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

Sovereign Network Homes (202325328)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325328

Sovereign Network Homes

28 August 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould.
  2. The Ombudsman has also decided to investigate the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has lived in the property as an assured tenant since November 2007. The property is a 2-bedroom ground floor flat.
  2. The landlord’s records show the resident reported damp and mould in the living room on 31 January 2023. The resident told the landlord the damp and mould had been reported before and painted over by the landlord. She said several surveyors had inspected her home and told her repairs were needed to the exterior of the property, but nothing had been done. She said the living room was cold and damp and she had a constant cough.
  3. An inspection was carried out on 13 February 2023, which identified further work was needed to check the cavity wall insulation for damp. The check took place in June 2023, and the insulation was removed in November 2023.
  4. On 2 January 2024, the resident complained that the cavity wall insulation had been removed but not replaced. She also said there was mould in the living room, and it was negatively affecting her health. She said nothing had been done despite promises over 6 years and she wanted to know when the problem with damp and mould was going to be fixed.
  5. In its complaint response on 24 February 2024, the landlord recognised there had been a history of mould. It said an inspection on 15 January 2024 had found the radiators were set at the wrong temperature. It also said air vents would be unsealed to improve ventilation and it would arrange a mould wash. It said there had been a service failure as it had not arranged this quickly enough.
  6. The resident escalated her complaint on 29 February 2024. She said she wanted an appointment to discuss the situation as calls and emails were not resolving the problem. She said the landlord’s response was wrong as the damp and mould was not caused by air vents or radiator temperatures, as the problem started in 2012. She also said her furniture was damaged because of the mould, her son’s room was uninhabitable, and he had breathing problems.
  7. On 30 April 2024, the Ombudsman asked the landlord to respond to the resident’s escalated complaint.
  8. In its final response on 10 May 2024, the landlord said it had a report of damp at the end of 2018 but there were no further reports until January 2023. It said it checked the cavity wall insulation in June 2023 and removed it in November 2023. It said it also unblocked air vents, checked there were enough radiators, and took damp readings, which showed rooms were habitable. It said the most recent survey on 3 May 2024, found the damp was caused by the roof. It said it would carry out repairs to the roof and once completed would carry out other work and make good the damage. It apologised for times it had not provided information to the resident, and for how it had dealt with the complaint. It offered £750 compensation.
  9. The resident escalated her complaint to the Ombudsman. She said the landlord had not resolved the damp and mould and did not understand the problem. She said the damp and mould was dangerous.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident said she had reported problems with damp and mould going back several years. The Ombudsman has noted that the resident’s complaint was made on 2 January 2024. The Ombudsman has decided to investigate the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould in the 12 months before the complaint was made. This is because under paragraph 42.c of the Scheme, the Ombudsman may not investigate matters that 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 matter arising.

 

The landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould

  1. Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act (1985), the landlord is responsible for keeping in repair the structure of the property. This means the landlord has a general obligation to repair and maintain the property. The landlord accepted that it was responsible for carrying out repairs to resolve the problem with damp and mould.
  2. The landlord’s statement to the Regulator of Social Housing on its approach to damp and mould in December 2022, said it reacted promptly to reports and had a triage process to prioritise them. It said its teams had received specialist training on spotting damp and mould and how to address it. It said it was committed to responding to reports within 10 working days, with follow-up in 3 months to check the damp and mould had not come back. It said where an inspection was required, it assessed the whole property.
  3. The landlord’s records show it responded to a report of damp and mould made by the resident on 31 January 2023 by arranging an inspection for 13 February 2023, which was 9 working days later. The Ombudsman has found that this was a reasonable response and was in line with the landlord’s commitment to respond to reports of damp and mould within 10 working days.
  4. Following the inspection, the landlord raised a job to have the cavity wall insulation checked for damp. The Ombudsman has not seen a record of when the check was carried out, but in its final response the landlord said it took place in June 2023. This was over 4 months after the report of damp and mould was made and the Ombudsman has found this was an excessive delay. In addition, the Ombudsman has seen no evidence of communication with the resident between February and June 2023. Because of this, the Ombudsman has found there was a failure by the landlord to carry out agreed work in a reasonable time. It also failed to have follow-up contact with the resident to check whether there continued to be a problem with damp and mould.
  5. The inspection of the cavity wall insulation in June 2023 found that it was damp, and the landlord arranged for it to be removed. However, this work was not carried out until November 2023. The Ombudsman has seen no explanation of why there was a 5-month delay between identifying the insulation was damp and it being removed. The Ombudsman has also seen no evidence of communication with the resident about the work or reasons for a delay. The Ombudsman has found this was a further excessive delay and a failure to communicate with the resident.
  6. On 2 January 2024, the resident complained that the cavity wall insulation had been removed but not replaced. She said she was concerned about rainwater and pests getting into the holes that had not been filled when the insulation was removed. She wanted an update on what was happening. She also said there continued to be a problem with mould in the living room and there was a smell of damp, which was not good for the health of her and her son. She said nothing was being done despite making phone calls and complaints.
  7. The Ombudsman has not seen a record of the contacts made by the resident or a response from the landlord, but on 3 January 2024 the landlord raised a job to treat mould in multiple areas as it noted it was “having a detrimental effect on the health” of the resident. It also raised a job for an inspection, which was carried out on 15 January 2024. The inspection found air bricks had been sealed by the operatives who had removed the cavity wall insulation, which it said meant there was no ventilation. It also found 3 radiators did not appear to be big enough to heat the rooms, and there was a strong smell of damp in the second bedroom.
  8. On 2 February 2024, the resident told the landlord she would like to move as she felt the damp and mould was dangerous, as her son had a bad cough and skin irritations.
  9. In its complaint response on 24 February 2024, which was 7 weeks after the resident complained, the landlord acknowledged a history of mould in the property. It said the inspection on 15 January 2024 had identified a potential issue with the radiators, and these had now been set to the right temperature. It also said it had recommended that the air vents were unsealed to improve ventilation. It said because it had not acted on this in a timely manner, there had been a service failure, and it had now arranged for the air vents to be unsealed and for a mould wash to take place as a matter of urgency.
  10. The resident escalated her complaint on 29 February 2024. She said the mould was not due to the air vents being sealed as the damp and mould had been a problem for several years. She also said there was damage to internal walls that could not be sorted with a mould wash, her sofa was damage by mould, and her son’s room was uninhabitable.
  11. The Ombudsman has found that the actions the landlord took following the report of damp and mould in January 2024 were reasonable actions in response to a first report of damp and mould. However, as the landlord acknowledged in its complaint response, there was a history of damp and mould in the property. Because of this, and in line with the landlord’s stated approach, the Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to carry out a whole property assessment at this stage. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence that this was done. This was a failure by the landlord and was not in line with its stated approach, especially as the resident had reported that the damp and mould was having a detrimental effect on her and her son’s health.
  12. On 16 April 2024, the landlord inspected the property again and took moisture readings. This found the level of moisture in all rooms was acceptable, but it also found there was water ingress in the living room from a “failed roof” and a chimney that was not capped off correctly and had poor pointing.
  13. After the Ombudsman contacted the landlord on 30 April 2024 about the resident’s escalated complaint, the landlord sent a final response on 10 May 2024. The landlord accepted it had taken too long to resolve the damp and mould and acknowledged that it was still a problem. It said it had now identified the damp and mould was caused by the roof, and as the roof was due for replacement in 2025, it would look to bring this work forward. It said once the repair to the roof was complete, it would reinject insulation into the wall, complete repointing works, and make good areas damaged by the damp and mould. The landlord offered £150 for the delay in taking action to resolve the damp, £300 to acknowledge the damp had not been resolved after 15 months, and £150 to acknowledge the distress caused.
  14. The Ombudsman has found the proposal to replace the roof and carry out remedial works was reasonable. However, the landlord says in its stated approach to damp and mould that its teams had received specialist training on spotting damp and mould. In this instance, the landlord’s teams did not spot the cause of the damp and mould until May 2024, which was 15 months after the first report. This was despite several visits to the property in response to reports of damp and mould between February 2023 and May 2024.
  15. Combined with earlier delays in carrying out agreed work and a lack of communication, the failure to identify the cause of the damp and mould sooner was maladministration by the landlord. This caused inconvenience to the resident, who had to chase the landlord for the repairs to be done. It also caused distress as the resident and her son were living in a property, which the landlord noted had a strong damp smell. The landlord offered compensation totalling £600, which comprised of £150 for delay in taking action to resolve the damp, £300 to acknowledge the 15-month period the damp had not been resolved, and £150 to acknowledge the distress caused.
  16. It is the Ombudsman’s view that this was insufficient in the circumstances, as the delay affected the resident’s enjoyment of her home. Because of this, the Ombudsman has determined the resident should be additionally compensated for the period when the damp and mould was not resolved. This should be based on 10% of her rent between when the report of damp and mould was made in January 2023 until the landlord’s final response in May 2024. The compensation is inclusive of the £300 already offered for the period the damp and mould had not been resolved, but in addition to the £150 for the delay in taking action, and the £150 for distress.
  17. Records provided by the landlord show weekly rent was £124.82 from 1 February 2023 to 31 March 2023, £133.56 from 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024, and £143.84 from 1 April 2024 to 10 May 2024. Compensation should be paid as follows:
    1. 8 weeks at 10% of £124.82 = £99.84.
    2. 52 weeks at 10% of £133.56 = £694.72.
    3. 4 weeks at 10% of £143.84 = £57.52.
    4. Total = £852.08.
  18. As the repairs have not yet been completed, the landlord should consider additional compensation based on this calculation from the time of the final response until the repairs are completed.
  19. The resident told the landlord that her furniture had been damaged by the damp and mould. In August 2024, the resident told the Ombudsman that she had to dispose of her sofa because of the mould damage. In these circumstances, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to provide the resident with information on how to make an insurance claim. The Ombudsman has not seen evidence that the landlord provided information to the resident. Because of this, the Ombudsman recommends the landlord provides the resident with information on how to make an insurance claim.
  20. The Ombudsman has noted that the flat above the resident’s is a leasehold property. The resident told the Ombudsman in August 2024 that some work had been completed but work on the roof had not been done as agreement was needed from the leaseholder. She said the work done had improved the damp and mould, but she was concerned it would return. The Ombudsman recognises the difficulties in progressing work where there are different ownership considerations.
  21. However, the resident has been given no indication of when the work will be done, which is causing her further concern and distress. The landlord must communicate to the resident any remaining outstanding work that is required and provide an indicative timeline for its completion. The resident has previously said she wants to move because of the damp and mould. Although the landlord has said all rooms are habitable, the resident continues to be concerned about the effect damp and mould could have on the health of her and her son. Because of this, the Ombudsman recommends the landlord conduct a further property assessment to establish the habitability of the property and share the results with the resident.

 

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy says it will provide a response at stage 1 within 10 working days. When the resident is dissatisfied with the stage 1 response, it will send a final response within 20 working days. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
  2. The resident made a complaint about the landlord’s handling of her reports of damp and mould on 2 January 2024. Records show the landlord responded on 24 February 2024, which was 39 working days later. The Ombudsman has found that this was a failure by the landlord to meet the commitments in its complaints policy and the Complaint Handling Code.
  3. The resident was dissatisfied with the response and escalated her complaint on 29 February 2024. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence that the landlord acknowledged the escalation request. When the landlord did not respond, the resident contacted the Ombudsman, who wrote to the landlord on 30 April 2024. The landlord then sent its final response on 10 May 2024. This was 49 working days after the escalation request was made and was a second failure by the landlord to meet the commitments in its complaints policy and Complaint Handling Code.
  4. The landlord acknowledged the failures in its complaint handling in its final response. It said the stage 1 response did not cover the history of the issues reported, and it failed to contact the resident when she escalated her complaint. It offered £150 to acknowledge the failures in its complaint handling, which the Ombudsman agrees was reasonable redress in the circumstances.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord must communicate to the resident any remaining outstanding work that is required and provide an indicative timeline for its completion within 2 weeks of the date of this report.
  2. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £1,152.02 in compensation. This is inclusive of the £300 already offered for the period the damp and mould had not been resolved. The total compensation comprises:
    1. £852.02 for the loss of enjoyment of the property.
    2. £150 as previously offered by the landlord for the delay in taking action, if not already paid.
    3. £150 as previously offered by the landlord for distress, if not already paid.
  3. The compensation should be paid directly to the resident, and not offset against any arrears. The landlord should provide evidence of compliance with the order to pay compensation within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord consider additional compensation, based on a percentage rent calculation, from the time of the final response until the repairs are completed.
  2. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord provides the resident with information on how to make an insurance claim.
  3. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord conduct a further property assessment to establish the habitability of the property and share the results with the resident.
  4. If it has not already been paid, the landlord should reoffer the £150 it previously offered for its complaint handling failure.