Regenda Limited (202312917)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202312917

Regenda Limited

21 March 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 handling of:

1. the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs of a toilet leak.
2. the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs including to a roof leak.
3. the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
4. the resident’s reports of barriers to his parents requesting repairs and of its staff bullying the resident’s parents.
5. the resident’s complaint.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of a housing association, residing in a 3–bedroom house. The tenancy started in September 2003. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident. It is noted 2 children were living at the property for at least part of the complaint period. The resident’s son has brought forward the complaint. For the purposes of this report the resident and their son will be referred to as the resident.
3. On 11 December 2023, the resident’s MP wrote to the landlord. The MP’s letter said:

1. the landlord had not resolved outstanding repairs at the property.
2. the landlord had not resolved the presence of damp and mould in the property.

4. The landlord acknowledged the complaint to the resident on 11 December 2023. The landlord provided its complaint response on 18 December 2023. The landlord upheld the resident’s complaint. It offered £700 in compensation. This was for the need to complete multiple call outs to repair the resident’s roof and for the landlord’s failure to arrange an inspection of the roof repairs in May 2023.

5. On 11 January 2024, the resident requested his complaint escalated. He requested the landlord reconsider the history of repairs and other complaints. In a call on 18 January 2024 to the landlord, the resident also asked the landlord to add the following issues to the complaint:

1. the landlord’s response to issues with the resident’s boiler.
2. barriers to the resident’s parents requesting repairs.
3. the landlord’s staff bullying the resident’s parents.

6. On 29 January 2024, the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord upheld the resident’s complaint about the outstanding repairs and the issues with damp and mould. It did not uphold the complaints about the boiler, barriers to making complaints and the bullying of the resident’s parents. The landlord apologised for the stress and inconvenience caused by its failings. The landlord outlined its timescale to its plan to address the outstanding issues. It also offered £3,000 in compensation which comprised of:
   1. £1,000 for the landlord’s failure to follow our escalation processes around repeat repairs issues.
   2. £500 for the landlord’s failure to resolve the repair issue following the initial attendance.
   3. £500 for the landlord’s failure to follow its escalation processes around vulnerable customers.
   4. £1,000 for the stress and inconvenience caused.
7. The resident escalated his complaint to this Service as he remained unhappy. Specifically, the resident said:
   1. he had concerns about the landlord’s handling of a toilet leak.
   2. he had concerns about how the landlord had dealt with the long-standing issues around repairs and damp and mould.
   3. he had concerns about barriers to his parents raising repairs and the landlord bullying his parents.
   4. he was unhappy with the compensation offered.

 

Events after the end of the complaints procedure

8. The repair record suggests contractor completed the repairs outlined in the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response. This includes a bedroom mould wash completed in February 2024 and a March 2024 installation of a PIV unit. Contractors installed the PIV unit to address the high humidity levels found in the property.

Assessment and findings

Jurisdiction

9. After carefully considering all the evidence, in accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the following aspect of the complaint is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction:

1. the resident’s reports of outstanding repairs for a toilet leak.

10. Paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme says the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints, which in the Ombudsman’s opinion, “are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.”
11. The resident has complained to us about the landlord’s handling of a toilet leak. The stage 1 and stage 2 complaint responses from the landlord do not refer to a leak from a toilet. We reviewed the available evidence and have found no reference to the resident complaining to the landlord about a toilet leak.
12. As this matter has not completed the landlord’s complaints process, it has not been considered as part of this investigation in line with the 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.

The landlord’s response to the resident report of issues with his roof

13. The landlord’s repair policy says it is responsible for a variety of responsive repairs these include:

1. external structure of the property including windows and roofs.
2. internal structure of the property including ceilings.
3. kitchen and bathroom sanitary ware.
4. internal services such as plumbing and heating.

14. The policy also provides timescales for the completion of repairs. This includes:

1. a 4-hour response time for emergency repairs. Emergency repairs are defined as any repair which presents a risk to the health of the resident or integrity of the building.
2. a non-emergency repair will be completed within 60 working days in an appointment arranged by the landlord with the resident. Where extensive works are required, a further appointment may be required and arranged with the resident. Further appointments may take 60 working days or longer to complete.
3. the right to adapt the timescales of these repairs for residents with vulnerabilities or to suit a resident’s needs.

15. The landlord also had an obligation under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, to keep the property free of hazards, which are so serious that the dwelling would not be suitable for occupation in that condition. In accordance with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, damp and mould growth are considered to be potential hazards. A property that is fit for human habitation would be free of damp and mould that could cause significant harm.
16. The landlord did not provide the Ombudsman with a copy of its internal escalation process. A copy of this policy was not available on the landlord’s website.
17. The landlord’s remedy guidance says it will consider the impact on the customer of its failings when offering compensation. The policy says:
    1. Significant impact – if the landlord’s actions have caused the resident to experience a significant degree of inconvenience or financial loss then awards of £600 to £1000 will be offered.
    2. Severe impact – if the landlord’s actions have caused the resident severe long-term impact, then awards of over £1000 will be considered. It provides examples of where a resident has had an extended stay in temporary accommodation due to mishandling of repairs.
18. This Service’s Remedy guidance is broadly similar to the landlord’s remedy guidance. It says where there has been a single significant failure or a series of significant failures, which have caused a serious detrimental impact on the resident, financial compensation of over £1000 should be considered. 
19. The repair log shows the landlord first recorded issues with the roof on 24 October 2022. The resident has raised issues around the roof leaking several times in December 2022 and January 2023. We have seen the landlord has raised repairs to address the leaking roof on several occasions.
20. On 11 December 2022, the resident’s MP sent the landlord a complaint letter. It said there continued to be outstanding repairs and related damp and mould issues in the house.
21. On 15 December 2022, a contractor completed a temporary repair to the roof and noted the presence of damp. The contractor raised the need for further work involving scaffolding. Between 24 October 2022 and 15 December 2022 is 35 working days and is within the timescales laid out in the landlord’s repair policy.
22. On 4 January 2023, a contractor attended the property due to reports of a leak and found the same ongoing issue with the roof. In its stage 2 response the landlord said a repairs supervisor and asset surveyor should have attended the property after the second report of issues with the roof. The landlord said it should have completed reviews of the previous roof repair before it raised additional repairs. This is a failure of the landlord to follow its internal escalation process.
23. On 9 January 2023, the landlord agreed an appointment with the resident for a roof repair for 20 February 2023.
24. On 17 January 2023, the resident reported there were children in the property who had become ill due to the damp. The landlord said at this point it should have escalated the query to the asset management team to bring the repair forward. The landlord did not do this. By not escalating the repair and not considering whether it should bring the repair forward the landlord has not treated the resident fairly or in line with its repair policy. This is because the landlord’s repair policy says timescales for repairs should consider a resident’s vulnerabilities.
25. On 20 February 2023 contractors attended the property. They installed loft insulation and 4 air vents. From the initial 15 December 2022 appointment, the additional works took 45 working days. This was within the timescales laid out in the landlord’s repair policy.
26. On 11 April 2023, the resident reported wet patches in the bathroom and bedrooms. A contractor attended on 26 April 2023 and completed a repair to the roof. The contractor recommended further work on tile and loft insultation. Contractors completed work on 14 June 2023. This additional took 33 working days and was within the timescales laid out in the landlord’s repair policy. In its stage 2 complaint policy the landlord said, due to the roof work being completed in February 2023, the issue should have been escalated to the asset management team for review. The landlord did not do this. The landlord has failed to follow its own internal escalation policy.
27. The landlord did not raise any further repairs until January 2024. The resident did not raise the need for further repairs until his complaint in December 2023.
28. The resident has told us the issues with repairs have caused him stress and inconvenience. We have seen indications the landlord should have escalated the roof repairs internally on three occasions. We have also seen evidence that the leak in the bathroom was not caused by a leak from the roof. It was caused by loft insulation not being installed correctly, leading to cold spots on the bathroom ceiling. This led to condensation forming due to the high humidity in the property. If the landlord had followed its internal escalation process, repeated repairs of the roof could have been avoided and the issue dealt with earlier. This could have led to reduced stress and inconvenience for the resident.
29. In the stage 2 complaint response the landlord has outlined the actions it would take to address the outstanding repairs. It has provided dates for repairs that it has booked. For those repair jobs it had not yet booked, it gave a date by which the landlord would book repairs by. This is in line with the Code which says remedies must clearly set what actions the landlord will take and by what date. We understand the landlord has now completed these repairs.
30. The landlord has also feedback to its customer services team to ensure they are aware of the process to escalate repeat repair issues. The landlord has also created a ‘Repairs Intervention Lead’ role which will complete investigations into repair issues at an earlier point. These actions are in line with the Code which says the landlord should consider changing policy or procedures when failures are identified. The landlord’s actions should help avoid these issues in the future.
31. We have seen evidence of errors in the landlord’s handling of the repairs to the resident’s roof. We have considered the remedy provided to address these issues in the summary section below.

The landlord’s response to the resident report of issues with his boiler

32. On 18 January 2024, the resident raised an issue with their boiler to the landlord. The resident said an engineer from his energy supplier had reviewed the boiler and advised it was not efficient and recommended a replacement. The landlord reviewed the boiler and found it was the most efficient model that it offered. The landlord informed the resident of this.
33. On 19 January 2024, the resident informed the landlord that the engineer had added a “do not use” sticker to the boiler. The landlord raised an emergency appointment, and a contractor attended within 4 hours. The contractor found the boiler was working correctly and was safe to use. The contractor completed this work within the 4-hour emergency repair timescale outlined in the landlord’s repair policy.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s report of damp and mould

34. The landlord’s damp and mould policy says that if there is mould within a property, it will contact the resident within 5 working days to arrange a mould wash.
35. The landlord’s damp and mould policy says, if it feels it is needed, it will send a surveyor to carry out a damp and mould inspection within 20 working days.
36. Our Service’s spotlight report on damp and mould says landlords should not leave residents living with damp and mould for extended periods. It suggests the diagnosis of the cause of the damp should happen at an early stage. It recommends landlords ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue.
37. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management “KIM” says landlords record accurate records and databases that are easily interrogated.
38. On 15 December 2022, a contractor reviewed the property and recommended repairs to the roof. The contractor also recommended insulation to be added to the loft, 4 air vents to be installed and the need for a damp specialist to review the property. The records show the landlord failed to raise a mould wash prior to the roof works taking place. This is a failure of the landlord to follow its own policy. This is because it recommends completing mould washes before extensive works, including to roofs. The landlord apologised for this issue. In its stage 2 response the landlord said it has now ensured all surveyors are aware of the current process around raising mould washes.
39. Records indicate the landlord raised a new damp and mould inspection on 4 January 2023. A surveyor attended the property on 6 February 2023. The surveyor raised works on the roof, rear door, and the need for stain blocker on the living room ceiling. The surveyor also did not raise a mould wash before these works. This is another opportunity to raise a mould wash that the landlord missed. Between 15 December 2022, when a surveyor first recommended a damp survey, and 6 February 2023 is 35 days. This is longer than the 20 working days outlined in the landlord’s damp and mould policy. This is a failure of the landlord to follow its own policy.
40. On 11 April 2023, a contractor reported wet patches on the bedroom and bathroom ceilings. Records indicate contractors completed repair work later in the month. Contractors reported the presence of damp to the landlord however it did not raise an inspection. From the available evidence it is not clear why the landlord did not raise an inspection. This is a failure to record accurate records in line with the recommendations of the KIM.

Repair and damp and mould summary

41. The landlord had a statutory and contractual legal obligation to keep the property in repair and free from hazards. The landlord was obliged to remedy issues with damp and mould in a timely manner upon this being brought to its attention.
42. The resident told this Service that these issues have caused him stress, inconvenience, time, and trouble. We have seen the landlord has raised several works to address the suspected leak from the bathroom ceiling. However, we have seen the landlord has failed to follow its own policy around escalating repairs and ordering works related to the presence of damp and mould. It is likely that had the landlord followed its own policy it would have reduced the resident’s level of stress and inconvenience.
43. Overall, the landlord’s handling of repairs and damp and mould reports was not appropriate. We have found landlord failed to:

1. raise an inspection of the repairs to the roof after the second report of issues of the roof on 4 January 2023.
2. escalate the roof repair to the asset management team on 17 January. The landlord should have done this after the resident reported children in the property were ill due to the leak.
3. raise an inspection of the repair to the roof on 11 April 2023, after further reports of the same issue.
4. raise mould washes in December 2022 and 6 February 2023 before works to the roof.
5. complete a damp and mould inspection, first recommended in December 2022, in an appropriate timescale.
6. to raise a damp inspection in April 2023.

44. We have seen several complaint failures which would, by themselves, amount to maladministration. In mitigation the landlord itself has identified that there had been failings in its handling of repairs and reports of damp and mould. It also identified that it had not addressed these issues within a timely manner, and it had not consistently followed its own policies and processes. The landlord attempted to put things right by apologising, by committing to complete repairs, providing feedback to staff, making process changes, and by offering £3,000 compensation. This level of compensation is in line with the landlord’s and this Service’s remedy guidance. It is a suitable remedy for the resident’s stress, inconvenience, time, and trouble.
45. When considering the level of compensation and the landlord’s other actions, the landlord has offered reasonable redress in relation to its handling of repairs and reports of damp and mould. The compensation amount satisfactorily resolves this aspect of the complaint.
46. To remedy the complaint, the landlord is recommended to pay the £3,000 compensation it previously offered, if it has not already paid this.

Staff conduct

47. The landlord’s complaint policy defines a complaint as an expression of dissatisfaction, however made. It also says the landlord will write to the resident to advise them of its decision.
48. The Code says landlords must consider all relevant information and evidence carefully and provide clear reasons for any decisions. It also says the landlord must treat residents fairly.
49. The resident did not complain to the landlord about barriers to his parents raising repair or bullying behaviour before 18 January 2023.
50. On 18 January 2024, the resident discussed his concerns with the landlord about barriers to his parents raising repairs due to language barriers. The resident also said the landlord bullied his parents. No specific examples were recorded in the evidence.
51. The stage 2 response said after the resident’s complaint it arranged for a quality improvement adviser to discuss the barriers in depth with the resident.
52. The stage 2 response also said there were several ways repairs could be raised. It referenced “Language Line,” which is a service available for immediate interpretation requirements if English is not a resident’s first language. The landlord’s actions in highlighting the “Language Line” as a service the resident’s parents can use is in line with the Code, which asks to treat residents fairly.
53. The landlord said, during the 18 January 2024 conversation, the resident was unable to provide any specific examples of bullying behaviour. The landlord said, due to this, it was unable to investigate further. In the response the landlord did ask the resident for details of the events and said once it had those it would investigate further. The landlord’s explanation of why it could not investigate further is in line with the Code.
54. In conclusion we have seen evidence the landlord has followed relevant policy when considering the resident’s complaints about barriers to raising repairs and bullying.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

55. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process. At the time of the resident’s complaint the landlord’s complaint policy stated it would send a stage 1 response within 5 working days, and a stage 2 response within 15 working days. The policy said at all stages, resident complaints should be acknowledged within 2 working days.
56. The landlord’s complaint policy, relevant at the time of the complaint, says there are some things which it does not class as a complaint. These include:
    1. an attempt to reopen a previously concluded complaint, or to have a complaint reconsidered which has already been though the landlord’s complaints process and where a final decision has been reached.
    2. the landlord did not normally investigate complaints over six months old, unless there were exceptional circumstances.
57. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (“the Code”) states:
    1. landlords must explain extensions to deadlines for complaint responses and be no longer than 10 days.
    2. landlords should treat residents fairly and reasonably.
    3. landlords must provide effective complaint handling and address all points raised in the complaint. Landlords should provide clear reasons for any decisions.
    4. complaint responses should provide details of any outstanding actions to be completed by the landlord.
58. When the landlord has identified failures the Code states:
    1. landlords must acknowledge where things have gone wrong.
    2. any remedy offered must reflect the impact on the resident of any fault identified.
    3. remedies must clearly set what actions the landlord will take and by what date.
    4. any remedy proposed must be followed through to completion.
    5. landlord should consider changing policies, procedures, or practices.
59. In January 2024 the resident requested the landlord reconsider his historic complaints. We have seen evidence of two historic complaints. The landlord upheld the complaints and provided a total of £500 compensation. The resident accepted this compensation and the complaints were closed.
60. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord declined to reconsider the historic complaints. The landlord said this was due to it making a final decision on both complains. It also highlighted the age of the cases, which were over 6 months old. The landlord’s decision to not reconsider the complaints was in line with its complaint policy at that time.
61. The resident has told us the landlord had refused to acknowledge he had an open complaint. We have seen emails from the resident sent in August 2023 to the landlord. The resident asked the landlord whether he had an open complaint. We have seen no evidence the landlord has provided an answer to the resident. In mitigation the resident has not chased an answer from the landlord. By not answering the resident’s query the landlord has not treated the resident fairly in line with the Code.
62. The landlord has also failed to investigate this issue during the complaints process. The stage 2 complaint process suggests the landlord does not have the email on file. This is a failure of the landlord to follow the recommendations in the KIM.
63. The landlord could also have requested a copy of the email before providing its stage 2 complaint response. This is a failure of the landlord to investigate the resident’s complaint thoroughly as outlined in the Code.
64. On 11 December 2023, the resident’s MP sent a letter to the landlord explaining mould within the resident’s property was still not resolved. The landlord opened a formal complaint. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint 11 December 2023 complaint on the same day. The landlord advised the resident it required additional time to complete its investigation on 15 December 2023. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint on 18 December 2023. The landlord completed these actions in line with the timescales outlined in the landlord’s complaint policy and the Code.
65. The resident agreed to provide additional time for investigation on 18 January 2024. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 29 January 2024. As outlined by the Code, the timeline extension did not extend beyond 10 working days. The landlord’s actions listed above were completed in line with the timescales outlined in the landlord’s complaint policy and the Code.
66. In summary we have seen the landlord did not answer the resident’s query about whether he had a repair open. We have also seen the landlord did not have the email on file or investigate the issue before completing the stage 2 complaint response. Overall, the landlord actions amount to a service failing.  The resident has told us he has suffered stress and inconvenience. The Ombudsman had ordered the landlord write to the resident to apologise for its handling of this part of the complaint. The Ombudsman has also ordered the landlord to pay £50 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

Determination

67. In accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the resident’s reports of an outstanding repair for a toilet leak is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
68. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of:

1. reports of outstanding repairs including to a roof leak.
2. reports of damp and mould.

69. The Ombudsman finds there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of barriers to making complaints or reports of its staff bullying the resident’s parents.
70. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

71. The landlord must, within 28 calendar days of the date of this determination:
    1. provide a written apology for the failures identified in this report.
    2. pay the resident total compensation of £50, comprised of:
       1. £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to investigate part of the resident’s complaint.

Recommendations

72. Our determination of reasonable redress is made on the understanding that the compensation offered of £3000 is paid to the resident within 28 days of this report, if it has not already been paid.