Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

Southern Housing (202337196)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202337196

Southern Housing

21 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 landlord’s handling of:
    1. The resident’s report of repairs and the associated temporary move.
    2. The resident’s complaint.

Background

  1. The resident has had an assured tenancy with the landlord since July 2021 and lives in a 2-bed first-floor flat. The landlord has not noted any vulnerabilities.
  2. The resident reported that a leak was coming through the bathroom ceiling from the flat above on 21 September 2023. The landlord attended; however, the resident reported further leaks from the same place on 3 more occasions. The landlord continued to attend but was unable to gain access to the flat above.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 16 November 2023 about staff conduct and failure to be updated on the progress of her repairs. Included in the stage 1 complaint was the following:
    1. The delay taken to repair the leak.
    2. The progress of rent arrears and financial assistance to the resident.
    3. The impact delays were having on a mutual exchange.
  4. The landlord responded to the complaint at stage 1 on 5 December 2023. In its response, the landlord:
    1. Apologised for poor communications about financial support that had been offered to the resident, and for the misunderstanding with the operative.
    2. Confirmed that the cause of the leak had been repaired. Further repairs to the resident’s bathroom had been identified and it would contact her with dates once arranged.
    3. Offered £322 compensation for the impact caused by the delays, for the cost of using a dehumidifier for 3 weeks, and the inconvenience to the resident in having to chase for details.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint with the landlord on 6 December 2023. She was unhappy with the amount of compensation offered by the landlord at stage 1 and wanted to be moved from the property. She was also waiting for payments to be processed which caused her a financial impact. She explained that she wanted an increase in compensation awarded, payments to be backdated to her account for the property not being in full working order, and to be re-housed as the mutual exchange had fallen through.
  6. The landlord contacted the resident on 3 January 2024 to apologise for the delay in responding to the stage 2 complaint. It responded to the complaint on 5 January 2024 and said:
    1. It had paid the resident for the time she was out of the property between 8 November 2023 and 19 December 2023. It had arranged to pay the resident a further £143 for 2 extra days out of the property.
    2. All repairs were now completed, and it was awaiting the redecoration to be completed on 4 January 2024.
    3. It offered support in rehousing her if the mutual exchange was no longer going ahead.
    4. The landlord increased the compensation offered by £100 to reflect the further delays the resident had experienced and awarded £50 for the delay in responding to the complaint.
  7. The resident contacted the Housing Ombudsman on 23 January 2024 explaining that she was unhappy with the landlord’s response. She explained she felt the landlord was refusing to acknowledge its own negligence, and the experience had affected her physically and emotionally as well as financially. She remained unhappy that the landlord had backdated financial assistance from 8 November 2023 and not the date the leak was first reported. The resident’s desired outcomes were an increase in compensation and to be moved to a different property.

 

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In her correspondence with the Housing Ombudsman, the resident indicated that she wished to be moved permanently into a different property. The way the landlord allocates its social housing is governed by its statutory obligations and its allocation policy which determines the priority of applicants on its waiting lists. The Ombudsman is unable to make orders that could cause an adverse impact on other individuals who may have a higher priority than the resident for the landlord’s properties. As such, it would not be appropriate to order the landlord to permanently move the resident.
  2. The resident also asked this service to investigate the landlord’s handling of events which took place after its final complaint response. This included issues with her neighbour that she alleges has been caused by the landlord’s handling of her repairs, and further issues with leaks in her property. A key part of our role is to assess the landlord’s response to a complaint. This means that it is important the landlord has had an opportunity to respond before we investigate. It is fair and reasonable therefore that we only investigate matters up to the date of the landlord’s final response 5 January 2024. The resident has the option to raise a further complaint with the landlord in the first instance if she remains concerned with any of the events after this date.

Handling of repairs and the associated temporary move

  1. The landlord advises that it will attend repairs within certain timescales dependent on the severity of the repair as follows:
    1. It will make safe an emergency within 6 hours of the report being made.
    2. It will arrange non-emergency appointments for as soon as possible.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord on 21 September 2023 to report a leak that was coming into her wet room. The resident told the landlord that she could see a stain on the ceiling, but no water was dripping through at that time. The landlord attended on 28 September 2023, overfilled a patch on the ceiling and told the tenant to contact the landlord if it happened again. This was appropriate as it attended within 5 working days. As there was no leak at this time, it was reasonable to ask the resident to monitor the situation.
  3. The resident reported damage to the ceiling in the bathroom on 24 October 2023 following a leak from the flat above. A further report was made on 26 October 2023 of an uncontainable leak coming through the bathroom ceiling. An emergency repair was raised to trace the leak and make it safe. This was attended within 6 hours as per the repairs policy which was appropriate. The landlord’s notes state that the leak was coming from the flat above and demonstrate that the landlord investigated this and completed a repair appropriately.
  4. A leak was reported on 2 November 2023 which was coming through the ceiling into the resident’s bathroom. This was noted as uncontainable, and an emergency appointment was raised. However, it is not evident that the landlord attended the resident’s property within its 6-hour timescale which was not appropriate. The landlord noted on 3 November 2023, that it attended the resident’s flat and tried to access the upstairs flat but there was no answer. Later that day, an operative accessed the flat upstairs and noted there were no visible leaks. The operative cut the ceiling in the resident’s flat and drained all the water and could not see any leaks. The operative requested an urgent inspection to take place if one was not already booked to identify the cause, which was reasonable in the circumstances.
  5. On 4 November 2023, the resident reported another leak coming through the hole in the ceiling. On attending, the section of ceiling was made safe which was appropriate. Notes state that there were no visible leaks in the flat above when inspected. A request was made that an inspection be booked the next working day for a thorough inspection to take place. There is no evidence that this was raised which was not appropriate of the landlord. It should have acted on this recommendation to identify the cause of the leak which was causing ongoing problems for the resident. Its failure to do so unreasonably prolonged the impact of the issue.
  6. On 6 November 2023, the resident reported that the ongoing leak from the flat above was affecting the electrics in her bathroom. An emergency appointment was raised to make this safe. The landlord attended within its timescales, and it tested and restored the electricity which was appropriate. The landlord attended the neighbour’s property on 8 November 2023 but was unable to gain access to the flat. Following this, the landlord internally discussed the actions that it could take to gain access to the neighbouring property which was appropriate.
  7. On 8 November 2023 the landlord agreed that the resident should be temporarily moved from the property after it deemed the property was unsafe for her and her family. This was appropriate as it was unable to gain access to rectify the leak in the neighbouring property. The landlord offered to move the resident to hotel accommodation which was reasonable because of the urgent nature of re-housing her and her family. The resident declined this and offered to move in with her parents due to her circumstances.
  8. The landlord has not provided any evidence of its communication with the resident regarding the temporary move. We have referred to information provided in the landlord’s complaint responses as this information has not been disputed by the resident.
  9. The landlord passed the resident to its resettlement team to organise the temporary move. The resettlement manager agreed the following:
    1. The resident would receive £500 per week that she was out of her property.
    2. Her rent would be zeroed for the time she was not able to live in the property.
    3. The payment would take 10 working days to process from 14 November 2023.
  10. The resident explained that she had to chase the landlord on several occasions as she had not received the payment. In the stage 1 complaint, the landlord advised that the payment was made on 29 November 2023 which was appropriate as per its given timescales from 14 November 2023. It confirmed a second payment was to be made once the repairs were completed.
  11. In its stage 1 response, the landlord acknowledged that there was a failure to communicate with the rents department about the agreement to zero the resident’s rent. This was a failing and this error caused the resident to be chased for rent arrears by mistake. The landlord apologised for this and awarded compensation to the resident within its impact payment at stage 1. The landlord said the rents department would only contact the resident following her return to the property.
  12. The landlord confirmed that it gained access to the neighbouring flat on 20 November 2023 and completed necessary repairs to fix the leak into the resident’s bathroom. Dehumidifiers were left to dry the resident’s bathroom and reduce the humidity. These were collected on 12 December 2023. In its stage 1 response, the landlord awarded the resident £42 compensation to take into account extra electric usage caused by the dehumidifiers which was reasonable.
  13. On 30 November 2023, the landlord assessed the resident’s bathroom to identify what works were required. All repairs were completed on 20 December 2023, and the resident could return to her property on 22 December 2023. It noted that only redecoration was left outstanding which was scheduled to be completed on 4 January 2024 with a post-inspection scheduled for 9 January 2024. It is not evidenced that this work was completed, and no appointments are on the repair history provided by the landlord. Notes state that a check over the bathroom raised on 4 January 2024 was cancelled on 5 January 2024 stating “cancelled, no repair necessary”. This is not appropriate from the landlord and demonstrates poor record-keeping.
  14. In the stage 2 response, the landlord confirmed that all payments for the resident’s time out of the property between 8 November 2023 and 19 December 2023 had been paid to the resident. It confirmed a further payment of £143 would be paid on 5 January 2024 to cover 2 extra days spent out of the property between 19 and 22 December 2023 which was reasonable. As part of her complaint escalation, the resident requested for the reduction of her rent payments to be backdated to when she first reported the leak. We note that the landlord’s initial responses were broadly in line with its repair timeframes, and the subsequent delays were caused by difficulties with access, which were beyond its control. It was therefore reasonable to provide a rent reduction for the period referred to in the landlord’s responses. However, it is not evident that the landlord has specifically addressed this concern, which was unreasonable and left the resident unclear on its position.
  15. The landlord also advised in its stage 2 response that the tenant who had agreed to complete a mutual exchange with the resident was willing to continue with the exchange in January 2024. This was based on all repairs being completed satisfactorily. It would be inappropriate to determine if a mutual exchange was not completed solely because of the delay in repairs. We are satisfied that the landlord addressed this appropriately in its final response and offered further support to the resident if this was no longer the case.
  16. In summary, the landlord acknowledged delays in gaining access to the neighbour’s flat prevented repairs being identified and completed within a reasonable time. The landlord demonstrated poor record keeping regarding the redecoration of the bathroom and communication with the resident. The landlord completed all repairs and redecoration works 43 working days after the report of the leak on 2 November 2023.
  17. It acknowledged the impact on the resident caused by delays in completing the repairs and delays in paying the resident agreed disturbance payments. In total, it awarded compensation of £380 for the impact caused to the resident and £42 for the electric consumption of dehumidifiers. This is in addition to disturbance payments of £500 per week and zeroing the rent for this time. The compensation is in line with our remedy guidance and therefore, we have made a finding of reasonable redress.

The resident’s complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy states the following:
    1. The complaint will be acknowledged within 5 working days.
    2. It will aim to give the resident a full response within 10 working days of the acknowledgement date.
    3. At stage 2, the landlord will acknowledge the escalation request within 5 working days.
    4. It will contact the resident with its decision within 20 working days of the acknowledgement.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord on 16 November 2023. No evidence has been provided that the landlord acknowledged the complaint which was not appropriate.
  3. The landlord responded to the complaint on 5 December 2023. In the absence of evidence showing when the complaint was acknowledged, assuming this was acknowledged 5 working days, the landlord responded within the 10 working-day target as per its policy which was appropriate.
  4. The resident told us the landlord acknowledged her escalation request to stage 2 on 6 December 2023. She was advised the landlord would respond by 28 December 2023 which was sooner than its 20 working-day response timescale detailed in its policy. The resident chased the landlord for a stage 2 response on 3 January 2024 and was told that it had been delayed and it would respond by 8 January 2024. It is not clear why the landlord advised the resident that it would respond sooner than its response timescales. It would have been reasonable to provide the timescales within its policy to manage the resident’s expectations.
  5. The landlord responded to the resident on 5 January 2024 which was 19 working days after the landlord acknowledged the escalation request. This was within the landlord’s complaint timescales on its policy, and this was an appropriate response. In the stage 2 response, the landlord awarded £50 compensation for delay in responding and complaint handling. The landlord was best placed to determine that their actions warranted compensating, therefore it is reasonable that they awarded the resident compensation.
  6. Overall, we have found that the landlord responded to the stage 1 and stage 2 complaints within its timescales. However, no evidence was provided that the landlord acknowledged the initial complaint, and the landlord provided incorrect timescales to the resident at stage 2. This caused the resident to chase the landlord for the response. Therefore, we have made a finding of reasonable redress as the resident was awarded satisfactory compensation for the complaint handling in the landlord’s final response.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, there was an offer of reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, there was an offer of reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Recommendations

  1. As the Ombudsman has made a finding of reasonable redress in both the landlord’s handling of the repairs and its complaint handling based on the landlord’s offer of compensation, the landlord should pay the resident £472 compensation previously offered in this case if it has not already done so.
  2. The landlord should contact the resident to offer guidance and support in helping the resident search for an alternative property.