The Riverside Group Limited (202229875)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202229875

The Riverside Group Limited

28 March 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 resident’s complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the resident’s property.
2. The landlord’s handling of provision of temporary accommodation while repairs were carried out, including the behaviour of specific housing officers.
3. The landlord’s handling of a request to offer suitable alternative accommodation to the resident.
The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy for a 2 bed ground floor flat. The flat is part of a very small block with one other flat in the building. Her tenancy started in 2009. The landlord is a housing association.
The resident lives at the flat with her young dependent child. The landlord states that there are no vulnerabilities on record for the resident. The resident has told this Service that both her and her son suffers from a number of mental and physical health complaints, including respiratory issues, and this Service has seen evidence that the resident has informed the landlord of these health issues.

Damp and mould

Concerns about damp and mould in the flat were first raised by the resident in March 2020. An appointment to inspect the flat and carry out remedial work was cancelled due to the COVID-19 outbreak and as the resident was self-isolating at this point.
The landlord arranged for mould washes in the resident’s flat in August 2020 and September 2020. Internal records state that contractors noticed ongoing issues with damp at the resident’s flat when visiting.
In September 2021, the resident reported finding black mould under peeling wallpaper in the flat. The landlord’s contractors attended twice and applied antifungal treatment to the affected areas, ripping some of the wallpaper while doing the work. The resident asked the landlord if it would redecorate following the damage caused by the contractors. This Service has not seen evidence that the landlord responded to this request.
The resident reported damp at her property in one bedroom and in a large kitchen cupboard in December 2021. The landlord’s contractors treated the cupboard with mould wash and applied anti-mould paint in December 2021. Notes from the landlord’s repairs log state that slightly elevated moisture levels were found in external walls in the bedroom, the room was cluttered with furniture against the external walls, and recommended removing affected plasterwork and replastering the walls. Further notes show that the landlord’s contractors came again in January 2022 to do more works and that the resident raised concerns about sleeping arrangements for her and her son due to health issues. A note from May 2022 states that the resident had got back in touch about this issue as the damp was getting worse, her child’s chest complaints were getting worse, and a mattress in the flat was now full of mould.
In late October 2022, the resident instructed a solicitor who sent the landlord a letter of claim under the Pre-Action Protocol for Housing Conditions Claims (England). The letter stated that there was damp in the main bedroom, peeling wallpaper in the other bedroom, and mould in the kitchen cupboard. An inspection by a surveyor was proposed to identify issues at the resident’s property. Within 3 weeks, the solicitor wrote to the landlord and told it that they were no longer instructed by the resident. Records show that the landlord decided to carry on with a planned inspection of the resident’s home.
An inspection of the resident’s property was carried out by an independent contractor in November 2022. The report found damp and mould in both bedrooms, damp in the bathroom behind the toilet, and mould growth in the kitchen cupboard. The cause was likely to be a failure or breaching of the original damp proof coursing in the flat. The following works were recommended:
1. For both bedrooms:
  1. Cutting into cavity walls to inspect for blockages and clean out as appropriate.
  2. Remove existing plasterwork and skirting boards, install damp proof membranes and insulated dry lined plasterboard, then replaster and install new treated skirting boards.
  3. Replace failed double glazed windows and mastic seals around window frames.
  4. Redecorate.
2. For the bathroom:
  1. Hack off affected plasterwork and replaster with salt retardant plaster behind toilet.
  2. Replace extractor fan with humidistat fan.
  3. Check pipework for leaks.
3. For the kitchen:
  1. Hack off affected plaster in cupboard, install thermal lined insulated plasterboard then skim and redecorate.
  2. Replace failed double glazed window and reseal window with mastic sealant.
  3. Install a baffle vent.
Another survey took place on the same day which reached the same conclusions and recommended the same works as the first survey, except it also recommended new chemical damp proof coursing injections in both bedrooms and the bathroom.
In December 2022, another survey took place. This found similar issues to the first two surveys, also identifying that pointing on external walls was poor with a protruding brick oversail, there were uncapped drilled holes in the walls which appeared to be from installing a chemical damp proof course, and that a radiator was leaking. This survey recommended similar works to the surveys carried out in November 2022 but included works to check a positive input ventilation unit in the flat and replace filters, and to repair the oversail and external drill holes. After this survey, the landlord started to arrange for these works to be carried out.
Later in December 2022, the resident made contact with her local councillor and a tenants union. The tenants union is referred to as ‘the resident’s representative’ for ease of reference in this report. Both parties made enquiries of the landlord about the condition of the resident’s property and what steps were being taken to resolve these issues.
At this point, the landlord agreed to consider whether the resident could be permanently moved to suitable alternative accommodation. Records from this period state that the resident expressed a preference for the repairs to be done on a room by room basis and she confirmed that her legal claim had been dropped. The landlord estimated that it would take a week to carry out remedial works.
Close to Christmas 2022, the resident’s representative and her local authority all made contact with the landlord to find out what works were going to be done and when.
In early January 2023, the landlord noted that repairs had not yet been carried out and chased internally for updates. Records state that a contractor attended on 4 January 2023 but the resident refused access as any dust at all posed a risk to her health, and as the resident hadn’t been told of the appointment. At this point, the landlord refused to permanently move the resident to another property but agreed to arrange temporary housing while works were carried out. A ‘decant’ to a hotel while works were carried out was agreed between the resident and landlord, with a provisional start date of 23 January 2023.
The resident shared a video of water coming through her walls with her landlord on 11 January 2023. A day later, the landlord agreed to bring forward repair works urgently and arrange for a hotel as quickly as possible. The resident and her child moved to a hotel on 16 January 2023 on a temporary basis while works were carried out. Contractors confirmed works were completed on 31 January 2023 and that the resident could move back.
In February 2023, the landlord agreed to carry out an inspection of the works done to see if it had resolved the issue. A damp survey took place on 14 March 2023 which stated that damp was still present but that more time was needed for the remedial work done in January 2023 to dry out to assess whether it had been successful.
In May 2023, the resident raised concerns that damp and mould had returned to the property via her representative. In June 2023, the landlord and the resident’s representative discussed concerns about damp and a further survey was arranged for 15 June 2023. This survey noted that the design and construction of the resident’s kitchen cupboard meant it was particularly susceptible to condensation formation, found no damp and mould in either bedroom, and small patches of black mould on the wall behind the toilet believed to be caused by condensation on cold water pipes. To resolve the remaining issue, the surveyor recommended insulating the cold water pipes and treating the cupboard with fungicidal wash and repainting with mould resistant paint.
In June 2023, discussions between the resident’s representative and the landlord started about whether the landlord should pay compensation to the resident for failing to carry out repairs following reports of damp and mould in March 2020. Extensive negotiations took place over the next few months, eventually reaching an agreement to pay £10,000 compensation to settle the potential claim, regular damp surveys in the winter months, and an assurance that the landlord would rehouse the resident if damp and mould returned. This Service understands that there is still a dispute between the resident and the landlord over compensation for alleged personal injury due to disrepair.
Another survey was carried out on 15 September 2023. This noted that no lagging had been installed on the cold pipes in the bathroom and that no redecoration had been done to the bedrooms, but that damp and mould had not returned. The surveyor recommended carrying out the remaining minor works. A further survey was carried out on 27 November 2023 which had the same findings at the 15 September 2023 report, although it noted that redecoration had been done in one bedroom.
The resident has told this Service that welfare officers from her child’s school had been in touch due to illness related absence, who had seen the extent of the damp and mould issues and written supporting letters to her landlord and her local authority. She also states that she is now under the care of her local mental health team as a pre-existing mental health condition had been triggered by the situation and made much worse.

Complaint

A formal complaint about the landlord’s handling of repairs was made via the local councillor on 12 December 2022.
A Stage 1 response was given on 14 April 2023. The complaint was defined as being about how the landlord had handled placing the resident and her child in a hotel for 2 weeks while repairs were carried out, and the attitude and behaviour of specific housing officers while handling the temporary move.
The response acknowledged that the resident was initially offered a first floor flat out of area and that this was not suitable for her, that she felt she had been bullied by the housing officers as they had told her that the temporary flat was the only one available or the landlord would have to arrange for a hotel, and that the resident had asked to move to a 2 bed house in the same area instead.
The landlord stated there was no evidence that the housing officers had bullied the resident, although one had mentioned the number of other residents they were helping with other issues. An apology was offered for this statement, although the landlord did state that after investigation, it was satisfied there was no intention to cause offence on the part of the housing officer. The landlord also acknowledged that medical issues had made both living in the property and in the hotel ‘a real struggle’, although it stated the move was on a temporary basis and that financial assistance was provided for help with meals and transport during the stay. The complaint was not upheld.
It is not clear if the resident requested escalation of her complaint. Regardless, the landlord gave a Stage 2 response on 9 May 2023. This response came to the same conclusion as the Stage 1 response, although it offered £200 for inconvenience caused by the temporary move and £100 for dehumidifier running costs until plasterwork dried out. The response also detailed efforts to treat a rat infestation reported by the resident on 25 April 2023.

Assessment and findings

As far as this Service is aware, the resident and her representative are still negotiating with regards to any compensation for alleged personal injury. Although we do not cast doubt on the resident’s allegations that damp and mould in her property have seriously affected the mental and physical health of the occupiers, this Service cannot make a binding decision on whether there is a causal link between any action or inaction by the landlord and any subsequent impact on the health and wellbeing of the resident and her child.

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

The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that urgent repairs will be addressed within 5 days and routine repairs will be addressed within 28 days (within 56 days ‘only during extreme circumstances, for example, Covid pandemic’). It also asks residents to ensure ventilation units are kept switched on to stop condensation and mould arising, to clean mould spots with antifungal cleaning products when noticed, and to report mould to the landlord if the mould comes back after cleaning.
The landlord has a separate damp and mould policy which was introduced in September 2022. This policy states that the landlord will undertake effective investigations into the cause of damp and mould, and take reasonable measures (including improvements) to eliminate damp. It also states that the landlord will carry out a property inspection when a repair is requested relating to suspected damp, mould, or condensation.
Section 11 of Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 implies a term into the resident’s tenancy agreement that the landlord will keep the structure and exterior of the resident’s property (including drains, gutters and external pipes) in repair and keep in repair and proper working order installations for the supply of water, gas, electricity, sanitation, heating water and for the provision of space heating. Section 9A of Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 also implies a term in the tenancy agreement that the property is fit for human habitation at the time that the tenancy being granted and throughout the lifetime of the tenancy. Both legal obligations are triggered when the landlord is notified of an issue; the landlord then has a reasonable period of time to carry out works for which it is liable.
This Service has seen evidence that first report of damp and mould was made on 13 March 2020. Repairs were successfully completed on 31 January 2023, over 2 years and 10 months after the initial report. The Ombudsman accepts that special measures were put in place shortly after the date of the resident’s first report due to the intervening COVID-19 pandemic, and that the resident told the landlord she was self-isolating, but this still presents a significant delay from first report to completion of works. This is a failure of the landlord to keep to timescales set out in its repairs policy and to carry out works to fully resolve the issue in a reasonable period of time.
It is positive that the landlord attempted repairs later in 2020 and that it continued to attempt repairs up until the resident’s then solicitor sent the pre-action letter. However, the landlord should have reviewed its approach to tackling the damp and mould before the letter of claim was sent, including considering other potential remedies and whether a damp survey was necessary. This would have allowed the landlord to correctly identify the root causes of the damp and mould and to take action before the situation got worse. Failing to consider alternatives at an early stage also impacted on the resident’s use and enjoyment of her property due to the damp and mould getting worse, and undermined the resident’s faith in the landlord’s ability to take effective action to resolve issues with the condition of her home.
The landlord should have taken steps to address concerns expressed by the resident on 28 May 2022 about the deteriorating situation in her property and the impact she felt this was having on her child. Recognising the impact of poor housing conditions on the resident would have allowed her to feel ‘heard’ and may have alerted the landlord to the fact that repairs had not been effective. The landlord’s failure to effectively listen to this point has had an adverse impact on the relationship between landlord and tenant, and ultimately led to the resident seeking legal advice from a solicitor and representation from the tenants union.
It is unclear why there was a delay between the first survey on 28 November 2022, which was the first time that the landlord identified the extent of the damp in the resident’s property and what remedial works were required, and repairs being completed on 31 January 2023. This is a delay of 43 working days and is beyond the landlord’s timescales for urgent and routine repairs. It is positive that the landlord brought the planned works forward when the resident sent a video of water coming into her property, but the delay is still beyond agreed timescales. This is a failure of the landlord to keep to its policies and procedures.
The resident and her child’s health issues, particularly their respiratory issues, should have been acknowledged at an early stage, and any decisions about when and how repairs were to be carried out should have borne these issues in mind during planning and execution of repairs. This should also have been considered when deciding on the priority of repairs. Many of these health issues are mental or physical impairments which have a substantial and long term impact on the resident’s ability to carry out normal daily activities, so could be classed as a ‘disability’ as per the definition set out in section 6 of Equality Act 2010. The landlord’s failure to fully consider these health issues prior to 4 January 2023 implies that the landlord failed to pay due regards to its duties under Equality Act 2010 up to this point. As the landlord has told this Service that there are no vulnerabilities on file for this resident, this is also a failure to keep adequate tenancy records.
Failing to consider health issues also let to a short avoidable delay in carrying out repairs in early January when it became clear that the resident could not stay in her property while works were carried out. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the landlord’s records state that the resident had expressed a preference for works to be done on a ‘room by room’ basis to minimise disruption, but it is not clear if the resident was aware of the extent of what works were required and whether she was making an informed choice about this point.
It is positive that the landlord agreed to carry out a number of surveys after completion of the works to assess whether they had been effective, that evidence provided to this Service indicates that repairs have been effective, and that it has committed to moving the resident to suitable alternative accommodation if damp and mould returns. It is also positive that the resident’s representative and the landlord have agreed for £10,000 compensation to be paid to the resident in recognition of the lengthy period between the first report of damp and works being carried out as well as damage to her personal belongings.
If these steps had not been taken, this Service would have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould. As it stands, this Service has found that reasonable redress has been provided by the landlord in connection to failings with its handling of damp and mould in the resident’s property, although this Service notes that this is largely down to the intervention and exhaustive efforts of the resident’s representative to reach a settlement. Recommendations have been made at the end of this report about further steps which may help the resident and the landlord repair their relationship.

The landlord’s handling of provision of temporary accommodation while repairs were carried out.

The provision of temporary accommodation in this case is closely linked to the landlord’s handling of repairs. If the landlord had been more effective at responding appropriately to requests for repairs at an earlier stage, temporary accommodation may not have been required. As issues with the landlord’s handling of repairs has been discussed in the previous section of this report, this section focuses on how temporary accommodation was arranged, what was provided, and whether the landlord acted appropriately in these circumstances.
This Service acknowledges that sourcing suitable temporary accommodation at short notice is challenging, living in temporary accommodation is disruptive and unsettling, and that temporary accommodation is usually a ‘last resort’ if repairs cannot be done with the resident remaining in occupation during the works. In this case, temporary accommodation was identified as an option at a fairly late stage as the landlord had genuinely believed that repairs could be done around the resident.
The landlord was correct to first consider self-contained accommodation which it could offer to the resident on a temporary basis. When it became clear that it had no suitable temporary accommodation for the resident at the date when it was required, the landlord acted appropriately by providing hotel accommodation with a number of different allowances offered to the resident to facilitate travel to and from school, to cover meals, and for laundry costs. The landlord acted appropriately by treating hotel accommodation as a last resort for the resident and by providing financial assistance while she was staying in the hotel to mitigate the impact on the resident and her child.
The resident has complained that she felt bullied by specific housing officers while temporary accommodation was arranged as she felt intense pressure to accept either the offer of self-contained accommodation or the hotel. This Service acknowledges that this was a deeply distressing time for the resident, that she had lived in a property with damp and mould for a long period of time, that she was concerned about health issues experienced by her and her child, and that she was now expected to live elsewhere on a temporary basis until repairs were completed. However, as the resident could not stay in her property while repairs were carried out, the resident had to accept one of the two options or make her own arrangements. Although the resident may have felt pressure from the landlord to accept one of the options presented to her, the landlord was simply being realistic and clear about what it could provide at short notice.
Although this Service acknowledges that the resident was distressed by having to stay in temporary accommodation and that it had an unsettling effect on her and her child, examination of the evidence provided shows that the landlord took reasonable steps to make sure that temporary accommodation was a last resort, that suitable temporary accommodation was provided, that financial assistance was provided to help with issues caused by living in a hotel on a temporary basis, and that the landlord ensured the resident stayed in the hotel for as short a time as possible. For these reasons, this Service has found no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of provision of temporary accommodation while repairs were carried out.

The landlord’s handling of a request to be moved to suitable permanent alternative accommodation.

The resident’s request to be provided with suitable alternative accommodation was made around the same time as extensive repair works were agreed for the resident’s property. It is unclear if the resident understood the landlord’s refusal of her request on 4 January 2023 as she made further enquiries about a permanent move via her representative in February 2023, after she returned to her property. The landlord should have been clear on what criteria it had assessed the request and why it had refused a transfer, as well as confirming its decision in writing. Due to the correspondence between landlord, resident, and other interested parties at this point in time, it would have been clear that the resident was highly distressed and that this may have restricted her ability to have a clear understanding of the landlord’s decisions.
The landlord’s ‘management let’ policy states that these can be considered in very extreme circumstances where it may not be safe for a resident to stay in their home. The most relevant example to the resident’s case in the policy states that a management let would be considered include where an existing property is uninhabitable. The landlord has provided evidence that a management let was considered on 18 July 2023 but it did not believe that the resident met the criteria for a transfer.
Although the landlord has considered the condition of the resident’s property and its marked improvement since repairs were successfully completed, the landlord has not acknowledged the potential impact on the resident’s mental health by continuing to live in a property which had substantial damp and mould. The resident has told this Service that she has now joined her local housing register and been given higher banding to reflect her personal circumstances, which is a positive step, but the landlord should have considered other ways to assist the resident with access suitable permanent alternative accommodation. This could have included making the resident aware of local services to get independent legal advice on her housing options, considering whether the resident could go on an internal transfer list, and discussing mutual exchange with the resident.
Ultimately, the landlord acted in line with its own policy when it refused to grant the resident a management transfer. However, it could have done more to assist the resident with her desire to move. For this reason, this Service has found service failure in the landlord’s handling of a request to be moved to suitable permanent alternative accommodation.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. The officer handling the complaint should make telephone contact with the complainant within a working day, with a written acknowledgement of complaint sent out within 2 working days. Stage 1 responses will be given within 5 working days and no more than 10 working days without good reason. Escalation requests are responded to within 2 working days, with a Stage 2 response given within 10 working days.
The landlord’s complaints policy also states that a written response will be given for all complaints which addresses all points raised and provides clear reasons for any decisions.
The resident made a complaint via her local councillor on 12 December 2022 about the outstanding repairs and how the landlord had handled the case. It is unclear if an acknowledgement was provided to the resident. A Stage 1 response was provided on 14 April 2023, 85 working days after the initial complaint, and did not cover issues with how requests for repairs had been handled. This is a failure of the landlord to keep to established timescales for a complaint response in its own policies. The landlord’s failure to consider its handling of repairs, compounded by the delay in issuing a complaint response, would have been disappointing for the resident and cast doubt that the landlord was willing to consider repairs issue through its complaints handling processes.
It is unclear if the resident made an escalation request and whether an acknowledgement was provided. The Stage 2 response given on 9 May 2023 mentions a phone call with the resident on 3 May to discuss repairs, which this Service has assumed is when the escalation request would have been made along with any acknowledgement. This means that the response was given 3 working days after the assumed date of the escalation request.
Due to the landlord’s failure to consider its handling of repairs as part of its complaints procedures, despite this being the root cause of the other issues considered by the landlord in the complaint responses, and due to the significant delay in providing a Stage 1 response, this Service has found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was:
1. Reasonable redress offered in respect of the complaint about the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the resident’s property.
2. No maladministration in the landlord’s handling of provision of temporary accommodation while repairs were carried out, including the behaviour of specific housing officers.
3. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of a request to offer suitable alternative accommodation to the resident.
4. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
1. Pay the resident £200 in compensation, in addition to any compensation already paid by the landlord in connection with this complaint. This offer consists of:
  1. £100 for its failings in handling the resident’s complaint.
  2. £100 for its failings in handling the resident’s request for a permanent move.
2. Contact the resident and discuss what assistance the landlord can provide with moving to another property, as well as informing the resident on where she can get independent legal advice on her housing options. Confirmation of this contact and the resident’s wishes must be provided to this Service.
3. Ask the resident if she would like her health issues recorded on her tenancy file. Confirmation of this contact and the resident’s wishes must be provided to this Service.
4. Assess what steps the landlord can take to support the resident in her current tenancy. A copy of this assessment must be provided to this Service.

Recommendations

The landlord should commit to regular meetings with the tenants union to discuss concerns that it is raising on behalf of the communities which it serves.
The landlord should review the findings and learnings from this case, with input from the tenants union and from the resident, and decide on what actions and improvements are needed. If actions and improvements are identified, the landlord should prepare a plan to implement its recommendations.
The landlord should self assess against the recommendations within the Ombudsman’s report titled Spotlight on attitudes, respect and rights – relationship of equals (available via this link: https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/ARRRoE-22012024-FINAL.pdf)