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

Plus Dane Housing Limited (202414110)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202414110

Plus Dane Housing Limited

3 July 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Repairs to a bedroom radiator.
    2. Damp and mould, and the associated repairs.
    3. The complaint.

Background

  1. The resident held an assured tenancy with the landlord, which she obtained by mutually exchanging with another tenant in October 2021. The property is a 4 bedroom house. She lives with her partner and children.
  2. Between November 2021 and up until her complaint in April 2024 the resident reported reoccurring damp and mould throughout her property to the landlord. The rooms affected included the bathroom, kitchen and bedrooms. She also logged repairs associated with the mould. The repairs included broken roof tiles, ineffective extractor fans, and moss on the brickwork.
  3. On 22 March 2024 the resident told the landlord that the thermostat on the radiator in her son’s bedroom was broken. She said it was always hot, and she was concerned it was increasing her energy costs. The landlord made an appointment to attend her property on 10 April, but rescheduled this. It then could not complete the repair when it attended, as it did not have the part.
  4. The resident complained to the landlord on 17 April 2024 about its handling of the radiator repair. She said the landlord had not told her it rescheduled the first appointment, and had been unable to complete the repair during its rearranged visit. She said that she had to take 2 days off work for the appointments and the work was incomplete. She also complained about the landlord’s handling of her reports of mould growing on the interior walls, she said that it posed “a serious health risk”.
  5. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint on 5 June 2024. It apologised it had failed to meet the resident’s expectations. It confirmed it had told the resident of the rescheduled appointment on 9 April and completed the radiator repair on 2 May. It outlined its plans for resolving the resident’s damp and mould issues. It said its contractor had “been unable to remove the mould from the furniture” and offered her £450 to replace this.  
  6. The resident escalated her complaint to the landlord on 11 June 2024. She said the mould had been ongoing for 3 years and remained unresolved. The landlord acknowledged this on 12 June, and again 2 July. It apologised for its delay in responding to the complaint and offered £50 in compensation for the “stress and inconvenience”. It said it would respond by 9 August.
  7. The landlord responded to the resident’s escalated complaint on 23 August 2024. It offered her an additional £150 in compensation. It outlined its plans to resolve the issues and explained the learning it had taken from the complaint.
  8. The resident escalated her complaint to this Service. She said she was concerned that the housing conditions were affecting her family’s health and she left the property at the end of March 2025.  She remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s overall handling of the issues and the level of compensation she was offered.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. In her complaint to the Ombudsman, the resident included issues dating from November 2021 onwards. There is no evidence of these concerns being raised with the landlord as a complaint until April 2024. We may not consider a complaint about matters which were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising. In this case, this report will centre on the landlord’s handling of the repair issues the resident raised from January 2023 up until her complaint in April 2024 and its response to these issues.
  2. The resident has raised concerns about the impact the issues may have had on hers and her 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 she considers that her health has been affected by the landlord’s actions or inaction. She also complained that the landlord’s actions potentially caused her to lose earnings. We are unable to assess this. Both of these issues are legal processes, and they are therefore more effectively resolved and remedied through the courts. They will not be considered in this report.
  3. Some of the issues in the resident’s Ombudsman complaint are new. This includes mould returning in the bathroom and bedrooms, spreading onto the carpets and furniture in December 2024. Whilst these issues may be linked to this complaint, they relate to a period after the original complaint. 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.
  4. The resident is advised to raise any new matters as a new complaint with the landlord if they remain a concern. If she remains dissatisfied following the landlord’s responses to any new complaint she has the option of asking the Ombudsman to investigate her concerns.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to a bedroom radiator

  1. Landlords must ensure they carry out repairs within a reasonable timeframe and in accordance with their policy timescales. In this case the landlord’s repairs policy says it will carry out planned repairs within 28 calendar days. It says it aims to ensure that works are completed “right first time”. However, it acknowledges some repairs require pre inspections, or may take more than one visit. It policy also says “If tenants are identified as vulnerable and the repair reported affects their health and wellbeing Plus Dane will provide a more appropriate response time based on the vulnerability, to quickly improve their health or comfort.”
  2. The evidence shows the resident reported the repair in her son’s room to the landlord on 22 March 2024. She asked the landlord to bring a new thermostat valve, so it could fix the problem in the “first visit”. In her complaint on 17 April, the resident said the works were not fixed first time, and the heat in the room was uncomfortable for her son. The landlord’s records show the resident had previously told the landlord that her son had autism.
  3. The landlord acknowledged in its complaint response on 5 June 2024 that its service had failed. Where a landlord says this, we will consider whether it remedied the complaint in line with its policy. In this case it explained the reasons for the perceived missed appointment on 10 April, and for the delay. It said its gas engineer needed to assess the work before bringing parts, and they had to drain the radiator, which took more time. It agreed to feed the resident’s complaint back to its contractors. These responses were appropriate and in line with its policy, which says it will understand what lessons can be learned from complaints to prevent the same issue happening again.
  4. The remedies offered by the landlord showed good practice in trying to resolve and learn from the complaint. In addition to the explanations, it apologised “for the impact this has had on your son, whilst the repair took longer than we initially aimed to complete.” These explanations and apology went someway to remedying issue. However, the landlord failed to fully acknowledge the impact on the resident by not offering any compensation, especially considering it was aware of the household’s vulnerabilities.
  5. The landlord’s policy says “Payments made as a gesture of goodwill following service failure should be considered taking into account the level of impact that they have on a customer and the length of time that the issue has been ongoing”.
  6. The resident has raised concerns about a potential increase in her energy costs as a result of the delayed repair. However, we have not seen any evidence of this. In any case, assessing this would potentially be difficult as the issue affected only 1 of the bedrooms. Instead, when considering appropriate redress, we have considered the landlord’s policy and our remedies guidance.

The landlord’s handling of damp and mould, and the associated repairs.

  1. The Housing Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould (published in October 2021) says a landlord should have a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould and must ensure its response to such matters is timely and reflects the urgency of the issue. The Ombudsman expects that where works may take longer than anticipated, the landlord will take steps to mitigate the potential risks of the damp and mould. In this case the landlord did not demonstrate that it appreciated the urgency of the situation and did not show it took prompt interim actions, such as providing dehumidifiers.
  2. The landlord identified a wide range of repairs as potential causes of the damp and mould, through its inspections. Its policy says it will complete major repairs (which require more planning) within 90 days. In this case it delayed in completing some of the repairs. For example, following its inspection on 18 January 2023, it found the rear bedroom window may have been contributing to the mould. Its records say it completed the window works 173 days later on 10 July 2023, which was a delay of 83 days. There is no evidence of the landlord offering a reasonable explanation for this delay at the time.
  3. The resident also raised concerns in March 2024 that trees were overhanging onto the property, causing moss to form and water to enter the brickwork. This issue, alongside moss in the gutter, was identified in the landlord’s inspection in March 2024. The report said the moss was a possible reason for the mould occurring. In its final complaint response the landlord said it had cleared the moss from the gutter. However, it said it had only just become aware that its contractor had not cleaned the moss from the walls. It was appropriate that it apologised for missing this. It offered a reasonable explanation why it would not do any works to the brickwork, based on the findings of its latest inspection in August 2024.
  4. The landlord acknowledged its inadequate service within its complaint responses. It said “You have been reporting damp and mould in your home since November 2021 and we failed to rectify the issue effectively.” It offered the resident £450 as a goodwill gesture for being unable to clear the mould from her furniture. Then it offered £150 in its final complaint response for its delay in acknowledging her stage 2 complaint and “for the stress, inconvenience, and disruption” the issue had caused her and her family. Whilst it recognised the impact on the resident, it did not apportion this amount. Therefore it was unclear how much it intended to compensate the resident for its handling of her reports of mould, and how much for its complaint handling.
  5. The landlord’s compensation policy says the landlord will exercise its discretion in making compensation awards. It says that it may offer up to £500, and amounts in excess of this. However, its policy is unclear as to what it will specifically offer in the resident’s circumstances. Consequently we have considered what is reasonable in line with our remedies guidance.
  6. Based on our remedies guidance, the amount the landlord offered was not sufficient to recognise the impact on the resident’s household. It is evident that the situation had been challenging for the resident. She had been inconvenienced by taking days off work, and had spent time and trouble chasing the repairs. Such as on 27 July 2023 when she asked the landlord to resolve the hole which it had left in the ceiling after her extractor fan had been relocated.
  7. The landlord offered compensation, apologised, and outlined the works it would do. It also explained the learning it would put in place. The landlord’s reply was partially in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. It offered some positive assurances to the resident. However, the level of compensation it offered was disproportionately low when considered against its own policy and our remedies guidance for a complaint in these circumstances where a resident has been caused unnecessary levels of distress, inconvenience, and frustration.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. Landlords must handle complaints in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) and their complaint policies. The Code says they must acknowledge stage 1 complaints within 5 working days and respond to them within 10 working days. They must acknowledge stage 2 complaint escalations within 5 working days and respond to them within 20 working days. The landlord’s policy complies with the Code.
  2. In this case the landlord’s acknowledgment of the resident’s complaint, and her escalation of it, were both delayed. She initially complained to the landlord on 17 April 2024 and it recorded the complaint on 29 April 2024. It then acknowledged the complaint on 7 May, meaning an overall delay of 7 working days. Although the landlord apologised, it was unreasonable as it did not follow its policy or the Code.
  3. The resident escalated her complaint to the landlord on 11 June 2024. It responded on 12 June and agreed it would formally acknowledge her request to escalate to stage 2 of its process later that day. However, it did not acknowledge her escalated complaint until 2 July. This represents a failure as it sent the reply 16 working days after the resident had requested the escalation, which was not in line with its policy or the Code.
  4. On 2 July 2024 the landlord apologised for its delay in acknowledging the resident’s escalated complaint. It offered her £50 in compensation. Although these actions were reasonable and in line with our remedies guidance, it failed to include this compensation offer within its final complaint response on 23 August. Its final stage 2 response was delayed by 33 working days and there is no evidence of it agreeing an extension. This is not in line with the Code which says: “Any extension must be no more than 20 working days without good reason, and the reason(s) must be clearly explained to the resident.”
  5. Given the failures identified, it was appropriate that the landlord apologised and offered the resident further compensation at stage 2 of its process within its final complaint response on 23 August 2024. However, the landlord did not specify what portion of its £150 goodwill payment was intended to be for its complaint handling failures. The amount it offered was considerably low when taken with the resident’s other issues it compensated for, and therefore not proportionate to recognise the full scale and impact of its failings.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Repairs to a bedroom radiator.
    2. Damp and mould, and the associated repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report the landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £1,000 in compensation (this is inclusive of the £650 landlord has previously offered the resident, if not already paid). This is made up as follows:
    1. £150 for the landlord’s handling of repairs to a bedroom radiator.
    2. £750 for the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould, and the associated repairs.
    3. £100 for the landlord’s complaint handling.  
  2. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of complying with these orders by their respective deadline of 4 weeks.