his home insurance for the damage to his personal belongings. It also gave the resident contact details to make a claim through its indemnity insurer.
7. Apologised for failing to progress the works and the inconvenience this caused the resident. If offered a further £300 compensation, which was broken down as:
  1. £250 for its failure to progress the works recommended by the roofer, its contractor and the LCDM team.
  2. £50 for the delay in sending its stage 2 response.

Events after the expiry of the landlord’s complaints procedure

On 9 September 2023 the resident reported he had no electricity in his property due to the leak. The landlord placed him in decant accommodation on 14 September 2023.
At the date of this investigation the resident told this service he was still residing in decant accommodation and the landlord had not completed the necessary roof repairs or remedial works to the flat.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The resident has continued to raise issues with the leak, damp and mould after the expiry of the landlord’s complaints procedure. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because under paragraph 42.a. of the Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure. The landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction prior to the involvement of the Ombudsman. If the resident continues to have issues, he should raise these with the landlord and ask to make new formal complaint if required.
The Ombudsman is unable to consider whether the landlord’s handling of the residents reports of damp and mould had a negative impact the resident’s health and wellbeing. This is because whilst this service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health or wellbeing as this is not within our expertise. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould

The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states it will carry out emergency repairs within 24 hours and non-emergency repairs within 28 calendar days.
The resident reported issues with damp and mould on 14 November 2022. In the landlord’s stage 2 response it said it inspected the property on 30 December 2022. This was 37 days later, which was outside its target timescale of 28 calendar days. The landlord did not provide any evidence to this service that this inspection took place or what the outcome was. It was not until the resident chased an update in February 2023 that the landlord became aware that the roof was leaking.
The Ombudsman expects landlords to maintain a robust record of contacts, inspections 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. In its complaint responses the landlord acknowledged it had not kept detailed records due to IT and staffing issues. In line with the Ombudsman’s knowledge and information spotlight report, landlords should have effective systems in place so residents are not impacted when these kinds of issues arise. This was a record keeping failure, which contributed to the delays in the landlord fulfilling its repairing obligations.
The landlord carried out another inspection of the roof on 2 March 2023. The landlord’s records state this was due to the resident’s neighbour reporting a leak. It found cracks and splits in the asphalt and that all the cement joints in the coping stones were exposed. There was no evidence the landlord contacted the resident to update him or discuss what action it was going to take to resolve the roof leak. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to effectively communicate with the resident and manage his expectations.
The landlord only started to address the roof leak after the resident made a formal complaint on 6 March 2023. Although it was reasonable for the landlord to instruct a roofing contractor to inspect the roof and provide a quote for the necessary works. This was carried out on 14 March 2023, 4 months after the resident first reported issues. This was an inappropriate delay which left the resident to deal with the leak, damp, and mould himself for a significant period. Although the landlord stated in its stage 1 complaint response that the roof was repaired on 14 March 2023, it has not provided any evidence that it carried out repairs on this date. And the contractor did not provide its report and quote until 16 March 2023.
On 23 March 2023 the resident told the landlord the situation was causing him stress and anxiety and the damp and mould was affecting his health. There was no evidence the landlord considered loss of amenity and what interim measures could be considered and put in place whilst it investigated the cause of the leak, damp, and mould. This could have included de humidifiers, a decant assessment and signposting to appropriate tenancy support services. Interim measures may not always be possible or necessary, but a landlord must show they have explored all options and explain to the resident why such measures were not being put in place. The landlord showed a lack of empathy for the resident’s situation and had no consideration of any interim measures or support.
In its stage 2 response the landlord acknowledged and apologised to the resident that between November 2022 and May 2023 it had failed to carry out further investigations and repairs as recommended by its roofer, LCDM team and contractor. As promised in its stage 2 response, it erected scaffolding in May 2023 and carried out a further inspection of the property on 1 June 2023. Repairs to the roof and guttering were completed on 17 and 19 July 2023. This showed the landlord had listened to the resident’s complaint and wanted to put things right.
However, the landlord did not show learning from the complaint. There was no evidence the landlord contacted the resident to update him on whether the repairs to the roof had resolved the leak. The landlord’s records do not show what repairs were completed, whether further repairs were needed or that it monitored the repairs to ensure a permanent resolution. There was no evidence the landlord discussed with the resident what action it was going to take to resolve the damp, mould, and damage caused by the leak. This was not proactive or resident focused.
Although this service has not investigated the landlord’s actions after the expiry of its complaints procedure, its records show continuous poor communication and record keeping. The landlord only considered offering the resident decant accommodations when the leak caused him to have no electricity in his property. This was 4 months after the expiry of its complaints procedure. At the date of this investigation the resident told this service the leak in the roof had not been resolved, over 2 years later. He did not know when he would be able to return to his home, which he said was causing him significant distress and inconvenience.
The resident raised concerns about the leak, damp and mould damaging his personal belongings. The landlord acted reasonably for providing the resident with the details to make a claim through its indemnity insurer. In cases where damage to the resident’s belongings was gradual, such as due to damp and mould, the landlord should refer this to its indemnity insurer rather than the residents own contents insurance.
In summary, there were delays in the landlord investigating and carrying out repairs to resolve the leak, damp, and mould. The landlord failed to act on the advice of its LCDM team and its contractors. It failed to show empathy towards the resident’s situation and did not consider interim measures or offer appropriate support. There was evidence of poor communication and record keeping. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for its failure to carry out the repairs. It offered the resident in total £500 compensation. This amount was in line with its compensation policy for the failings identified at that time. However, the landlord failed to put things right as promised in its stage 2 response or show any learning from this complaint. The resident was left living in the property to deal with the leak, damp, and mould himself for 10 months. At the time of this investigation the issues are still outstanding and have been on-going for 2 years.
Based on the above there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
In January 2024 the landlord implemented a leaks, condensation, damp and mould policy. This is a positive step to the landlord improving its response to leaks and damp and mould.

The landlord’s complaints handling

At the date of this investigation the landlord’s complaints policy stated it would acknowledge a complaint within 10 working days and respond to stage 1 complaints within 20 working days, and stage 2 complaints within 40 working days.
The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 6 March 2023. There was no evidence the landlord acknowledged the complaint or contacted the resident to discuss the complaint before issuing its response. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to effectively communicate with the resident and manage his expectations.
The landlord provided it’s stage 1 complaint response on 22 March 2023, which was within its target response time of 20 working days. The landlord provided incorrect information about the repairs it had carried out in its response. The landlord’s poor record keeping meant it could not effectively review the case when responding to the resident’s complaint which restricted it’s ability to put things right and to learn from points in this case.
The resident escalated his complaint on 23 March 2023. The landlord acknowledged the escalation on 27 March 2023 and again on 14 April 2023. On both dates the landlord said it would respond within 20 working days. It was unclear from the landlord’s records whether it was aware it had given the resident 2 different dates in which it would respond.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 16 May 2023, although this was not within the timescale of its first acknowledgement letter to the resident, it was within the second timescale given and was within its policy’s target response time of 40 working days. The response was detailed and covered all of the resident’s complaint issues.
In summary the landlord failed to provide a written acknowledgement of the resident’s complaint. It failed to fully investigate the complaint at stage 1 and it gave 2 different timescales for its stage 2 response. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for the delay in providing its stage 2 response. It offered the resident £50 compensation. The landlord failed to acknowledge all the failings identified in this investigation. Its policy states it will offer £50 per failure. Therefore, this service has ordered the landlord to increase its offer of compensation.
Based on the above, there was service failure with the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.
Since the date of this complaint the landlord has produced a new complaints policy which reflects the recommended response timescales set out in the Ombudsman’s complaints handling code.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was serve maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the residents reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders and recommendations

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report. A senior member of staff must do this.
2. Pay the resident the £550 compensation it offered in its stage 2 complaint response, if this has not already been paid.
3. Pay the resident a further £600 compensation. This is broken down as:
  1. £500 compensation for the time, trouble, distress and inconvenience to the resident caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  2. £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience to the resident caused by the landlord’s complaints handling. All compensation should be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any rent arrears.
4. Contact the resident and discuss:
  1. Whether there is any support, sign posting, or referrals it can make to support him whilst he awaits a resolution to the leak and damp and mould issues.
  2. What repairs are outstanding to resolve the roof leak and the estimated timescales for when these repairs will be carried out. It should agree a communication plan with the resident on how it will provide regular updates going forward.
  3. Any damage to the decoration of the property caused by the roof leak, damp and mould. If works are required to put the decoration back to what it was before the leak, the landlord must agree the works with the resident. Although these works cannot be carried out until the roof repairs are completed and the leak resolved, the landlord should start planning this to avoid further delays in the resident returning to the flat.
  4. Any on-going damage to the resident’s personal belongings due to the leaks, damp and mould. It should discuss whether it needs to assist the resident to place his belongings in storage until all repairs are completed. The landlord should consider covering the cost of this. Or whether it needs to assist the resident in making a claim with its indemnity insurer

Recommendations

It is recommended the landlord considers reviewing its staff’s training needs to ensure all relevant officers:
1. Respond to requests for repairs appropriately and progresses works orders in accordance with its relevant policies and procedures.
2. Are keeping relevant records up to date and making sure information is accessible to all relevant departments. This includes information from third parties such as it’s contractors.
3. Respond to formal complaints appropriately. Responses must address all issues raised by the resident. It should ensure all relevant officers do so in an efficient and timely manner, and in accordance with its relevant policies and procedures and the Ombudsman’s complaint handling code.