Sovereign Network Group (202452934)

Decision
Case ID	202452934
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Sovereign Network Group
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	12 January 2026

Background

1. The resident lives in the property which is a 1 bedroom first floor flat. His complaint is in relation to the time taken for the landlord to address the leaks, damp and mould in his property.

What the complaint is about

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

Our decision (determination)

3. We found there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Leaks, damp, and mould in the property.
   2. The complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

Handling of leaks, damp, and mould

4. The landlord did not carry out repairs to remedy the leaks, damp, and mould in line with its policy timeframes. Although it acknowledged this failure and offered compensation, it did not recognise all its failures or put them right.

Handling of the complaint

5. The landlord did not handle the complaint in line with its policies which were in place at the time. This unreasonably delayed the resident in reaching a resolution to his complaint. It also put into question the fairness of the landlord and whether it had learnt from its outcomes.

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 09 February 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £3,010 made up as follows: £2,360 it offered in its stage 2 response. £500 to put right the additional failures related to the leaks, damp, and mould. £150 to put right its additional complaint handling failures.   This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 09 February 2026
3	Insurance order The landlord must provide its public liability insurance details to the resident should he wish to make a claim.	No later than 09 February 2026
4	Inspection report and commencing the works The landlord must provide the outcome of its most recent inspection in line with the expectations outlined below. If it cannot outline the following from its recent inspection, then it must arrange a further inspection to ensure the below points are addressed:  What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: Inspects the whole of the property and produces a written report with photographs The survey report must set out: Whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards The most likely cause of the leaks, damp, and mould are. Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue together with reasons where it is not responsible A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) The likely timescales to commence and complete the work Whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works.	No later than 09 February 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
9 January 2024	The resident complained that although the landlord had replaced his roof tiles, there was an ongoing issue with leaks and mould. He said it was an issue in every room and there were mushrooms growing in his bathroom. He said the smell was unbearable and causing damage to his health. He said no matter what he did the mould kept returning and the house was cold. The resident asked the landlord to address the issues and provide alternative accommodation.
25 January 2024	The landlord provided a follow on response to a previous stage 2 response provided in August 2023. It outlined the action it had taken so far. It said it raised a works order on 18 January 2024 to clear the guttering, install a gutter guard, and install new lead on the roof or correct the existing one. It said it was waiting for the contractors to confirm their attendance and it would undertake an internal inspection. It concluded it would award further compensation once it had resolved all the issues.
7 June 2024	The resident continued to report ongoing issues in the property. He said there was no conclusion to his previous complaint and he was expecting a response months ago.
24 June 2024	The landlord provided a stage 1 response. It outlined the action taken in relation to the complaint since 18 December 2023. It confirmed its latest action was to conduct a level 2 damp survey. It said to do so it would provide scaffolding to access the front and rear roofs/drainage. It said it would erect the scaffolding in 4-6 weeks. It concluded it had taken longer than expected to rectify the root cause of the damp and mould. It apologised and awarded £416 in compensation. It later revised its offer on 11 July 2024 to £785 to reflect the time taken to erect the scaffolding.
08 November 2024	The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2. He said there had been no progress with his roof replacement. He said the leaks and mould were ongoing, caused damage, and resulted in him having minimal use of his home. He said the house was constantly cold. He said the issues had heavily affected his health and relationships. He wanted the landlord to complete the work, compensate him, and rehome him until it completed the works.
13 December 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It confirmed it inspected the property on 12 December 2024. It outlined the next steps which included roof repairs, dehumidifiers, and a thorough inspection. The landlord said it would be in touch with a proposed timeline for the works and next steps for temporary re-housing. It recognised the time taken to resolve the issues and the significant distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. It awarded a total of £2,360 in compensation. It said it would review the compensation following completion of the works.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. He was temporarily moved in April 2025. But he said the landlord did not then carry out the necessary works to address the leaks and on his return to the property, the issues continued. The resident has since submitted a further formal complaint which has not yet exhausted the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. In December 2025, the resident confirmed the issues were ongoing, he said his bathroom ceiling had collapsed, and he was afraid for his health and safety. We contacted the landlord on 15 December 2025 to notify it of a change which indicated a potential hazard in the property and which may fall under Awaab’s Law.

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	Leaks, damp, and mould
Finding	Maladministration

6. The landlord has not disputed there were failings in its handling of the reports of leaks, damp, and mould. Where the landlord admits failings, our role is to consider whether it resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances and offered appropriate redress. In considering this, we assess whether the landlord’s actions were in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
7. Following repairs which took place as part of a previous stage 2 response, the records show the resident raised the issues again in October 2023 but they do not detail what he reported at the time.
8. In the initial stage 2 follow on response, the landlord said it raised the concerns with its contractor in October 2023. It said the contractor then inspected the roof and guttering and outlined the repairs required to the roof and guttering to address the issues. It said the likely cause of the damp and mould was poor ventilation and insulation. It is unclear when this inspection took place as it is not referenced in the landlord’s repair records. In the absence of this information and evidence that it carried out the identified repairs in a timely manner, we cannot conclude the landlord’s actions at the time were reasonable.
9. On 9 November 2023, the resident said there was still a leak. He said there were growing water stains in his bathroom, hallway, and living room. On 14 November 2023, he reported mushrooms growing out of the ceiling. The landlord responded the next day to ask if the issue was with his guttering as there was an outstanding repair. It also asked the resident to check the loft space for wet insulation. The resident said he was unaware of any guttering issues and said he was unable to check the loft space, he attached pictures of the issues.
10. In line with its policy and damp and mould self-assessment, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to then raise an urgent repair to trace and rectify the leak. It is a failing it did not do so. The landlord arranged an inspection for 22 December 2023 and there was no access. The landlord acknowledged it was unclear if it had arranged the appointment with the resident. It inspected the property on 8 January 2024, almost 2 months after the resident’s first report.
11. The inspection dated 8 January 2024 identified damp and mould was present in all the rooms in the property, with high damp meter readings. It confirmed there was a leak and there was a medical condition in the household. It said it needed to raise immediate repairs due to the leak from the roof. The resident made a complaint the following day regarding the condition of his home and impact caused to him. He described his home as an “ice box” saying it did not retain heat. He described the impact on his health and asked the landlord to place him in alternative accommodation. The landlord raised a works order on 18 January 2024 for the identified repairs. It said its contractor would be in touch to arrange the works, and an internal survey would take place.
12. The landlord carried out a mould wash on 5 February 2024 and it carried out an internal inspection on 21 March 2024. We have not seen evidence of it carrying out the repairs raised in its works order or communicating to the resident any reasons for delays. In not doing so, it did not manage the resident’s expectations. This led to him chasing the landlord and querying why it had not carried out any repairs.
13. The landlord did not dispute in its complaint responses that there were delays in it addressing the issue. In its stage 1 response dated 24 June 2024, the landlord outlined the findings from its inspections. It said it would carry out a level 2 damp survey and was awaiting the erection of scaffolding to access the roof which would take 4-6 weeks.
14. We understand it can take more than one attempt to rectify a leak and roof repairs would be categorised as major works and take time and planning. Although, we would expect the landlord to show consideration to any interim actions it could attempt to make the area weatherproof and mitigate the internal damage. If it could not do so, it would have been reasonable to show consideration to whether the property was habitable in the meantime given the reported vulnerabilities and extent of the issues. Aside from a mould wash in February 2024, there is no evidence of the landlord carrying out any other remedial actions or erecting the scaffolding within the timeframe specified and prior to the stage 2 response. This was not appropriate.
15. Following the stage 2 escalation on 8 November 2024, the landlord carried out a further inspection on 12 December 2024. It identified defects with the roof which it needed to rectify. But contrary to all its previous findings, it stated there was no current leak from the roof. It said there was penetrating water from deteriorating render. It said the damp and mould was a result of condensation and lack of heating, render, and insulation. It outlined the works required to remedy the issues and confirmed it would be in touch regarding temporary housing. It offered £2,340 in compensation for the delays, distress, time, and trouble caused to the resident from 18 December 2023 to 13 November 2024.
16. Following the stage 2 response, the resident’s bathroom ceiling collapsed in February 2025. The landlord made it safe but the resident said he was left without a source of light in the bathroom. In March 2025, the resident reported the landlord had not carried out any work, there was mould in every room, and the house was very cold. He said he had been diagnosed with depression and was unable to work. The landlord temporarily moved the resident in April 2025.
17. The landlord’s offer of compensation at stage 2 was in line with its compensation policy at the time. It awarded its highest tier of compensation for the time period it investigated. This shows it recognised the significant impact caused to the resident. However, we have found there were additional failings in the landlord’s handling of the leaks, damp, and mould which it did not fully account for and which amount to maladministration. These are:
    1. It did not acknowledge that the resident reported the issues again from October 2023 or the impact caused by its delays in taking appropriate action at the time. The landlord stated the reasons for why it only investigated back to December 2023 but we do not consider the reasons sufficient or in line with its obligations at the time. We will consider this further in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.
    2. The resident repeatedly referred to the impact on his health, the cold temperatures, and how he did not feel the property was habitable. While we have seen instances where the landlord recorded vulnerabilities in the household, it has not evidenced how it considered them or set out its position on whether the property was habitable. The landlord carried out a mould wash on 2 February 2024 and referred to other mould washes. It also awarded compensation to recognise the distress caused by its failures. But it did not set out how it would assess and manage any risks in future.
    3. Additionally, the resident repeatedly referred to damage caused to his property as a result of the leaks, damp, and mould. On 11 July 2024 the landlord informed the resident it would be unable to compensate for damage to belongings unless they were insured. This was not appropriate. In line with its compensation policy, the landlord should have referred the resident to its own insurance team to open a public liability claim with its own insurer. In not doing so, this likely caused the resident further distress and inconvenience.
    4. The time taken for the landlord to take further action following its stage 2 response was not appropriate or in line with its policy. This likely caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident which is supported by his communication chasing the matters after the stage 2 response. This does not suggest the landlord learnt from its outcomes or put things right for the resident.
18. The resident submitted a further formal complaint in July 2025 and is currently awaiting a stage 2 response from the landlord. While we cannot consider the matters related to that complaint as part of this investigation, it is concerning the situation is ongoing for the resident. In its latest update dated 7 January 2026 the landlord confirmed it had carried out a further inspection and identified issues with the roof. It said it was waiting to hear back from its contractors regarding the guarantee/recall. We have made an order for the landlord to provide the full findings from its latest inspection and an action plan for completing the identified works.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Maladministration

19. Following the resident’s formal complaint on 9 January 2024, the landlord responded with a follow up response to its previous stage 2 response issued on 8 August 2023. This was not appropriate or in line with its policy. In line with its policy and as the complaint was about events which occurred after the previous stage 2 response, it should have acknowledged the complaint and provided a stage 1 response in 10 working days. By not doing so, it did not afford the resident the opportunity to then escalate his complaint and bring it to the Ombudsman.
20. The follow on response said it would consider compensation once it had completed the repairs but it did not provide a timeframe. This would not have managed the resident’s expectations and caused him to chase the landlord 5 months later querying why he had not received a resolution to his complaint. The delays likely caused the resident time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience.
21. In its stage 1 response the landlord explained it would only look at a 6 month time period of events related to the complaint. It said it had used its discretion to investigate from 18 December 2023. The landlord’s approach was not in line with its policy at the time which said it expected residents to raise their concerns within 6 months of the matter they wish to complain about occurring. The landlord failed to consider that as the resident initially complained on 9 January 2024, 6 months prior to that would be 9 July 2023. We acknowledge the resident’s previous complaint exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure in August 2023 and the landlord outlined actions it would take. Therefore, it would have been appropriate for it to scope its investigation to the resident’s new reports in October 2023.
22. In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged there was a delay in providing its stage 2 response and awarded £20 compensation, which was reasonable for that failing. However, as outlined above, there were additional complaint handling failings which the landlord did not account for or put right. The landlord said it would review the level of compensation once it completed the works but it is unclear whether the landlord has done so. To ensure fairness to residents, an effective complaint procedure should identify service failures at the earliest opportunity and provide reasonable redress for those failings.
23. Overall, we found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint. We acknowledge the landlord has since updated its complaints policy, which is in line with our Complaint Handling Code. However, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident further compensation to put right the additional failures.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

24. The poor record keeping in this case likely contributed to the delays in this matter, as it was not always clear what happened and when. This raises further concerns about the accuracy of its records and in turn its decision making through reliance on these records. The number of repeated surveys, inspections, and varied findings supports this. The landlord has not shown learning in this area. It should reflect on its record keeping and lack of oversight of the repairs in this case. This includes the importance of keeping accurate and detailed records.

Communication

25. It is evident in this case that much of the onus was on the resident to keep chasing the landlord and re-raising the same issues to reach any progression. The landlord should ensure it keeps residents updated around timeframes for repairs, and any delays which are likely to impact on completion times for repairs.
26. There appears to also be a concern regarding the workmanship of the repairs carried out by the landlord’s contractors. The landlord should ensure it is appropriately communicating and addressing its concerns via the correct channels. Carrying out post-inspections, where appropriate, would also help to prevent any unnecessary delays in resolving the matters.