Southern Housing (202502888)

Decision
Case ID	202502888
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Southern Housing
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	9 October 2025

Background

The resident and her husband are assured tenants of the landlord. The property is a 3 bedroom terraced house. The landlord has “no vulnerabilities” recorded for the household on its systems. However, during her complaint, the resident told it that her and her husband were disabled.

What the complaint is about

The landlord’s response to the resident’s:
1. Reports of damp and mould.
2. Request for it to renew the roof and loft insulation.
We have also assessed the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

There was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
There was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for it to renew the roof and loft insulation.
There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Response to reports of damp and mould

The landlord apologised to the resident and made a reasonable offer of compensation for the initial delay in its response to her report of damp and mould. However, it has not evidenced that it completed all the works recommended by its surveyor. The works that it has evidenced completing took significantly longer than its target timescale.

Response to request to renew the roof and loft insulation

There is no evidence that the landlord, or its contractors, recommended renewing the roof of the property. The landlord failed to respond to the resident’s request for it to provide her with a date for works before she arranged to have her belongings cleared from the loft space. This has prevented it from fully inspecting the area and diagnosing any remedial works required.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s handled the resident’s complaint in keeping with the requirements of our complaint handling code (the Code)

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.	No later than 06 November 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £370 made up as follows: £135 as offered in its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses for the delay in its handling of her initial damp and mould report. £135 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of damp and mould repairs. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the loft insulation renewal. 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 06 November 2025
3	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident and arrange an appointment for a suitably qualified person to inspect the loft space of the property (including the insulation). The landlord should ensure it allows sufficient time before the appointment for the resident to arrange removal of her belongings.	No later than 06 November 2025
4	Starting the works If it has not already completed them, the landlord must take all steps to ensure the works to relocate the thermostat and remove redundant air bricks are started no later than the due date. If the landlord cannot start the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date: Why it cannot start the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will start and finish the works; or The steps it has taken to start the works and provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to ensure the works were started by the due date. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot.	No later than 06 November 2025
5	Update vulnerability records The landlord must contact the resident and ensure it appropriately records all household vulnerabilities, and any reasonable adjustments required, on its systems.	No later than 06 November 2025

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
9 January 2025	The resident raised a complaint to the landlord. She said that: There had been ongoing issues with the roof since 2019. The landlord’s contractors had told her the roof needed renewing. The landlord had refused to do this and only raised a repair for the loft insulation. The landlord had told her to clear her possessions from the loft before it would carry out works to the insulation. She would need to pay someone to do this. She did not want to do so until the landlord had confirmed a date for the works. She had reported mould in the property multiple times, but the landlord had never responded.
14 February 2025	The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response. It said that: It had no record of it, or its contractors, agreeing to replace the roof. Its contractor had inspected the loft and roof areas on 30 January 2025. It had told the resident the “overloaded loft space” and screwed down boards would increase humidity in the property. The contractor had asked for the resident to remove her belongings so it could fully assess the area. The landlord asked her to contact it when she had done this to make an appointment for a further inspection. Its surveyor had inspected the property for damp and mould on 10 February 2025. It was awaiting a copy of their report and would raise any necessary repairs. It apologised for the delay in dealing with the resident’s initial report of damp and mould and offered her £135 compensation.
28 February 2025	On or around this date, the resident asked to escalate her complaint to stage 2. She said that she had been told “multiple times” that the roof needed replacing. She claimed the property was not retaining heat due to the roof issues.
11 March 2025	The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It said that: Its surveyor had recommended installing extractor fans to the kitchen and bathroom and carrying out mould washes. It had reviewed its roofing contractor’s job reports and could not find any record of a recommendation for a new roof.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred her complaint to us on 23 April 2025. She said she wanted the landlord to renew the roof “like they have been saying for the past 6 years”.

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	Damp and mould
Finding	Service failure

The resident reported damp and mould “throughout” the property to the landlord on 15 November 2024. In her complaint, the resident referred to having reported the issue “multiple times”, however we have not seen evidence of any earlier reports.
The landlord opened a case on its system and passed it to its damp and mould team. The landlord’s damp and mould ‘standard operating procedure’ (SOP) says after receiving a report of damp and mould it aims to arrange an inspection within 10 working days. However, the landlord took until 10 February 2025 to send a surveyor to inspect the property. This was 58 working days after the resident made her report, which was an unreasonable delay.
In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord acknowledged the delay and apologised to the resident. It offered her £135 compensation composed of £60 for the delay and £75 for the ‘stress and inconvenience’ caused. This was a reasonable offer for a single instance of service failure, in keeping with our remedies guidance.
The landlord’s surveyor concluded that the damp and mould was due to “an imbalance of heating and ventilation” causing condensation. They recommended installing new extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom, relocating the thermostat and removing redundant air bricks from the walls.
The landlord also sent an operative to carry out a mould wash in the property on 13 February 2025. They recorded that they were unable to gain access to the property and left a calling card. The landlord cancelled the works order on 19 February 2025. This was in keeping with its responsive repairs policy which says that it will cancel a repair if the resident does not contact it within 7 days of it leaving a calling card.
On 11 February 2025, the landlord raised a works order to its contractor to install the new extractor fans and carry out a mould wash. It is unclear exactly when the contractor completed this, but it invoiced the landlord for the works on 25 April 2025. It is reasonable to assume it completed the works on or around this date.
The landlord’s damp and mould SOP says that it aims to “have completed any necessary works within six weeks of the initial report”. 25 April 2025 was 23 weeks after the resident had reported the damp and mould, which significantly exceeded this target.
The landlord has already apologised and compensated the resident for its delays in addressing her report up to 10 February 2025 – when its surveyor inspected. However, from that date onwards it was still over 10 weeks before the repairs were completed.
The landlord has said that it raised works orders to remove the air bricks and relocate the thermostat separately. These were not sent to the contractor which installed the extractor fans. However, the landlord has not provided any evidence that these repairs have been completed. They do not appear in the repair logs it has provided for the property. We note that the landlord also failed to include these when it listed the works recommended by its surveyor in its stage 2 complaint response. It is therefore unclear whether it ever made the resident aware of them.

Complaint	Roof renewal and loft insulation
Finding	Service failure

In her complaint, the resident said that issues with the roof had been ongoing since 2019. The landlord’s complaints policy says that residents can complain about an issue within 12 months of it happening or them becoming aware of it. This is in keeping with the requirements of the Code. Due to this, this investigation will only consider events from January 2024 onwards.
On 8 January 2024, the resident asked the landlord to inspect the roof of the property. She expressed concern that the insulation was inadequate and causing heat to escape. The landlord raised a works order on 25 January 2024 for its contractor to inspect. It is unclear why the landlord took over 2 weeks to do this and it was an unreasonable delay.
The landlord’s contractor attended on 7 February 2024. It found that there was “a large quantity of the tenant’s belongings being stored in the loft and the floor has been boarded”. It said that as the order was for insulation, it needed to be sent to an insulation contractor. The landlord closed the works order on 9 September 2024. It wrote that it would reraise it once the resident had cleared the loft space.
We have not seen any communication between the resident and landlord, prior to her complaint, about clearing the loft space. However, it is apparent that the resident knew this was required as she referred to it in her complaint.
In her complaint, the resident explained that her and her husband were disabled and unable to clear the loft themselves. She said she wanted the landlord to confirm a date for the works before she paid someone to clear the loft.
The landlord failed to acknowledge or respond to this request in either of its complaint responses. In its stage 1 complaint response it asked the resident to contact it once she had cleared the loft. At stage 2, it claimed only that there had not been a recommendation for new loft insulation. Whilst this was technically true, it had not yet appropriately inspected the insulation to determine its condition.
The resident has told us that the situation has not progressed since. This means that the landlord and its contractors have been unable to fully inspect the loft space and assess the condition of the insulation and internal elements of the roof. The landlord has not provided any explanation as to why it could not accommodate the resident’s request to provide her with a date prior to her arranging for the loft space to be cleared.
In both its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses, the landlord told the resident it could not find any evidence that it, or its contractors, had recommended a new roof. We do not dispute that the resident may have been told the roof required renewing. However, we have seen no record of the landlord being told this by any of its employees or contractors. Nor have we seen any evidence of an inspection of the roof being carried out (during the period subject to this investigation) which might have prompted such a recommendation.
The resident said she believed the roof being in disrepair was contributing to damp and mould in the property and difficulties in heating it. The landlord’s surveyor’s inspection attributed the damp and mould to condensation. As part of this the surveyor identified that the placement of the thermostat was making it “impossible to balance heating in the property”, whilst redundant air bricks were also “a source of cold air, also making heating ineffective”. This provides a reasonable explanation for the issues reported by the resident and suggests they were unrelated to the roof.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	No maladministration

The Code requires landlords to acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days and provide a stage 1 response with a further 10 working days. If a resident escalates their complaint, it requires landlords to acknowledge this within 5 working days and provide a stage 2 response within 20 working days.
The resident made her complaint on 9 January 2025. The landlord acknowledged her complaint on 17 January 2025. This was 6 working days later, but we do not consider its delay of 1 working day to have caused significant detriment to the resident.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 31 January 2025 – 10 working days later, to advise it needed to extend the timeframe for its stage 1 response. The landlord has not provided us with a copy of this letter.
The Code allows landlords to extend their stage 1 complaint response by up to 10 working days. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 14 February 2025 – 10 working days after its extension letter.
The resident emailed the landlord on 24 February 2025, expressing her dissatisfaction with its stage 1 complaint response. The landlord replied on 28 February 2025 asking if she wished to escalate her complaint. We have not been provided with a copy of the resident’s response to this. However, it is apparent she escalated the complaint, and the landlord provided its acknowledgement of this on 6 March 2025 – 4 working days later.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 11 March 2025. This was within the 20 working days the Code requires.

Learning

Where possible, the landlord should attempt to schedule damp and mould inspections at the point it first receives reports. Avoiding handovers between teams will minimise the risk of cases ‘slipping through the net’, as the resident’s appears to have done prior to her complaint.