Sanctuary Housing Association (202412843)

Decision
Case ID	202412843
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Sanctuary Housing Association
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	28 November 2025

Background

1. The resident lives in a 2-bedroom mid terraced house. The tenancy was transferred to her under a deed of assignment dated 11 December 2017.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about:
   1. A roof leak.
   2. Internal damage to plaster, skirting boards and cracks in the ceiling.
   3. The resident’s requests for compensation for damaged belongings.
   4. The associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was maladministration in how the landlord handled:
   1. A roof leak.
   2. Internal damage to plaster, skirting boards and cracks in the ceiling.
   3. The resident’s requests for compensation for damaged belongings.
   4. The associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

A roof leak.

4. The landlord took nearly 17 months to complete repairs to the roof. There were delays at each stage of the repair process.  There was also poor communication between the landlord and its contractors, and with the resident.

Internal damage to plaster, skirting boards and cracks in the ceiling.

5. The landlord took 143 calendar days to repair cracks in the ceiling. It also significantly delayed completing repairs to damaged plaster and skirting boards. The delays resulted in the resident paying for the repairs privately.

The resident’s requests for compensation for damaged belongings.

6. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s concerns about damage to her belongings in any of its correspondence.

The associated complaint.

7. The landlord delayed providing a stage 1 response and did not provide a response in writing. It also delayed its stage 2 response and did not address all aspects of the complaint.

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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 07 January 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,050 made up as follows: £500 for the distress and inconvenience to the resident for its failings in how it handled reports of a leak. £350 for the distress and inconvenience to the resident for its failings in how it handled requests for repairs to plaster, skirting boards and cracks in the ceiling. £200 for the distress and inconvenience to the resident for its failings in how it handled requests for compensation for damaged belongings. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 07 January 2026
3	Order The landlord must contact the resident and obtain details and evidence of the damaged items she wishes to claim for. The landlord must pay her the replacement value of the items as per its compensation policy. Payment should then be made no later than 6 weeks from the date of this report.	No later than 07 January 2026

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
Between 20 November 2023 and 21 February 2024	The resident reported damp issues in her front bedroom walls. She contacted the landlord on a further 2 occasions to chase up the repairs.
21 February 2024	The resident raised a complaint to the landlord. She said it took 2 weeks for a damp inspection. It then took even longer for a roof inspection. The inspector told her scaffolding was required, but she had heard nothing since. She said the leak had ruined some belongings and she had no insurance. She had spent a lot more money on energy using a dehumidifier. She also had to sleep on the sofa due to her bed getting wet.
15 March 2024	The landlord responded to the stage 1 complaint by phone call. It said it had significantly delayed arranging the required repairs. It said its communication had been poor and the resident had to keep chasing for updates. It apologised and offered £400 for the delays completing repairs and the resident having to chase it up. It also offered £150 for poor communication and delays responding.
15 April 2024	The resident asked to escalate her complaint. She said the landlord had taken no action and she had received no further communication.
30 July 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It said the quote from a roofing contractor did not provide evidence of a roof leak, so it declined the quote. It said a further inspection inside the property on 26 July 2024 reported all areas were dry and there were no signs of any water ingress. It had arranged an appointment for 12 August 2024 to repair the plaster and skirting boards. It apologised for not sending a stage 1 response and for the delay issuing its stage 2 response. It also apologised for the delays arranging repairs and not responding to her emails. It offered compensation of £1,050 (£750 for the overall time and trouble caused and £300 for complaint handling failures).
Events since the final complaint response	The landlord paid compensation of £1,050 to the resident on 8 August 2024. It cancelled the appointment to repair the plaster and skirting boards. The resident then paid to have the plastering and skirting boards repaired privately. The resident raised a further complaint about the roof repair delays. The landlord issued a further stage 2 complaint response in February 2025 and paid a further £350 compensation. It completed all outstanding repairs to the roof on 11 April 2025.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident brought her complaint to us as she wants the landlord to provide compensation for damages to her belongings.

 

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.

Complaint	A roof leak.
Finding	Maladministration

8. Under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord must keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property, including the roof, gutter, drains and pipes. The landlord acknowledges this obligation in its repairs policy.
9. Under the landlord’s repairs policy, it will complete all appointed repairs within 45 calendar days. It will complete all major repairs within 90 calendar days. A leaking roof would be classed as a major repair. The landlord required access, inspection, and scaffolding before completing the works. It should therefore complete the works in 90 calendar days.
10. The resident first reported the leak on 20 November 2023. The landlord inspected the property on 5 December 2023. It then raised a request for a roofing contractor to inspect the roof.
11. The roofing contractor inspected the roof on 12 January 2024. This length of time between reported repair and inspection could make it increasingly difficult for the landlord to meet its repair timescale. The landlord refers to a pre-inspection process guidance at Appendix 4 of its repairs policy. However, that was not included with the documents provided to us. The roofing contractor did not provide its report and quote for works to the landlord until 10 March 2024. This was 111 days since the reported repair and 21 days over the timescale for the landlord to complete the works. The resident had chased an update on several occasions during that time.
12. The landlord should ensure that it employs contractors which have sufficient capacity to respond to its repair service standard. It should keep residents updated and clearly explain if repairs are going to take longer than usual. The delays obtaining the roofing report and quote for works was a systems failure. It also did not provide updates to the resident to manage her expectation of when it would complete the repairs. This was inappropriate.
13. Once the landlord received the quote for the roofing work on 10 March 2024, there were internal communications over the necessity of the work and value for money. It then rejected the quote as it deemed the work unnecessary. The delays caused by the process or lack of it to approve the works significantly lengthened the time to complete the works. The works were already overdue at this time.
14. When the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response of 30 July 2024, it had not yet completed the repairs. It said there were no signs of any water ingress. It said there were some repairs required to the chimney. However, it did not propose any other roof repairs. It completed repairs to the chimney on 14 August 2024. This was almost 9 months after the resident first reported the leak and is a failure.
15. Following its stage 2 response, it identified the roof was still leaking. There was a hole in the roof with daylight visible through some slates. It completed further roof repairs on 20 August and 8 October 2024. It then completed further roof inspections on 8 November 2024, 6 December 2024 and 25 February 2025. It then completed all roof repairs on 11 April 2025. This was almost 17 months after the resident first reported the issue and is a significant failure.
16. In summary, the landlord took nearly 17 months to complete repairs to the roof. There were delays at each stage of the repair process. It took 53 calendar days to inspect the roof. It then took a further 7 months before completing any repair work. It took a further 8 months to fully complete all repairs to the roof. There was poor communication between the landlord and its contractors. There was also poor communication by not providing any updates about repair works to the resident and several of her emails went unanswered.
17. The landlord offered £750 compensation in its stage 2 response for the overall time and trouble caused. However, it did not specify the proportion of this it allocated for its delays repairing the roof.
18. We note the landlord has since paid a further £350 compensation in February 2025. This was in response to a second complaint the resident raised based on its ongoing delays to repair the roof. It still hadn’t completed the repair works to the roof at that time.
19. We order the landlord to pay the resident a further £500 total compensation for the time, trouble, distress and inconvenience caused by its delays to repair the leak in the roof. This is within the range of awards set out in our remedies guidance for cases such as this where there was a failure by the landlord which adversely affected the resident.

Complaint	Internal damage to plaster, skirting boards and cracks in the ceiling.
Finding	Maladministration

20. According to the landlord’s repairs policy, it is responsible for repairs to skirting boards. It is also responsible for large repairs to plaster on walls and ceilings. The most appropriate category for the repairs is appointed. The landlord should therefore complete these repairs in 45 calendar days.
21. The resident first reported the internal damage to plaster and skirting boards on 20 November 2023. The landlord inspected the property on 5 December 2023. It reported repairs were required for damaged plaster and skirting boards.
22. On 3 January 2024 the landlord arranged appointments to repair the plaster and skirting boards for 22 April and 26 April 2024. These appointments were significantly outside the landlord’s repair timescales from the initial report of 20 November 2023. This was a failure.
23. On 4 March 2024 the landlord told the resident it had brought the appointment to repair the plaster forward to 19 March 2024. The resident queried bringing the appointment forward as the roof repair was still outstanding. The landlord therefore changed the plaster repair appointment to 26 June 2024. It also changed the skirting board repair appointment to 1 July 2024. It was right that the plaster and skirting board repairs were postponed until the roof repair was complete. The water from the leak was damaging them and would only have damaged any repair works. However, this made it more important that the landlord repaired the roof within its repair timescales. The landlord should have considered and acted to mitigate the effects of the leak whilst repairs were pending.
24. On 4 March 2024 the resident also reported cracks had appeared in her living room ceiling. Although the landlord attended on 22 March 2024, it did not complete the ceiling repairs until 25 July 2024. This was 143 calendar days after the resident’s report, and a failure.
25. While the roof repairs remained outstanding, the landlord kept rearranging and pushing back the internal repair works to the walls and skirting boards. We note this was done in agreement with the resident. She wanted the root cause of the matter resolved first before completing repairs to the internal plaster and skirting boards. This was appropriate.
26. In its stage 2 complaint response of 30 July 2024 the landlord confirmed it would complete the plastering and skirting board repairs on 12 August 2024. However, it subsequently cancelled the appointment and rearranged them for 19 November 2024 due to other urgent jobs being required elsewhere. This was not appropriate due to how long the issue had been ongoing.
27. The resident contacted the landlord on 9 August 2024 and disputed the change of appointment date. The landlord then referred the issue to another contractor as an external job. The external contractor attended on 21 August 2024, but reported further work was needed and there was a hole in the roof that needed repairing before it could repair the plastering.
28. The landlord contacted the resident on 23 October 2024 to try to rearrange the plastering and skirting board repairs. However, the resident advised she had paid to get the repair work completed privately. As the landlord should have completed the repairs in 45 calendar days, it is inappropriate it was still trying to arrange the repairs 11 months later.
29. In summary, the landlord took 143 calendar days to repair cracks in the ceiling. It also significantly delayed completing repairs to damaged plaster and skirting boards. The delays resulted in the resident paying for the repairs privately.
30. It is unclear how much of the £750 compensation it offered at stage 2 was apportioned to this matter.
31. We therefore order the landlord to pay the resident the sum of £350 compensation. This is to recognise the time, trouble and inconvenience caused by its failure to repair the damaged plaster, cracked ceiling and damaged skirting boards within its timescales. This is within the range of awards set out in our remedies guidance for cases such as this where there was a failure by the landlord which adversely affected the resident.

Complaint	The resident’s requests for compensation for damaged belongings.
Finding	Maladministration

32. The landlord’s compensation policy says it can award compensation up to an amount which would allow the resident to purchase like for like replacements.
33. The resident raised the matter of damaged belongings in her complaint of 21 February 2024. The landlord should have dealt with the matter in its compliant response. However, the landlord responded to the complaint by phone on 15 March 2024 and made no record of this issue in its system notes, which is inappropriate.
34. The resident emailed the landlord later that day and said it told her on the phone to send in evidence of the damaged belongings. She attached images to the email of some damages and proof of purchase of various items.
35. There is no evidence the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns about damage to her belongings in any of its correspondence. This is a failure.
36. We therefore order the landlord to pay the resident £200 compensation. This is to recognise the time, trouble and inconvenience caused by its failure to consider requests for compensation for damaged belongings. This is within the range of awards set out in our remedies guidance for cases such as this where there was a failure by the landlord which adversely affected the resident.

Complaint	The associated complaint.
Finding	Maladministration

37. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out clear expectations for how landlords should manage complaints. At stage 1 of its complaints process, landlords must acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It should issue a response within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. At stage 2 of its complaints process, landlords must acknowledge escalation requests within 5 working days. It should issue a response within 20 working days of the acknowledgement. The landlord’s complaint policy is compliant with the Code.
38. The resident submitted a stage 1 complaint on 21 February 2024. The landlord acknowledged the complaint 3 working days later. It said it would respond within 10 working days. This is compliant with the Code and its own complaint policy.
39. The landlord then telephoned the resident on 15 March 2024. This was 14 working days later and a failure. It provided its complaint response and proposed resolution verbally by phone. There is no evidence it sent any response or confirmation in writing. Under the Code, landlord’s must confirm in writing the details of its response at the completion of stage 1. It was therefore a failure not to provide a complaint response in writing.
40. Following the resident’s escalation request of 15 April 2024, the landlord acknowledged the request 2 days later. This is compliant with the Code and its own complaint policy.
41. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response 72 working days later. This is a failure. It also did not address all aspects of the complaint. The Code states that landlords are expected to respond to all aspects of the complaint as defined by the resident. It failed to respond to the resident’s concerns about damage to her personal belongings. It also did not provide any resolution to the roof leak. These omissions were inappropriate and reflects a failure to provide a complete and reasonable resolution.
42. In summary, the landlord’s complaint handling was not compliant with the Code or its own policy at both stages of the complaint process. It delayed responding at stage 1. It also did not send any stage 1 response in writing. It significantly delayed providing its stage 2 response. It also did not respond to all aspects of the complaint. It recognised its complaint handling failures and delays in its stage 2 response and provided £300 compensation. However, this did not acknowledge its failure to not respond to all aspects of the complaint.
43. We have therefore found maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling. However, the amount paid by the landlord for complaint handling failures is sufficient for the findings we have made. No further compensation is ordered.

Learning

44. The landlord’s communication with its contractors was poor, which negatively affected its ability to carry out repairs to the roof. It should consider reviewing its contractor communication processes to ensure it is effectively monitoring outstanding responses.
45. The landlord did not issue a stage 1 complaint response. It also significantly delayed its stage 2 response and did not address all concerns. It should ensure staff are familiar with the requirements of the Code, particularly the importance of responding to complaints in writing, responding within the prescribed timescales and addressing all aspects of the complaint.
46. It is good practice for landlords to be explicit in their compensation awards. It should highlight the specific amount of compensation it has awarded to each element of the complaint. The landlord should consider this learning in its future complaint responses.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

47. Evidence shows the landlord did not fully record the contents of the complaint phone call of 15 March 2024. It should ensure all staff fully record all interactions on its system.

Communication

48. There were several instances where the landlord failed to respond to the resident. The landlord should ensure its communication with residents are regular and consistent while repairs are ongoing.