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

Town and Country Housing (202219392)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202219392

Town and Country Housing

30 April 2025


Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
    1. Reports of damp and mould.
    2. Request for reimbursement for damaged items.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. It records noted that she had physical disabilities. The property is a 2-bedroomed ground floor flat.
  2. The resident reported a leak to the landlord on 24 March 2023 from her bathroom which it attended as an emergency. On 28 March 2023, the resident said the leak had gone through the wall into the lounge and had damaged her wallpaper and carpet. The landlord inspected on 19 April 2023 and raised repairs for the next day for the bathroom wall and to wash mould and repaint. The landlord has said that the mould wash could not be completed that day due to too many workers being present in the bathroom.
  3. The landlord attempted to carry out the mould wash on 25 April 2023, but the resident said she was not informed of the appointment. 3 further appointments up to 23 June 2023 were unsuccessful as these were cancelled by the resident or the landlord could not gain access.
  4. On 7 July 2023 the resident said she was unhappy with the progress of repairs. The landlord raised a stage 1 complaint about this on 12 July 2023.
  5. The landlord attempted to inspect the property on 19 and 25 July 2023 but the resident cancelled the first appointment, and it could not access the property on the second. During August 2023, the landlord chased the resident for her availability for the inspection.
  6. On 11 September 2023 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response to the resident. It acknowledged that it had initially planned the works poorly by scheduling in too many workers on 20 April 2023. The landlord highlighted that its subsequent attempts to complete the work had been delayed by the resident cancelling or not providing access for appointments. It confirmed that it had agreed to carry out an inspection on 26 September 2023 to inspect the issues in the property and plan a schedule of repairs. There is no evidence to confirm whether the inspection went ahead or what the outcome of this was.
  7. On 1 February 2023 the landlord attended to carry out mould treatment in the lounge and bathroom of the property. The resident wanted the work to be completed within 1 day and the landlord rescheduled the job for when 2 workers would be available.
  8. The resident raised a new stage 1 complaint with the landlord on 7 February 2024. She raised this as it had told her that she needed to raise a complaint to seek reimbursement for her wallpaper and carpet which had been damaged by the damp. On 4 March 2024 the resident cancelled an appointment for the work as she was unwell. On 15 March 2024 the landlord’s surveyor carried out an ad hoc inspection of the property when in the area on other business. It found that there was significant damp and mould in the bathroom, and poor ventilation elsewhere in the property. The landlord noted that the position of guttering outside the child bedroom may be contributing to dampness.
  9. The landlord provided a further stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 19 March 2024. It said, while it would make good areas affected by its repairs, to allow for redecoration, it could not offer compensation for her decorations which may be damaged by the upcoming work. The landlord acknowledged that there had been a delay in arranging the work but noted that the resident had cancelled its repair appointments. It therefore said that it did not consider itself responsible for any damage which may have been due to the resident delaying the repairs.
  10. The resident escalated her complaint to the final stage of the landlord’s process on 25 March 2024. She said she had been experiencing damp and mould for several years which was now in the bathroom, lounge, child bedroom and at the back door. She wanted compensation to cover damage to her child’s mattress and bedding, a wardrobe, her carpet and wallpaper.
  11. The landlord issued its final complaint response to the resident on 17 May 2024. It acknowledged that it had been slow to resolve the damp and mould but said that some delays had been due to the resident cancelling appointments and not granting access. It confirmed it would put a programme of work in place to resolve the damp and mould. The landlord offered the resident £1,483 compensation, made up of £300 to recognise her distress and inconvenience, and £1,183 to reimburse her for damaged possessions.
  12. The landlord carried out a damp and mould survey on 24 July 2024. After being unable to gain access to do work on 2 occasions, it wrote to the resident on 3 October 2024 to set out the scope of work and confirm her responsibility to allow access under the tenancy agreement.
  13. The landlord told us that it completed work to remedy the damp and mould by 21 October 2024.
  14. On 7 April 2025 the resident told us that she was still experiencing damp and mould in the property.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident told us that the issues with damp and mould in the property have been ongoing since 2020. However, there is no evidence of the resident reporting the issues which were the subject of her recent complaint to the landlord before March 2023. Therefore, this investigation focuses on events from March 2023 onwards.
  2. This is in line with paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme. This says that the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints which were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period. This would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould

  1. The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (the Act) sets out that the landlord is required to maintain the structure and exterior of the property and the installations within for the provision of power and sanitation. The Act also confirms that a resident must provide access to the landlord to carry out repairs. This is so long as it has given them at least 24 hours’ notice (unless in an emergency), and it attends at a reasonable time of day.
  2. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy confirms that when it is unable to gain access to the resident’s property on a pre-agreed appointment, it will cancel the repair and ask the resident to rebook. The policy also says that if a resident fails to provide access for an agreed appointment, the landlord may recharge its costs for the appointment to the resident.
  3. When a landlord receives a report of damp and mould, the Ombudsman would expect it to respond promptly to inspect it. It should carry out urgent repairs, if required, to reduce any risk to the resident and complete work to address the underlying cause of the damp and mould. The Ombudsman’s “Spotlight on: Damp and mould – It’s not lifestyle” report, published in October 2021, set out that landlords should take a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould, and be proactive in remedying the causes.
  4. The landlord acted reasonably by carrying out an inspection on 19 April 2023 within 4 weeks of the resident’s report of damp on 24 March 2023. It was also reasonable that it acted promptly to carry out repairs on 20 April 2023. However, it was a failure by the landlord in organising for 2 different trades to attend on the same day, leading to the mould work being postponed.
  5. There may be legitimate reasons why a resident is unable to allow access for an appointment. The Ombudsman is not commenting on the resident’s reasons for not granting access, However, the landlord cannot be held responsible for the subsequent delay in carrying out the mould work in the bathroom as the resident did not provide access. It would not be reasonable to expect the landlord to make progress in dealing with the damp and mould if it cannot access the property. There was evidence that the landlord made regular attempts to agree appointments with the resident between May and September 2023. This demonstrated that it was acting proactively to address the damp and mould.
  6. However, was unclear if the inspection scheduled for 26 September 2023 took place. There are no records of contacts or appointments between September 2023 and February 2024. This is a recordkeeping failure by the landlord.
  7. The landlord is expected to keep robust record of contacts and repairs to provide an audit trail. When events are disputed and there are gaps in records, the Ombudsman is unable to conclude that the landlord acted reasonably or in line with its obligations. Therefore, we are unable to conclude that between September 2023 and February 2024 it took reasonable steps to complete the repairs. The landlord was not responsible for the subsequent lack of progress with the repairs in February and March 2023, as the evidence showed that the resident did not provide access to the property.
  8. Overall, the landlord’s failings in progressing the damp and mould work were not the most significant factor contributing to the overall delay and the difficulty gaining access was more significant. Therefore, its offer of £300 compensation in its final response was a proportionate offer to recognise the inconvenience caused by its failings. This offer was broadly in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, which is available to view on our website and sets out our approach to compensation. This says that awards of compensation of between £100 and £600 are appropriate where there has been a failing by the landlord which caused distress and/or inconvenience but did not have a permanent impact on the resident.
  9. The evidence also showed that the landlord made reasonable attempts to follow through with the programme of work it proposed in its final complaint response. This demonstrated its commitment to resolving the damp and mould for the resident. Therefore, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord made an offer of redress to the resident which satisfactorily resolves the complaint about its response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  10. Going forward, it is recommended that the landlord inspects the property as the resident is continuing to report damp and mould after repairs were completed in October 2024.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for reimbursement for damaged items

  1. The landlord‘s compensation procedure states that it will consider claims for damage to a resident’s possessions if it decides not to refer the claim to its liability insurer. To do so it requires ‘proof of ownership’, such as photographs or receipts, and will consider depreciation and when damage occurred. The procedure states that if the resident is unable to evidence ownership or damage to the items they are claiming for, it will not provide any compensation.
  2. When there is evidence of damage to a resident’s possessions caused by a landlord’s failings, the Ombudsman would expect it to consider reimbursing them. We would expect the landlord to base any calculation of reimbursement on evidence of the resident’s costs.
  3. The landlord’s final response noted that the resident had provided it with a list of damaged items without any proof of ownership or evidence of the cost of the items. Despite this, it offered the resident £1,183 in its final response to reimburse her for her claimed damaged items. In the circumstances, the landlord’s policy above states that it is not obligated to provide any compensation or reimbursement.
  4. It was positive that the landlord made the offer of £1,183 to the resident, in excess of its obligation. This demonstrated that the landlord took the resident’s concerns seriously and it was committed to resolving the issues for her. However, it may have been useful for the landlord to explain to the resident how it had arrived at this figure, given the lack of evidence.
  5. We would not order the landlord to increase its offer for the damaged possessions in the absence of any evidence to show that the value of the items was more than the landlord has offered.
  6. The landlord should not have told the resident that she needed to raise a complaint in order for her claim for reimbursement to be considered. This is not specified in the landlord’s compensation procedure. It was appropriate that the landlord acknowledged this and apologised for the incorrect information in its stage 1 response on 19 March 2024. As the landlord corrected the error promptly, its apology for this was suitable redress.
  7. Overall, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord made a reasonable offer of redress to the resident to satisfy this aspect of the complaint.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered redress to the resident which satisfactorily resolves the complaints concerning its response to the resident’s:
    1. Reports of damp and mould.
    2. Request for reimbursement of her damaged possessions.

Orders and recommendations

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should:
    1. Pay the resident the total of £1,483 compensation it offered her in its final complaint response, if it has not done so already. The Ombudsman’s finding of reasonable redress is based on the understanding that this compensation will be paid.
    2. Contact the resident to arrange an inspection in response to her reports of continuing damp and mould.