Torus62 Limited (202423279)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202423279

Torus62 Limited

23 May 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:
1. Response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property and the associated repairs.
2. Complaint Handling.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of a 3-bedroom end of terraced house. The tenancy started in October 2018, and she lives with her husband and disabled son. The landlord is a housing association and freeholder of the property. The landlord is aware of reported household vulnerabilities.
The resident complained on 26 November 2023. She said she had reported damp and mould problems within the property since the start of her tenancy. The resident’s complaint said the landlord had recently surveyed the property, but she had not heard anything since. The resident described the presence of mould within “almost every room.”
Agreeing a 10-working day extension to complete its investigation, the landlord sent its stage 1 response on 28 December 2023. It said:
1. A surveyor inspected her home on 13 December 2023.
2. The surveyor discussed with the resident the effects of moisture in her home. Including her decision to remove the kitchen door, drying clothing indoors, and obscuring radiators with household items.
3. The surveyor raised jobs to install a rotary washing line in the garden, install additional loft ventilation, and repair trickle vents to 5 windows.
4. It completed all work around the resident’s availability and school runs.
5. It completed a mould wash on 20 December 2023.
6. It called the resident on 22 December 2023 to check on the success of the mould wash. And repeated the importance of ventilation and preventative methods to ensure the resident managed moisture inside her home.
7. That it would follow up in 3 months to monitor the situation.
8. Its complaint investigation identified that its contractors had not completed a mould wash in May 2023 following a damp and mould survey on 3 February 2023.
9. Sorry for this failure and offered £100 compensation.
On 2 January 2024 the landlord informed the resident that its damp and mould team had opened a case following the resident’s reports and complaint. And repeated its intention to follow up in 3 months to monitor the situation.
On 3 January 2024 the resident confirmed the landlord had completed all work, apart from the living room ceiling. She also considered the landlord’s offer of compensation “inadequate” due to her son’s weakened immune system. She said she was looking for compensation of £700. The resident said 3 rooms had been “virtually unusable” for 78 weeks and based her calculations on a percentage of the of £111.14 weekly rent.
On 12 March 2024 the landlord called the resident to monitor her reports of damp and mould. The resident said “all” jobs remained outstanding and the family were all sleeping in 1 room.
The resident repeated her dissatisfaction with the landlord’s complaint handling on 19 July 2024.
On 10 September 2024 the landlord sent its stage 2 response. It remained satisfied that it had identified no evidence of poor workmanship or recurring repairs. The landlord also identified occasions where the resident had not provided access, resulting in delays. However, it identified 2 jobs from May 2022 that it had cancelled in error having received no acknowledgement from the resident. It apologised and offered an additional £50 compensation for its failure to follow this up. Therefore, increasing its total offer to £150. It acknowledged the resident’s comments regarding her son’s health and provided details of its personal liability insurance for her to make a claim.
The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and brought the complaint to us. She considered the landlord responsible for effects on her and her son’s health.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident states the landlord’s handling of her damp and mould repairs significantly affected her son’s weakened immune system and her own breathing.
Although we are an alternative dispute resolution service, we are unable to prove legal liability. Nor can we award damages for personal injury. These matters require a decision by a court or an insurance claim. The resident may wish to seek independent legal advice if she wants to pursue a claim for damages.
The resident states she had reported damp and mould issues since 2018. Our investigation will consider events 12 months prior to the resident’s complaint on 26 November 2023, through to the landlord’s final response on 10 September 2024. Any reference to other events will be to provide context only.

Response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property and the associated repairs

The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard. The landlord must consider whether any mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard that may require a remedy. It is therefore appropriate that the landlord acknowledges this obligation in its repairs and maintenance policy.
The landlord’s responsive repairs and maintenance policy and damp and mould policy states:
1. A suitably qualified surveyor will inspect any damp and mould reports made by its residents.
2. It will fix the cause of the problem and arrange a follow up in 3 months.
3. It will review completed works after 6 months to see if the work has been effective.
4. It will then arrange a further inspection if the problem continues.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy states the landlord is aware how damp and mould can affect the health and wellbeing of household members. It says it fosters a culture of ‘never turning a blind eye’ as part of its commitment to safeguarding residents.
The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states it aims to complete all routine repairs within 20 calendar days.
The landlord’s complaints policy states that it must refer any issue or alleged incident that might give rise to a claim against its public liability insurance to its insurers.
On 16 December 2022 the resident informed the landlord that it had not completed a planned mould wash around her windows in May 2022. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response explained that due to a history of no access, it had sought confirmation of the appointment from the resident. As it had not received a response, it cancelled the work. The process of seeking confirmation from the resident was a reasonable step for the landlord to ensure the effective use of its resources.
However, while it is unclear why the resident did not confirm the appointment, or raise her concerns for more than 7 months, it was appropriate that the landlord acknowledged it should have monitored and followed up the job. It was therefore reasonable in the circumstances that it apologised, offered £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused, and rearranged the work to put things right.
Following the resident’s complaint on 26 November 2023, the landlord inspected the property on 13 December 2023. This was appropriate and 3 days within the landlord’s 20 calendar day response time for a routine repair.
The evidence shows the landlord’s surveyor identified preventative steps the resident could take to reduce moisture in her home. This included the impact of her decision to remove the kitchen door, blocking radiators, the importance of ventilating the home, and the need to minimise drying clothes indoors. The landlord photographed the contributing factors in the household and recorded providing the resident with advice. This was a reasonable step to take to ensure the resident was aware of the effects of her own actions.
The evidence also shows the landlord raised work orders to assist the resident’s situation. This included repairing the window trickle vents, installing a rotary washing line in the garden, and installing a ventilation system to the loft. This was appropriate and demonstrated the landlord acting in line with its damp and mould policy by fixing potential causes of the reported issues.
The landlord’s stage 1 response said it would complete the washing line and trickle vent work by 19 January 2024 and 6 February 2024, respectively. The evidence shows the landlord arranged works around the resident’s availability and completed these works ahead of time.
However, the landlord’s stage 1 response also said it would complete the loft ventilation system work by 6 February 2024. It is therefore unclear why it did not complete this until 4 April 2024. This was not appropriate as it was neither by the date it promised, nor consistent with its 20-calendar day routine repair response time.
The evidence shows the landlord contacted the resident in January 2024. It informed her it would monitor her damp and mould reports in 3 months. This was appropriate and consistent with its damp and mould policy.
At the same time, the landlord recorded the resident’s confirmation that it had completed all mould wash work; except the ceiling of the room her dog slept in. The landlord recorded asking the resident if she required further support, which she declined. Based on the resident’s feedback, it was reasonable for the landlord to conclude that it had resolved her concerns. Its decision to monitor matters was appropriate and in line with its policy.
On 12 March 2024 the landlord contacted the resident to monitor her case. This was appropriate and consistent with the 3-month monitoring step within its damp and mould policy.
That said, during this contact, the resident said multiple rooms continued to experience mould and work remained outstanding. The resident also described how her family were sleeping in one room. Given the resident’s comments, and the landlord’s knowledge of the household vulnerabilities, it is unclear why the landlord did not arrange a further inspection as per its damp and mould policy. This did not demonstrate the landlord giving due regard to its approach to safeguarding residents in such situations.
However, we note the landlord completed the outstanding loft ventilation work in April 2024. And neither party has presented any evidence that the rooms were uninhabitable.
The landlord reviewed the resident’s situation on 5 July 2024. This was appropriate and demonstrated the landlord completing a 6-month review as per its damp and mould policy.
However, in conversation with the landlord between July to September 2024 the resident continued to report mould issues. She also said she had experienced difficulties using the washing line. As such, the landlord had further opportunity to arrange another inspection. And based on the resident’s comments, the landlord also had opportunity to assess the effectiveness of its wash line solution. By not arranging an inspection, the landlord failed to meet the expectations of its damp and mould policy. This caused the resident time and trouble having to repeat her concerns.
While the landlord was satisfied with its handling of the resident’s reports, it identified and apologised where its services had fallen short of its expectations. This included compensation and providing the resident with its liability insurance details. As the resident said the damp and mould had affected her and her son’s health, this was appropriate and in line with the landlord’s complaint’s policy.
When there has been an admission of failure, as is the case here, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the complaint satisfactorily. In considering this, we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our remedies guidance.
Our determinations should also recognise the fact that the distress caused to an individual resident is unique to them. Not all residents will experience the same distress in response to the same instance of maladministration. This might be due to their particular circumstances, or because of a vulnerability (‘aggravating factors’). Consideration of any aggravating factors could justify an increased award to reflect the specific impact on the resident.
The landlord’s stage 2 response did not dispute the resident had raised damp and mould reports in 2019, 2022, and 2023. However, it produced evidence that showed it had responded to each of the resident’s concerns and experienced some historic access issues. It remained satisfied that it had identified no failure with workmanship. And it presented evidence that it had provided advice to the resident to minimise her own contributions to the household moisture levels. We have considered this evidence as mitigation.
We have not identified any evidence of a loss of amenity to warrant a room loss calculation. However, the landlord did not complete the loft ventilation work by 6 February 2024 as planned. And there are also aggravating factors to consider due to the resident’s son’s health conditions. By not completing a further inspection for 6 months between March to September, the landlord did not evidence meeting the expectations of its damp and mould policy, particularly its commitment to safeguarding residents.
Therefore, we find maladministration and order the landlord to pay £350 compensation. This is made up of:
1. The landlord’s offer of £150.
2. £30 for each of the 6 months between March 2024 to the landlord’s stage 2 final response in September 2024.
3. £20 for the delay to complete the loft ventilation work as planned.
This is consistent with our remedies guide where the landlord’s failures adversely affected the resident, and its offer of compensation was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation.

Complaint Handling

The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) 1 April 2022 required landlords to acknowledge a complaint within 5 days. Also, for landlord’s to respond to stage 1 and stage 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days, respectively.
The Code says that if the landlord needs an extension to enable it to respond to the complaint fully, both parties should agree this in advance.
At the time of the complaint, the landlord’s complaints policy states it will acknowledge a complaint within 2 working days. It will send its stage 1 response within 10 working days. And it will send its stage 2 response within 20 working days of the resident’s escalation request. At both stages, it would agree a response extension date with the resident in advance, if unable to meet these timescales. This was appropriate and consistent with the Code.
The resident complained on 26 November 2023. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint the same day and agreed a 10-working day extension on 8 December 2023. This was appropriate and consistent with the landlord’s complaints policy and the Code.
The landlord discussed matters with the resident on the new deadline date of 22 December 2023. However, it did not send its stage 1 response until 28 December 2023. Given it had already agreed an extension date, it is unclear why the landlord did not meet the agreed timescale. This caused the resident inconvenience waiting for the landlord’s response.
The Code states that a complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction, however made.
During the landlord’s follow up calls to the resident on 2 January 2024 and 19 July 2024, the evidence shows the resident told the landlord she was unhappy with the landlord’s compensation offer. Therefore, the landlord had opportunities to register her escalation request sooner. It was not appropriate that this did not happen until 24 August 2024. This caused the resident time and trouble repeating the matter to the landlord to progress the complaint.
Having agreed a stage 2 response extension date with the resident in advance, the landlord said it would provide its response by 6 September 2024. Therefore, it was not appropriate that it did not send its stage 2 response until 10 September 2024.
Based on our findings we find service failure with the landlord’s complaint handling. Although the landlord’s responses demonstrated thorough investigations, we have identified delays in the landlord registering the resident’s escalation request and recurring delays sending its complaint responses. Furthermore, in this case, we have been unable to identify evidence of learning the landlord took from the resident’s complaint. Or what steps it would take to prevent similar happening again. This is not consistent with the Code.
We order the landlord to pay £70 compensation. This is made up of £50 for missing opportunities in January and July 2024 to escalate the resident’s complaint and £20 for sending both stage responses late. This is consistent with our remedies guide when a landlord has not appropriately acknowledged matters and not fully put things right.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration with the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property and the associated repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure with the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

We order the landlord to take the following action within 4 working weeks of the date of this report. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence that it has complied with these orders:
1. Pay the resident a total of £420 compensation. This is made up of:
  1. £350 for the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property and the associated repairs. The landlord may deduct £150 offered during its internal complaints process, if already paid.
  2. £70 for the time and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling.
2. Arrange or demonstrate that a suitably qualified person has completed a further property inspection since the stage 2 final response in September 2024. The evidence must include the landlord’s findings, recommendations, and details of any work completed or that requires monitoring.

Recommendations

We recommend the landlord ensures all complaint responses include identified learning opportunities.