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.

Freebridge Community Housing Limited (202447154)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202447154

Freebridge Community Housing Limited

27 August 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 handling of the resident’s reports of damp, mould, and structural concerns.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. She moved into the property in September 2022. The property is a 2 bedroom house. At the time of the complaint, the resident lived in the property with her partner and young child.
  2. The resident first reported mould on her hall and kitchen walls to the landlord on 10 October 2022. The landlord arranged for a plumber to check for leaks and arranged to complete a mould wash of the affected areas. However, the resident reported on 17 November 2022 that the damp and mould had got much worse.
  3. The resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord on 15 November 2023. She said the landlord had treated the mould but it was growing back in the downstairs rooms and on the upstairs ceilings.
  4. The landlord sent the resident a stage 1 complaint response on 28 November 2023. It said it had carried out a survey of the property and it had identified some follow up work to address the damp and mould. It apologised that it had not yet addressed the underlying cause. It said it had booked works in to address the damp and mould. The landlord offered the resident £100 compensation for the delays and inconvenience.
  5. Following escalation of the complaint to stage 2 on 24 January 2024, the landlord sent the resident a stage 2 response on 21 February 2024. It accepted that there had been a lack of sufficient communication and a delay in dealing with the damp and mould. It said it had instructed a surveyor to assess the roof and it had asked the repairs team to raise some outstanding work. The landlord increased its offer of compensation to £250.
  6. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, so referred her complaint to the Ombudsman. The resident said she wanted the landlord to identify the root cause of the issues, resolve the damp and mould, and pay adequate compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. Throughout the complaint and in communication with this Service, the resident said this situation had a detrimental impact on her and her son’s health and wellbeing. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. This is largely because independent medical experts are appointed to give evidence. They have a duty to the court to provide unbiased insights on the diagnosis, prognosis, and cause of any illness or injury. When disputes arise over the cause of an injury, oral testimony can be examined in court. While the Ombudsman cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced because of any service failure by the landlord.

The resident’s reports of damp, mould, and structural concerns

  1. The landlord does have a separate damp and mould policy. However, it manages reports of damp and mould through its repairs policy and it uses its standard repairs timeframes when allocating the work. It does not specify a particular timeframe for reports of damp and mould.
  2. The evidence shows the resident first raised concerns of damp and mould with the landlord on 10 October 2022. She reported mould on the walls in the hall and kitchen. The landlord raised a request for a loft inspection and raised a job to renew slates to the kitchen roof on 12 October 2022.
  3. The landlord sent a plumber out to check for leaks on 14 October 2022. This was in line with the landlord’s timeframe of 7 days for urgent repairs. The landlord also raised a job to carry out a mould wash. However, there is no evidence to show that the mould wash was completed.
  4. The resident contacted the landlord on 16 November 2022. She reported that there was cracking to the walls in every room and the plaster was coming away from the walls. The resident asked the landlord to inspect her property. The landlord asked her to send in photographs of the issues and said it would take it from there.
  5. The resident sent the landlord photographs of the damp, mould, and cracks in the walls by email on 17 November 2022. She said winter was approaching and the issues in her home were getting worse. She asked the landlord for help. The resident contacted the landlord by telephone on 22 November 2022 to chase a response. The landlord said only 1 of the resident’s photographs was a concern. However, it is unclear from the information provided what that concern was and whether the landlord raised any repairs to address it.
  6. The landlord’s repairs policy says, in general, it will pre-inspect reports of condensation, damp or mouldy conditions. It also says the need for a pre-inspection will not affect the overall priority timescale for the repair. However, even though the resident had raised concerns of damp and mould, and sent photographs of the issues, there is no evidence to show that the landlord arranged an inspection at this point. This was inappropriate in the circumstances given that the resident told the landlord the damp and mould was getting worse and she had asked the landlord to inspect.
  7. The resident contacted the landlord again on 28 November 2022 to chase a response to her concerns about the kitchen roof tiles. She said she had been told that someone would get back to her, but she had not heard from the landlord. The records show the landlord raised a further job to renew the roof tiles as the earlier job raised on 12 October 2022 was still outstanding. This meant the work had not been completed within the timeframe of 28 days set within the landlord’s repairs policy for routine repairs.
  8. The resident raised concerns that her property did not have a damp proof course on 29 November 2022. A landlord internal email dated 2 December 2022 also said the resident had reported damp and mould where the fire had previously been blocked up. The landlord contacted the resident on 6 December 2022 to ask for more photographs. It said it was unable to arrange for a surveyor to attend without pictures.
  9. It is unclear from the evidence provided why the landlord could not arrange for a surveyor to attend until it had photographs. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to request the photographs once it had raised the inspection order, while waiting for the surveyor to attend. Photographs can be a useful diagnostic tool. However, it would depend on the quality of the camera as to how useful the picture was and ultimately the landlord would need to take damp readings before diagnosing damp.
  10. The landlord’s repairs policy refers to the use of pre-inspections for reports of damp and mould. It does not mention the requirement to provide photographs before raising an inspection request. Besides, the resident had already provided photographs in November 2022.Therefore, in this case, it would be reasonable to conclude that the need to provide further photographs was an unnecessary delay in the inspection process.
  11. The resident sent further photographs and the landlord raised a request for a surveyor to attend the resident’s property on 9 December 2022. The evidence shows the landlord completed a damp, mould, and condensation assessment tool on 24 January 2023. This was 43 days (excluding bank holidays) from the date the inspection was requested, and outside of the timeframe of 28 days for routine repairs. The report showed that there was damp and mould on the kitchen, hallway, stairs, and bedroom walls.
  12. The landlord arranged for a further inspection to take place. It originally booked the inspection for 14 February 2023, however the resident re-arranged the appointment date to 9 March 2023 due to her availability.
  13. The survey report shows that the landlord found damp in the living room and kitchen. It also found mould around most windows. It concluded that the damp was likely linked to roof drainage, ground levels, and cold spots along the edge of the roof. It also found hairline cracks on the stair bulkhead and around windows. It said they were likely caused by thermal cracking.
  14. The landlord raised several external repairs including the renewal of the rear downpipe, repairs to the front door, repairs to external walls, new insulation in the loft, new tiles in the bathroom, installation of a new radiator on the landing, and a mould wash of the affected areas.
  15. The landlord completed a mould wash on 11 May 2023. It is unclear from the evidence provided exactly when the other identified repairs were completed. However, the evidence shows an email from the landlord’s contractor dated 9 May 2023 which said they had almost finished the damp works. The contractor also said there was further work that needed to be addressed, although the work did not relate to damp apart from the bathroom fan being in the wrong position. It would therefore be reasonable to assume that the damp repairs took around 2 months from the date of the survey to complete. This was outside of the timeframe of 28 days for routine repairs.
  16. The evidence shows the resident contacted the landlord on or around 6 September 2023 to report that there was still a problem with damp and mould in her property. The landlord completed a further mould wash on 27 October 2023, almost 2 months later. The job ticket shows the operative informed the landlord that the chimney breast had a large damp patch on it.
  17. The resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord on 15 November 2023. She said the landlord had been out to treat the damp and mould in her property but the treatment had not been effective and it had been unable to find the root cause. She said her carpets smelt of mould and mould was growing very quickly on her upstairs ceilings. She said there was mould in every single room. The resident said she thought it was rising damp.
  18. The evidence shows the landlord confirmed in internal emails dated 15 November 2023 and 22 November 2023 that it needed to treat the mould as a matter of urgency as it was a health risk. The landlord confirmed on 23 November 2023 that it had spoken to the resident and booked the mould wash and damp treatment in for 17 January 2024. It is unclear from the evidence provided what priority the landlord had given the work. However, there is no evidence to suggest the resident delayed the appointment.
  19. This was an unreasonable delay because the appointment was outside of both the 7 days for urgent repairs and 28 days for routine repairs. The delay was particularly concerning as the landlord was aware that there was a young child living in the property, and young children are more likely to be susceptible to the effects of damp and mould.
  20. The landlord sent the resident a stage 1 response on 28 November 2023. It said it had carried out a survey on 9 March 2023 and it had identified follow up work to address the damp and mould. It said the treatment had not been effective due to other required works. It said it was sorry it had not addressed the underlying reason and said a breakdown in communication had resulted in works not being completed. It accepted that the level of service received by the resident was not at an acceptable standard.
  21. The landlord said to put things right it had arranged to carry out a mould wash and damp treatment on 17 January 2024. It said it was arranging for quotes from contractors in relation to groundworks. It said it had arranged to inspect the rear downpipe on 24 November 2023, it would attend on 22 December 2023 to clear the gutters, and it would attend on 1 December 2023 to repair the plaster around the windows. The landlord offered the resident compensation of £100 for the delays and inconvenience.
  22. The resident sent photographs of her bedroom ceiling to the landlord on 12 December 2023 to show how much worse the damp and mould was. She asked the landlord to confirm when it would complete the drainage works, although she said she did not feel it would solve the problem. She said she had already told the landlord that her upstairs ceilings were wet to touch and dripped with water. She also said the wall around her bathroom window was wet and the mould growth was getting worse. She said she had been into the loft and she could see daylight coming in from the front of the house. She said more of her belongings had been damaged and she was concerned about the risk to her family’s health. In light of the resident’s reports and the extent of the reported issues, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to conduct a habitability assessment at this point to ensure the property was in a safe condition for the resident and her family.
  23. However, the landlord responded on 21 December 2023. It said it could not give an exact date for the drainage works, but it hoped it would be imminent. It asked the resident for photographs of the light showing through the roof. Although it said not to worry if she did not have any as the surveyor could attend around the middle to end of January 2024 to assess the reported issues. This was unreasonable in the circumstances. The landlord did not show any urgency or concern. It was aware of the history of the issues with damp and mould and, at this point, the issues had been ongoing for over 12 months.
  24. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 24 January 2024 during a telephone conversation with the landlord. She told the landlord that her 2 year old child had been getting coughs from the damp and mould. During the call the landlord confirmed that it had not yet started the works, although it said it had booked some in. It also said the surveyor could not revisit until mid to late February 2024.
  25. The landlord sent the resident a stage 2 response on 21 February 2024. It accepted that there had been a lack of sufficient communication and delays in dealing with the damp and mould. It confirmed it had completed the drainage work and it had instructed the repairs team to arrange the work to the gutters. It said a surveyor would also assess the roof. It said it would be in touch to book the appointments. It said it would provide a dehumidifier and reimburse the resident for the running costs. It also provided contact details for the tenancy team so the resident could discuss options to move. The landlord also increased the offer of compensation to £250.
  26. Although the landlord appropriately apologised for the delays in taking action and the lack of sufficient communication and it offered increased compensation, it did not fully recognise its failings. It did not acknowledge the full extent of the delays or the effect the delays had on the resident and her family. It did not acknowledge the full extent of the damp and mould or its lack of urgency to raise inspection requests and repairs. The response itself showed a lack of urgency by not booking the work in prior to issuing the response. It also did not recognise the resident’s concerns as to the habitability of the property and the wellbeing of her family.
  27. In addition, the evidence shows the roof assessment did not take place until 25 March 2024. It is unclear from the evidence provided when the landlord completed the work to the gutters. However, both the resident and the landlord have told us that there was still a substantial amount of mould in the property on 1 October 2024. The landlord moved the resident and her family to temporary accommodation between 7 November 2024 and April 2025, so that it could carry out substantial works.
  28. The resident has also told us that the landlord moved her into temporary accommodation again since then, for a period of 2 weeks. She said the issues have still not been completely resolved. The resident has also confirmed that the landlord has paid her compensation of more than £3,000 to cover the cost of items (such as carpets, clothing and furniture etc) damaged by the damp and mould.
  29. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, we will consider whether the redress offered put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  30. Having considered all the circumstances of the case, while the landlord has recognised that there were failings in the case, as set out above, and it did make attempts to address the cause of the damp and mould, it has not shown it has recognised all the failings. As such, it has not done enough to fully resolve or learn from the complaint, and on that basis, we find that there has been maladministration. Therefore, although the amount offered by the landlord for distress and inconvenience was the maximum it could offer under its compensation policy, we consider the offer of £250 insufficient to reflect the resident’s circumstances and the impact of the landlord’s failings over a significant length of time.
  31. We consider an order for the landlord to pay the resident £600 compensation (inclusive of the landlord’s original offer) to be appropriate in the circumstances. This is in line with our remedies guidance where there was a failure which adversely affected the resident and the landlord acknowledged failings but the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation.
  32. We have also made additional orders in relation to the damp, mould and structural concerns and for the landlord to apologise to the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp, mould and structural concerns.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks from the date of the report, the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident, in writing, for the failings identified in this report. A senior manager must make the apology on behalf of the landlord.
    2. Pay the resident compensation of £600 (the landlord may deduct from this amount the £250 compensation it previously offered if this has already been paid) in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the resident’s reports of damp, mould and structural concerns.
    3. Pay the compensation directly to the resident.
    4. Arrange for an appropriately qualified surveyor to carry out a full damp and mould survey and a structural survey of the property.
    5. Consider the habitability of the property and whether a temporary move is needed for the resident and their family while any identified work is carried out.
    6. Within 2 weeks of the survey the landlord must:
      1. Provide a copy of the surveyor’s report to both the resident and the Ombudsman.
      2. The report must include details of the likely cause of any unresolved damp, mould and structural issues, and any necessary works to resolve the identified issues.
      3. Within 4 weeks of the date of the surveyor’s report the landlord must begin any identified works. If it is unable to meet this deadline the landlord must notify both the resident and us, providing a clear explanation for the delay.
  2. The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.