We are updating our systems this weekend. You will be unable to submit an online complaint form from Friday 3 April until Monday 6 April.

Normal services will resume on Tuesday 7 April.

Thank you for your patience.

Clarion Housing Association Limited (202427244)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202427244

Clarion Housing Association Limited

15 September 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:
    1. Handling of the resident’s reports of bed bugs at the property.
    2. Complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 3-bedroom house and the landlord is a housing association. The landlord is aware of the resident’s vulnerabilities.
  2. The resident reported bed bugs at her property in 2024, the landlord attended to complete some treatment following in August 2024. On 25 October 2024 the resident raised her complaint about the landlord’s handling of the issue and told it she was sleeping in the bath.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 18 November 2024. It apologised for the time taken to respond to the complaint. It said:
    1. It was made aware of the bed bugs in August 2024. It noted that the resident had said she reported the issue before August 2024 and was told it was her responsibility to manage.
    2. Its pest contractor attended in August 2024 and provided advice on how to manage the situation. It attended again in October and November 2024.
    3. In response to the resident’s report that she was told to dispose of her furniture, it explained this was not the case as the pest infestation was deemed to be low level with treatment eradicating the issue.
    4. It apologised for the issues faced and acknowledged further reports made to it. It noted how the resident felt she was not supported and that her son was left with no bed. The landlord explained how the resident could continue to report issues to it and provided advice on how to manage the issue.
    5. In response to requests for compensation for furniture, the landlord provided details of how to submit an insurance claim.
    6. It accepted there was a service failure in its delay in providing the resident with a stage 1 response and offered £50 compensation to recognise this.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint on 26 November 2024 and told the landlord that the bed bug issue was ongoing at her property. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 7 February 2025. It apologised for the delay in responding to the resident’s complaint. It said it had reviewed the stage 1 response and was unable to identify a service failure. It said its contractor attended within the timeframes it expected and its communication was also in line with its expectations. It added:
    1. Following its last visit in December 2024, further appointments were not scheduled despite ongoing reports about bed bugs. It said it did not respond as promptly as it should have and in attempts to acknowledge the impact it awarded £50 compensation for its service failure. It asked its contractor to arrange further pest control visits to reassess and treat the bed bug issue. Its contractor would contact her directly to arrange this.
    2. Its review found no evidence to suggest the resident was advised to dispose of her furniture or belongings. It said it would investigate the issue further if additional information could be provided.
    3. It repeated its stage 1 response explaining how the resident could raise an insurance claim.
    4. It acknowledged the concerns about the impact on the resident’s mental health and said it takes this very seriously. It had arranged for a Neighbourhood Response Officer (NRO) to contact the resident directly to discuss any additional support that may be available.
    5. It offered the resident a further £100 compensation. It said this was made up of £50 for complaint handling delays and £50 for the inconvenience caused by its handling of the pest issue after December 2024.
  5. Following the stage 2 response, the landlord completed further treatment in February and March 2025. The resident has said the bed bug issue is ongoing. She remained unhappy with the landlord’s stage 2 response and asked this Service to consider her complaint further.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has told us of the impact of her living conditions on her health. She has mentioned the impact on her general wellbeing and her son’s health We cannot say the landlord’s action or inaction has directly caused a detrimental impact to health. These are matters better suited for consideration by a court. However, the Ombudsman will give consideration to the general impact the situation had on the resident.
  2. The resident has also said she threw away her personal belongings due to bed bugs. While the Ombudsman acknowledges the upset that may be caused in the circumstances, it is important to explain that we can not make decisions on liability for damage to items which should be covered by insurance. However, the Ombudsman has considered what the landlord did following the resident’s reports of damage to her belongings.

Handling of the resident’s reports of bed bugs at the property

  1. The tenancy agreement says the landlord is responsible for keeping the communal area in reasonable repair and fit for use. The terms and conditions of the tenancy agreement confirm a resident is responsible for preventing and eradicating any pests, including bed bugs, within the property.
  2. The landlord’s pest and wildlife policy sets out the circumstances in which it provides pest control services. It says the responsibility for preventing, reducing and eradicating pests is shared between it, residents, and the local authority. It says:
    1. Residents are responsible for taking all reasonable action to prevent or reduce pests and infestations including, amongst other things, keeping their home and communal areas clean and tidy.
    2. It will fulfil any legal responsibilities it has or responsibilities under a tenancy agreement, including eradicating any infestation and pests in communal areas or those caused by its own actions or lack of action.
    3. It will not usually take any responsibility for bed bug infestation, amongst other things, within a resident’s home.
  3. The landlord’s vulnerable residents policy from November 2023 says its staff should understand and recognise vulnerabilities and how to take them into account in the delivery of its services. It says it will consider the additional actions or variations from its usual service as a way of making reasonable adjustments.
  4. The landlord has said the first report of bed bugs was made to it in August 2024. The resident disputes this, she says the issue was reported before this and she was told bed bugs were her responsibility to manage. While the position of both sides has been considered, the evidence shows the landlord would have been aware by no later than 1 August 2024 of the bed bug issue.
  5. At that time, it was reasonable for the landlord to have arranged for its pest control contractor (the contractor), who was best suited to deal with a possible infestation, to attend. The contractor attended the property within 2 weeks, on 14 August 2024, for an initial visit and treatment. It found the property had “low level” bed bug infestation. It completed treatment on 14 and 30 August 2024.
  6. Even though the landlord did not have an obligation, it acted reasonably in completing treatment especially in light of the vulnerabilities. However when it made the commitment to do this, it did not explain what it would do and failed to monitor if the treatment resolved the issue. This was unreasonable in the circumstances.
  7. The resident raised further reports of bed bugs on 10 October 2024 and told the landlord she was sleeping in her bath. The landlord noted the resident’s vulnerabilities and how the situation was difficult for her to manage. However, it missed opportunities to support the resident at that time. This was not appropriate.
  8. On 25 October 2024 the landlord completed a further visit and treatment at the property. Here it made attempts to monitor the situation in adding bed bug detectors. However, despite the resident’s further reports of bed bugs it did not attend the property again until 13 February 2025. It is acknowledged that the landlord did make some attempts to attend the property in December 2024 but following the no access from 20 December 2024, it did not manage the situation in a meaningful way. This was unreasonable in the circumstances.
  9. The landlord’s internal email from 24 January 2025 said it had received a number of calls from the resident about bed bugs. It mentioned the need for a welfare check. However, there is no evidence to show the landlord completed a welfare check at that time. The landlord missed opportunities to provide the resident with support and/or consider the steps it could take with regards to her vulnerabilities. This was despite what it was aware of in October 2024, (the resident sleeping in her bath). This was not appropriate.
  10. The resident has said she was told by the contractor that she would need to throw away items of furniture to resolve the bed bug issue. Within the landlord’s stage 1 response it explained it had spoken to its contractor who said this was not the case. It repeated this within its stage 2 response and said it would investigate the issue further if additional information could be provided. It was reasonable for the landlord to have explained the need for further information. Within its complaint responses it acted reasonably in providing the resident with details of its insurer and explaining how to submit an insurance claim.
  11. Overall, the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of bed bugs was not appropriate. While the landlord acted reasonably in conducting treatment for the bed bugs within the property, it failed to proactively monitor the situation. This meant the resident had to continue to report issues to it, instead of it assessing if the treatment was successful. The landlord missed opportunities to consider the support it could provide the resident in light of her vulnerabilities. It was told that she had removed furniture from the property and the bath was being used to sleep in. However, it took the landlord until January 2025 to consider the need of a welfare check and there is no evidence to show it did this or considered the other support it could provide the resident.
  12. Within the landlord’s stage 2 response it accepted that it did not schedule further appointments after December 2024 and did not respond as quickly as it should have. It offered the resident £50 compensation in recognition of the impact. The landlord’s insight into some of its failings is recognised. However, it failed to recognise the extent of its failings and the impact this would have had on the resident. The landlord did complete further treatment in March 2025 and it is noted that the resident has said the situation remains ongoing with bed bugs. As such the stage 2 compensation offer of £50 does not go far enough to recognise the impact the situation would have had on the resident over a prolonged time. The landlord’s failings would have adversely affected the resident and amounts to maladministration.
  13. When deciding an appropriate remedy, this Service’s remedies guidance has been considered and a compensation payment of £250 has been decided as more appropriate in the circumstances. This is in addition to the £50 previously offered.
  14. Following the stage 2 response, the landlord attended the property for further treatment work on 14 March 2025 and found bed bugs. It is unclear if the landlord attended after this. The resident has said the situation with bed bugs is ongoing and despite her attempts to contact the landlord it has not recently attended. In attempts to resolve matters, the Ombudsman has asked the landlord to assess the ongoing situation with bed bugs and consider the support it will provide the resident, if any.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. Its complaints policy says it will issue a stage 1 response within 10 working days of acknowledgement. A stage 2 response will be provided within 20 working days. It explains how with agreement it can extend this timeframe by a further 20 working days.
  2. The landlord took 16 working days to issue its stage 1 response on 18 November 2024. This timeframe exceeded that set within its complaints policy. The landlord appropriately recognised the delay within its stage 1 response, apologised and offered £50 compensation to recognise this.
  3. However, it failed to demonstrate learning and took 50 working days (26 November 2024 to 7 February 2025) to issue its stage 2 response. This timeframe of over 2 months was not appropriate and significantly exceeded the timeframe set within its policy.
  4. The landlord’s complaint handling delays were not appropriate and amount to a service failure. The landlord offered a further £50 compensation for its delayed stage 2 response. In total the landlord has offered £100 compensation for its complaint handling. However, when considering the extended timeframe to issue a stage 2 response, the repeat nature of its delays, and its lack of updates, the Ombudsman considers it more appropriate to increase compensation offer to £150 in total.  

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of bed bugs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was a service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Arrange for a manager to apologise to the resident for the failings identified within this report. The apology should be in writing and a copy should be provided to this Service.
    2. Pay the resident a total compensation of £350. This is made up of:
      1. £250 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by its handling of bed bug issues.
      2. £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling delays. This amount includes the £100 it previously offered.
    3. To assess the bed bug situation within the property and explain its planned approach to address the issue. It should explain in writing, to the resident and this Service:
      1. Details of how it will monitor and resolve the situation.
      2. The support it will provide the resident, if any.

Recommendation

  1. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord contact the resident to explain its process for submitted an insurance claim. It should consider the support it can provide the resident in making such a claim.