From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

Stonewater Limited (202323307)

Back to Top

 

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202323307

Stonewater Limited

23 September 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:
    1. Handling of the resident’s report of roof repairs and damp issues in her home.
    2. Complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a shared owner of a new-build 3 bedroom house from 23 November 2018. The resident is responsible for repairing and keeping the “premises in good and substantial repair and condition”.
  2. The evidence shows on 9 February 2020 the resident reported tiles had fallen off her roof. Up until mid-2023, she reported 3 further instances of falling tiles. While the landlord inspected the roof in April 2023, it has not undertaken any repairs.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 28 July 2023. She explained the ongoing roof issues had led to damp in her home. She complained that her roofers had told her that the roof had been poorly constructed and therefore she wanted the landlord to resolve the issues. She was also dissatisfied with the landlord’s poor communication.
  4. The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response on 11 October 2023 when it said it did not repair shared ownership properties. While it said it would not pay for any damage, it apologised for its poor communication for which it offered £75 compensation.
  5. The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated her complaint on 25 October 2023. She said the landlord had only addressed her concern about the damp issue and not the roof. The landlord’s final complaint response of 13 November 2023 restated its position and repeated its £75 compensation offer.
  6. The resident brought her complaint to the Ombudsman on 21 January 2024. She is seeking compensation from the landlord as she says the landlord provided her with a property which she says was not properly constructed.

Assessment and findings

Investigation scope

  1. The resident has explained that her health conditions have been exacerbated by the stress of dealing with the matter. The Ombudsman is unable to assess the cause of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. The resident may be able to make a personal injury claim if she considers that her health has been affected by the landlord’s actions or inaction. This is a legal process, and the resident may wish to seek legal advice if she wants to pursue this option. This issue is more effectively resolved and remedied through the courts. It will not be considered in this report.
  2. The resident has told us she has made a new complaint to the landlord about the information it signposted her to, to resolve the repair issues. That complaint will not be considered in this investigation, which centres on the complaint made to the landlord in July and October 2023. Nonetheless, if the resident has exhausted the complaint process with her further complaint, she has the option to ask the Ombudsman to investigate it in a new investigation.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of roof repairs and damp issues

  1. The shared ownership lease states the resident has “the normal responsibilities of a full owner” and explains she will be required to “keep the property in good and substantial repair and condition”. The landlord is obliged to provide the building insurance details to the resident.
  2. The landlord’s web page ‘repairs and maintenance (homeowners) – I’m a shared owner’ says residents are responsible for all repairs to their home under their lease. It explains properties under 12 months old are within the defects liability period when the property developer will resolve repairs. After the expiry of this period, it sets out steps to follow to report defects including for NHBC policy claims. It says new properties are covered by the NHBC policy which is effective after the handover of the property from the developer to the landlord.
  3. The resident’s NHBC certificate confirms its Buildmark policy (warranty and insurance cover for new-build homes) was effective from 6 November 2018 to 5 November 2030.
  4. The defects liability period expired on 15 November 2019. The resident reported falling roof tiles to the landlord on 9 February 2020 after which it gave her the landlord’s insurer’s contact details. The insurers repaired the roof. From August 2020 to 2022, she continued to report to the landlord further roof issues, which were resolved by the insurers on each occasion. On 5 September 2022, the resident was informed by the insurers it would resolve the works for the final time. The evidence shows the insurers said there was “poor workmanship” with the initial roof tile installation. The evidence shows from October 2022, the resident asked the landlord to inspect the roof given the initial workmanship issues. In February 2023, she reported damp which she said was caused by the roof issues.
  5. The resident complained on 28 July 2023 about the roof and damp issues. She wanted the landlord to take responsibility for the repairs due to concerns about the quality of the new-build works. She said she had been told by her roofers and surveyors that the roof was poorly built, and they had recommended replacing a large section of tiles. She said despite sending the relevant details to the landlord, it had not responded. She stated it had also delayed responding to the NHBC (to allow an investigation), who she had herself contacted in early 2023. She asked the landlord to resolve the roof and damp issues, refund her insurance excess payments, and compensate her for the time trying to resolve the issue. She said her health and wellbeing had been negatively impacted.
  6. The landlord’s initial complaint response of 11 October 2023 said it would not pay for the damage caused by the “water coming in” as it did not repair shared ownership properties. It apologised for its poor communication and offered £75 compensation for this, and the time and trouble and distress caused to the resident. Following the resident’s escalation, its final complaint response of 13 November 2023 confirmed it was also unable to repair the roof for the reasons set out in its initial response. It repeated its initial apology, and the £75 compensation offered.
  7. While the resident’s distress and frustration are understandable, her lease and the landlord’s web page for repairs for shared owners confirms she is responsible for keeping the property in repair. The web page sets out clear information around how to report repairs before and after the defects liability period including claims under the NHBC policy. The landlord has told the Service the NHBC certificate was provided to the resident during the conveyancing process. By confirming the resident’s repair obligations, the landlord’s complaint responses resolved this part of her complaint.
  8. The resident complained about the landlord’s poor communication including it not responding to her emails about the assessments and recommendations about the roof (by her roofer and a surveyor). Both of the landlord’s complaint responses acknowledged, apologised, and offered compensation for its poor communication. This was reasonable.
  9. The Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account whether its offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  10. In this case, the landlord’s explanations are supported by the facts, and its apology and compensation offer were in line with the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance. It was proportionate to the distress and time and trouble experienced by the resident.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy states that it operates a 2 stage complaint process with complaint acknowledgments sent within 5 working days of the complaint and responses being issued within 10 working days at stage 1. It states if it needs longer than a further 10 working days, it will agree the extension deadline with the resident.
  2. The landlord’s initial complaint response of 11 October 2023 exceeded its policy timescales. The response should have been issued by mid-August 2023 had it been acknowledged and issued within its policy timescales. There is no evidence of an agreement with the resident to extend the response deadline or give her clear reasons for the extension.
  3. In neither complaint response did the landlord recognise its complaint handling failures. This was unreasonable as it meant it did not apply its complaints policy. It was also a failure to apply the Complaint Handling Code (Code) which requires an initial response within 10 working days. The Code also states that any extension must not be more than 10 working days without good reason, and which must be clearly explained.
  4. The landlord has not apologised or compensated the resident for its complaint handling failures which means the complaint has not been resolved.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which resolves the complaint satisfactorily concerning the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of roof repairs and damp issues in her home.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report the landlord must pay the resident £100 compensation for its complaint handling failures and the inconvenience caused. Evidence of payment must be provided to the Service by the deadline.

Recommendations

  1. If it has not done so already, the landlord should also now pay the £75 compensation previously offered. The determination is partly based on it doing so.