Stonewater Limited (202413590)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202413590
Stonewater Limited
12 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
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
- Faults with the storage heaters and the time taken to replace them.
- Damp and mould and associated repairs.
- We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.
Background
- The resident has an assured tenancy with the landlord. She has lived in the 3-bed house with her children since 2021. The landlord has confirmed its knowledge of the children’s breathing vulnerabilities.
- The resident reported problems with mould and the storage heaters on 7 September 2023. The contractor cleaned and treated the mould on the bedroom ceiling on 9 October 2023, and on 21 November 2023 it looked at the mould and condensation in the bathroom. It suspected a roof leak and referred the matter to a sub-contractor. The contractor assessed the storage heaters on 20 September 2023 and made an appointment to replace them on 16 October 2023 however this was rescheduled due to no access. It was passed to a sub-contractor who completed repairs on the heaters.
- The resident complained to the landlord on 27 November 2023. She said:
- she had been told 2 new heaters were needed but was still waiting
- the lack of heating was impacting the health of her children who were born prematurely and struggled with the cold
- she had bought heaters to keep the house warm and wanted the landlord to reimburse her for these as it had not offered temporary heaters
- she had reported mould and was told the roof needed inspecting, the insulation was mouldy, the roof was dripping, and mould was growing, and she wanted the landlord to resolve these issues
- the property smelt of damp and she had been told the children should not be living in the conditions they were
- The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint on 19 December 2023, when it:
- apologised for the resident having to chase for updates on the heating problem, and acknowledged the stress this had caused
- apologised for not supplying temporary heaters and confirmed it would take this into account when calculating the compensation
- confirmed the heaters would be replaced on 2 January 2024 and that it would monitor the repair to ensure it was completed
- confirmed it had applied mould treatment to affected areas on 6 December 2023 when several repairs were identified to eliminate the mould
- advised the repairs team were arranging the repairs “asap” and included the renewal of loft insulation, repairs to the bathroom extractor fan, and the installation of extra vents
- said it had asked the tenancy sustainment team to contact the resident to discuss support options
- offered £581.65 compensation, made up of £60 for the heaters, £250 for the time, trouble, and inconvenience, £50 for having to chase the landlord, £50 for failing to provide repair dates for the heaters, £25 for failing to provide temporary heating, and £146.65 for the time without heating
- The resident escalated her complaint with the landlord on 29 February 2024, however had to request this again on 13 May 2024. She remained unhappy with the time taken to complete the work. As a resolution, she asked for the work to be fully completed and an investigation into why it had not been done.
- The landlord provided its final complaint response on 13 June 2024. It said:
- a case had been opened for the mould but as the main issue was seen to be the heating, it was passed to the repair team and then closed in error and this led to delays in the mould repairs
- a mould wash on 24 March 2024 had been rearranged to 8 April 2024 to accommodate the resident’s availability
- a damp survey was completed on 14 May 2024 which confirmed a list of repairs including the replacement of loft insulation, renewal or repair of the extractor fans in the bathroom and kitchen, the installation of trickle vents to all windows, and the removal and reinstatement of all white goods and flooring in the en-suite following checks for leaks
- the remedial work to address the damp would be completed by 3 July 2024
- it had identified failings with the complaint handling in relation to the first escalation request and the delayed acknowledgement
- confirmed the learning that had been implemented to improve services and offered an additional £200 for the time, trouble, and inconvenience, and £150 for the complaint handling failures
- There is evidence of the contractor attending the property in September and October 2024 to complete repairs, however on 18 October 2024, the resident referred her complaint to us. She told us:
- she was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould
- there were outstanding repairs to the loft space and en-suite which she said could not be used as it was ‘too risky’
- the heating had been resolved in January 2024, but she was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of the issue
- she was concerned for her children’s health and although she had asked for alternative accommodation, the landlord had not offered a temporary move
- she wanted to be moved to a safe home
- In contact with us on 4 March 2025, the resident confirmed all the repairs had been completed, but she said the mould was still a ‘big problem’ and continues to return despite it being cleaned. On 7 March 2025 the landlord has confirmed it contacted the resident and due to her ongoing concerns, it has arranged an inspection of the roof space on 20 March 2025 to assess if there is an issue with the area.
Assessment and findings
- The resident has referred to the impact the situation has had on the health of her and her young family, along with damage to belongings. Although we can consider the impact the situation has had on the resident and whether the landlord acted reasonably, we cannot determine liability for damage to health or belongings. These matters are best suited to an insurance claim or court. Any compensation offer will be assessed in line with our remedies guidance. If the resident wishes to pursue these matters further, she should seek legal advice.
- The resident has asked to be moved to another property as an outcome of this case. This is not something we can order. This is because this would be subject to assessed bedroom requirements for the household, the availability of properties, and the priority of other applicants.
Faults with the storage heaters and the time taken to replace them.
- The landlord’s repair policy states it would:
- attend emergency repairs (where there is a threat to the safety of the customer or their home) within a maximum of 24 hours, non-emergency repairs within a maximum of 28 days, and major repairs within a maximum of 42 days
- maintain clear and continuous communication with customers to ensure they know when a reported repair will be completed
- encourage customers to provide their feedback in relation to all repairs and maintenance services so it can continue to develop its services based upon the experiences, priorities, and aspirations of customers
- Our spotlight report on heating, hot water, and energy in social housing, published in February 2021 recommended landlords:
- must act promptly, particularly where issues are having a significant impact on residents
- should be particularly aware of the needs of vulnerable residents and respond accordingly
- should have access to and offer residents temporary practical help during a period without heating such as electric heaters
- On receipt of a report regarding a smell of burning from the storage heaters, the contractor called the resident to make an appointment but was unsuccessful. It sent a letter confirming an appointment for 20 September 2023. This was appropriate and was in line with policy.
- The contractor confirmed 2 new storage heaters were needed. The heaters were ordered, and to allow for delivery, an appointment was made for 16 October 2023. This was reasonable.
- When the contractor attended, it could not get access. Due to limited resources, it asked a sub–contractor to attend. This was reasonable and showed the contractor wanted to complete the repair without unnecessary delays for the resident, but it did not tell the sub–contractor that it already had the heaters, and they just needed installing. This led to avoidable delays in resolving the issue for the resident. This was unreasonable.
- The sub–contractor attended on 17 October 2023 and reset the existing heaters. The contractor said it assumed the issue had been resolved so it closed the repair. The landlord’s repair policy states it will obtain feedback from residents regarding the repairs service. With no evidence of any feedback or confirmation from the resident, it was not appropriate to close the repair.
- Consequently, the resident reported the problem again on 27 October 2023. The sub–contractor attended, confirmed 2 new heaters were needed and submitted a quote. The contractor failed to highlight the heaters were already in stock, and the quote sat waiting to be approved until December 2023 due to what the contractor called a ‘backlog’. The landlord was responsible for the completion of the repairs, with no evidence to confirm it was monitoring the progress, the further delays were unreasonable and led to further inconvenience to the resident.
- In its stage 1 response the landlord acknowledged the heaters had not been working since October 2023 and that the resident had been chasing a repair date. It recognised the impact on the resident and her young family as highlighted by the resident in her complaint and assured her they would be fitted on 2 January 2024. It confirmed it would monitor the repair through to completion.
- The landlord did not demonstrate an investigation into why the repair had taken so long to complete. This meant it could not explain the delays to the resident, identify any service failures or highlight any learning for the contractor to prevent a recurrence.
- Notwithstanding the above, the landlord recognised the service failures and the impact on the resident in its compensation offer of £581.65. This was appropriate and in line with our remedies guidance for a finding of maladministration where the landlord has attempted to put things right for the resident and has acknowledged the impact on the resident. As such, a finding of reasonable redress is appropriate.
Reports of damp and mould and associated repairs
- The landlord’s damp, mould, and condensation (DMC) policy states:
- it operates a zero-tolerance approach to DMC which is supported by its data led DMC process
- it is committed to working with customers to ensure any household either experiencing or at risk of experiencing DMC is provided with targeted and proportionate support to address this
- customers who engage with it on this matter will be supported to maintain effective use of their home. However, should it be identified that DMC poses any risk to the health, safety, and wellbeing of the customer/family an interim move from the home (decant) will be discussed immediately
- The landlord has not provided a copy of its DMC process as evidence therefore we will refer to the repair timescales noted in paragraph 13.
- When the resident reported mould on the bedroom ceiling on 7 September 2023, the contractor made an appointment for 21 September 2023. This was appropriate and in line with policy. However, due to road resurfacing it was unable to reach the property. The contractor returned on 4 October 2023 but did not have the correct equipment to fully assess the loft and identify the cause of mould. This was a failure and delayed a potential diagnosis and any remedial action. The mould patch was cleaned and treated on 9 October 2023.
- The resident reported mould and condensation in the bathroom on 17 November 2023 and the contractor attended on 21 November 2023 which was in line with repair timescales. It believed the cause was a roof leak and made a referral to a roof specialist. This was a reasonable approach to diagnosing the root cause of the mould, however the contractor noted the resident declined an appointment as another job was already being arranged. While this was disputed by the resident, we can only assess the evidence provided.
- In the resident’s complaint on 27 November 2023, she said someone had been to her home and told her the roof needed inspecting. She said the loft insulation was mouldy, the roof was dripping, mould was growing, and her children “were getting poorly”. The resident advised the contractor she had been told the children should not be around the conditions.
- The contractor arranged an appointment for 1 December 2023 however the resident told the landlord it was late to the appointment slot of 10am to 2pm. The contractor called at 2pm and offered an appointment later that day, but she had to decline it due to other commitments. While delays cannot always be avoided, as per our Spotlight report on repairs, published in March 2019, the resident should have been notified about the delay as soon as possible. This would have reduced any inconvenience caused.
- The appointment was amended to 6 December 2023. From the evidence seen, the contractor cleaned the mould present at the time and advised the matter needed to be referred to a roofing specialist due to a suspected leak.
- In its stage 1 complaint response on 19 December 2023, the landlord confirmed the actions taken to date. It confirmed a sub–contractor needed to renew the insulation and felt in the roof as moisture and mould had been found. It said repairs were needed to the extractor fan in the bathroom and extra vents were needed to help with the airflow in the loft. It said the repair team would raise the repairs “asap,” however scaffolding was needed in a neighbouring garden. It said a surveyor would follow up on the work within the next 3 weeks.
- This was a reasonable response and showed the landlord was trying to resolve the matter as quickly as possible, however the roofing contractor did not attend until 1 February 2024, approximately 6 weeks after the stage 1 complaint response. There is no evidence to explain why the visit took so long to attend, or that the resident received an update. This was not appropriate as it was not in line with policy.
- It was confirmed there was no leak in the roof, but a lack of ventilation had caused moisture to gather. To remedy this, the roofing contractor recommended the installation of vents to the front and rear of the property, and the quotes were passed to the landlord to approve. This was reasonable.
- On 5 March 2024, the resident contacted the landlord again regarding the mould. Although the landlord confirmed it had passed the matter to the damp and mould team for further investigation, the resident said the ‘spots’ had been treated but because the cause had not been fixed, the mould was coming back worse and was under the beds and the baby’s cot.
- With the roof repairs still pending, the contractor attended on 25 March 2024. The operative arrived 30 minutes late and the resident had to refuse access due to a GP appointment. As previously stated, it would have been reasonable for the contractor to inform the resident of the delay and to avoid any inconvenience. There is no evidence this happened.
- The contractor returned on 8 April 2024 and cleaned the mould where needed. Around the end of April 2024, the roofing contractor installed new vents and renewed sections of roof tiles and felt.
- After further reports of mould from the resident, a damp survey was arranged for 14 May 2024. The actions of the contractor to treat the cause of the damp to this point are not disputed, but as the resident continued to report the problem, and knowing the vulnerabilities within the family, it was unreasonable that the landlord had not requested the damp survey sooner than it did.
- The inspection confirmed high levels of mould in every room except for the kitchen and recommended the repairs confirmed in paragraph 8. It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on the opinion of the surveyor who did not recommend a temporary move while the work was being completed.
- In the landlord’s final complaint response, it acknowledged there had been delays with the damp and mould work due to the incorrect closure of the case. It confirmed the action taken to that point and committed to completing the remedial work by 3 July 2024.
- The landlord informed the resident of the learning taken to improve the service and apologised for the delays which it said had ‘clearly’ impacted the resident and her family. In acknowledgement of the time, trouble and inconvenience to the resident, the landlord offered £200. This would have been reasonable if the repairs had been completed by the date given, but the evidence shows this was not the case. Additional compensation has been ordered to reflect this.
- On 10 July 2024 the evidence shows the contractor asked the sub–contractor if the repairs had been arranged. It was confirmed an appointment had not been made. This was after the completion date given to the resident. Without evidence to explain the delay, it was unreasonable that the landlord had not fulfilled its repair commitment.
- From the evidence seen, the work was delayed further due to the resident’s daughter recovering from an operation. This was unavoidable with no fault from either party.
- On 20 September 2024 the contractor checked the loft insulation and found it was dry and covering the loft space therefore did not change it. This was reasonable as the landlord was entitled to rely on the contractors findings. It confirmed a potential leak above a bedroom and suggested a further visit from the roofing contractor to investigate this further.
- The contractor inspected the ensuite on this date and confirmed 2 days were needed to complete the necessary work. An appointment was initially raised for 6 and 7 November 2024, however this was changed due to sickness. Further confusion and errors regarding the rescheduling of the work meant the ensuite was not completed in full until 4 December 2024.
- The contractor attended on 27 September 2024 to replace the extractor fans in the bathroom and kitchen, however returned on 2 October 2024 due to no access. It replaced the bathroom fan, and all the window vents were opened. It tested the kitchen fan and cooker hood and found these worked well therefore did not replace them. This was reasonable if no defects were found.
- On 28 October 2024, the roofing contractor confirmed there was no leak from the roof, but it lifted and relayed the loft insulation which was too thick in places. The evidence confirms wet loft insulation was later removed and replaced to address the ongoing damp.
- In summary, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and associated repairs. This is because:
- the landlord should have considered conducting a damp survey sooner than it did to account for the recurring reports and household vulnerabilities
- although the landlord committed to completing the damp and mould repairs by 3 July 2024, they were not completed until December 2024
- there was no evidence to confirm if the delays were avoidable (except for the resident’s daughter’s recovery period)
- there was a lack of communication with the resident regarding the delays
- there is no evidence to suggest the landlord contacted the resident following the repairs to confirm if they were successful
Complaint handling
- The landlord operated a 2-stage complaint policy. It states it would acknowledge stage 1 complaints within 5 working days of receipt and respond within 10 working days. Stage 2 complaints would be acknowledged within 2 working days and responded to within 10 working days. If at any stage, further time was needed, it would communicate with the resident.
- The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) states:
- landlords must decide whether an extension to a timescale is needed when considering the complexity of the complaint and then inform the resident of the expected timescale for response
- outstanding actions must be tracked and actioned promptly with appropriate updates provided to the resident.
- When the resident complained to the landlord on 27 November 2023, it acknowledged receipt on 6 December 2023. This was not appropriate as it was not in line with policy.
- The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint on 19 December 2023, 16 working days from receipt. There is no evidence the landlord informed the resident of the delay in the complaint response, and this was not acknowledged or explained in the response. This was not appropriate as it was not in line with policy or the Code.
- The resident asked for her complaint to be escalated on 29 February 2024 however this was not processed by the landlord. Although this was a failure, it was recognised by the landlord in its final complaint response. This was reasonable.
- The resident requested the escalation of her complaint on 13 May 2024 however this was not acknowledged until 17 May 2024. This was not in line with policy, however, the landlord highlighted this in its final complaint response.
- The landlord provided its final complaint response on 13 June 2024, 22 working days from receipt. There is no evidence the landlord informed the resident of the delay in providing the response. This was not appropriate as it was not in line with policy or the Code.
- Notwithstanding the above, the landlord took the opportunity to review its complaint handling. In doing so, it identified its own service failures, confirmed the learning and training that had been implemented, recognised the additional stress this caused the resident, and offered compensation of £150.
- In line with our remedies guidance, this offer was at the level we would expect for a finding of maladministration where there was no permanent impact on the resident, but where the landlord has acknowledged its failings and attempted to put things right. As such a finding of reasonable redress is appropriate.
Determination
- In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds reasonable redress with the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of faults with the storage heaters and the time taken to replace them.
- In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds maladministration with the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and associated repairs.
- In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds reasonable redress with the landlord’s complaint handling.
Orders
- Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must:
- write a letter of apology to the resident which refers to the service failures highlighted in this report
- pay the resident £200 for the impact and inconvenience caused by the delays in the completion of the damp and mould repairs
- the payment should be made directly to the resident and not offset against any debt that may be owed. The landlord must provide us with evidence to confirm the payment has been made
- arrange an inspection of the property to assess the cause of the ongoing mould in the property and provide a copy of the inspection report to the resident and us
- provide the resident and us with a schedule of work which should be completed within a reasonable timeframe
- confirm its approach to post inspecting the work completed, and in agreement with the resident, it should monitor the property to ensure the repairs have resolved the damp and mould
Recommendations
- If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £931.65 that was offered in its complaint responses.
- The Ombudsman’s findings of reasonable redress for the failures in the landlord’s handling of the faults with the storage heaters and complaint handling are made on the basis that this compensation is paid.