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

Orbit Group Limited (202322674)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202322674

Orbit Group Limited

26 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 the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  2. We have investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a 4-bedroom house.
  2. On 5 December 2022 the resident told the landlord she was experiencing damp, mould, and condensation in the property. The landlord inspected the property on 30 January 2023 and installed further ventilation via the roof on 16 February 2023.
  3. The resident submitted her complaint to the landlord on 12 April 2023. She told the landlord despite her contacting it in March 2023 and April 2023, she had not received an update. She said the damp and mould issues were getting worse in the property, and she did not know how to deal with it. The landlord wrote to the resident acknowledging her complaint on 22 April 2023 and said it would aim to respond by 31 May 2023. The landlord had scheduled a mould wash on 28 April 2023, but it said another inspection was required.
  4. The landlord wrote to the resident on 21 August 2023 and provided the contact details of this Service. The landlord wrote to the resident on 23 November 2023 and said it would provide a stage 1 complaint response by 7 December 2023. The landlord also inspected the property on 6 December 2023 and identified repairs which consisted of:
    1. Mould treatment.
    2. Roof, gutter, loft, and soffit check for water ingress issues.
    3. Upgrade to bathroom extractor fan.
  5. On 7 December 2023 the landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident. It upheld her complaint and said:
    1. Call logs showed the resident continued to chase the landlord after repairs were completed on 16 February 2023.
    2. Mould treatment raised on 20 April 2023 was completed on 28 April 2023.
    3. The resident chased for another inspection after 28 April 2023, and an appointment arranged for 30 August 2023 had not taken place. It noted this as an administration error and apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused.
    4. There was a delay in providing the stage 1 complaint response due to 4 different case handlers being involved.
    5. An inspection was completed by its surveyor on 6 December 2023(it attached a copy of this report).
    6. The resident could contact its surveyor directly.
    7. It would undertake the following action regarding damp and mould:
      1. A 28-day repair was scheduled to clear the front and back gutters.
      2. A 7-day roof investigation was scheduled.
      3. A 7-day mould treatment was scheduled.
    8. There were delays in getting issues resolved and it offered compensation which totalled £1,620, which comprised of:
      1. £400 for distress and inconvenience.
      2. £150 for its delay in complaint handling.
      3. £70 for administrator errors.
      4. £1,000 for its handling of damp and mould in the property, as well as its communication.
  6. Following the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response it proceeded to:
    1. Complete a mould wash on 11 December 2023.
    2. Replace the bathroom fan on 4 January 2024.
    3. Inspect the roof on 26 March 2024.
    4. Visit the property on 3 April 2024.
  7. The resident told the landlord on 9 May 2024 that despite the mould treatment, there was still damp and mould in the property. The landlord attended on 17 May 2024 and applied sealant to the front and rear of the property. It carried out another inspection on 28 June 2024 and documented that repairs were required as the property was still experiencing mould.
  8. The resident escalated her complaint in September 2024 as the landlord had not resolved the damp and mould issue. On 6 September 2024 the landlord contacted contractors to erect scaffolding. This was so the sealant works could be carried out, as well as replacement to damaged roof tiles and vents.
  9. On 16 September 2024 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It said:
    1. It was clear that the damp and mould issue had not been resolved within expected timeframes and apologised.
    2. The following would be completed by 4 October 2024:
      1. Replace any damaged or missing roof tiles. Also replace the missing vent cover.
      2. Repair and redecorate the ceiling.
    3. The compensation of £1,620.00 awarded at stage 1 of its internal complaint’s procedure was sufficient. It would not increase its offer.
  10. On 15 November 2024 the resident confirmed to this Service she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and wanted us to investigate her concerns. She was unhappy with the landlord’s lack of communication regarding damp and mould works, and the issues remained outstanding. She also said she had been reporting damp and mould since 2020 and her daughter kept being ill from the mould spores.
  11. The landlord told this Service that further works were completed to the ceiling on 10 March 2025. It also said further works to address damp and mould in the property would be carried out starting from 17 March 2025.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. It is noted the resident said that the damp and mould affected her daughter’s health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s concerns, but this Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, effects on health and wellbeing. This element of the complaint may perhaps be better suited for the courts. However, we will consider the landlord’s actions to put things right and its consideration of any distress, or inconvenience caused due to the presence of damp and mould.
  2. The evidence shows the resident first complained to the landlord on 12 April 2023. In communication with this Service, she said the issue with damp and mould had started in 2020. The Ombudsman’s investigation will only consider events that took place after 12 April 2022, which was 12 months before the resident’s stage 1 complaint. Residents are encouraged to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner. This is so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider issues, and evidence is available for it to reach an informed conclusion. Therefore, the first report of damp and mould in the period within the scope of this investigation was 5 December 2022.

Reports of damp and mould

  1. The landlord has accepted that it made administrative errors during the internal complaints procedure. There were also delays and issues which remain unresolved, and the resident had to chase it for updates. Throughout the landlord’s internal complaints procedure, it identified external and internal works required to the property. The landlord did not dispute the presence of mould. The resident remains unhappy with the landlord’s response and its actions to remedy the damp and mould in the property. Where there are admitted failings by the landlord as in this case, the Ombudsman applies its dispute resolution principles, which are as follows:
    1. Be fair, treat people fairly, and follow fair processes.
    2. Put things right.
    3. Learn from outcomes.
  2. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) to assess hazards and risks within its 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.
  3. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states non-emergency repairs would be completed by it within 28-calendar days. The policy also says that it may prioritise the speed of appointments dependent on household circumstances.
  4. When the resident first reported damp, mould, and condensation issues on 5 December 2022, the landlord inspected the property on 30 January 2023, which was 56 calendar days later. The landlord’s damp, mould, and condensation (DMC) procedure sets out that it should have inspected the property within 28 calendar days. Therefore, the initial inspection by the landlord was delayed and inappropriate.
  5. Following the inspection of 30 January 2023 the landlord decided to undertake roof repairs on 16 February 2023. This is where the landlord installed further ventilation. The landlord’s actions at this stage were in line with its DMC procedure and showed it was resolution focused. However, the resident said this did not resolve the issue and there was still mould in the property.
  6. It is evident the resident frequently chased the landlord for a response. The landlord completed mould treatment on 28 April 2023. Despite its contractor noting that a gutter investigation was required on this date, this did not happen in the timescales it said it would. The landlord admitted in its stage 1 complaint response that it failed to organise a gutter inspection after the mould treatment, so it had arranged a 28-day appointment. This was booked by it for 5 December 2023 and cancelled by its contractors, despite already being overdue. This was unfair to the resident and showed the landlord had not learnt from its stage 1 complaint investigation.
  7. Further, the above shows there were some record keeping issues by the landlord. Record keeping is a core function of a repairs service. Good record keeping assists the landlord in fulfilling its repair obligations. Accurate and complete records ensure that the landlord has a good understanding of the age and condition of the structure and its fittings within the property. It enables outstanding repairs to be monitored and managed, and the landlord to provide accurate information to its residents. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management (published May 2023) provides recommendations that the landlord could use to improve its record keeping practices.
  8. The earliest evidence this Service has that the gutters were inspected by the landlord was 3 April 2024. This was almost a year after documenting that they needed to be checked. Although the landlord found no issues with the gutter on this visit, it did not follow the timescales in its responsive repairs policy. The inspection was delayed which was inappropriate action by it.
  9. The landlord’s DMC policy, which it operates in addition to its DMC procedure says that it places importance on its communication with residents. It also sets out it reviews communications with residents to improve tone. The DMC policy also references the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould (published in October 2021). The spotlight report stated that residents should be given a choice of appointment times and, wherever possible, reasonable notice. If appointments need to be changed, the landlord should inform the resident of this at the earliest opportunity and rearrange at the same time.
  10. There is evidence that the landlord failed to attend on 24 August 2023 to carry out a damp and mould inspection. This was not acknowledged by the landlord throughout its internal complaint procedure. The resident wrote to the landlord on 24 August 2023 saying she waited all day, and no contractor showed up. She also said she left work early to ensure she was at the property, but did not receive a call about the cancellation of this appointment. It is clear this missed appointment caused the resident distress and inconvenience. Its lack of communication was not in accordance with its DMC policy.
  11. In contrast the landlord accepted in its stage 1 complaint response that there was a missed inspection of damp and mould on 30 August 2023. The landlord booked a further mould treatment in its stage 1 complaint response on 7 December 2023 and provided a 7-day timescale. This was positive, albeit delayed as it showed the landlord was using its discretion to expedite repairs under its responsive repairs policy. This was completed appropriately on 11 December 2023.
  12. The landlord completed a bathroom fan upgrade within its 28-calendar day target time on 4 January 2023. This was appropriate.
  13. The landlord booked a roof leak inspection in its stage 1 complaint response with a 7-day appointment. In contrast, the evidence shows this roof inspection was not completed by it until 26 March 2024. The appointment was therefore inappropriately delayed by 103 calendar days from the timescale it set out to the resident.
  14. The landlord’s communication regarding the roof inspection was poor as the evidence shows the resident chased the landlord from December 2023. She said she was unsure which appointments were scheduled for which action, as she had texts about 3 different dates. She had told the landlord she was available for appointments on Fridays. However, some appointments were not booked for Fridays. The resident expended time and trouble as she continued to chase the landlord for updates with regards to the roof. The landlord’s communication was not in line with its DMC policy. The landlord’s lack of communication also demonstrated inconsistency with our spotlight report on damp and mould.
  15. On 19 April 2024 the landlord inspected the property again and said it needed to seal between the brickwork and the soffits. It completed this on 17 May 2025 which was appropriate and in line with its 28 calendar days policy timescale.
  16. The landlord carried out another damp and mould inspection on 28 June 2024 and found the presence of mould. The landlord identified repairs to the roof as some roof tiles were cracked. It also needed to complete an internal mould treatment. Despite this information, the landlord did not arrange the repairs needed until it issued its stage 2 complaint response on 16 September 2024. The landlord completed works to repair the cracked roof tiles on 19 September 2024, which was within the timescale of 28-days stated to the resident. However, the landlord was aware repairs were needed as early as 28 June 2024. There was an unreasonable delay to schedule the repairs which caused the resident to experience further inconvenience with damp and mould affecting the property.
  17. The landlord’s visit to the property on 4 October 2024 (as agreed with the resident) found that there were issues with the ceiling. Thermal boards were installed by it on 9 November 2024, and follow-on works were needed to decorate. This meant it had taken 36-calendar days to start repairs, which was 12-calendar days outside its responsive repairs policy. This was inappropriate action by the landlord. This Service acknowledges that the landlord faced scheduling obstacles with the resident due to her availability, but she still experienced unreasonable delays. We also acknowledge the landlord has since replaced the ceiling on 10 March 2025.
  18. In the landlord’s final response, it committed to replacing the missing vent cover on the roof and any damaged roof tiles. It said it would do so by its 4 October 2024 visit, however from the information provided to this Service these works remain outstanding as of 17 March 2025. This has meant the resident has continued to face distress and inconvenience after the landlord’s final response due to unresolved issues.
  19. Under the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies, we consider distress and inconvenience, time, and trouble, as well as loss of enjoyment of home caused to a resident by service failures.
  20. The landlord’s compensation policy allows payment in recognition of:
    1. Service failures.
    2. Distress and inconvenience.
    3. Residents who have lived in poor conditions longer than is reasonable due its failure to deal with repairs.
  21. The landlord’s offer of £1,470 (proportioned for damp and mould without complaint handling) considered the detriment caused to the resident as of 7 December 2023. The landlord did not offer additional compensation in its final response of 16 September 2024. Although its total compensation went some way in recognising the impact on the resident, repairs remained.
  22. It is clear the resident has experienced loss of enjoyment of her home throughout the landlord’s internal complaint procedure. This includes after its stage 1 complaint response. The landlord’s offer did not consider the resident has lived in poor conditions longer than reasonable, as set out in its compensation policy. The landlord has not resolved the damp and mould in the property and did not complete all the repairs it committed to do so by 4 October 2024. Therefore, the resident has been affected by damp and mould for a prolonged period, which has not been accounted for by the landlord.
  23. The Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies provides consideration for severe maladministration for long term detriment and where the landlord has exacerbated the situation. This Service will not find severe maladministration because the landlord apologised that the damp and mould had not been resolved within its expected timeframes. It also attempted to put things right, but it has not acknowledged all the failings identified in this report. There have been inconsistencies with the application of timescales and communication in its policies and procedures. Additionally, it has not demonstrated learnings from the complaint about damp and mould, so it did not go far enough for a finding of reasonable redress.
  24. Overall, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould. Orders have been made that take into consideration the delays with repairs and the cumulative effect on the resident.
  25. In the circumstances, the landlord has not offered additional compensation to the resident since its stage 1 complaint response. The offer of £1,470 was reasonable at that stage, but the resident has been living with ongoing mould for 15 months since then. The landlord had the opportunity to proactively revise its compensation for the additional time and trouble expended by the resident as she continued to chase it for updates. It did not do so by its final response.
  26. Considering these factors, the landlord is required to pay additional compensation for the 15 months the resident was affected. It is clear the resident took steps to minimise the effects on her and that she remained concerned about her daughter. This has been calculated at £50 per month for the 15 months, which equates to a total of £750. This award is also in line with our guidance on remedies for significant impact.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord accepted in its stage 1 complaint response that there were delays in handling the complaint. It awarded £150 for the delays. We will consider whether the landlord has done enough to put things right and learnt from outcomes.
  2. The landlord’s complaints policy sets out that it aims to acknowledge complaints at stage 1, in 5-working days. It aims to respond in 10–working days, however extensions can be agreed. It says it will discuss this with the resident and explain the reasons why, and this would be confirmed in writing.
  3. The resident’s initial complaint was made on 12 April 2023 and a stage 1 complaint response was first acknowledged on 24 April 2023. This was 3 working days after the times stated in its policy, which was inappropriate. This acknowledgement said it aimed to complete the response by 31 May 2023 due to the complexities of the case.
  4. There is no evidence the landlord confirmed in writing, in line with its policy, that it still needed more time to complete its investigation until 21 August 2023. The landlord did include the contact information of this Service, but there was no target date a complaint response would be provided. The landlord also wrote to the resident again on 23 November 2023 that a response would be provided by 7 December 2023. This meant it had taken nearly 6 months for it provide a stage 1 complaint response, from the time it initially said it would. It did not manage the resident’s expectations properly and there were large gaps between contacting the resident in writing, even when the complaint response was overdue. Overall, the delay with the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response was inappropriate. It also meant the resident experienced delays in referring her complaint to us.
  5. The Ombudsman’s complaint handling code (the code) states landlords are expected to prioritise complaint handling and a culture of learning from complaints. All relevant staff must be suitably trained in the importance of complaint handling. It is important that complaints are seen as a core service and must be resourced to handle complaints effectively.
  6. The landlord acknowledged the delays at stage 1 and attributed it to having 4 different complaint handlers. As above, the Code sets out that its staff are expected to be suitably trained in complaint handling. The learning identified by the landlord was to raise awareness and training amongst its teams. It would ensure that its systems are being used effectively for its residents. This was fair in the circumstances. It also offered £150 to the resident for the delays, which demonstrated it attempted to put things right. This level of compensation was reflective of our guidance on remedies where there have been delays which affected the resident for this period. There were no further service failings identified after its stage 1 complaint response, which showed the landlord had not repeated errors and learnt from outcome.
  7. As such, we find the landlord has made an offer of reasonable redress in its complaint handling. This finding of reasonable redress is based on the understanding that the financial remedy of £150 offered is paid to the resident, if not already done so.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of reasonable redress for its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must do the following:
    1. A senior member of the landlord’s staff is to apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report. This is to include the continued distress and inconvenience, as well as loss of enjoyment of her home.
    2. Pay the resident £750 in compensation for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble, and loss of enjoyment of her home as identified in this report since its stage 1 complaint response. This is in addition to the £1,470 offer it made on 7 December 2023, if it has not already paid this.
    3. Contact the resident and provide a schedule of works. It should outline any timescales in relation to repairs that remain outstanding.
  2. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to this Service.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord is recommended to re-offer the resident £150 it awarded for its complaint handling, if not already paid.
  2. If it has not done so, the landlord is recommended to review the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management.