From 13 January 2026, we 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.

Plus Dane Housing Limited (202305218)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202305218

Plus Dane Housing Limited

17 June 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 landlords handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of a leak and the associated roof repairs.
    2. Reports of damp and mould in the bedrooms of his home.
    3. Associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

  1. The resident has been an assured tenant of the landlord since 2018. The property is a 2 bedroom, top floor apartment.
  2. The resident reported a leak on 25 December 2022. The landlord’s roofing contractor completed a roof inspection on 31 January 2023. It recommended the landlord arrange a full roof survey.
  3. The landlord’s roofing contractor completed a roof survey on 13 March 2023. It recommended the landlord replace the roof. It also suggested several short-term repairs.
  4. The resident raised a stage 1 complaint on 28 April 2023. He was unhappy that the landlord had not repaired the roof of the building yet. The landlord visited the resident on 11 May 2023. He showed the landlord stains on the ceilings of both bedrooms and a missing vent cover.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 11 May 2023. It apologised for the delays in completing the roof repairs. It explained the works were extensive and it had needed to fully consider the quotation from its contractor. It assured him its roofing contractor would begin the repairs on 12 May 2023. It said the roofing contractor would also clear his gutters and replace the vent cover. It also arranged for its damp and mould contractor to repair the bedroom ceilings. It awarded him £75 compensation for distress and inconvenience.
  6. The resident e-mailed the landlord on 12 May 2023. He refused the £75 compensation and said he wanted to escalate his complaint.
  7. The landlord’s roofing contractor completed the short-term repairs to the roof on 16 May 2023. It also replaced the vent cover. It was unable to clear the gutter due to the presence of nesting birds.
  8. The resident contacted the landlord on 11 August 2023 to chase up a response to his complaint. The landlord increased its offer of compensation to £250. The resident accepted its offer.
  9. Also on 11 August 2023, the landlord’s damp and mould contractor completed a mould treatment in both bedrooms. It also resealed the window in the second bedroom. It did not repair the ceiling.
  10. The resident contacted this Service in July 2023 because the landlord had not provided a stage 2 response. We contacted the landlord on 1 and 29 September 2023 to ask it to respond to his stage 2 complaint.
  11. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 13 October 2023. It told the resident that:
    1. Its roofing contractor completed the repairs to the building’s roof on 16 May 2023.
    2. Its damp and mould contractor completed the repairs to the ceilings in both bedrooms on 11 August 2023.
    3. It apologised for the delay in completing the bedroom ceiling repairs.
    4. It apologised that it did not escalate his complaint to stage 2 after his 12 May 2023 e-mail.
    5. When he accepted the increased £250 compensation in August 2023 he did not say he wanted further compensation so it did not escalate his complaint to stage 2.
    6. It had decided to award him a further £300 compensation broken down as £150 for its failure to escalate his complaint to stage 2 and £150 for the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident from its poor communication.
  12. The resident escalated his complaint to this Service on 5 December 2023. He was unhappy with the amount of compensation the landlord awarded. He does not feel it acknowledges the length of the delays in responding to repairs and his complaint. He has asked for increased compensation.
  13. The landlord replaced the roof of the building with works completed on 25 April 2024.
  14. In another call with this Service in June 2025 the resident said the landlord had filled in the holes in the bedroom ceilings. He said its repairs have not been long lasting and there are still patches of damp. He also said there are cracks in the plaster on the ceiling caused from the period where the roof was repaired.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has said that the issues have had a negative effect on his mental health. Whilst this service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. However, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident may have experienced as a result of any service failure by the landlord.

Handling of reports of a leak and associated roof repairs

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will only respond to emergency repairs out of hours where they are considered life or property threatening. It lists examples include major leaks that cannot be contained. It aims to complete repairs by appointment within 28 calendar days. It considers roof leaks where there is no danger in relation to health and safety as a repair by appointment. Its policy allows it 90 days to complete major repairs. This includes repairs where scaffolding is required and roof tiling.
  2. When the resident first reported the leak on 25 December 2022 he told the landlord he had contained it with a bucket. It acted in line with its repairs policy when it treated it as a repair by appointment, rather than emergency.
  3. The 37 calendar days it took the landlord to complete an inspection of the roof was slightly outside its repair timescales. The landlord noted it completed the inspection within 28 days of its office reopening after the Christmas period. In its stage 2 response it also referred to the resident rearranging an earlier appointment to that date.
  4. The landlord’s roof contractor completed a full roof survey on 13 March 2023. Given it would have had to wait for the outcome of the earlier inspection that recommended the survey it was reasonable the survey was completed slightly outside the 28 day timescale.
  5. The landlord’s approach at stage 1 was reasonable. It was appropriate it explained the reason for the delay and assured him the roof repairs would begin on 12 May 2023. It also showed it had taken the results of the inspections seriously. The £75 it offered for the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident recognised it had not completed the repairs as quickly as it should have under its repairs policy. The landlord’s compensation policy allows it to award up to £500 compensation for low impact failings. The £75 awarded falls within the service failure banding of this Service’s remedies guidance.
  6. The landlord’s contractor completed the roofing repairs on 16 May 2023. That was within the 90 day timescale for major repairs from the March 2023 roof survey. Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 it is illegal to disturb nesting birds, so it was reasonable that it did not clear the gutters. Although it is not clear it explained this to the resident. There is no evidence it made arrangements to clear the gutters at a later date. As it had assured the resident it would have clear the gutters it should have explained to him why it could not complete that work. It would have given it an opportunity to agree to revisit the work at a later date. It was appropriate it completed the remainder of the works it had assured the resident of in its stage 1 response.
  7. Given it had completed the roof repairs within 90 days of the roof survey it was reasonable the landlord increased its offer of compensation to £250 in August 2023. As it had already increased its offer of compensation it was appropriate it repeated its position at stage 2. It was reasonable that it awarded him a further £150 for its poor communication. It did not apportion that amount between the issues he had raised.
  8. Taken in isolation the delays in completing the initial roof inspection, survey and approving the quote were reasonable. While the landlord completed the roof repairs within the 90 days allowed under its repairs policy the cumulative effect of the delays resulted in it taking 141 days to complete the roof repairs. That meant the resident had to live with a leaking roof for almost 5 months. The landlord recognised that in August 2022 when it increased its compensation to £250. Taking that into consideration, alongside the £150 it awarded him for its poor communication and had it delivered on all the assurances it made to repair the roof the landlord’s approach would have been reasonable. However, as it left the clearing of the gutters outstanding there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak and the associated repairs.
  9. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a further £100 compensation to reflect the inconvenience caused by it failing to reschedule the clearing of the gutters. That amount falls within the service failure banding of this Services’ remedies guidance. It is awarded in addition to the £250 the landlord awarded in its stage 2 response for its handling of the roof repairs.

Handling of reports of damp and mould in the bedrooms

  1. The landlord’s damp and mould policy states that it will complete an inspection when a resident makes a report of damp and mould. It says it will track cases through to completion. When it refers work to its damp and mould contractor it should communicate with the resident before it closes the repair job to ensure the problem has been rectified.
  2. The landlord acted in line with its damp and mould policy when it arranged a damp and mould survey following the resident’s reports of damp patches on his bedroom ceilings. The survey, completed on 23 February 2023 recommended mould treatments to both rooms and the removal of window sealant and its replacement in the second bedroom. Given the damp and mould survey identified the cause of the damp and mould was leaks from the roof it was reasonable the landlord waited to complete the roof repairs before it arranged the bedroom repairs. An internal landlord note from 11 May 2023 shows the resident agreed to that approach.
  3. It was not appropriate that the landlord did not schedule in the bedroom repairs following the completion of roof repairs on 16 May 2023. In not doing so it failed to honour the assurance it made in its stage 1 response. It would have been appropriate for it to have completed the damp and mould repairs within 28 calendar days of the completion of the roofing works in line with its repairs policy.
  4. It was not until the resident chased the bedroom repairs on 11 August 2023 that the landlord raised a repair with its contractor. It told him it would fill the hole but would not skim the whole ceiling “for now”. It said its contractor would assess the ceiling when it attended. It was reasonable that the landlord was able to complete a mould treatment to both bedrooms and re-seal 1 of the bedroom windows the same day. The contractor’s notes show the resident told it not to paint the ceiling because it was to be skimmed. In not communicating with the resident before it closed that repair job it did not follow its damp and mould policy. It missed an opportunity to establish what repairs remained outstanding. While it told the resident it did not plan to skim the ceiling “for now” it should have provided him with clarity following its contractor’s visit.
  5. The landlord provided inaccurate information in its stage 2 response. It told the resident its contractor had filled the hole and skimmed the bedroom ceiling on 11 August 2023. In telling him that it did not show it understood what repairs its contractor had completed. As it was unaware the ceiling repairs remained outstanding it did not remedy those repairs as part of its stage 2 response. In awarding £150 compensation for its poor communication across both issues the landlord made some attempt to put things right at stage 2. It was also appropriate it apologised for the delay in completing the repairs to the bedrooms. However, it missed an opportunity to award the resident further compensation specific to its failings in completing those repairs.
  6. The length of time taken to complete the damp and mould repairs to the bedrooms from 16 May to 11 August 2023 was not appropriate. The landlord did not show it was effectively monitoring the repairs. It was only following further contact from the resident it completed repairs. The landlord also failed to understand what repairs had been completing during that appointment which meant it did not put that right in its stage 2 response. While it put some matters right at stage 2 it did not go far enough. Considering delay in completing the mould treatments and that the repairs to the bedroom ceiling remained outstanding there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  7. The landlord should pay the resident £200 compensation for the distress and inconvenience of him having to chase up the damp and mould related repairs to his bedrooms. That amount falls within the maladministration banding of this Service’s remedies guidance and is in line with the landlord’s compensation policy for low impact failings. That amount is in addition to the compensation the landlord awarded in its stage 2 response.
  8. The resident has mentioned that the landlord has since completed some repairs to the bedroom ceilings. The landlord has not provided this Service with evidence showing what works it has completed. As the resident told this Service the issue regarding the holes and damp patches remain the landlord is ordered to inspect the ceilings of both bedrooms. It should consider whether further repairs are required, including whether it would be appropriate to skim the ceilings.

Complaint handling

  1. Under the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) in place at the time of the resident’s complaint, a landlord should acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It must provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days of receiving the complaint. If the resident requires an escalation, it should respond to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The landlord’s complaints policy in place at the time of the resident’s complaint was compliant with the Code.
  2. The resident raised a stage 1 complaint on 21 April 2023. The landlord acknowledged his complaint within the 5 working days allowed under the Code on 28 April 2023. It provided its stage 1 response on 11 May 2023. While that was 3 working days later than it should have responded the impact on the resident of such a delay would not be significant. It was also positive that the landlord attended the resident’s home as part of its investigation. That showed it had taken his concerns seriously.
  3. The resident contacted the landlord on 12 May 2023 to refuse the offer of compensation made in its stage 1 response. It was not appropriate that the landlord took no action following that e-mail. It should have contacted him to discuss his concerns and establish whether he wanted to escalate his complaint. That inconvenienced the resident because he was unaware the landlord was not acting on his complaint until he approached this Service in July 2023.
  4. We wrote to the landlord on 1 September 2023 to remind it of its obligations under the Code. We asked it to provide its stage 2 response to the resident within 5 working days. It was not appropriate that it did not respond to us or send its response to the resident. We contacted it again on 29 September 2023 and again gave it another 5 working days to provide its stage 2 response.
  5. The landlord responded to this Service on 30 September 2023. It apologised that it had not responded sooner. It said it would aim to provide its response shortly after 10 October 2023. While that was more than the 5 working days we had set it, as it had already resolved the majority of the repair issues the impact of a minor delay would not be significant. As we had updated the resident he was aware of the escalation so there was no detriment in the landlord’s failure to acknowledge his stage 2 complaint. It provided its stage 2 response on 13 October 2023.
  6. The landlord’s complaint handling at stage 1 was reasonable. However, its handling of the resident’s escalation request was not appropriate. In not responding to his initial request it caused him inconvenience because he felt he had to approach this Service prematurely. It also failed to show it had taken its obligations under the Code seriously when it did not respond to our initial request for it to respond to the resident.
  7. Usually, the failings identified in the landlord’s complaint handling would amount to a maladministration determination. However, in its stage 2 response the landlord awarded the resident £150 for its delay in responding to his stage 2 complaint. As that amount falls within the maladministration banding of this Service’s remedies guidance the landlord has made an offer of reasonable redress for its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak and the associated repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the bedrooms of his home.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 53 (b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord has made an offer of reasonable redress in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Apologise to the resident for the delays in completing the damp and mould related repairs to his bedrooms and for not rescheduling the clearing of the gutters.
    2. Pay the resident a total of £550 compensation. The landlord is entitled to deduct the £250 it awarded the resident in its stage 2 response for its response to the roof repairs if it has paid that amount already. The compensation is broken down as:
      1. £350 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the roof repairs following a leak.
      2. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of damp and mould related repairs.
    3. Complete an inspection of the ceilings of both bedrooms. If it identifies further repairs are required it should schedule those to be completed within 4 weeks of the date of its inspection.
    4. Complete an inspection of the gutters of the block to establish whether it is able to clear them. If it is able to, it should arrange for the gutters to be cleared within 4 weeks of the date of its inspection.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should pay the resident the £300 compensation awarded in its stage 2 response for its poor communication and complaint handling delays, if it has not done so already.