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

Southern Housing (202318776)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202318776

Southern Housing

28 April 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 concerns the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a bed bug and mice infestation.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord.
  2. The resident reported a bed bug infestation on 17 April 2023 and a mouse infestation on 24 April 2023.
  3. The resident’s Housing Officer raised a complaint for her on 30 May 2023 about the landlord not addressing the infestation and the lack of updates. She said she was seeking compensation for poor service and to replace damaged items including a bed.
  4. The evidence shows the landlord’s contractors visited 3 times from 21 June to 17 July 2023 during which time they observed no mouse activity and treated the bed bugs.
  5. The resident’s Housing Officer re-raised the resident’s complaint on 17 July 2023 as the May 2023 complaint was sent to an unused mailbox in error. The resident added to her complaint on 25 July 2023. She asked the landlord for £661.20 for the cost of bed bug treatment she had arranged herself and which had been done on 13 June 2023.
  6. The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response on 3 October 2023. It said its contractors had not been able to gain access, so the job for the mouse and bed bug infestation was closed in June 2023 (it subsequently explained in its stage 2 response that this was incorrect as access was given).
  7. The landlord said it would not pay the bed bug treatment costs. It signposted her to her home insurance for damaged belongings. However, it acknowledged initial delays raising the works and responding to the complaint, along with poor communication. It apologised and offered £130 compensation.
  8. The resident remained dissatisfied and asked the Service to escalate her complaint on 5 October 2023. She repeated her original concerns and did not provide any new information. On 9 November 2023 the landlord issued a final complaint response. It acknowledged its stage 1 response was issued outside its timescales and had incorrectly said its contractors were unable to gain access. It accepted that the April 2023 pest reports had not been addressed until June 2023 and apologised for its poor service and impact on the resident. It refused to pay the resident’s private bed bug treatment costs and explained it would only address communal bed bug issues. Nonetheless, it offered £460 for its service failures, and the inconvenience, and time and trouble they caused the resident.
  9. The resident brought her complaint to the Ombudsman seeking further compensation from the landlord.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has complained the landlord’s actions had a detrimental impact on her mental 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. This is a legal process, and the resident may wish to seek legal advice if she wants to pursue this option. It will not be considered in this report.

Handling of reports of a pest infestation and the associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s pest procedure states it will treat pests, which present health and safety risks, such as mice. It says residents are responsible for dealing with low-risk pests including bed bugs unless “this is necessary due to the vulnerability of a resident”. In the case of single property infestations, high–risk pests are to be treated “without delay” with no timeframe for multiple property or communal infestations. The procedure is silent on the definition of ‘vulnerability’.
  2. The resident complained about complaint handling delays and her April 2023 reports of an infestation of bed bugs and mice being unresolved. On 3 October 2023, the landlord’s stage 1 response said its contractors had not gained access at visits scheduled in June and July 2023, so the job had been closed. This was a failing as the evidence shows the resident agreed access and at the time of the response, the treatment was complete.
  3. It however reasonably signposted the resident to her home insurance for the damaged belongings, as tenants are responsible for their own belongings and the landlord’s website makes clear they should have home contents insurance. It also appropriately apologised for its delays with initially raising pest control works and its complaint response, and for poor communication.
  4. The landlord’s final complaint response put right the error in its initial response about access. It appropriately acknowledged its delays in its complaint handling and resolving the substantive issue as well as its failure to keep the resident updated. It apologised for its failings and increased its compensation to £460 (£100 for complaint handling, £50 for delays, £60 for service failures, and £250.00 for inconvenience, and time and trouble). Putting right its mistake and increasing the compensation offer showed a willingness to build trust into its relationship with the resident and was reasonable.
  5. At both complaint stages, the landlord explained it would not reimburse the resident for the bed bug treatment she had arranged on 13 June 2023. It explained this was because such treatment was her responsibility, in line with its pest policy. This had already been confirmed to the resident in emails on 19 April and 22 May 2023. It acknowledged its pest controllers had treated the bed bugs, but they had been arranged for the mice problem. The landlord’s explanation reflected its policy.
  6. However, the evidence shows the landlord was aware of the resident’s vulnerabilities, including obsessive compulsive disorder, and the impact on her. Its pest policy states there are some circumstances in which it will treat pest issues such as bed bugs, due to a resident’s vulnerability. There is no evidence it considered this aspect of its policy and the resident’s situation when it made its decision not to reimburse her. Because of that its decision cannot be said to be robust or sound and was a failing.
  7. The resident has told the Service the landlord resolved the bed bug issue after the local council’s environmental health services wrote to it in late May 2023. The landlord has told the Service it did not receive this correspondence but was aware from discussion with the resident that it may be contacted. We have not seen evidence of contact made by the local council and therefore, the Service is unable to comment on the landlord’s reasons for treating the bed bugs.
  8. Overall, the landlord appropriately acknowledged mistakes, apologised for service failures, and offered compensation for its complaint handling and the substantive issue. The resident has told the Service the infestations were resolved in 2023. However, the evidence does not show that it considered all relevant factors when applying its policy including its records about the resident’s vulnerability. This means the complaint was not resolved fully.

 Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of reports of a pest infestation.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report the landlord must pay the resident £200 compensation for its handling of reports of a pest infestation as well as for the distress and inconvenience caused. This sum is in addition to the £460 compensation offered by the landlord. It must provide evidence of compliance with the order by the deadline.
  2. Within 6 weeks the landlord must revisit its decision about reimbursing the resident’s £661.20 bed bug treatment costs in light of the findings in this report. It must consider if the resident’s circumstances merited the application of an exception under its pest procedure. If so, reimburse the costs of the treatment. It must clearly explain its decision and reasons to the resident.
  3. Evidence of compliance with these orders must be provided by their respective deadlines.