GreenSquareAccord Limited (202337924)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202337924

GreenSquareAccord Limited

30 September 2025

 

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her home.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. She lives in a 3-bedroom semi-detached house.
  2. In January 2023 the resident reported damp and mould in her property. The landlord sent an operative to inspect, but there was no access on arrival.
  3. In March 2023 the resident report issues again. The landlord carried out an inspection in April 2023. It identified works such as mould treatment, door replacements, damp course repair, guttering, plumbing and kitchen wall works were required to resolve the damp and mould.
  4. On 21 August 2023 the resident made a formal complaint about the damp and mould. The landlord said it could not respond in time because of demand.
  5. On 20 October 2023 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It acknowledged it had failed to raise the required works after its April 2023 survey. It apologised and said that it would raise the works. It offered the resident £350 for service failure.
  6. From November 2023 to January 2024 the resident chased the landlord for updates. She said the April 2023 survey works still had not been booked in.
  7. On 31 January 2024 the resident escalated her complaint. She was concerned that the landlord’s repair proposals would not fix the root cause of the damp and mould.
  8. On 1 February 2024 the landlord wrote to the resident to apologise for delays to the work. It offered £75 compensation for the delays. It confirmed repair jobs had now been raised included mould removal, gutter replacement, damp-proofing, outhouse door renewal and kitchen redecorating.
  9. In February 2024 the resident’s MP contacted the landlord on her behalf and asked it to investigate her concerns about the damp and mould in her home.
  10. On 29 February 2024 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It further acknowledged that it did not act on the resident’s reports of damp and mould, which dated back to 2019. It increased its offer of compensation to £3,275 and said it would complete repairs.
  11. Remedial works to resolve the damp and mould were carried out between March and April 2024. These included jobs from the original April 2023 survey.
  12. On 3 July 2024 the landlord and the local authority’s environmental heath team inspected the property to assess the resident’s concerns. They found no damp, noted only minor repairs, and identified back door issues.
  13. As of September 2025, the resident informed us that the landlord has carried out some repairs, and others are scheduled in with the resident.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation.

  1. The resident has advised that she has experienced damp and mould within the property for several years.
  2. The Ombudsman considers it reasonable for a resident to raise a formal complaint about matters within a reasonable period of these occurring, usually considered to be 12 months. This is so the landlord has an opportunity to investigate the matters while they are still live and while relevant records are still readily available. It is not evident that the resident raised a formal complaint about these earlier matters which completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure. As such, while the earlier events are noted for context, this investigation has focused from 2023 until the end of the landlord’s internal complaints process.

The landlord’s handling of damp and mould.

  1. As per the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord is responsible for repairs to the structure and exterior of the building. The resident’s tenancy agreement also states this.
  2. The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation policy aims to manage reports of damp and mould or contributing factors such as condensation, in a proactive way. This may be through the completion of reactive repairs, planned works or in some cases by providing advice and information to residents on measures they can take to help manage damp and mould through changes to the way they use their home.
  3. The landlord’s repairs policy says that it will complete routine repairs within 28 calendar days. Planned repairs will be completed within 84 days.
  4. When the resident reported damp and mould in 2023, the landlord arranged for a survey, and the surveyor completed it in April 2023. This was reasonable, especially considering this was a recurrent issue the for the resident. It was appropriate the landlord investigated reports in line with its policy.
  5. The landlord’s policy states following a report of damp and mould, it will:
    1. Undertake effective inspections and implement all reasonable remedial repair solutions and improvements to eradicate damp.
    2. Prioritise remedial repairs in accordance with repairs required, all mould washes will be attended to within 7 days.
  6. In cases of damp and mould, we would expect the landlord to take proactive steps to resolve the matter within a reasonable timeframe. Where the delays are expected to take longer than the expected timeframes, we would expect the landlord to inform the resident of this and keep them updated with schedule of repairs.
  7. In this case, there was a significant delay in actioning the recommended works in the report dated April 2023. Despite the resident continuously chasing the landlord for updates and repairs throughout 2023, the matter remained unresolved. This caused avoidable distress and inconvenience to the resident, often times she chased the landlord for an update and received no response.
  8. In the landlord’s stage 1 letter dated 20 October 2023, it acknowledged these repairs had still not been raised. It also confirmed that it would action this and provide the resident with an update by 2 November 2023. Given the significant delays, it was appropriate that it committed to a quick resolution. However, the resident was not provided with an update in the promised time. This further added to the distress and inconvenience she experienced.
  9. Furthermore, the resident chased the landlord for an update 4 times in November 2023. Subsequently, it responded on 24 November 2023 and apologised for the delay and explained this was due to capacity issues with staff. It promised to update the resident by 18 December 2023. While it was an explanation that the landlord had staffing issues, this was not an adequate excused for the continued delays. There is no evidence it considered any interim works or a mould wash while its full response was delayed, which further demonstrated to the resident that it was not taking her concerns seriously.
  10. This was also the second time the landlord had said that it would contact the resident by a certain date and failed to do so. By failing to adhere to its own promises, it mismanaged the resident’s expectations and caused further distress and inconvenience. This meant that the resident had to chase again.
  11. On 18 January 2024 the landlord apologised to the resident and said it would provide her with an update by 26 January 2024. Subsequently she was provided with an update.
  12. The repair records show the landlord raised the works on 26 January 2024. This was approximately 9 months after its inspection in April 2023. This was a significant delay outside of the landlord’s timescale. This was unreasonable, particularly as, aside from staffing issue, the landlord gave no clear explanation for why such a long timeframe was needed. This was not in line with its policy or what we would have expected.
  13. We acknowledge that the landlord offered the resident £75 compensation on 1 February 2024, for its delays and poor communication. However, given that the resident had to chase it for updates for approximately 4 months, the compensation offered was not proportionate or reasonable for the distress and inconvenience caused over an extended period.
  14. The landlord’s internal complaints procedure concluded on 29 February 2024. Once again, it appropriately recognised its failings, apologised, and provided a clear timeframe for the scheduled repairs, being March and April 2024.
  15. The repair records show that most of the repair were completed. However, the landlord left the gutter repair outstanding until August 2024. It is unclear why this was not completed at the time, or why the resident was not kept updated. Given the history of delays and poor communication in this case, and that the gutter repair was identified in earlier inspection, this was a further missed opportunity to improve its service and demonstrate to the resident it was taking the issues seriously.
  16. The landlord arranged for a further damp and mould survey on 29 April 2024. This confirmed the property still suffered from damp and condensation in certain areas. Additional advice on how to manage condensation was provided to the resident. It also signposted her to third parties who could support her. It was appropriate that the landlord followed up its previous works to assess their efficacy and that it continued to take action with the ongoing issues.
  17. A joint inspection was completed on 3 July 2024. The surveyor confirmed there was no visible evidence of mould. He also did not detect damp in the property walls. However, it is noted that further works were raised following the visit, such as repairs to the gutter. While it was appropriate that the landlord continued to address the issues, it is evident that there were some delays to the further works. However, given the time that had passed since the landlord’s stage 2 response, and that these issues have not been investigated as part of the landlord’s internal complaint process, these are beyond the scope of this investigation.
  18. Overall, while the landlord did take steps to initially investigate the resident’s report of damp and mould, there was a significant unreasonable delay to it taking any meaningful action. This was repeated after its stage 1 response, despite its promises. The landlord’s communication throughout was poor and its explanation that it was short staffed was insufficient to justify the lack of communication or action over such a long period.
  19. In its stage 2 response, the landlord offered compensation to reflect the impact of the delays. In addition to the £250 offered at stage 1 and the £75 offered separately for delayed communication, it offered £2,050 for the delays, time and trouble chasing updates, and overall distress and inconvenience. This meant it offered a total of £2,375. It also noted the resident’s comments around damage to personal possessions. While it may have been reasonable to refer the resident to her own insurer or its liability insurer in relation to this damage, it chose to use its discretion and offer £350. It also remained open to increasing this amount if the resident offered further information.
  20. The landlord’s compensation policy awards over £1,000 compensation where there has been significant detrimental impact on the customer for a prolonged period of time. It is evident that the landlord has exceeded the guidelines of its policy when considering the circumstances of this case. The landlord’s offer was also in line with our own remedies guidance for such circumstances. Therefore, we are satisfied the landlord’s compensation offer was fair and proportionate.
  21. In summary, while we identified there were failings by the landlord, the amount offered adequately reflected the delays, distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. Therefore, we have found the landlord made a reasonable offer of redress.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. The landlord updated its complaints procedure on 1 April 2024 to match with our complaint handling code. At the time of the complaint, it used a 3 steps process:
    1. Step 1 – informal stage, where the landlord tried to resolve the complaint within 2 days. Where this is not possible it would escalate the complaint to step 2.
    2. Step 2 – formal stage where the landlord aimed to resolve this within 10 working days.
    3. Step 3 – if the resident escalated their complaint, the landlord aimed to resolve the complaint within 10 working days.
  2. The resident made a complaint on 21 August 2023. There is no evidence to show whether the landlord started step 1 of its complaint process at this time, or whether it considered the complaint should go straight to stage 2. No acknowledgement was given to the resident.
  3. On 31 August 2023 the landlord told the resident it could not meet the normal response time because of high demand. It promised a reply by 28 September 2023. While this delay would have been frustrating, it was appropriate that it measured the resident’s expectations and provided an indicative timeframe for its response.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1 response (step 2),on 20 October 2023. This delay was approximately a month after its extended deadline. The delay meant the resident waited longer than our complaint handling code expects. It appropriately recognised the impact of this delay, apologised, and offered £100 compensation.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint on 31 January 2024. The landlord issued its stage 2 response (step 3) on 29 February 2024. This was almost a month after the resident escalated the complaint. The delay meant the landlord missed the policy timescales. In its stage 2 the landlord offered an additional £450 for its complaint handling failures.
  6. Considering the failure and poor communication, it was appropriate that the landlord considered its compensation policy. This states that where there has been a service failure which adversely impacted the resident but did not have a permanent impact it will award between £100 and £600.
  7. The landlord’s total offer of £550 falls within its compensation policy range. The   amount reflects the repeated delays and poor communication that caused significant distress and inconvenience. Overall, we find the amount to be proportionate and fair. This offer, along with its acknowledgement of poor service and apology, amounted to reasonable redress in the circumstances. A recommendation has been made for the landlord to reiterate its offer of compensation if it is yet to have been paid.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of reasonable redress in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of reasonable redress in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord is to reiterate its offer of £2,925 relating to its complaint handling failures if this yet to have been paid.