Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council (202509792)

Background

1. The resident has lived at a 1-bedroom semi-detached bungalow since 2019. The landlord’s records say the resident is elderly and she suffers from breathing problems. The resident has experienced problems with damp and mould at the property and first raised concerns to the landlord in 2020.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Reports of damp and mould in the property.
   2. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found that:
   1. There was severe maladministration in how the landlord handled reports of damp and mould in the property.
4. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the property

4. Despite numerous reports of damp and mould in the resident’s property, the landlord failed address the root cause of the problem over a prolonged period. The landlord accepted it should have acted more promptly to address the problem. It offered compensation during its complaints process and has taken some actions to address the damp and mould, however, its actions have been insufficient to put right its significant failings and the impact upon the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

5. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint in line with its complaint policy.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

What we have not considered

6. The resident told us that damp and mould in the property has affected her health. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We have not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.

What we have considered

7. The landlord’s records from 2020 show it was aware there was mould in the resident’s property. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlord in a timely manner. This is because our Scheme states we may not investigate complaints that were not brought to the landlord’s attention within a reasonable time, normally within 12 months from when the issue is first raised.
8. When deciding the scope for this investigation, we have considered that the issue in dispute is the same through the whole timeline. Although the resident did not formally complain to the landlord until February 2025, the evidence shows the landlord was aware of the damp and mould at the property in January 2020 and the resident engaged with it from then onwards. As such we have exercised our discretion, and it is appropriate for this investigation to include the detail of the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould in the property from January 2020 onwards.
9. Landlords need to make sure their homes are safe, warm, and free from hazards. When a resident reports a risk such as damp and mould, the landlord should quickly inspect the property to check for hazards. They must determine if the home is safe and fit to live in. Ignoring hazards can lead to serious consequences for everyone involved.
10. The landlord’s records show it attended the resident’s property on 4 occasions and it treated mould in various rooms of the property, including the kitchen, between January 2020 and January 2023. The landlord’s records do not say what type of treatment took place on those occasions. The landlord’s repairs policy up to January 2023 considered reports of damp and mould as a routine repair to be treated within 25 working days.
11. The landlord’s records from this period show acted within its policy timescales. However, there is no evidence the landlord conducted works or inspections which sought to determine the cause of the damp and mould in the property. This was despite the repeated need for it to return to the property to conduct treatments.
12. In February 2023 the landlord introduced its damp and mould policy which states it should respond to reports and remove the hazard within 7 days. The resident reported damp and mould in her kitchen again on 12 April 2024. The landlord attended on 18 April 2024 and said it needed to inspect the property to determine the cause of the damp and mould.
13. No further action was taken until the landlord inspected the kitchen again on 18 June 2024. The landlord has not provided evidence which explained why there was a gap and inactivity between the resident’s report on 12 April 2024 and its inspection on 18 June 2024. This was not in accordance with its damp and mould policy.
14. The landlord decided to replace the kitchen units and flooring, but there is no record which showed it identified the reason for the damp and mould returning. The landlord carried out repairs to the kitchen and replaced the units. In October 2024 it found mould had appeared in the new units.
15. The landlord’s surveyor inspected the property on 13 November 2024. They decided the property’s roof and drainage needed to be checked to see if water ingress was causing the damp and mould. Those inspections were completed on 17 January 2025, and repairs were carried out to the roof and gutters in February 2025. The landlord’s response at each stage of the works it conducted was outside of the timescales it had set to respond to and irradicate hazards caused by the presence of damp and mould.
16. On 28 February 2025 the resident complained to the landlord. She said it had been treating damp and mould in the property for 5 years, but it kept returning.
17. A further inspection was carried out by the landlord’s surveyor on 29 March 2025. They identified severe damp and mould in the property. The surveyor said the necessary repairs should be treated as a priority as the resident was elderly and vulnerable. The surveyor said the landlord needed to carry out further repairs to the roof, chimney, brickwork and guttering due to water ingress. They also said remedial works should be carried out to treat the internal areas affected by damp and mould.
18. On 3 April 2025 the landlord sent its response to the resident at stage 1 of its complaints process. The landlord apologised and offered £250 compensation for the delays in taking action to treat damp and mould since 2024. It accepted that it had not stopped the damp and mould returning in the property, and said it was reviewing the recent property inspection report. The landlord confirmed it intended to carry out the repairs required within 30 days, and it would provide her with details of when they would be.
19. Between 4 and 15 April 2025 the landlord carried out further repairs to stop water ingress from the roof and gutters. It said there were no issues with the property’s wall insulation or damp–proof course.
20. The resident called the landlord on 22 April 2025 and escalated the complaint as the landlord did not provide a schedule of repair works following its stage 1 response.
21. The landlord sent its stage 2 response to the resident on 9 May 2025. The landlord apologised and offered a further £100 compensation for not telling her when the repairs would be carried out, as it said it would. The landlord told the resident it would remove the chimney by the end of October 2025, and it would renew the roof by the end of March 2026.
22. The landlord’s records say it repointed damaged walls on 19 May 2025 the chimney was removed on 11 August 2025. Works to renew the roof were completed on 30 October 2025.
23. On 8 October 2025 the landlord inspected the property to check if there was still damp and mould present. It said there were further repairs required to treat mould in the lounge, but it required another inspection beforehand.
24. Throughout the timeline of the resident’s complaint, the evidence shows there were substantial delays by the landlord to effectively address the causes of damp and mould in the resident’s property. Both of the landlord’s complaint responses recognised it had not taken sufficient action to address issues the resident raised. The landlord offered £350 overall compensation for the distress and inconvenience the lack of action caused the resident.
25. There is clear evidence of repeated visits to conduct works at the property, which have failed to tackle the root cause of the issue. This is evidenced by the total time the resident has been reporting damp and mould and the duration the landlord has been put on notice about the problem. The resident has reported to us that there is still mould inside the property.
26. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances.
27. When considering the landlord’s compensation offer against the criteria set out in our remedies guidance, its offer of £350 is not in line with an amount we would expect where the failings have resulted in a severe long term impact which occurred over a significant period of time and where the landlord has repeatedly failed to provide a service. It is concerning that despite several attempts by the landlord to deal with the situation since 2020, its inspection from March 2025 identified there was still severe damp and mould in the property.
28. The evidence shows that although the landlord has carried out external repairs outlined in its stage 2 response, it has yet to complete internal remedial works to the areas affected by damp and mould. The landlord’s inspection in October 2025 identified further repairs were still required, but these remain outstanding.
29. The failure to effectively deal with the damp and mould at the property over a 5 year period, together with the failure to provide appropriate redress to this point, leads to a determination of severe maladministration in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property. The landlord is ordered to pay £1,500 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its failings. This amount is calculated in line with our remedies guidance. In addition, the landlord is ordered to complete the outstanding inspection of the property and carry out the required works in a timely manner.

30. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. Its complaints policy states it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days from when it is raised. It should send its stage 1 complaints response within 10 working days. The landlord should acknowledge escalated complaints within 5 working days and send its stage 2 response within 20 working days. The landlord can extend the timescales for when it replies to a complaint, but it must inform the resident of the reason for the delay. This is in line with our Complaint Handling Code.
31. The resident complained to the landlord on 28 February 2025. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 7 March 2025, which was within its policy timescale.
32. The landlord wrote to the resident on 21 March 2025 and apologised that it could not yet reply to her complaint. It said it wanted to inspect the property so it would send its complaint response by 4 April 2025. This extension was in line with its complaints policy, and the landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 3 April 2025.
33. The resident told the landlord on 22 April 2025 that she had escalated her complaint on 4 April 2025. The landlord has no record of receiving an escalation request prior to 22 April 2025. The landlord did not acknowledge the escalated complaint.
34. On 9 May 2025 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It apologised for any confusion caused regarding when the complaint was first escalated.
35. The landlord handled the resident’s initial complaint as per its policy process. Although there was some dispute as to when the resident escalated the complaint, the landlord’s first record of this was 22 April 2025. The landlord did not acknowledge the escalated complaint, but this was of no detriment to the resident as it sent its stage 2 response within its policy timescale from when it first recorded the complaint. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

36. The landlord demonstrated sufficient record keeping in respect of the matters we have investigated in this case.

Communication

37. There were periods from when the landlord was aware of the damp and mould, but it did not contact the resident and provide updates on when it would carry out repairs. This lack of communication contributed to the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and is reflected in the compensation order above. The landlord should look for opportunities to draw learning from this complaint to inform improved customer service going forward.