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.

Peabody Trust (202324996)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202324996

Peabody Trust

29 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of concerns about the condition of the windows and reports of damp and mould.
  2. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The property is a 1-bedroom flat in a low-rise building. The resident has said he is disabled.
  2. The resident used the landlord’s online complaint form on 20 October 2023 to submit concerns about the condition of his windows. On the same day, the resident contacted us about this. On 12 January 2024 the resident sent evidence to the landlord that he had submitted a complaint on 20 October 2023 and that further action was needed for his windows. On 8 February 2024 we forwarded the resident’s complaint to the landlord. The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 22 February 2024 and said:
    1. It had previously sent a stage 1 complaint response on 4 August 2023 and had advised the resident his block may be added to the window replacement programme. This was in response to the resident’s complaint on 8 January 2023 about damp and mould and the condition of his windows. The resident had accepted £700 in compensation after it sent its stage 1 complaint response. It had however considered that he was not provided updates about his windows since then.
    2. The resident had experienced delays with his windows being repaired but it had raised these repairs on 16 February 2024.
    3. It had asked internally about the status of a block window replacement programme.
    4. It offered £350 for the inconvenience the resident had experienced.
    5. It had provided feedback to its internal teams to improve its service delivery.
  3. On the same day of the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response, the resident told the landlord he believed £350 in compensation was insufficient. The resident also told the landlord he was disabled. He said he had physical and mental health issues related to the lack of repair to the windows. He told the landlord there was mould in the property but did not specify where. He wanted the windows to be replaced and for him to be moved to a new home.
  4. On 7 March 2024 the landlord told the resident it empathised with his situation. The landlord said:
    1. It would conduct a dwelling assessment of the block. Based on this outcome it would advise if the property fell under its window replacement programme.
    2. If he wanted alternative accommodation, he could visit its website which detailed how to move properties. It had let its rehousing team know about the resident’s request to be moved.
    3. It would raise damp and mould repairs for the resident, but asked to clarify where the mould was in the property.
  5. On 13 March 2024 the resident said a contractor had attended the property and said “only” 1 of the 3 windows were authorised to be replaced. The resident disputed this position. The resident also told the landlord that more mould was growing but did not specify where. The resident chased the landlord for a response on 24 March 2024. On 28 March 2024 the landlord confirmed to the resident that 1 of 3 windows would be replaced and it was reliant on the professional opinion of its staff. The resident replied on the same day confirming he wanted his complaint escalated. On 21 April 2024 he told the landlord the reasons why he wanted the complaint escalated were:
    1. He had been living with “rotten” windows for 17 months.
    2. There was mould on his walls and it was affecting his health.
    3. He wanted to be moved to a new property.
  6. The landlord completed a dwelling assessment of the building on 20 May 2024. On 3 June 2024 the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint at stage 2 of its complaints procedure. On 25 June 2024 the landlord told the resident it needed until 4 July 2024 to provide its stage 2 complaint response. On 2 July 2024 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It said:
    1. All of the windows in the resident’s block were due to be replaced as part of a block window replacement programme. It needed planning approval from the local council. It estimated works would start in September 2024, it would send out letters regarding this, and its contractor would provide specific timescales in due course.
    2. The resident had advised that at the time of the final response, he did not have damp and mould in the property. This was after it replaced the bathroom extraction fan and completed mould treatment in his living room (completion dates were not specified). The damp and mould issues may permanently improve after the window replacement programme.
    3. It provided advice about housing options. It had sent a medical application form to the resident on 25 June 2024 and was awaiting him to complete that, so it could potentially put him forward for a medical move.
    4. Regarding its complaints it did not acknowledge the resident’s complaint at stage 1. On 22 February 2024 the resident requested for his complaint to be escalated, but it did not acknowledge this until 3 June 2024. In line with its complaints policy, it had extended the final response by 3 working days, but there were prior complaint handling failures.
    5. It had identified learning from the resident’s complaint. It said these were:
      1. Increased recruitment for complaint handling staff, as well as structural changes.
      2. That it had shared the resident’s complaint with relevant teams so that delays were not repeated.
    6. It offered the resident a total of £475, made up of £350 for the distress and inconvenience he experienced as per its stage 1 complaint response and £125 for the time and trouble expended due to its complaint handling.
  7. On 2 December 2024 the landlord internally confirmed the resident’s building had been removed from its window replacement programme. In June 2025, the resident told us the issue with the windows remain unresolved and he is finding cleaning the damp and mould challenging due to his disability.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. We have considered the resident’s complaint of 8 February 2024, the concerns that exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure, and those he subsequently referred to us.
  2. Given the time that passed since the resident’s complaint in 2023, it was reasonable for the landlord to raise a new complaint in February 2024. We can look at issues complained of after 4 August 2023 up until the resident exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 2 July 2024. We can also comment on any commitments the landlord made in its final response. However, we cannot comment on any new events that have happened after 2 July 2024. If the resident is dissatisfied with any new events, he may wish to raise a complaint with the landlord.
  3. The resident said the condition of the property affected his health. Unlike a court, we do not decide whether there was a link between the landlord’s action or inaction and the resident’s health. The resident may wish to seek independent advice about this matter. However, we can consider the distress and inconvenience experienced.

Concerns about the condition of the windows and reports of damp and mould

  1. We consider whether the landlord’s actions were in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles and our Remedies Guidance. The principles are:
    1. Be fair, treat people fairly, and follow fair processes.
    2. Put things right.
    3. Learn from outcomes.
  2. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places an obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. This includes windows. The landlord had not disputed it was responsible for repairs to the resident’s windows.
  3. The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), to assess hazards and risks within its properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard. The landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
  4. The landlord’s Responsive Repairs Policy (repairs policy) states that it aims to attend and complete:
    1. Emergency repairs within 4 hours and make the area safe within 24 hours.
    2. Non-urgent repairs in 28 calendar days.
    3. Major repairs in 60 calendar days.
  5. The landlord also operates a ‘Damp, Mould, and Condensation Policy’ (damp and mould policy). This states it invests in properties, including through the renewal of windows.
  6. On 12 January 2024 the resident put the landlord on notice that he expected further action regarding his windows. The evidence showed the landlord raised window repairs on 16 February 2024 and attended to the property on 27 February 2024. At this visit the landlord’s contractor told the resident only 1 of 3 windows would be replaced. The resident disputed the landlord’s position on 13 March 2024 as he believed all 3 should be replaced. The evidence showed:
    1. The landlord should have completed any repairs to the resident’s windows by 12 March 2024, which was 60 calendar days from 12 January 2024. It not doing so, was inappropriate.
    2. The landlord told the resident on 28 March 2024 it relied on the professional opinion of its staff and confirmed 1 out of 3 windows were authorised to be replaced. This response was unreasonable at that stage as repairs were overdue and were incomplete. There was no evidence the landlord advised the resident when it would complete the replacement of one of the windows.
  7. On 22 February 2024 the resident told the landlord there was mould in the property. The landlord’s records showed it:
    1. Raised repairs to the resident’s bathroom fan on 4 March 2024 after his report, and this was completed on 3 April 2024. This was outside its 28 calendar day timescale by 2 days. While this was inappropriate, this alone would not constitute a service failure.
    2. Completed a mould treatment to the internal walls of the resident’s property on 8 May 2024. This was 17 calendar days after the resident clarified to it that mould was affecting his walls on 21 April 2024. This was appropriate.
  8. There was no evidence the landlord was aware that the resident was disabled prior to February 2024. However, the landlord was put on notice that the resident was disabled at that stage. The landlord’s repairs policy states it considers prioritising repairs for vulnerable residents and that it would monitor the resident’s vulnerability. While we acknowledge the landlord sent the resident a medical move form to help him move on those grounds, there is no evidence it risk assessed. By the landlord not evidencing it had taken into consideration the resident’s vulnerability by its final response was inappropriate in the circumstances.
  9. The landlord confirmed all 3 of the resident’s windows were added to its window replacement programme (for the entire block) in its final response. This was after the landlord conducted a dwelling assessment of the whole block on 20 May 2024. We acknowledge that under the Decent Homes Standards, landlords are entitled to complete upgrade works of a significant cost, such as window replacement programmes, as part of a planned programme of works to be carried out over a given financial year.
  10. However, this conflicted with the landlord’s previous communication which said it would only replace 1 of the windows, which it assessed as necessary. The landlord provided the resident with an estimate of September 2024 for all the windows to be replaced. The evidence showed the landlord removed the entire block from the window replacement programme which was an operational decision. Given that the landlord committed to replacing all of the resident’s windows in its final response, its communication about this was unreasonable.
  11. It was therefore inappropriate the landlord:
    1. Failed to repair one of the resident’s windows, which it had identified as needing to be replaced in March 2024. There is no evidence it replaced this window at any stage. It was obligated to complete this repair.
    2. Failed to evidence it had updated the resident with reasons as to why it would not replace all of the windows after it had committed to do so in its final complaint response.
  12. The landlord accepted its communication with the resident from August 2023 until July 2024 was poor. However, as above, the landlord repeated its communication errors, and the window issue remains unresolved. This is unreasonable and demonstrates the landlord had not learnt from outcomes.
  13. Under our Remedies Guidance, consideration is given for distress and inconvenience caused to a resident by service failures. The remedies Guidance also considers the length of time the resident experienced detriment and vulnerabilities.
  14. We acknowledge the landlord attempted to put things right with its apology and offer of compensation. The landlord confirmed in its final response it apportioned £350 towards the distress and inconvenience the resident experienced. This was due to its lack of communication and mismanagement of the repairs. We would have considered this amount proportionate had the issues been resolved. However, as the issues remain outstanding and errors were repeated, the total compensation was not proportionate to the events. Further, there was a lack of consideration towards the resident’s vulnerabilities.
  15. As such, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the condition of the windows and reports of damp and mould.
  16. It is clear that the resident has continued to experience distress and inconvenience from the lack of repairs to one window which needed to be replaced. Additionally, the resident’s expectations were mismanaged by the landlord who told him all his windows would be replaced, but this was later retracted. Although the mould had been treated at the property, the resident had concerns it would re-occur due to the condition of the windows. This was acknowledged by the landlord who told him that this would be mitigated after it replaced all the windows, which it then did not. The resident had unreasonably experienced a further 14 months of distress and inconvenience due to a lack of repairs, and lack of action from July 2024.
  17. Having considered the above, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £700 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused from August 2023 until September 2025 (present). We have also made further orders which include an apology to the resident, as well as for the landlord to contact him and explain its position on why it removed his property from the window replacement programme. Given the length of time that has passed since February 2024, it is also ordered to inspect the current condition of the windows. It is to make an action plan and communicate with the resident what steps it will take to address any repairs.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy says that:
    1. At stage 1 it will acknowledge complaints in 5 working days and it aims to provide a response in 10 working days after its acknowledgment.
    2. At stage 2 it will acknowledge complaint escalations in 5 working days and it aims to provide a response in 20 working days after its acknowledgement.
    3. It can agree extensions to the complaint response deadlines at both stages.
  2. After we sent the resident’s complaint to the landlord, it logged the complaint on 12 February 2024. The complaint was not acknowledged at stage 1 but the response was issued within 10 working days. The landlord admitted in its final response that not acknowledging the complaint at stage 1 was a service failure. We have considered that there was no overall detriment to the resident and the landlord’s response about this was reasonable. 
  3. The evidence showed the resident tried to escalate his complaint to stage 2 on 22 February 2024. This was not acknowledged by the landlord until 68 working days after. This was inappropriate and it is clear the resident expended time and trouble chasing the landlord for a response.
  4. We can see the landlord extended the stage 2 complaint response deadline on 25 June 2024 by a further 3 working days (4 July 2024). The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response within the extended deadline. However, it had been 89 working days since the resident first asked for his complaint to be escalated. Overall, his complaint journey had been unreasonably delayed. 
  5. By the landlord’s final response, it acknowledged all of the above complaint handling errors. The landlord apologised and offered the resident £125 in compensation for the time and trouble he expended. We would have considered reasonable redress as this was proportionate to the above events and in line with our Remedies Guidance.
  6. However, the landlord’s response did not address its failure to respond to the resident’s October 2023 complaint. The landlord did not provide any explanation and caused the resident time and trouble chasing updates. The landlord missed the opportunity to fully put things right for the resident, as it did with the other complaint handling failings.
  7. Overall, while the landlord acknowledged some of its errors, we have made a finding of service failure as it failed to respond to the resident’s October 2023 complaint and failed to acknowledge this in its later response.
  8. We have ordered the landlord to re-offer the £125 it apportioned for complaint handling in its final response. We have also ordered an additional £50 for its inactions regarding the resident’s complaint submission on 20 October 2023. The Complaint Handling Code is now statutory, so no further orders have been made regarding the delays.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the condition of the windows and reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident for it mismanaging the resident’s expectations that it would replace all of his windows under its window replacement programme.
    2. Contact the resident to explain why it removed his property from its window replacement programme.
    3. Pay the resident a total of £875 in compensation, made up of:
      1. £700 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the condition of the windows and reports of damp and mould. If any of the £350 previously offered in its stage 2 complaint response had been paid, it can be deducted from the £700 award.
      2. £125 it offered in its stage 2 complaint response, if not paid already, for the time and trouble expended by the resident due to its complaint handling between February 2024 and July 2024.
      3. £50 for the time and trouble caused by its lack of response to the resident’s complaint in October 2023 as identified in this report.
  2. Within 6 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to re-inspect the condition of the resident’s windows. If repairs are required, it is to then make an action plan for what steps it will take and provide target completion dates. If the landlord does not intend to carry out any repairs it is to explain why. This is to be shared with the resident and us.
  3. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to us.