Southern Housing (202304187)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202304187

Optivo (now Southern Housing)

26 June 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
1. a leak from the roof.
2. damp and mould in her property.

Background and summary of events

The resident is an assured tenant of the housing association landlord. She has been a tenant for over 10 years. She occupies a 2 bedroom first floor maisonette with her 6 children. The resident has type 1 diabetes. She has a disabled son and two other children with additional needs. She has said that her mental health has deteriorated which she attributes to her housing conditions.
The resident says that she has been experiencing problems in the property for 10 years due to leaks from the roof. She said that there is damp and mould in the flat and that she has not been able to use one of the bedrooms for over 2 years.
In March 2022, the landlord arranged for its surveyor to inspect the property. Their report concluded that there was black mould in the property which they concluded was due to condensation mildew. The landlord agreed to conduct mould treatment to all affected walls.
Following a complaint by the resident on 6 April 2022, the landlord raised a job on 7 April for contractors to erect scaffolding so that they could inspect the roof for damage. The landlord raised internal works to treat the mould in the property. It recorded that the resident agreed to the landlord’s informal complaint process on 8 April 2022.
The landlord did not progress this in April and May 2022. This was because the contractors said that there would be a delay in erecting the scaffolding. As an alternative, they said that they would try to access the roof using a cherry picker. However, on two separate days when they tried to reach the roof using the cherry picker, they could not do so because there were parked cars obstructing access.
On the 27 June 2022, the contractors told the landlord that they had approved an order for scaffolding and the scaffolding went up on 7 July 2022. On 6 July, the landlord asked the contractor to inspect the loft space as well as the roof as the resident had said that another operative had found that there was an issue with the beams.
The contractors told the landlord that they had attended on the 7 July 2022 and their operatives replaced cracked tiles to the roof but could not find another source of water ingress. The resident later reported that contractors had been there for less than an hour and had not inspected the loft space.
The contractors returned later that month but could not get access to the property as the resident was not in. They accessed the roof and undertook some further repairs to tiles. They recommended that the landlord include the resident’s roof onto the programme for roof renewal in the next 12-18 months. The landlord agreed to this on 21 July 2022 and said it would continue to repair the roof as far as possible, until it was replaced.
On the 4 July 2022, the landlord raised works to repairs cracks in the walls of the property and for the affected walls to be replastered.
On the 18 July 2022, the contractors emailed the landlord to say that it would be difficult, and potentially unsafe, for interior works to go ahead with the family in occupation. It asked if the landlord could arrange to decant the family to temporary accommodation while it carried out the works. It said that the work would be likely to take a full week.
The works to the interior of the property did not go ahead during July and August 2022 as the resident remained in occupation and there was no decision about a decant.
On 23 November 2022, the resident raised a complaint with the landlord. She said that the roof was leaking as it had done for the last 10 years. The contractors had attended and conducted repairs, but the roof continued to leak when it rained. She said that her property was uninhabitable.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint the following day and said that it would respond by 12 December 2022.
The landlord made a formal request to its resettlement team on 30 November 2022 that it find decant temporary accommodation for the family.
On 6 December 2022, the resident contacted the landlord to chase the decant. She said that the property was very cold and the mould in the property was making her and her children ill.
On 8 December 2022, the landlord inspected the loft area in the resident’s property. The landlord has not provided this Service with a report of the loft inspection, however the resident reported that she could see that the loft area was very damp.
On 12 December 2022, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said that:
1. It was sorry for the issues the resident had experienced due to the roof leaking. The roof replacement was due to start towards the end of January. It hoped to complete this by end of March 2023.
2. The internal works to the property would go ahead between 9 and 22 January 2023. It would need to temporarily decant the resident while it undertook the works.
3. It offered £415 in compensation.
The following day, the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint as she thought that the compensation offered was too low. She also said that she needed to replace damaged items including flooring, mattresses, wallpaper, and clothing.
In January 2023, contractors completed a mould treatment to the property. The works to replaster walls did not go ahead as planned on 9 January 2023. This was because as the landlord had delayed in authorising a decant and thereafter there was difficulty in finding accommodation suitable for the resident and her 6 children. The resident then asked that the roofing work go ahead as planned, but that it did not arrange decant accommodation for her until she was satisfied that the roof was watertight. She would then move out so that the landlord could arrange the internal works.
The landlord arranged a stage 2 panel meeting to review the resident’s complaint on 4 January 2023. On 26 January 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response:
1. It apologised for the time it had taken to address the damp and mould and leaks in the property.
2. It confirmed that it would replace the roof by March 2023 and that the resident would remain in occupation during this time. Once it had completed the works to the roof, it would decant her to temporary accommodation while it arranged internal works to the property.
3. It increased the offer of compensation to £965.

Post complaint.

The roof replacement was delayed due to the weather and the need for asbestos testing of the roof tiles. The landlord completed the roof renewal at the end of April 2023.
The resident contacted the landlord on 26 June 2023 to say that she was ready for the internal work to begin on the flat.
There was a delay between June and September 2023 in arranging for the works to start in the property. Initially, this was because the contractors needed to requote for the works and then there was an issue with accessing the property. The contractors requoted for the works in September and asked that the works take place during the first two weeks of December 2023.
The landlord had further difficulties in sourcing suitable accommodation for the resident. The resident then reported a further roof leak in November 2023. She said that there was water coming down the bedroom wall, through the extractor fan and that there was mould developing on the wall in the other bedroom. She asked that the landlord put internal works on hold again until it had repaired the roof.
The landlord has said that it planned to erect scaffolding to start work on the roof on 13 June 2024. Delays were due to difficulties accessing the ground and basement floor flat.
The scaffolding was put up on 13 June 2024 and contractors attended that week to inspect the roof. The resident says that she has not been told what repairs, if any, had been completed following the inspection. She has said that the scaffolding has since been removed.
The landlord has not yet started internal works, given the outstanding roof works. It could not look for suitable decant accommodation until it had a start date for the internal works. The resident has said that she would now like to be decanted and for the internal works to start, particularly as her children’s school year will finish soon for the summer holidays.

Assessment and findings

When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its dispute resolution principles. These are high-level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.
2. put things right, and.
3. learn from outcomes.
The Ombudsman published a special report in relation to the landlord following an investigation carried out under paragraph 49 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme which allows the Ombudsman to conduct further investigation into whether there is a systemic failure. The investigation related to decisions on 77 cases that were decided between 30 June and 31 October 2023.
The special report found common points of failure and made recommendations for improvement. The Ombudsman is currently working with the landlord in relation to its improvement plan.
Some of the events in this case took place over the same period as the cases determined in that investigation and some of the findings of the special report are relevant to this case. While we have referred to these in this report, we have not made any orders or recommendations that would duplicate those made to the landlord in the Ombudsman’s special report.

Scope of the investigation

The resident has informed this Service that she has been reporting that her roof has been leaking, and that there is damp and mould in the property, since 2014. While details of earlier reports have been helpful in providing a clear picture of the history of this complaint to date, where they are referenced in this report, this will be for contextual purposes only. This is because the Ombudsman is limited to investigating only those issues that have progressed through a landlord’s complaints procedure and then brought to the attention of the Ombudsman within a reasonable period. As such, the scope of this investigation will be limited to consideration of the landlord’s handling of the various repair reports and its complaints handling from March 2022 onwards.
Throughout the timeframe investigated, the resident told the landlord that the mould in the property and the lack of action taken to address this was having an impact on her mental health and the physical and mental health of her young children. While this Service has considered the impact on the resident and her young family, we do not have the expertise to make findings on matters such as causation and liability or to award damages. These matters are best determined by a court. The Ombudsman can, however, consider whether the landlord appropriately assessed the resident and her household’s needs when considering the issues raised and any distress and inconvenience caused to them.
The Ombudsman understands that the resident had reported leaks from the roof following its replacement, and since this complaint had been closed and the matter referred to this Service. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to the involvement of this Service. Any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord and progressed as a new complaint if necessary.

   The landlord’s record-keeping

The Ombudsman expects landlords to maintain a robust record of contacts and repairs. This is because clear, accurate, and easily accessible records provide an audit trail and enables landlords to identify and respond to problems when they arise.
It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the landlord has failed to keep adequate records, which has affected this service’s ability to carry out a thorough investigation, as highlighted at various points throughout this report. This was a failure by the landlord and contributed to the other failures found in this report.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak from her roof

The landlord’s repairs policy says that it will respond to emergency repairs within 24 hours. The policy does not specify timescales on which the landlord would respond to non-urgent repairs, but that it will do so as quickly as possible.
After the resident’s report of a further roof leak in April 2022, there was a 3 month delay in the landlord inspecting the property’s roof. The landlord’s contractors said that this was because of the limited availability of scaffolding at this time. The Ombudsman acknowledges that when inspections are dependent on access arrangements being in place, delays can be outside of the landlord’s control. We would, however, expect landlord to explore other solutions. In this case, the landlord’s contractors did take reasonable steps to find alternative means of accessing the roof at this time, using a cherry picker, but this was unsuccessful. However, there is no evidence that the landlord risk assessed the impact of the delays on the resident at this time, nor that it took any action to mitigate the impact.
While this Service acknowledges that there were some occasions when appointments were pre-arranged and the resident was not at home, there were ongoing issues with the resident not having advance notice of appointments arranged by contractors. Neither the landlord nor its contractors told the resident in advance that scaffolding would be put up on 7 July 2022. When the contractors undertook repairs to the roof on 7 July 2022, they did not inspect the loft space as specifically requested by the landlord. The landlord took steps to follow this up with the contractor and they agreed to reattend. However, once again they did not contact the resident in advance and therefore when they attended later that month she was not at home. It did not rearrange a loft inspection until December 2022, 5 months later. A landlord is responsible to the resident for meeting its repair obligations. The evidence shows that there was a lack of management and oversight of the repair by the landlord, which led to gaps in service delivery.
In July 2022, the landlord agreed to replace the roof as part of a planned works scheme within the financial year. Planned works are often major works that are scheduled to take place at defined intervals to maintain, repair, or replace external or common parts of the building and structures. Social landlords have limited resources and are expected to manage these resources responsibly, to the benefit of all their residents. It can be more resource-effective for landlords to replace items such as roofs as part of a planned programme of works rather than on an ad-hoc basis. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to take this approach.
The Ombudsman expects landlords to consider interim works where there will be a delay until a planned programme of works takes place and to take steps to mitigate the impact on the household caused by delays. In this case, the landlord had agreed that it would undertake repairs pending the roof replacement.
However, the resident has said that when she reported leaks, she was not satisfied that the landlord’s contractors thoroughly investigated the leak or that they had completed works to an acceptable standard. While the Ombudsman cannot assess the standard of workmanship, it would have been good practice for the landlord or its contractors to feed back to the resident what its assessment of the problem was, and what steps it had taken to repair it so that she could be reassured that matters were in hand.
The roof replacement took longer than expected due to matters outside of the landlord’s control including poor weather and a need for an asbestos test. The landlord replaced the roof in April 2023.
Overall, the landlord’s decision to replace the roof, following the inspection of 7 July 2022 was reasonable. There were also delays to the landlord inspecting and renewing the resident’s roof, which were outside of the landlord’s control. However, there was a lack of communication with the resident which led to missed appointments, causing further delays in its service delivery. The landlord did not keep the resident updated as to the works undertaken, which was unreasonable.
The Ombudsman therefore makes a finding of maladministration in relation to this aspect of the complaint. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance recommends that a financial remedy of between £100 and £1000 is proportionate where a finding of maladministration has been made. This can include an uplift where there are aggravating factors that would justify an increased award to reflect the specific impact on the resident. Examples of aggravating factors can include where a resident has young children, particularly where the resident has a dependent or dependents with disabilities.
The Ombudsman considers that the landlord’s offer of compensation is not proportionate to the detriment caused to the resident. An order has been included below for a further payment of compensation, which includes an uplift due to the resident’s circumstances.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property

Under the tenancy agreement, the landlord must complete repairs to the structure of the property, which will include the roof, internal walls, and ceilings. This mirrors the statutory provisions under s11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The landlord’s repair policy states it will complete (or make safe) emergency repairs within 24 hours. It will undertake all other repairs ‘as soon as possible.’
The Housing Act 2004 stipulates that landlords must assess hazards and risks in their rented homes, in line with its assessment tool, the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Section 5 of the Government’s Decent Homes Standard guidance says the social landlords must ensure that their properties are free of category 1 hazards under the HHSRS, as the existence of such hazards should be a trigger for remedial action. The HHSRS lists damp and mould as potential hazards.
The resident reported damp and mould on 3 February 2022 and asked for an urgent inspection. The records show that a surveyor visited on 3 March 2022 and told her that it would arrange a mould treatment for the condensation and mould in the property. Photographs of the property in the report show black mould on the walls in the bedroom and high moisture readings. While it was right for the landlord to arrange a mould treatment, it is also reasonable to expect the landlord to undertake a thorough investigation to find the root cause, particularly when it is clear the issue was recurring, as in the resident’s case.
The landlord has not provided this Service with a damp and mould policy. It does provide self-help information on its website about dealing with damp and mould. It also says that where there is damp and mould in a property, a resident should contact it at once. However, it does not give guidance on timescales or action plans for addressing damp and mould reports. The landlord has not included this information in any of the repair policies or procedures that the landlord provided to this Service.
The resident made clear, at an early stage, that she believed the mould within the property was affecting the health of her children. She told the landlord that she had a young baby with disabilities, and 5 other children, some of whom had health needs. Given the presence of vulnerable children in the property, the Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to have prioritised its response. This would have been in line with its repairs policy which says that where a resident or their household has a medical condition, it will investigate the matter promptly and work in partnership with contractors and the resident to resolve the matter. It says that “in all instances, the resident’s welfare, health and safety will be the landlord’s primary concern.”
The information on the landlord’s website also says that when it inspects for damp and mould, it will also install data loggers to record heat, humidity, and moisture levels in a property. There is no evidence that the landlord took this action. The landlord arranged a mould wash, and the records show that it completed this in April 2022 and January 2023. There were other mould treatments scheduled between these two dates which did not go ahead due to access issues, which were matters outside of the landlord’s control. However, it did not raise internal works to the property until July 2022, 3 months after the property’s inspection.
The contractors informed the landlord, when it inspected the property in July 2022, that it would not be possible to do the works while the resident remained in occupation. It took until November 2022 for the landlord to progress a request for a decant. The landlord has not provided an explanation for the delay. There were further delays with the contractors taking time to confirm when they could undertake the works, and thereafter by the landlord not finding a suitable decant property.
The Ombudsman acknowledges the challenges the landlord faced in finding suitable decant accommodation for the resident and her six children. Hotel accommodation was inappropriate as the resident and her children would not be able to occupy the same room. There was also difficulty in finding temporary housing in the locality so that her children could access transport routes to school and for her son to attend regular healthcare appointments.
As part of its complaints resolution, the landlord did explore whether it could refer the resident for a ‘priority move’ in line with its policy. This is a recommendation for a permanent move where a resident is in urgent housing need. As the local authority manages the landlord’s housing stock through its housing register, any decision about housing allocations would be for them to make. While this did not form part of the resident’s complaint, the landlord did take steps, in line with its policy, to explore whether a priority move would be a possibility for the resident. However, it later concluded that she did not meet the criteria.
The resident then said that she did not want the landlord to temporarily decant her from the property until she was satisfied that the roof was watertight. This is because she was concerned that further leaks would damage the internal works which would lead to more repairs and extra upheaval for the family. Given the length of time the problems with the roof have been ongoing, and her concerns about the disruption to her children, the resident’s position was understandable.
The landlord completed the roof works in April 2023, and it would have been reasonable for it to then arrange the internal works and decant the resident. However, the records show that the follow-on works were poorly coordinated, with the landlord chasing the contractors for start dates. The landlord’s efforts to minimise the disruption to the resident by planning a decant around school holidays were thwarted because of poor communication and planning.
This Service would have expected to see records to show that the landlord was considering every means to resolve the issue with the condensation, damp, and mould in the property. This could have included exploring ventilation and insulation solutions. The records do not support this. The resident had raised concerns with the landlord about inadequate insulation in the loft, her high heating bills, and the cold condition of the property. The resident had also reported that the loft space was very damp and her roof insulation saturated. The outcome of the loft inspection of December 2022 has not been provided to this Service or to the resident, therefore it is not possible to determine what follow-on works, if any, were identified.
This Service acknowledges that damp and mould can be a complex issue to resolve and requires a co-ordinated and holistic approach. This said, since the resident raised her complaint in April 2022, the works are still outstanding, 26 months later. There was a lack of proactive management of the repairs process by the landlord. Overall, the landlord did not meet its repairing obligations towards the resident. She was caused avoidable distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble by both the delays and the landlord’s failure to keep her informed.
This failure was compounded by the presence of young vulnerable children in the household, some of whom have health needs and disabilities. The resident had informed the landlord on many occasions that she was worried about the risk to the health of her children, particularly her disabled son and her 4 year old daughter, who has asthma. There was a lack of urgency with the landlord’s approach to the works and there was no assessment of the risk that the property presented to the family. These failures were significant and have had a seriously detrimental impact on the resident.
Considering all the circumstances, the Ombudsman finds that there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property.
The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance recommends that a financial remedy of upwards of £1000 is proportionate where a finding of severe maladministration is made. As noted earlier in this report, this can include an uplift where there are aggravating factors that would justify an increased award to reflect the specific impact on the resident.
In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord offered £965 in compensation. When the resident asked if her complaint resolution could include an amount to compensate her for items damaged due to the mould in the property, the landlord told her that its policies did not allow for this. It is not clear why the landlord did not refer this to its insurers. Given that more than 12 months have passed since the items were damaged, a claim may now be out of time. Overall, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord’s award of compensation was inadequate.

The impact on the resident

In correspondence with the landlord and this service, the resident detailed extensive damage to the property and her possessions. This includes:
1. 2 mattresses that she had to dispose of as they were damaged by mould.
2. The carpet in one of the bedrooms which is mouldy.
3. Children’s clothing that she had to dispose as they were mould damaged and smelled of mildew.
4. A television that was no longer functioning due to moisture.
The resident has also reported that she has had to pay high heating bills.
She has described that she has had to spend time chasing up works and had to make a complaint for the works to start. This had caused her distress and frustration particularly as, having completed the landlord’s complaints procedure in January 2023, the damp and mould works are still outstanding, 17 months later.
The resident has also described how the disrepair has caused a loss of enjoyment of her home. She said that:
1. Her children could not have friends to visit given the condition of their home.
2. Her and three of her children have had to sleep in the living room for more than 2 years because one of the bedrooms is unusable. Not being able to use this bedroom increased the impact of the overcrowding on the resident and her young family.
3. She has not been able to decorate her home because, despite the landlord completing mould washes, and the resident trying to clean the mould herself, the mould returns every couple of months. She is embarrassed to have visitors because of the appearance of the stripped walls and the smell of damp.
It is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the landlord’s failures caused significant detriment to the resident, for which the further redress is warranted.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak to her roof.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The Ombudsman orders that, within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is to:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The apology is to be made by the chief executive officer and the resident is to be given the choice as to whether the apology is given verbally or in writing.
2. Pay the resident £2100 which is compensation based on 20% of the rent charged between 10 April 2022 and 8 November 2023 (excluding dates when the resident asked for works to be suspended). This is to compensate the resident for the loss of a bedroom during the period of the repairs.
3. Pay the resident a further £1400 compensation which consists of:
  1. £700 for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the failures found in this report.
  2. £700 to contribute to the replacement of her damaged possessions and other costs outlined above.
4. Provide the Ombudsman with evidence of these payments.
The landlord is to:
1. Contact the resident within 2 weeks of the date of this report to discuss if she is now ready to decant the property to allow the internal works to proceed.
2. If so, it should write to her within 2 weeks of the discussion to confirm the schedule of the internal works (including dates), the period of decant necessary, a point of contact for her during this process, and how it will ensure that temporary accommodation is suitable for the family and has good transport links to meet their day-to-day needs.
3. Within 3 weeks of the discussion, the landlord is to update this Service in relation to the decant.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is to:
1. arrange an appointment for a heat loss survey at a time that is convenient to the resident. This is to include an inspection of the loft and its insulation.
2. inspect the property again for damp and mould and look at any solutions available to increase ventilation in the property.
Within 6 weeks of the date of this report, where available, the landlord is to provide this Service and the resident with a copy of the report following the inspections. The landlord should arrange for the recommended works in the report to take place while the resident is decanted from the property.
Within 2 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is to either confirm with this Service and the resident that it will either arrange to redecorate the affected rooms in the property once the works are completed or provide the resident with decorating vouchers to cover all affected rooms.

Recommendation

As the resident is overcrowded in the property, the landlord should consider providing the resident with advice and assistance to ensure that she has maximised her rehousing options.