Southern Housing (202313985)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202313985

Southern Housing

1 May 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:
1. Handling of repairs to a shutter.
2. Response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property’s living room.
The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord at the property, which is a 3-bedroom house. The resident is asthmatic, and the landlord has said that its systems show that she has health concerns.
In May 2017, the resident reported that water was entering the living room of the property, causing damp patches on the wall. The landlord investigated and completed some works, but this did not resolve the issue. The resident reported the damp again in October 2017 and the landlord says it closed the job in error.
The resident made a further report of damp in 2020.The landlord’s repairs records from 25 August 2020 show that its surveyor found crumbling brickwork beneath the window on the outside wall of the property. The resident also reported that an external shutter needed repairing. The landlord completed some works to the affected area of brickwork, but this did not resolve the issue.
The resident reported mould in the property in September 2021. A survey in October 2021 recommended further works but these were not completed.
The resident’s local councillor wrote to the landlord on 24 March 2022. They said that the resident had raised concerns about poor repairs. The resident said that her shutter had been broken for over 2 years and that the landlord had not completed works to resolve the damp. The councillor asked the landlord to deal with these issues promptly.
The landlord responded to the resident’s local councillor on 8 April 2022. It said that:
1. It apologised for the delay in resolving the issues and acknowledged it had failed to provide a good service.
2. A surveyor had attended on 4 October 2021 and said that the landlord needed to complete works to the brickwork and cement pointing to resolve the damp. Works had been completed to the brickwork in November 2021, but the contractor had not applied the recommended sealer. The landlord had asked the relevant team to contact the resident to apologise and rectify this.
3. It would inspect the resident’s shutters and deal with any required repairs at the same time.
The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 2 November 2022. She said that despite chasing the repairs to her shutter and works to address the damp, these had not been completed. She said that the damp and mould was getting worse and asked the landlord to complete the repairs. She also requested compensation of £4,730 in respect of the service failure, distress and inconvenience caused, and for the delay in completing the repairs.
In response to the resident’s formal complaint, the landlord forwarded the response sent to her counsellor on 8 April 2022. The resident escalated her complaint on 23 November 2022. She said that the landlord’s response was inadequate and that it lacked care. She noted that her councillor had not made a formal complaint and that 8 months had passed since the landlord’s previous response.
The landlord provided a stage 2 complaint response on 20 March 2023. It said that:
1. The resident’s complaint about damp and mould at the property was upheld. The landlord sincerely apologised for the length of time the issue had been ongoing.
2. It had failed to complete the works it committed to carry out in its response of 8 April 2022 to the resident’s local councillor.
3. A surveyor had inspected the property on 21 February 2023 and found that previous works had been completed to a poor standard. A specialist damp contractor would be instructed to confirm and complete the required works to resolve the issue. The landlord hoped works could be completed before the end of April 2023.
4. The landlord committed to complete the works and it offered £755 compensation in recognition of its failings.
5. The landlord noted that the resident had said the damp and mould had worsened her medical conditions. The landlord said this would need to be dealt with as a personal injury claim.

Events after the landlord’s final complaint response

The resident referred her complaint to us on 1 November 2023. She said that some repairs were still outstanding and that she wanted the landlord to calculate its offer of compensation after the works had been completed. The resident wanted the landlord to carry out the repairs and to consider the total length of the delay, plus the loss of use of her living room, in its offer of compensation.
The landlord has confirmed to us that all works have now been completed. The resident states that all works, including replastering, reattachment of a radiator and redecoration, were completed on 3 July 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

We note that the resident first reported damp in the living room of the property in 2017. According to the information provided to us, the resident next reported damp at the property in 2020, and she further reported damp and mould in September 2021. The landlord completed some investigations and works between 2017 and 2021, but this did not permanently resolve the issue.
We would expect a resident to raise a formal complaint about concerns about the landlord’s repairs service, such as delay or poor-quality repairs, within a reasonable time, usually being 12 months after becoming aware of the issues. This is so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to investigate and put things right while the issue is still “live”, and the evidence is still available.
Our investigation has therefore focussed on events following the report of damp in 2020. We have considered the landlord’s response to the local councillor’s enquiry, and its complaints responses, to determine whether the action it took was fair and reasonable in all the circumstances.

Handling of repairs to the shutter

It is not clear when the resident first reported the broken shutter but a record from 25 August 2020 shows that the landlord inspected it on or around that date. The landlord recorded that the hinge was broken, and it was unable to source a replacement. Records from October and November 2020 and January and March 2021 show that the landlord was arranging the manufacture of a hinge because a suitable standard hinge was not available. It is unclear what happened between March 2021 and the local councillor’s enquiry sent on 24 March 2022.
The landlord did initially take appropriate action to progress the repair, although it was not proactive about updating the resident. Its records show that the resident called for an update on at least 3 occasions before the local councillor’s enquiry. Where a landlord cannot complete routine repairs within a reasonable timeframe, we would expect it to provide an explanation to the resident and to keep them informed of progress.
In response to the local councillor’s enquiry, the landlord committed to inspect the shutters and to complete any required repairs. It was appropriate to arrange a further inspection, given the length of time that had passed. However, there is no evidence that the landlord investigated the history of the shutter repairs before providing its response.
The response therefore did not acknowledge or apologise for the lengthy delay the resident experienced since first reporting the issue. The landlord failed to identify the outcome of previous investigations, or to provide an update on the manufacture of a bespoke hinge. Offering a further inspection without reference to the history of the repair likely increased the resident’s frustration. The landlord missed an opportunity to recognise the impact its service failure had had on the resident, and to take reasonable and appropriate steps to put things right.
There is no evidence that the landlord completed an inspection of the shutters until almost 6 months later. This was an unreasonable delay. Its inspection again identified that it needed to source a non-standard hinge. The additional delay may have been avoided had it consulted its records and followed up on the action it had previously taken to source a suitable replacement.
The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response focussed on the resolution of the resident’s complaint about the presence of damp and mould within the property. It did not provide an update on the status of the shutter repair. The landlord does not appear to have taken the delay in completing the shutter repairs into account in its calculation of compensation.
It is not clear when the works to repair the shutters were completed, although the information provided to us shows that this was still outstanding on 1 August 2023. The landlord’s repairs logs have not provided sufficient information for us to accurately assess the length of the delay. This raises concerns about the landlord’s record keeping.
Given the above failings, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s shutter. When the landlord received the enquiry from the resident’s local councillor, it should have investigated the issue with reference to its records in order to progress the repair. There were further unexplained delays following the landlord’s commitment to complete the works. The evidence shows that the repair was outstanding for at least 3 years. Although the landlord needed to source a non-standard component to complete the job, it did not do enough to progress the repair and to keep the resident updated during that time.
The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £250 compensation in recognition of the time and trouble taken to pursue the repair and the stress and inconvenience caused. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance, which says such sums are appropriate where the landlord’s failings adversely impacted the resident. The orders for compensation made in this report replace the £755 offered at stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process.

Response to reports of damp and mould

The Ombudsman published a spotlight report on damp and mould in October 2021. This states that a landlord should adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould and its response should reflect the urgency of the issue. The report also highlights that people living in homes with damp and mould may be more likely to have respiratory problems, including asthma. Damp and mould is also one of the hazards listed in the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) and the landlord has an obligation to take action to minimise or remove identified hazards.
The landlord did investigate and complete some works to repoint the brickwork between September and November 2020, although this did not resolve the issue. The landlord should have had processes in place to follow-up to ensure the works had been effective. 10 months then passed and it is not evident that the resident reported any further issues within that time period. The resident next reported damp and mould in September 2021 and the landlord has acknowledged that the works raised in October 2021 were cancelled in error.
It would have been reasonable for the landlord to consider ways to mitigate the impact on the household whilst more extensive works are arranged and completed; however, there is no evidence that the landlord considered interim works or interventions to address the mould within the living room following the report in September 2021. Although a request was raised on 4 October 2021 to install ‘data loggers’ and to repair and re-point the brickwork, there is no suggestion that the landlord considered ways to reduce the presence and growth of mould, such as the application of a mould wash or the use of dehumidifiers.
Where an issue is ongoing, it is reasonable for a landlord to consider an escalated response. After the resident escalated her complaint in November 2022, the landlord took necessary steps to survey the property and to engage a specialist damp contractor to confirm the scope of works. This demonstrated a commitment to finding a permanent solution to the problem.
In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord acknowledged that it had provided poor service and that there had been an unreasonable delay in completing works to resolve damp and mould in the property. The landlord identified that it had failed to complete some works and that some works had been completed to a poor standard. The landlord responded appropriately by apologising and taking responsibility for its failings. It also set out an action plan to re-assess and complete the required works.
The landlord said it had learnt from the complaint and re-evaluated its use of specialist damp contractors. It also said it would monitor the process of arranging surveyor visits for a period, to ensure its procedures were working effectively. It was important that the landlord committed to review what had gone wrong and to use this information to improve its services in the future.
It appears from the evidence that after the inspection by the specialist damp contractor and the stage 2 complaint response, the landlord failed to progress the works. The evidence suggests that this was due to a delay in payment of a deposit to the damp contractor and changes in staff. The landlord must ensure that where staff leave the organisation, it has processes in place to ensure continuity for residents.
The landlord has said that its records show the resident has health concerns. The resident has told us that she suffers from asthma. It is not clear from the evidence when and how the landlord first became aware of the resident’s health conditions but an email from the resident’s daughter on 10 March 2023 referred to her mother’s asthma and associated symptoms.
Where damp and mould are reported, it is reasonable for a landlord to be proactive in identifying any vulnerabilities in the household. The landlord has provided us with an undated copy of its Damp & Mould Repairs & Serious Health Conditions policy. While it is not clear if this was in use prior to or at the time of the resident’s complaint, it captures best practice for instances involving damp and mould. The policy states that where property conditions may be having serious adverse health impacts on a resident, the landlord will gather details, record this on its system, and inspect the property within 5 working days. It is also reasonable for a landlord to take into account a resident’s health conditions in assessing the urgency of the works, including considering whether it may be appropriate to temporarily move a resident out of their home.
There is no evidence that the landlord used the information it held about the resident’s health conditions to inform its approach after 10 March 2023. Despite it being aware that the resident was asthmatic, no action had been taken to address the damp and mould when the resident’s referred her complaint to us in November 2023. This contravened its policy, and the standards set in our Spotlight On: Damp & Mould report, published in October 2021 and available on our website.
It was particularly disappointing for the resident that after the landlord apologised, acknowledged its failings, and committed to carry out the works, it then failed to complete the repairs within a reasonable time. It undermined the resident’s faith in the landlord’s complaints process and further damaged the landlord tenant relationship. It also showed that the learning identified from the complaint had not been adopted to prevent further delays.
The resident has told us that the works are now complete. She wants us to assess whether the landlord’s offer of compensation was reasonable. The landlord offered £755 in total, £705 of which related to the delay in completing works to resolve the damp and mould. This was broken down as:
1. £45, being 3 payments of £15 for service failure.
2. £60, being the maximum delay payment under the landlord’s compensation framework.
3. A £600 discretionary payment to recognise the impact of living with the damp and mould for an unreasonable length of time.
The landlord’s apology, commitment to undertake works, and offer of compensation demonstrates that it made some attempt at redress, which was appropriate in the circumstances. However, the landlord has told this service that the works were not completed as promised.
The total length of time taken to complete the works was in excess of 33 months. There was a period of 18 months where the issue remained unresolved between the report of damp in September 2021 and the stage 2 response of 20 March 2023. There was then a further delay of approximately 15 months after the final complaint response until the landlord had completed all necessary works to resolve the issue, including the remedial and agreed redecoration works, which the resident states were completed on 3 July 2024. This was unacceptable and amounts to severe maladministration.
The landlord’s Damp & Mould policy states that it will aim to complete any necessary works within 6 weeks. As the report of damp and mould was inspected on 4 October 2021, the landlord should have resolved the issue by 22 November 2021, or written to the resident to inform her of the reason for the delay. As there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the residents’ reports of damp and mould, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total sum of £1,550 in recognition of the impact of the significant delay in resolving the issue and the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
Calculated at a rate of £50 per month, we consider that £1,550 is an appropriate amount of compensation to reflect the total duration of the unreasonably delay, which was approximately 31 months. This total amount is in line with our remedies guidance, which says such sums are appropriate where there were repeated failings and where there has been an adverse impact on a resident for a significant period of time.
After the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response, the resident asked it to consider compensating her for loss of the use of her living room. While we acknowledge the significant adverse impact on the resident of the presence of damp and mould in her home, no evidence has been provided to indicate that the room was uninhabitable for the period of time that the works were outstanding. In the absence of such evidence, we cannot make a finding that a room was uninhabitable, as we do not have the expertise to assess this.
The landlord’s Compensation Framework states that where a resident makes a claim for the loss of use of a room, a qualified employee or contractor would need to confirm that the room was uninhabitable. As the resident did not ask the landlord to compensate her for loss of use of the room until after the final complaint response, and in the absence of clear evidence that the room was uninhabitable, it was reasonable that the landlord did not take this into account in the calculation of compensation it provided during the complaints process. However, it should have followed its policy to engage a professional to provide a view when the issue was raised by the resident in an email on 4 April 2023. Its failure to do so has been taken into account in our calculation of compensation.
The orders for compensation made in this report replace the £755 offered at stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process. Any compensation already paid to the resident in respect of this complaint may be deducted from the total amount of compensation payable in accordance with the orders in this report.

Complaints handling

The landlord did not provide a stage 1 complaint response after the resident’s formal complaint of 2 November 2022, in line with the requirements of its policy. As she received no reply, the resident asked to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 23 November 2022. The landlord then forwarded the response sent to her local councillor 8 months earlier instead of providing a complaint response.
The landlord did not investigate the complaint or check to see whether the actions set out in the response to the resident’s councillor had been completed. It missed an opportunity to address the complaint at the earliest opportunity and to progress the works required to resolve the issues complained about.
The resident clarified on 30 November 2022 that she was making a new complaint and that it was not sufficient to simply forward the response sent to her councillor. It is clear that the delay and poor communication increased the resident’s frustration.
The landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s complaint escalation, initially made on 23 November 2023, until 12 December 2023. This was outside the 5 working days for an acknowledgement set out in its complaints policy. This increased the resident’s frustration, as she felt that her complaint was being ignored.
Although the landlord did take action to investigate the repairs issues after the complaint escalation, it did not provide a stage 2 response until 20 March 2023. This was a significant delay beyond the 20-working day response time set out in the landlord’s policy. The landlord was in contact with the resident and her representative to communicate the outcome of inspections and to discuss the level of compensation. However, the delay in providing a complaint response meant that the resident was unable to refer her complaint to this service if she remained dissatisfied.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s complaints handling. The landlord’s offer of £50 compensation for delay at stage 2 of its complaints process did not adequately reflect the stress and inconvenience the resident experienced, or the time and trouble she went to in order to progress her complaint. An order for £150 has therefore been made to reflect the impact on the resident of the landlord’s complaint handling failures. This replaces the landlord’s offer of £50 in relation to complaints handling.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s shutter.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Provide a written apology from the Chief Executive for the failures detailed in this report.
2. Pay the resident £1,950 compensation, made up of:
  1. £1,550 to recognise the impact of the significant delay in completing repairs to address damp and mould and the stress and inconvenience caused.
  2. £250 to recognise the time and trouble the resident took to chase the repair to her shutter and the stress and inconvenience caused.
  3. £150 to recognise the time and trouble the resident took to pursue her complaint.
3. The landlord may deduct any amount already paid to the resident as part of a previous offer of compensation from the amount ordered.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the landlord review its record keeping policies and procedures to ensure that it keeps accurate, detailed and accessible repairs records.
It is recommended that the landlord provide training to staff on how to handle complaints where there has previously been a response sent to an MP or local councillor enquiry.