GreenSquareAccord Limited (202446617)
|
Case ID |
202446617 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
GreenSquareAccord Limited |
|
Landlord type |
Housing Association |
|
Occupancy |
Secure Tenancy |
|
Date |
18 December 2025 |
- In mid-2024, the resident experienced a rat infestation and a roof leak that damaged insulation in her loft. Around the same time the resident reported a problem with her boiler losing pressure. The resident complained about the time it took the landlord to deal with the roof and boiler repairs because it was causing damp and mould in her bathroom and making her house colder.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the:
- Roof leak causing damage to insulation and damp and mould.
- Boiler repair.
- Associated complaint.
Our decision (determination)
- We have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the roof repair.
- We have found no maladministration in its handling of the:
- Boiler repair.
- Associated complaint.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
Summary of reasons
Roof repair
- The landlord acknowledged there were delays in installing the insulation and failings in communication about repairs associated with the roof repair. Mainly it took appropriate actions to put things right, however there was a further delay to relaying the insultation that likely could have been avoided or lessened.
Boiler repair
- During the period concerned, the landlord responded to the resident’s reports within or under its repair timescales. This was appropriate given the nature of the issues and the household vulnerabilities.
Associated complaint
- The landlord followed its policy timescales and commitments in delivering timely responses, addressing the issues complained about, and providing appropriate resolutions.
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 |
Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £100 for the distress and inconvenience arising from its handling of the roof repairs issue. It must provide evidence that this has been paid or of its attempts to make payment. |
No later than 16 January 2026 |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
9 December 2024 |
The resident complained about the repair issues with the roof, damp and mould in the bathroom, and boiler losing pressure. She reported that her teenage children (who are neurodivergent) and baby were unwell. |
|
8 January 2025 |
In the stage 1 response, the landlord said it had been unable to replace the insulation because the roof needed to be repaired and advised it would confirm a date for when this would happen. It said the boiler had been repaired following her report of a problem and to contact it if it reoccurred. The landlord advised a surveyor would inspect her home for damp and mould. It awarded £100 compensation for further delays in replacing the insulation.
The resident escalated her complaint the same day because she was unhappy with the amount of compensation. She said she had incurred extra costs because the property was colder and it was causing her and her family distress. |
|
5 February 2025 |
The landlord said in the stage 2 response that it had:
|
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident asked us to investigate her complaint because she was unhappy with how long it took to complete the roof repair and relay insulation, and that the intermittent boiler issue continued after the complaints process ended. She said during this time her home was cold and her family were inconvenienced by not having easy access to hot water. She is seeking service improvements. |
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.
|
Roof repairs |
|
|
Finding |
Service failure |
- For context, the resident made a separate complaint about the landlord’s handling of the repairs needed to prevent rats from entering her home prior to the one this investigation concerns. One of the issues she raised in this was about the time it was taking to remove and relay the insulation. The resident referred that complaint to us and we investigated it separately. As such, the timeline we have considered is from when the first complaint process ended in mid-October 2024.
- Largely the landlord provided a reasonable response to the resident’s complaint about its handling of the roof repairs. It recognised its mistakes and proposed appropriate resolutions, such as:
- Acknowledging there had been more delays in replacing the insulation after the end of the first complaint, at which time it was still in place. It was removed on 11 November 2024 and due to be replaced on 27 November 2024. However, this was delayed by the discovery of the roof leaks and droppings, and its need to rectify these things beforehand.
- Recognising its communication over repairs was poor and that this caused the resident time and trouble.
- Confirming dates for the roof repairs, which records show it completed on time in mid-February 2025. This was also within the 84 day planned routine timescale it allocated for this repair and was in keeping with the landlord’s policy for standard issues that were more complex and needed time to plan.
- Confirming that the damp and mould repairs would be completed after the roof repair and before 14 March 2024. Records show it completed the mould treatments within 10 days of the roof repair, which was appropriate.
- Awarding compensation for the varying impacts of the delays on her in line with the range (£50-£100) both its policy and our remedies guidance suggests is paid for service failure that has had a low impact over a short duration. Its award of £250 was proportionate to the cumulative impact at that time.
- Reimbursing the proven costs the resident incurred, including for additional bedding and blankets. This was in line with the approach set out in its compensation policy for where there is an actual expenditure arising from its failure.
- We have identified a failure in its handling of the roof insulation that the landlord may have helped avoid or mitigate through the complaints process. This was a further delay caused by the need to clear the loft of rat droppings, which was one of the issues preventing the insulation from being re-laid in late-November 2024. Records from this time show the landlord believed this was not from an active infestation and was, rather, due to its failure to complete the work to an appropriate standard.
- In the final response, the landlord said it would complete the work after the roof was repaired and gave the impression it would be soon after. The landlord could have considered coordinating the loft to be cleared before, during, or soon after the roof repairs. The records do not show that it considered the loft clearance until 25 February 2025. This was a failing.
- The insulation was replaced in late-May 2025, around 3 months after the landlord’s response indicated it would be. We cannot know for certain that the original timeframe would have been achievable because it may still have been dependent on completing the roof repairs. However, the resident is likely to have been caused distress and inconvenience from the raised expectation that the insulation would be renewed within a short while of the roof repair.
- In view of the above, we have found service failure and have ordered the landlord to pay additional compensation for the further impact on the resident.
|
Complaint |
Boiler repair |
|
Finding |
No maladministration |
- Apart from reporting a leak from underneath the boiler in November 2023, the resident made no other reports until shortly before complaining. During this time an annual gas safety inspection found no issues with the boiler. She reported on 18 November 2024 that the boiler was not working and she was without heating and hot water. The landlord attended on the same day, within its emergency timescale, which was appropriate given the nature of the issue.
- In her complaint, in early December 2024, she reported needing to refill the boiler daily. The landlord attended to this within 3 days, well under its urgent timescale of 7 days, which was reasonable given the vulnerabilities in the household. It then completed a full repair 7 days later after replacing a part on 18 December 2024. This was reasonable and well under the routine timescale of 28 days it allocated for replacing the part. The resident still had access to heating and hot water during this time, albeit we recognise she experienced some inconvenience.
- The resident did not refer to still having a problem with the boiler in her escalation request. However, the landlord said its surveyor had raised a boiler repair but did not state what this was for and why and there is no record of this in the repair log. We have though seen that a gas safety inspection was completed on 24 March 2025 and the boiler was found to be functioning. This demonstrates that there was no fault with it at that time.
- During a call with the landlord to discuss repairs relating to the pest control issue, on 29 October 2025, the resident reported that her boiler intermittently was not working. She said she was sometimes unable to use the heating because of this. While we appreciate this must have been frustrating, nothing in the records show she had reported a problem with the boiler in the 10 months after the last repair. It is therefore not a failing in the landlord’s handling of repairs during the period we investigated that she experienced a further problem with the boiler. The resident though may wish to make a complaint about the more recent issue if she is unhappy about how it has handled more recent boiler repairs.
- Considering the above, we have not seen any failings, which is our reason for making a finding of maladministration.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
No maladministration |
- The landlord’s 2 stage process aligns with the requirements of our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). It must then respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 within 20 working days of acknowledging the complaint, which must be within 5 working days of receipt. It may though take up to 20 working days longer if needed and as long as the resident is notified in advance.
- Records show the landlord followed its process and timescales at all stages. Our reasons for this are that it:
- Acknowledged the resident’s complaint of 9 December 2024 and escalation of 8 January 2025 in 1 working day.
- Gave notice of the need to extend the stage 1 timescale by 10 working days on 12 December 2024 and then met this.
- Responded in 19 working days at stage 2 on 5 February 2025.
- The tone of both the responses was in keeping with the landlord’s aim, set out in its complaints policy, to be respectful and respond positively. It recognised how the resident was affected and took steps to put things right, in line with its guidance.
- Given the above we find no failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.
Learning
Knowledge information management (record keeping)
- The landlord’s records were largely reasonable because we were able to show what issues the resident report, the priority rating it allocated, what work it intended to do, and when the repair was completed. The landlord though may wish to review whether its records or information sharing in this case was the reason it did not consider that the loft needing clearing during the complaints process.
Communication
- In our October 2024 special report, publishing themes from our investigations into the landlord, we identified repeat failings in the landlord’s communication with residents about repairs. The landlord responded positively to our recommendations and agreed to make improvements as part of its 5-year organisational strategy. We encourage the landlord to consider any learning from its communication failings in this case in its ongoing work to improve its service.