South Derbyshire District Council (202425889)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202425889

South Derbyshire District Council

07 October 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 handling of repairs to the bedroom ceiling and the property’s roof.
We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the complaint as part of the assessment.

Background

The resident is the tenant of the property the complaint concerns. The landlord owns the property. The resident’s tenancy started in July 2023.
The tenancy paperwork for the property recorded that the resident had vulnerabilities which included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.
The property is a 2 bedroom bungalow in sheltered accommodation.
On 9 August 2024 the resident made a complaint to the landlord about the repairs service it had provided. In summary the resident said:
1. The landlord had failed to remedy a leak into the bedroom since she first reported the issue in October 2023.
2. As a result of the leak the property had developed damp and mould.
3. She was aware the previous tenant of the property had also experienced the same issue with water coming into the bedroom. She stated that the issue should have been addressed while the property was void.
4. The ceiling in the bedroom was removed at the start of 2024 as it contained asbestos. She stated this should also have been completed while the property was void.
5. The landlord had not replaced the ceiling. She explained that plastic sheeting had been installed as a temporary measure.
6. The condition of the property was impacting on her health conditions.
On 28 August 2024 the landlord provided its stage 1 response. In summary the landlord said:
1. On receipt of the complaint it visited the property to assess the repair issues which the resident had raised in the complaint. The assessment found that repairs were required to the roof and the bedroom required plastering.
2. Scaffolding had been ordered as it was needed to complete the roof repairs.
The landlord concluded by apologising for the time taken to complete the repairs and for the inconvenience the resident had experienced as a result.
An internal record by the landlord on 7 October 2024 set out that the resident wished to escalate the complaint – no further details given.
On 22 October 2024 the landlord provided its stage 2, final, response. In summary the landlord said:
1. It had been let down by the roofing contractor it had employed to carry out the roof repairs. It had instructed a new contractor to complete the roof repairs and the works would be progressed as a “priority”. It noted that the resident had been contacted about a start date later that week.
2. Once the roof repairs had been completed it would complete the plastering in the bedroom.
3. It acknowledged that the repairs had been outstanding for a long time and its communication with the resident had been poor.
4. It would like to offer the resident compensation. It therefore requested to visit the property to see the repairs and discuss the payment with her.
The landlord concluded by confirming that the resident could refer the complaint to us if she was not happy with its response.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the bedroom ceiling and the property’s roof

Landlords have a legal obligation to carry out repairs in the properties they rent out. A landlord’s main repairing obligations are set out under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. Section 11 requires landlords to make repairs to the structure and exterior of the property. These obligations are also set out in the tenancy agreement for the property.
A landlord is not liable to carry out any repair until it has been put on notice of the need for repair. The landlord must then carry out the repair within a reasonable time thereafter. As the repairs reported by the resident fell within the repair obligations of the landlord, it was required to investigate and to make good any issues it identified.
We have not been provided with any evidence documenting that the resident contacted the landlord regarding a leak into the bedroom in October 2023. However the landlord has confirmed that the bedroom ceiling was removed on 22 March 2024 due to “severe water damage”. We can therefore say with reasonable confidence that the repair issues that the resident was raising as part of the complaint were outstanding from at least early 2024.
The landlord confirmed to us that the bedroom ceiling was not immediately replaced as the resident requested that the work was done after the “roofing works were completed”. The evidence shows that a tarpaulin sheet was hung in place to make a barrier between the roof space and the bedroom as a temporary measure. As the roof repair required repairing to make water tight it was reasonable for the landlord to provide a temporary solution for the bedroom ceiling. However it is our position that a temporary fix should be removed and a permanent repair implemented as soon as possible. This is because a temporary repair is a stopgap measure only and should not be intended as a long-term solution.
Between 22 March 2024 and 9 August 2024, the date of the resident’s complaint, the evidence does not document that the landlord took steps to investigate or repair the roof and bedroom ceiling. This is a failing. As the landlord was aware of outstanding repair issues in the property it should have taken prompt actions to effect repairs. We note the landlord has provided an entry from its repairs log dated June 2024 which it states is in relation to the leak in the roof. However the entry does not provide any information to support that a roof repair was undertaken.
In response to the complaint the landlord inspected the property in order to assess the repair issues raised. This was appropriate to determine what repair work was needed. The inspection confirmed that roof repairs and plastering was required.
Despite the landlord raising a work order for roof repairs and plastering following the inspection, the work did not go ahead at that time. While we acknowledge the landlord’s explanation for this, that its contractor let it down, it will have resulted in inconvenience and frustration to the resident. The evidence shows that the new contractor completed some repairs to the roof in late October 2024 / early November 2024. This was 3 months after the inspection in August 2024 which was a protracted period of time.
The landlord’s internal records document that on 14 November 2024 it requested an urgent order for a survey to be completed on the property’s roof. The landlord noted that the property may require “re-roofing”. This indicated that further works were necessary following the repairs that were completed in late October 2024 / early November 2024 to fully resolve the roof issues.
The roof survey was completed on 18 February 2025. This was 3 months after the landlord first made the request for the survey. This is a protracted period of time. This is a failing. From the evidence is not clear why the survey was delayed. The delay will have resulted in inconvenience and distress to the resident and suggests a lack of oversight by the landlord in managing the repair work. As these were works that the landlord had committed to do in its stage 2 reply to put matters right for the resident this is particularly concerning.
The survey noted:
1. The roof had been temporarily recovered with existing tiles and polythene sheeting.
2. Some rot had been found to the valley rafter and adjacent timbers.
3. The plasterboard ceiling in the bedroom had been removed and replaced with a “polythene sheet and perimeter duct tape”.
4. Some mould spotting, water staining and hairline cracks were present in the bedroom which appeared to be related to the roofing works.
The survey set out 2 options to repair the roof which it stated were “relatively straightforward and common works”. The survey confirmed that once the roof repairs were completed the mould in the bedroom could be treated and the bedroom ceiling replaced.
The landlord’s records do not clearly show its response to the survey. Following the survey the only record that we have identified sets out that some “plastering” was completed in mid-April 2025. The landlord’s limited records have meant that it has been unable to clearly demonstrate that all necessary works were completed to repair the roof and bedroom ceiling, or that it considered that an alternative approach should be taken. This is a failing.
In an update to us in September 2025 the landlord confirmed that the property’s roof was being replaced with the work due to be completed by the end of the month. The landlord confirmed that following completion of the work it would complete a post-inspection.
The resident set out in the complaint that she had health issues. The landlord was also aware prior to the complaint that the resident had health issues as these were disclosed as part of the tenancy sign up process. During the period under investigation we have not identified any evidence which demonstrates that the landlord considered the resident’s health circumstances in relation to the repair issues in the property. This is a failing. This is particularly concerning given the status of the bedroom ceiling from March 2024. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have discussed the resident’s health conditions with her to see whether any reasonable adjustments were required while the repairs were outstanding. For example, a temporary move or additional heating may have helped to alleviate the impact on the resident whilst the works were outstanding.
In responding to the complaint the landlord acknowledged that the repairs service it had provided had fallen short. It therefore apologised and confirmed that some compensation was due. This was appropriate and demonstrated that the landlord recognised that the resident had been impacted as a result of its actions.
The landlord confirmed to us in September 2025 that no compensation has been awarded to the resident. It explained that compensation was not awarded as the resident “was not willing to engage or discuss compensation”. The landlord’s comments are noted and it was positive that it wanted to discuss the matter with the resident. This is because a conversation could have helped it to understand the impact of the failings in its management of the repairs. However as the resident did not engage with this it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have calculated an amount of compensation taking into account the severity and duration of the problem, in addition to impact on the resident. The landlord should have taken into account its own guidance on compensation and could have also used the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance to help it decide how much to offer the resident.
There was severe maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the bedroom ceiling and the property’s roof. The landlord significantly delayed in completing repairs to fix the bedroom ceiling and the roof. The landlord also failed to consider the resident’s health in relation to the repair issues and whether any adjustments were required while they were outstanding.

The landlord’s complaint handling

While the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint was timely, its response to the complaint was not in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). The Code sets out that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decision.
In responding to the complaint the landlord did not address the resident’s concerns that the repair issues (bedroom ceiling and roof) had been outstanding since 2023. The landlord also did not address the resident’s assertion that the repair issues should have been resolved prior to her tenancy and when the property was void. In responding to the complaint the landlord should have demonstrated that it had considered the history of the repair issues reported to determine if there had been any failing in relation to those specific issues. In not doing so the resident was left without an explanation to what had or had not happened. It also suggests that the landlord was not fully focused on resolving the complaint and it was therefore a missed opportunity to put things right at an earlier time.
There was service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling. The landlord did not provide a comprehensive response to the complaint which addressed all issues raised by the resident.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was:
1. Severe maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the bedroom ceiling and the property’s roof.
2. Service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination the landlord should provide a written apology to the resident in respect of the failings identified in this report.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination the landlord should pay the resident a total of £1,100 compensation. This comprises:
1. £800 for the delay in the landlord’s repair service.
  1. The resident has paid approximately £420 per month (with some annual incremental increases) in rental payments during the period of the landlord’s maladministration, which the Ombudsman considers started in March 2024 when the bedroom ceiling was removed. This will have impacted on the resident’s living arrangements and use of the property.
  2. In the circumstances we consider it is appropriate for the landlord to pay compensation in recognition of the loss of the full use of the property. Taking into account the rent paid by the resident over the period we are ordering the landlord to pay the resident £800 compensation to recognise the loss of the full use of her home during this period.
  3. This figure has been calculated as approximately 10% of the total rent during the period in question and rounded up. While the Ombudsman acknowledges this is not a precise calculation this is considered to be a fair and reasonable amount taking all the circumstances into account.
2. £200 to recognise the overall distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident while the repairs were outstanding, including that the landlord failed to consider her known health circumstances.
3. £100 in respect of its complaint handling and therefore the inconvenience, distress and uncertainty the resident would have experienced.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination the landlord should write to the resident to confirm the outcome of the post-inspection on the roof replacement. If any further works are identified the landlord should provide a schedule of works to the resident which includes timescales. The landlord should provide a copy of its letter to us.
Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination the landlord should inspect the bedroom to ensure that the ceiling replacement works have been completed to a satisfactory standard. The inspection should also confirm that all mould has been remedied. The landlord should write to the resident to provide the outcome of the assessment. The landlord should provide a copy of its letter to us.
Within 12 weeks of the date of this determination the landlord should identify its learning from this investigation. It should produce a report to tell us what it has learned, the steps it has taken to improve its service and how it intends to prevent similar failings from occurring in the future. The landlord should provide a copy of its report to us.

Recommendations

The landlord should review its approach to compensation where a resident does not engage with its request to discuss the payment. When this happens the landlord should calculate an amount of compensation using its own guidance which takes into account the severity and duration of the problem, in addition to impact on the resident.