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

Hyde Housing Association Limited (202335754)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202335754

Hyde Housing Association Limited

22 August 2024


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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of repairs to the property, including damp and mould.
    2. The landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a semi-detached house. The resident has 3 children, one of whom has asthma.
  2. A work order was initially raised on 29 September 2023 to place scaffolding and complete significant works to the roof and guttering. Two further work orders were raised on the same date in relation to slabs and a garden wall, and to replace bath taps. The landlord’s repair records suggest that an appointment for the slabs and garden wall took place on 6 October 2023. A work order was raised on 19 October 2023 to complete a mould wash to the bathroom ceiling. It stated that the mould was reoccurring despite multiple treatments.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 8 November 2023. The landlord understood she was dissatisfied that an appointment for that day had been cancelled and rescheduled without notice. She had experienced 3 other missed appointments and her husband had needed to miss work to be available. She added that there was no working light in the bathroom, scaffolding had been up for a month but no roofing work had been carried out, 4 plumbers had attended for the same issues and engineers had said they could not complete work or did not have time during appointments.
  4. The repair to the bath taps took place on 14 November 2023. The landlord spoke to the resident on 15 November 2023 and sent an acknowledgement letter on the same day. It recorded that her concerns related to multiple repair issues, including the roof leak which had caused damp and mould in the bathroom and delays in repairs to the light and taps in the bathroom. It noted that a surveyor had attended the previous day to review any other repairs that formed part of the complaint and that it would speak to them. It confirmed that it would respond by 29 November 2023.
  5. On the same day, the landlord’s records show that it had asked for works to be raised to overhaul the bathroom and kitchen extractor fans, treat mould affecting the walls in the bedrooms, and to get a quote to rebuild the garden wall. It also asked that rubbish in the loft was removed as part of the roofing works. A work order was raised on 17 November 2023 to reinstate the bathroom light. On 20 November 2023, the landlord asked that a heat loss survey was carried out to the property.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 23 November 2023. It acknowledged that there had been delays in roof repairs and in carrying out internal works following this. It upheld the complaint, apologised and confirmed it should have completed works sooner. It acknowledged that roof works were due to be completed in November 2023, but these were delayed, and it had not communicated effectively. It committed to renewing the roof between 4 and 8 December 2023 and said it would reinstate the bathroom light on 6 December 2023. It would also replace a damaged bath panel and complete a further mould wash on 12 December 2023. It offered the resident £300 compensation comprised of £50 for her customer effort, £100 for delays, and £150 for distress and inconvenience. 
  7. On 24 November 2023, the resident contacted the landlord to ask about additional issues, including items left in the loft by previous tenants, her garden wall, the extractor fans in the bathroom and kitchen, and the report from the heat loss survey that had been completed.
  8. The landlord’s records from 1 December 2023 show that an inspection took place, with photos taken of damp and mould affecting the bathroom, as well as walls in other rooms, and around windows and doors. The roof works were completed in early December 2023 as agreed. The resident has also confirmed that a mould wash took place, but the landlord’s records do not confirm a date. She requested updates from the landlord on 5 and 18 December 2023.
  9. The landlord’s records show that an appointment took place on 13 December 2023 in relation to the extractor fan not working and the job notes show that it would look at options for installing a stronger extractor fan.
  10. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 3 January 2024 and explained that:
    1. She remained dissatisfied due to a lack of response to her communication since November 2023 and the landlord’s failure to complete works it had previously agreed to. She said that the roof and mould treatments were completed as agreed, but the bath panel work and toilet light were not. She had asked that the scaffolding was removed and been told that it would be removed within 2 weeks of the work being completed which had not been done. She said she had experienced higher energy bills due to the scaffolding blocking light to the property and that her neighbour had also asked that it removed the scaffolding.
    2. During an inspection on 14 November 2023, several repair issues were raised, and other matters identified. These included unsafe brickwork in the garden, extractor fans in the bathroom and kitchen, the previous tenant’s possessions in the loft, works following a heat loss survey and her request for the deeds to the property to confirm which party (her or her neighbour) was responsible for a boundary fence. She had been told that several radiators were too small for the room they were in and needed to be changed. She did not feel that she had been taken seriously due to the landlord’s failure to respond to her queries.
  11. A repair to the bathroom light was completed on 20 January 2024. The resident confirmed that a mould wash was completed to all rooms in the property on 24 January 2024
  12. Following contact from the resident, the Ombudsman wrote to the landlord on 13 February 2024 and asked it to respond to the complaint by 20 February 2024.
  13. The landlord’s records show that mould washing and painting of areas were marked as completed on 15 February 2024.
  14. The landlord contacted the resident and acknowledged her complaint escalation on 16 February 2024. The resident responded to the landlord, setting out her specific concerns in relation to:
    1. The scaffolding which was still in place and impact on natural light into the property, resulting in increased energy usage.
    2. The garden wall which she had raised the previous summer. She said that a plumber was initially sent, then a plasterer. Since an inspection on 14 November 2023, another plasterer was sent on 12 January 2024 but did not have time booked to complete the work. An appointment was booked for 6 February 2024 but she was not available and she said she would leave the side gate open for access, but the work was not completed.
    3. The extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom were replaced but the kitchen extractor was “useless”, and she had been told the bathroom extractor was too small for the room.
    4. She had been told following the heat loss survey that the radiator in the front reception room was too small, the radiator in her daughter’s room did not function properly, and the one in her bedroom was also too small.
    5. A mould wash was completed on 24 January 2024 but was not effective and a further wash was completed on 14 February 2024. The only rooms not affected by mould were the upstairs toilet and kitchen.
    6. She had asked the landlord to fix the bathroom shower tap in August 2023 and 4 plumbers visited before the issue was resolved on 14 November 2023. She was initially told there was not enough time booked to carry out the repair; on the second time, the work was not on the operative’s job sheet. During the third visit, she was told not enough time had been booked. The fourth plumber changed the tap but damaged the bath panel in the process. This remained outstanding despite the landlord confirming this would be replaced on 6 December 2023.
    7. The amount of time she had needed to spend chasing the landlord for information regarding the repairs via phone and email and the lack of communication.
  15. The landlord’s records from 23 February 2024 note that mould in one of the bedrooms had not been treated previously due to furniture on the walls that needed to be removed. The resident had now moved the furniture and it asked that the work was completed.
  16. The scaffolding was struck on 22 February 2024 and the resident agreed to allow the landlord additional time to respond to the complaint.
  17. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 29 February 2024 and said:
    1. It had failed to complete works as agreed within the timescales provided or offered reassurance as to how it intended to rectify the leak in the property. It had also failed to communicate with her and had taken the delays, inconvenience, and her personal effort into account when increasing the compensation offer.
    2. It had now arranged for the outstanding works to take place. An appointment had been booked for 11 March 2024 to renew the bath panel, check and overhaul the bathroom and kitchen extractor fans, and complete a mould treatment now furniture had been moved in one of the bedrooms.
    3. Its surveyor had visited in November 2023 and February 2024 and noted cracks in the garden wall. They had recommended the wall was taken down and rebuilt, and it was arranging for a supervisor to inspect and provide a quote. It would also be undertaking a further damp treatment and would monitor the damp situation to ensure the problems had been resolved.
    4. In addition to the issues raised in the initial complaint, it confirmed that the radiators in the property would be fixed on 8 March 2024. It noted that the resident had reminded it that it had completed a heat loss survey in 2023 and as the work following the survey was outstanding, it had included this within its stage 2 investigation. It also addressed the resident’s query about which side of the boundary fence was her responsibility to maintain.
    5. It apologised for the service she had received and increased the compensation offer to £650, comprised of £50 for her patience throughout the complaints process, £100 for customer effort, £250 for the delays in completing repairs and £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused. It added that it would consider any increased energy costs to heat the property during the delays and asked the resident to provide comparable energy bills showing the increase in usage for it to consider.

Events following the landlord’s final complaint response

  1. The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman to investigate on 19 March 2024 as a number of repairs remained outstanding. She was concerned about the garden wall which she felt may collapse and injure her young children. She also said that when the bath panel was replaced, the landlord identified that a previous leak had not been resolved and had removed tiles which had not been reinstated.
  2. Following the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response, the bath panel was removed on 18 March 2024 and a leak was found to be affecting the tiles behind the bath and this was reportedly resolved. The radiators were replaced on 22 March 2024, and the bathroom and kitchen fans were changed on 25 March 2024. A visit on 2 April 2024 established there was no further leak but that tiles needed to be replaced. The bath panel was replaced on 12 April 2024 and further tiling works took place on 17 and 18 April 2024. Further tiling works were needed in May 2024 following reports these had fallen. The work to rebuild the garden wall took place on 10 and 11 May 2024 The landlord’s records from 20 June 2024 note that the tiling and walls in the bathroom appeared to need further work. It said that the resident had been updated.
  3. In July 2024, the resident informed the Ombudsman that several repair issues remained outstanding, including returning damp and mould. She noted that an extractor fan was put in but that the trunking had not been completed for the fan, and the mould had not been treated. Treatments were applied in other rooms, but the issue had returned. She said the bath panel was replaced but a leak was identified that had damaged the panelling behind the bath. Workmen changed the tiles but did not address the cause of this so the tiles had come off again. She had been told that another post inspection would be completed but had not been given a date. She confirmed that the light, external wall, and roof works had been completed.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In her communication with the Ombudsman, the resident has raised concerns about ongoing issues with the bathroom wall during the bath panel replacement, fan, and ongoing damp and mould in the property. The Ombudsman is only able to consider matters that the landlord has had the opportunity to respond to within its formal complaints process. The landlord will need to be given the opportunity to address and respond to its handling of ongoing matters. An order has been made below for the landlord to contact the resident to discuss her ongoing concerns.

Policies and procedures

  1. The tenancy agreement confirms that the landlord is responsible for works required to the roof, internal and external walls, plasterwork, electric wiring, and pipework. The landlord’s repair policy states that it attends to emergency repairs within 4 hours and makes safe within 24 hours. Follow-on works would be completed as a routine repair. Routine repairs are to be completed within 20 working days. Major repairs or complex work are expected to take longer and would be undertaken as part of the landlord’s stock investment procedures.
  2. The landlord has a 2 stage formal complaints process. At stage 1, the complaint should be acknowledged within 5 working days and responded to within a further 10 working days. At stage 2, the landlord should provide a response within 20 working days of the request.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s property

  1. In this case, it is not disputed that there were delays in completing repairs to the resident’s property and the landlord failed to communicate effectively. The landlord has acknowledged that it should have completed works sooner and that it subsequently failed to complete actions it had agreed to within its stage 1 complaint response. Within its responses, it has apologised to the resident and offered £600 compensation for the repair aspect of her complaint. This was comprised of £100 for customer effort, £250 for the delays in completing repairs, and £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
  2. Where there are admitted failings, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the landlord’s offer of redress put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  3. As part of this investigation, the landlord was asked to provide information relevant to the resident’s complaint. While the landlord provided information, its repair records were not always clear as to when appointments took place and where there were missed or failed appointments. In addition, the Ombudsman has seen limited information in relation to the period prior to the resident’s complaint in November 2023 and landlord has also provided undated internal records, all of which has somewhat impacted a fair and thorough investigation.

Bath taps

  1. In her complaint, the resident raised multiple repair issues, including the delay in her bath taps being replaced. The landlord’s records show the work order was raised on 29 September 2023 to replace the bath taps and the work was completed on 14 November 2023, the day after the resident’s complaint. While the landlord acknowledged overall delays within its complaint responses, it failed to suitably acknowledge its failing in relation to this work or explain the reason for the work being completed outside of its policy timescales.

Roof and scaffolding

  1. Works to renew the roof were initially raised on 29 September 2023 and were subsequently completed by 8 December 2023. Overall, this was a timeframe of around 70 days and not considered excessive for works of this nature. However, there is a lack of evidence to show that the landlord communicated effectively with the resident regarding the repairs and the works were supposed to be carried out in November 2023. It acted fairly by acknowledging its poor communication within its responses to her. However, it could have done more to explain the reason for the delay given the resident’s frustration.
  2. The resident has advised that the scaffolding was initially placed, in part, on 30 September 2023. Following the work, she expressed concern that the scaffolding had been left up. The scaffolding was removed on 22 February 2024, over 2 months following the work and almost 5 months since it was built. This was an unreasonable length of time and there was a continued lack of communication between the landlord and the resident as to when the scaffolding would be removed.

Bathroom light

  1. The resident said that her bathroom light had not worked since September 2023 and has suggested that the lack of light was due to the ongoing roof leak. The landlord has offered no further insight as to how long the light had not worked for or the reason for the fault but did accept responsibility for the repair.
  2. The landlord was put on notice of the issue on 8 November 2023 at the time of the resident’s complaint. Following this, the light was not reinstated until 20 January 2024, which was significantly outside of the landlord’s repair timescales. The landlord acknowledged that it had not completed the work it had agreed to at stage 1 within its subsequent complaint response. However, it failed to provide the reason the work was not completed on 6 December 2023 as agreed. It ultimately did not demonstrate that it had adequately recognised the impact having no light in the bathroom would have had on the resident and her family. 

External garden wall

  1. A repair was raised on 29 September 2023 which included the garden wall and slabs. This work was marked as completed on 6 October 2023; however, it remains unclear as to what work was done to the wall at the time. The landlord acknowledged on 15 November 2023 that the resident complained about multiple repairs and confirmed it would speak to the surveyor who attended on 14 November 2023 regarding the repairs that formed part of the complaint. However, it failed to comment on the subsequent works needed to the external wall in its stage 1 complaint response despite these works being raised by the surveyor. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have confirmed its position in the complaint response as it was already aware that it intended to gain a quote as of 15 November 2023.
  2. The resident needed to spend additional time and trouble pursuing her concerns regarding the wall. Her escalation requests in January and February 2024 noted that there had been multiple visits and 2 failed appointments, including one where a plasterer was sent and another where the operative did not turn up. The landlord failed to address her concerns about multiple appointments within its subsequent complaint response on 29 February 2024 but confirmed that its surveyor had asked for a quote for the wall to be taken down and rebuilt. The surveyor had first asked for a quote for the wall on 15 November 2023, a significant time earlier, and the landlord could have done more to acknowledge and explain the reason for the delay.
  3. The landlord’s records show that the garden wall was rebuilt between 9 and 10 May 2024. This was 6 months following the initial inspection where the surveyor identified that the wall needed to be rebuilt. It is of concern that despite the landlord’s notes indicating that the wall was not secure, and there being children in the property, this was not treated more proactively by the landlord in view of the potential risk.

Bath panel

  1. The Ombudsman has not seen evidence that concerns related to damage to the bath panel formed part of the resident’s initial complaint on 8 November 2023. The damage is said to have occurred during an appointment on 14 November 2023 for the bath taps. The landlord included the bath panel matter within its complaint responses and so the Ombudsman has investigated its subsequent handling of the matter.
  2. Despite confirming that it would replace the bath panel on 12 December 2023 within its initial response, it is clear that this did not happen. The landlord further confirmed within its stage 2 complaint response on 29 February 2024 that it would attend on 11 March 2024 to replace the bath panel but this was not attended until 18 March 2024. The 3-month delay in attending to the bath panel was unreasonable. The landlord has somewhat acknowledged this in its complaint responses.
  3. During the appointment on 18 March 2024, it was established that there was a further leak which had affected the tiles below the bath. The bath panel was subsequently replaced on 12 April 2024 while awaiting works to the tiling. The further delay in replacing the bath panel due to the need for tiling works was somewhat outside of the landlord’s control as it was not apparent that there was a further leak until the panel was removed. The issues related to tiles in the bathroom did not form part of the complaint but are noted to be ongoing. As such, the ongoing repairs have been taken into consideration within the orders and recommendations made below.

Damp and mould

  1. The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying. The Ombudsman expects landlords to take a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould.
  2. The landlord’s records in relation to its handling of the resident’s damp and mould reports are not always clear, with dates of attendance and the findings following surveys missing from the evidence provided to the Ombudsman. It is understood that the resident’s initial reports of damp and mould in the bathroom were thought to be linked to the outstanding roof repair works which were outstanding at the time of her complaint in November 2023. Alongside the complaint, the resident also raised concerns about damp and mould in the bedrooms of the property. This was addressed by the landlord within its complaints process and has therefore been included within the Ombudsman’s investigation.
  3. Following the resident’s complaint, the landlord took reasonable steps in an attempt to resolve the damp affecting the bathroom in December 2023 by completing the roof repair, and carrying out work to the extractor fan which was not working efficiently. It also completed a heat loss survey in November 2023 which was reasonable given that a lack of adequate heating can also contribute to damp within a property.
  4. Despite a work order being raised for a mould treatment to the bathroom ceiling on 19 October 2023, which was prior to the resident’s complaint, there is a lack of evidence to show that this was carried out. Following this, the landlord’s records show that on 15 November 2023, it had asked for the bedrooms to also be treated. In her communication to the landlord, the resident has suggested that a mould wash was carried out as agreed on 12 December 2023, there was a further mould wash on 26 January 2024 and another, which is confirmed by the landlord’s record, on 15 February 2024. It remains unclear as to which rooms were treated on each date or why multiple appointments were required in a relatively short space of time.
  5. While it was reasonable for the landlord to carry out treatments to remove the potential hazard caused by mould spores, there were delays in this being carried out initially. It is noted that there was a delay in treating one of the bedrooms due to furniture being placed on the walls which needed to be removed by the resident which was outside of the landlord’s control. The landlord’s records suggest that this took place on 28 February 2024.
  6. While some actions taken by the landlord to assess and resolve the damp and mould were reasonable, there is a lack of evidence to show that it had a clear diagnosis of the cause of the damp or an action plan as to how it intended to treat and monitor the situation. Combined with a lack of clear records as to the findings of the heat loss survey or dates of treatments, this is likely to mean that the landlord did not have full oversight of the damp issues affecting the property.
  7. The landlord’s communication with the resident was also poor and she needed to spend additional time and trouble pursuing updates following the heat loss assessment. It also failed to provide an explanation as to how its proposed actions would resolve the damp long term or provide reassurance to the resident. While the Ombudsman has seen evidence to support that further works to the extractor fan and radiators were carried out in March 2024, the resident has advised that the issues are ongoing to date, suggesting that further investigative work is required and that the treatments carried out were not monitored as agreed.

Summary

  1. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance states that compensation figures between £600 and £1,000 are considered proportionate in instances where there has been a failure which had a significant impact on the resident. The landlord’s offer of £600 compensation was within this range and goes some way to put things right. However, in view of the failings identified in this case, and the continued failures to put right the repair issues following its stage 2 complaint response, it is the Ombudsman’s view that additional compensation is warranted.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s records show that the resident initially made a complaint on 8 November 2023, and it responded at stage 1 on 23 November 2023. This timeframe was in line with the landlord’s published response timescales.
  2. The resident asked for her complaint to be escalated on 3 January 2024 due to a lack of response to her communication and questions she had asked, as well as the landlord’s failure to complete some of the repairs it had agreed to. She called on the same day and the landlord confirmed her contact had been received by its complaints department. Despite this, the complaint was not escalated at the time, and the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 29 February 2024. This was a period of 41 working days and significantly outside of its 20-working day timescale. The resident also needed to spend additional time and trouble pursuing her complaint via the support of the Ombudsman during this time.
  3. Within its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord offered £50 compensation for the resident’s patience through the complaints process. This amount of compensation is considered reasonable to acknowledge the inconvenience caused by the delay in issuing a stage 2 complaint response. However, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have also acknowledge and apologised for the delay within the response to show that it had fully considered its failings.
  4. The Ombudsman expects landlords to address each aspect of a resident’s complaint. In this case, it is acknowledged that the resident had raised concerns about other repair issues at stage 2 that did not form part of the initial complaint but were in the process of being addressed at the same time. It subsequently addressed some of the additional repair issues at stage 2 at the resident’s request which was reasonable in the circumstances.
  5. However, the resident raised specific concerns in her complaint about multiple missed and failed appointments, and that operatives attended and had said they could not complete the work or had not been booked sufficient time. She also raised that a plumber had attended 4 times since August 2023 and delays in completing work to the bath taps. The landlord failed to comment on these aspects of the complaint within its responses which amounts to a failing. Despite raising similar concerns about failed appointments and time spent contacting the landlord within her escalation request, it again failed to address those specific concerns at stage 2.
  6. In addition, while the landlord apologised for overall delays, poor communication, and failure to do what it said it would do, it did not comment on any specific failings or explain the reason for any delays. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have acknowledged where there had been specific failings to show that it had adequately investigated her concerns. It should also have addressed her concerns related to missed or failed appointments and to have confirmed its position regarding multiple visits to demonstrate that it had taken her concerns seriously.
  7. Overall, the landlord’s offer of £50 compensation for the resident’s patience throughout the complaints process is not considered proportionate redress for the impact of the failings identified. An order has been made below for the landlord to pay additional compensation.

Determination

  1. In line with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the property, including damp and mould.
  2. In line with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its handling of the complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks, the landlord is to write to the resident to apologise for the failings identified in this report.
  2. Within 4 weeks, the landlord is to pay the resident £950 compensation, comprised of:
    1. £800 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused, and time and trouble spent by the resident in pursuing repairs to the property. This includes the landlord’s previous offer of £600 if this has not yet been paid.
    2. £150 in recognition of the inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor complaint handling. This includes its previous offer of £50 if this has not yet been paid.
  3. Within 4 weeks, the landlord is to contact the resident regarding any outstanding repair issues. It should arrange to survey the property to assess her concerns. This should include an assessment of any ongoing damp and mould. It should assign a staff member to oversee works through to completion.
  4. Within 6 weeks, the landlord is to write to the resident setting out:
    1. Its understanding of any outstanding repair issues and a plan for how it intends to resolve each repair, including a schedule and expected timescales for works.
    2. The contact details for the staff member assigned to act as a point of contact for the resident.
  5. The landlord is to provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to the Ombudsman within the specified timescales.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord upholds its offer to refund the resident for any additional energy usage while the scaffolding was erected should she provide evidence of increased energy costs.