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

ForHousing Limited (202217774)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202217774

ForHousing Limited

06 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.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Repairs within the resident’s bathroom, including damp and mould.
    2. The resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident and his partner hold an assured tenancy with the landlord. They have 2 children, one has breathing difficulties.
  2. The resident first reported dampness and excess water on his bathroom ceiling, thought to be coming from the extractor fan, on 13 January 2022. The landlord attended the property on 22 February and fixed the leak in March. During this time, the resident also raised concerns about the effects the damp and mould might be having on his child. The landlord carried out a damp survey in April which recommended works, such as removing and reboarding the ceiling.
  3. On 14 June 2022 the resident contacted the landlord as he was expecting the works to the ceiling to have been booked in. He said that mould was forming around the bath and not just on the ceiling. He said that he thought the reason for some of the damp and mould was that his bathroom was poorly ventilated as there was no window and only a small vent.
  4. The landlord removed part of the bathroom ceiling on 29 July 2022. It reboarded and plastered the area where the leak had occurred. It carried out another damp survey on 18 October and arranged further works to be done in the bathroom on 28 October. This included removing mould from the tiles around the bath and installing a new fan to improve ventilation.
  5. The resident complained to the landlord on 14 November 2022 about the handling of the works. He also reported that water was coming through the ceiling again and it was damp. He said the landlord had mismanaged his appointments. Following his complaint, the landlord carried out works in the bathroom in December. It replaced the fan and vent to offer more ventilation.
  6. The resident said he did not receive a complaint response from the landlord and contacted the Service for help. We wrote to the landlord in January 2023 and asked it to respond to the resident. On 1 June 2023 the landlord confirmed that it had sent its first response by post to the resident on 23 November 2022. It gave the resident a copy of this letter, and an opportunity to escalate the complaint.
  7. When escalating his complaint in July 2023, the resident said his main issues were the landlord’s delay in resolving the damp and mould. He said he did not think his child’s respiratory problems had been taken seriously. He also said he had waited in on numerous occasions and taken time off work for appointments and nobody had attended his property.
  8. The landlord gave its final response to the resident’s complaint on 18 August 2023. It explained that it had contained 2 separate leaks that had affected the bathroom, and carried out remedial works. It said the only work outstanding was the repainting of the bathroom ceiling, which the resident had declined. It offered the resident £200 in compensation which it said was for the delay in completing the repainting of the ceiling. It also offered to cover the cost of the repainting if the resident provided quotes.  
  9. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and asked the Service to investigate. He said that he did not think the compensation payment reflected the stress and inconvenience that the issues had caused him and his family. The landlord said it completed a post-works inspection which identified that some works had not been successful and that it would need to renew the resident’s bathroom ceiling, and it scheduled these works in for May 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident has raised concerns about the impact the issues may have had on his family’s health. The Ombudsman is unable to assess the cause of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. The resident may be able to make a personal injury claim if he considers that his health has been affected by the landlord’s actions or inaction. This is a legal process, and the resident may wish to seek legal advice if he wants to pursue this option. In accordance with paragraph 42.f. of the Scheme, this issue is more effectively resolved and remedied through the courts. It will therefore not be considered in this report.
  2. The resident has also raised issues about the potential loss of earnings. The Ombudsman is unable to assess the loss of a resident’s income. This is also a legal process, and the resident may wish to seek legal advice if he wants to pursue this option. In accordance with paragraph 42.f. of the Scheme, this issue is more effectively resolved and remedied through the courts. It will therefore not be considered in this report.
  3. The resident has complained to the Ombudsman about new issues, such as the bathroom sealant failing causing leaks in the ceiling below. Whilst these issues may be linked to this complaint, they relate to a period after his original complaint. 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 the landlord needs to be given an opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to our involvement. If the resident remains dissatisfied following the landlord’s responses to his new complaint he has the option of asking the Ombudsman to investigate these concerns.

The landlord’s handling of repairs within the resident’s bathroom, including damp and mould

  1. The evidence shows that there were delays in the landlord inspecting, and completing, the works in the bathroom. An example of this was when the resident reported the first ceiling leak on 13 January 2022. The landlord inspected this on 22 February, which was outside of its 10 working day timescale for routine repairs. It was unable to stop the leak, and re–booked in the works. It returned to fix the leak on 29 March, which was outside of its policy timeframe, and therefore a service failure.
  2. Another example of a delay was when the landlord did not complete the ceiling works that were recommended in the damp surveyor’s report dated 19 April 2022. The resident chased the landlord for a response on 14 June. The landlord apologised for its delay in completing the ceiling works within emails on 16 June and 19 July. It said it had raised the lack of action with its contractors and its management.
  3. The landlord acknowledged its service failure regarding the ceiling works, but it did not acknowledge its initial delays in carrying out these other works within either of its complaint responses. As it did not consider this, it did not fully resolve the resident’s complaint.
  4. The landlord also failed to acknowledge its delay in responding to the resident’s second report of damp and mould (around the bath) in its complaint responses. When he reported this in June 2022 the landlord said it would contact its damp supervisor to recommend prevention work. There is no evidence of it considering this until almost 3 months later on 9 September, when it booked a second damp survey. This was a significant delay with no apparent reason. As this was a fundamental part of the resident’s complaint, in the circumstances of his concerns about his family’s health, it should have offered an appropriate explanation and remedy for this.
  5. The landlord also did not respond to the resident’s complaint about missed appointments. It is unclear from the records what appointments may have been missed. Nonetheless, the landlord missed an opportunity to explain its position on this and what its records showed. This goes against the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code 2022 which says “Landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions”.
  6. Overall, the landlord acknowledged some repair failings and delays, such as repainting the ceiling, and it offered an appropriate solution and remedy for them. However, it failed to identify the other failings found in this report. Because of that, the landlord’s offer of compensation was not proportionate to the full scale of its poor service, which left the complaint unremedied.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

  1. The landlord operated a 2-stage complaint process during the time of the complaint. Its timescales for responding aligned with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. This says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days at both stages. It says it will issue a response within 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2.
  2. In this case the landlord’s records show that it sent its stage 1 response to the resident on 23 November 2023. This was within its timeframe outlined in its policy. However, the resident did not receive this letter, and he contacted the Service for advice.
  3. We wrote to the landlord on 11 January 2023 and asked it to provide its stage 1 response to the resident by 25 January. There is no evidence of the landlord contacting the resident around this time to either re-send its original complaint response, or clarify his complaint. This was a service failure.
  4. When we wrote to the landlord again in May 2023 its response was appropriate and timely. It re–sent the resident its stage 1 letter and gave the resident a reasonable amount of time to escalate the complaint. When the resident escalated the complaint on 17 July, it responded within its policy timescales.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the repairs within the resident’s bathroom, including damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report the landlord is ordered to pay total compensation of £700 to the resident. This amount is comprised of:
    1. £400 in recognition of the landlord’s handling of repairs within the resident’s property, including damp and mould.
    2. £200 which it offered in its complaint response.
    3. £100 in recognition of its poor complaint handling.
  2. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with these orders to the Service within 4 weeks.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord has offered to pay a tradesperson (of the resident’s choice) to paint his bathroom ceiling. It is recommended that the landlord offers this again to the resident so he can decide whether to accept this offer.