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

Midland Heart Limited (202435994)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202435994

Midland Heart Limited

30 June 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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property when she moved in, including reports of damp and mould.
    2. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has an assured tenancy agreement which commenced in August 2024. The property is a 2 -bedroom house. The landlord has indicated that it had no record of the resident’s family having any additional needs prior to her informing it in October 2024 that her children had been hospitalised due to breathing difficulties caused by the damp and mould.
  2. The resident told the landlord on 27 August 2024 that there was damp and mould in the property. She reported a roof leak and a broken window handle on 4 September 2024 and said the landlord should have completed the repairs whilst the property was empty.
  3. The resident made a complaint on the same day. She said the property was not in a ‘‘fit state’’ when she moved in and she had identified numerous repairs. She said there was damp and mould in the property, the roof leaked and the window handle in the living room was broken. The resident also noted the wallpaper she had put up had been damaged by the leak.
  4. The landlord arranged for the window handle to be repaired and a mould wash applied in the living room on 9 September 2024 but was unable to complete the work. This was because a contractor employed by the resident was working in her home. A further appointment was arranged for 13 September 2024, but the landlord was unable to gain access.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 18 September 2024 and said:
    1. The resident told the landlord on 23 August 2024 that the living room window handle was broken and this was causing damp and mould. The repair request was allocated to the wrong surveyor and this caused delays.
    2. It contacted the resident on 27 August 2024 to arrange an appointment to complete the work but was advised by her that the timing was not convenient. The resident agreed to contact the landlord at a later date to arrange an appointment.
    3. A repair was raised on 4 September 2024 to check the roof following contact from the resident. An appointment was arranged for 4 October 2024.
    4. It arranged an appointment on 9 September 2025 to repair the window handle and treat the damp and mould. It was unable to complete the work as the resident had a contractor working in her home. A further appointment was made for 13 September 2024, but it was unable to gain access on this date. A new appointment had been arranged for 19 September 2024.
    5. The identified repairs should have been completed prior to the resident moving into the property. The delays in completing the work were due to it having to wait for the resident to make contact and because it was unable to gain access on 2 occasions.
    6. It was unable to offer the resident any compensation for having to take time off work for the repair appointments. It would, however, offer her £420 compensation for the identified service failings. This included £250 compensation for failing to meet its void standard and £170 for the inconvenience caused. It would also offer her £35 worth of decorating vouchers for the damaged wallpaper.
  6. The landlord carried out a property inspection on 26 September 2024 and identified damp in the living room and bedroom. A job was ordered on 11 October 2024 to unblock the gutters, re-point a section of a wall, replace missing roof tiles and replaster walls affected by the damp.
  7. The resident escalated her complaint on 2 October 2024.
  8. The landlord issued its final complaint response on 5 December 2024 and said:
    1. The repairs identified during the property inspection carried out on 26 September 2024 were incorrectly referred to the wrong contractor.
    2. It would contact the resident within 5 working days to agree a mutually convenient appointment to complete the identified works.
    3. There had been ‘‘extensive and unnecessary delays’’ in resolving the problem with damp and mould in the resident’s home.
    4. It would offer the resident £2,955.82 compensation. This included a rent rebate of £2,105.82 for the period between 21 August 2024 and 31 December 2024 for the extensive works that were not completed whilst the property was empty. It would also offer £350 for the inconvenience caused and £500 for the damage caused to the resident’s carpet.

Post complaint events.

  1. The resident told the landlord on 12 December 2024 that her children struggled to breathe and had to use an inhaler. She also said she had to arrange for a wall to be re-plastered and this cost her £195. She said she did this because the landlord said it was not responsible for the work. She asked the landlord to increase its offer of compensation.
  2. The landlord told the resident on 16 December 2024 that it was unable to increase its offer of compensation. It noted that the cost of replastering the wall had not been included in the compensation award and it was happy to review its position upon receipt of the invoice.
  3. The resident told the landlord on 14 January 2025 that no work had been done and there was damp and mould in the property.
  4. The landlord arranged for a further property inspection to be carried out on 24 April 2025. Whilst no signs of damp were identified during the inspection, the landlord noted that the majority of the work that had previously been identified had not been completed. This included noting that the gutters had not been cleared, the roof tiles had not been replaced or the walls in the living room and bedroom replastered. A job was raised on the same day to complete the outstanding work.
  5. The resident told this Service that the landlord had recently completed all of the work and there was no evidence of damp and mould in her property. She also said the landlord had not paid her the compensation offered in the final complaint response or agreed to cover the cost she incurred plastering the wall.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s obligations, policies and procedures.

  1. The landlord has an obligation to ensure it complies with the Housing, Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). The HHSRS does not specify any minimum standards, but it is concerned with avoiding or minimising potential health hazards. Damp and mould are potential hazards that can fall within the scope of HHSRS. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under HHSRS and are expected to carry out additional monitoring of a property where potential hazards are identified.
  2. Whilst reasonable timescales are not defined in law, the potential health risks from damp and mould are significant. It is this Service’s view that landlords should take urgent action following reports of damp and mould.
  3. This Service’s spotlight review on damp and mould (published October 2021) recommends landlords adopt a zero-tolerance approach to reports of damp and mould. It also highlights the importance of landlords taking a proactive approach to identifying problems and communicating clearly with residents to ensure they have confidence in it and understand the next steps. This includes explaining if follow up work is required and providing a clear timetable for any future works. If there is any slippage to the timetable, landlords are encouraged to inform residents as soon as possible and explain why the timetable has changed.
  4. The resident’s tenancy agreement says the landlord is responsible for keeping the structure and exterior of the property in repair. This includes the roof, gutters, walls and window catches. The resident is required to provide access to her home.
  5. The landlord’s damp and mould policy says it will investigate reports of damp and mould and take action to eradicate it at the earliest opportunity. Upon receipt of reports of damp and mould, the landlord arranges for an anti-fungicidal treatment to be applied within 14 days and for repairs to be completed within 28 days. If further reports of damp and mould are received, the landlord arranges for a survey to be carried out. It says it will do this within 7 days and carryout any identified works within 90 days.
  6. The landlord’s repairs policy says it will comply with legal and statutory requirements. It also says it will process repairs accurately and promptly. Responsive repairs are prioritised into the following categories:
    1. Emergency repairs are completed within 24 hours.
    2. Routine repairs are completed within 28 days.
    3. Major repairs are completed within 90 days.
  7. The landlord’s void standard says it will comply with housing and property legislation, including the HHSRS. Roofs must be structurally sound and free from leaks, gutters clear of obstructions and brick work watertight when properties are let. Empty properties must also be free of damp and mould and windows secure with operational fittings.
  8. The landlord’s complaints policy comprises of 2 stages. Complaints are acknowledged within 5 working days and a reply at stage 1 issued within 10 working days. The landlord responds to escalations at stage 2 within 20 working days. If more time is needed, the landlord says it will contact the resident to advise them.
  9. The landlord’s compensation and reasonable redress policy says it will consider offering an apology and compensation where a resident has suffered distress and inconvenience, unnecessary time and trouble or actual financial loss due to an action or omission on its part. Compensation is not offered where the incident was caused by the resident’s failure to comply with the terms of their tenancy. This includes failing to provide access to their home for essential work.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property when she moved in, including reports of damp and mould.

  1. In considering the landlord’s response to the issue of damp and mould, it is noted that the resident has referred to a possible impact upon her children’s health. Whilst these concerns have been referenced in this report, it should be noted that this Service is not in a position to make findings about the possible impact of the issues under investigation on a resident’s health, as this would be more appropriate for a court to consider. In this respect, the resident is advised to seek legal advice if she wishes to take her concerns further
  2. The resident told the landlord on 27 August 2024 that there was damp and mould in the property. The landlord responded on the same day. This demonstrated it took the resident’s concern seriously and wanted to put things right for her. The resident advised the landlord during the telephone call that it was not convenient to speak and she would contact the landlord at a later date.
  3. The resident contacted the landlord on 4 September 2024. She said the property was not in a ‘‘fit state’’ and there were a number of repairs that needed to be completed. This included damp and mould around the windows and the external walls. She also noted there had been a roof leak and a window handle was broken. She said the wallpaper was damaged by the leak.
  4. The landlord raised a job on the same day to repair the roof and an appointment was made for 4 October 2024. This was consistent with the landlord’s repairs policy. It arranged for the window handle to be replaced and a mould wash to be completed on 9 September 2024. This was in accordance with the timescales set out in the landlord’s damp and mould policy.
  5. The landlord visited the resident’s home on 9 September 2024 but was unable to complete the work. This was because a contractor employed by the resident was working in her home. A further appointment was arranged with the resident for 13 September 2024. The landlord’s actions were reasonable in the circumstances.
  6. The landlord visited the resident’s home on 13 September 2024 but was unable to gain access. This caused delays in completing the identified work. The landlord cannot be held responsible for these delays given the resident was responsible for providing access as stated in her tenancy agreement.
  7. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 18 September 2024. When considering how a landlord has responded to a complaint, this Service considers not just what has gone wrong, but also what the landlord has done to put things right in response to the complaint. This includes the steps the landlord has taken to address the shortcoming and prevent a reoccurrence, as well as any compensation offered.
  8. In this case, the landlord acknowledged the repairs should have been completed whilst the property was empty. It also noted that the delays were due in part to the resident failing to provide access.
  9. The landlord offered an apology for the identified service failures and arranged an appointment for 19 September 2024 (incorrectly dated 19 August 2024) to fix the window handle and apply a mould treatment. It also confirmed the appointment for 4 October 2024 relating to the roof repairs and noted it had shared learning from the complaint with its repairs team and offered the resident decorating vouchers for the damaged wallpaper. The landlord’s actions were reasonable in the circumstances. The landlord’s offer of £420 compensation was consistent with its compensation and reasonable redress policy.
  10. It is unclear from the housing records whether the appointment scheduled for 19 September 2024 took place. This demonstrated poor record-keeping on the part of the landlord.
  11. The landlord carried out a property inspection on 26 September 2024. This was consistent with the landlord’s damp and mould policy. Evidence of damp was found in the living room and a bedroom.
  12. A job was raised on the same day to investigate and repair the roof leak, clear the gutters, repoint areas of brickwork and replaster internal walls. Whilst this demonstrated the landlord wanted to put things right for the resident, it is unclear whether she was provided with an update or told when the work would be completed. This was a failure and meant the resident was not clear on what action was being taken by the landlord.
  13. The resident escalated her complaint on 2 October 2024. She noted that the window handle had been repaired, but the roof repairs were outstanding and there was still damp in her home. She said her children had difficulty breathing and had been hospitalised due to the damp. She also noted her carpet and wallpaper were damaged and she had paid £180 for a wall to be replastered. She said she did this because the landlord told her it would not cover the cost of the work.
  14. It is unclear from the housing records if the landlord attended the resident’s property on 4 October 2024 to assess the condition of the roof and carry out the identified works. Its contractor carried out roof repairs on 9 November 2024. This included re-bedding the ridge tiles, re-fixing the fascia and soffit boards and clearing the gutters. This was some 2 months after the resident first reported the roof leak.
  15. The landlord noted on 5 December 2024 in its final complaint response that there had been ‘‘extensive and unnecessary delays’’ in resolving the problem with damp and mould in the resident’s property. It said this was because the repairs identified during the property inspection on 26 September 2024 were passed to the wrong contractor. It also acknowledged the roof leak was ongoing and said it would contact the resident within the next 5 working days to agree an appointment to complete the outstanding work. The landlord offered the resident £2,955.82 compensation for the identified service failures.
  16. In summary, the landlord’s initial response was reasonable and the delays in identifying the cause of the damp and roof leak were due to it being unable to gain access to the resident’s home. There were, however, delays in completing the identified works once it gained access.
  17. Whilst the landlord’s offer of compensation was proportionate and this Service will not be making a further order of compensation, it cannot be considered reasonable redress. This is because the landlord failed to carry out the identified work in a timely manner once it had issued its final complaint response. The situation caused the resident inconvenience and distress. In this case, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property when she moved in, including reports of damp and mould.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

  1. The resident made a complaint on 4 September 2024. The complaint was acknowledged on 5 September 2024 and the resident advised she would receive a response by 18 September 2024. This was consistent with the landlord’s complaints policy.
  2. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 18 September 2024 in accordance with the timescales set out in its complaints policy.
  3. The resident escalated her complaint on 2 October 2024. There is no evidence the escalation request was acknowledged by the landlord. This was not consistent with the landlord’s complaints policy and meant the resident was unclear when she could expect to receive a response.
  4. The landlord issued its final complaint response on 5 December 2024. This was some 2 months after the resident asked for her complaint to be escalated and was not consistent with the landlord’s complaints policy. The landlord did not offer an apology or specific compensation for the delay in responding. This was not consistent with the landlord’s compensation and reasonable redress policy.
  5. In summary, the landlord failed to acknowledge the resident’s complaint escalation request and there were delays in issuing its final complaint response. This caused the resident time and trouble. In this case, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint, for which it is ordered to pay £50 compensation.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the property when she moved in, including reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

Orders.

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident for the failing set out in this report. A copy of the apology letter must be shared with this Service.
  2. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £3,005.82 compensation.  This must be paid directly to the resident and made up as follows:
    1. £50 compensation for the time and trouble caused to the resident in its handling of her complaint.
    2. The £2,955.82 previously offered to the resident, if not already paid.
  3. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to contact the resident and confirm its position regarding the cost she incurred replastering a wall and if appropriate, arrange for her to be reimbursed these costs.
  4. Within 6 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to undertake a review of this case to identify learning and improve its working practices. This review must include: 
    1. An exploration of why the failings identified by this investigation occurred, including its lack of consideration of the impact the situation had on the resident.
    2. A review of its approach to dealing with reports of damp and mould including how it prioritises cases and acts on the findings.
    3. Consider what measures need to be put in place, in addition to any which it already has in place, to avoid a re-occurrence of any identified obstacles.