Chesterfield Borough Council (202418945)

Back to Top

 

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202418945

Chesterfield Borough Council

28 August 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould throughout his property.

Background

  1. The resident has been a secure tenant of the landlord since 11 August 2014. His property is a 3-bedroom, mid-terrace house.
  2. On 30 October 2023, the landlord inspected the resident’s property. It noted there was rising and/or penetrating damp which it attributed to a leaking gutter from a neighbouring private property. It agreed with the resident to plaster the lounge, hallway, and kitchen after Christmas.
  3. On 4 March 2024, the resident raised a formal complaint. He said that the landlord as far back as 2019 had identified rising damp in all walls, most likely due to a faulty end stop on a neighbour’s gutter. He further stated, after a representative contacted the landlord, it had plastered the living room in November 2023. However, electrical switches and sockets remained hanging off the walls.
  4. In its stage 1 response of 18 March 2024, the landlord noted it had contacted the resident about outstanding works. It decided, after the resident returned from holiday, it would arrange a date to finish plastering works and all required electrical works.
  5. On 26 March 2024, the resident asked the landlord to escalate his complaint, although the landlord did not record any reasons. On 9 August 2024, the landlord sent the stage 2 response. It found that it had completed all outstanding repairs. This included damp proofing works in the hallway, then replacing skirting and refixing loose switches and sockets.
  6. The resident referred his complaint to the Ombudsman on 9 August 2024. He said there had been rising damp in his property since 2019 despite works by the landlord. He wanted compensation for rent and a damaged carpet. On 12 September 2024, he advised us the landlord had decided to carry out again the damp proof works in the kitchen and hallway. He said this included completing works on 2 more walls in the kitchen. The resident further told us the landlord had decided to survey the drains to ascertain whether this was the cause of rising damp.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. In his complaint to the Ombudsman, the resident requested compensation for a damaged carpet. There is no evidence he made this request to the landlord when progressing his complaint. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because the landlord should be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to the Ombudsman assessing its handling of the matter. Any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord and progressed as a new formal complaint if required.
  2. We will not therefore be considering further the damage to the resident’s carpet. We note, however, that on 5 March 2025, the landlord approved an offer of £650 for the carpet. We recommend that the landlord makes this offer to the resident, if it has not already done so. Alternatively the landlord assist the resident to make a claim against its insurers for the damages if he requests this.
  3. The resident also advised the Ombudsman on 6 January 2025 that the landlord’s contractor had broken kitchen tiles during works. Also, the landlord had not yet surveyed the drains. The landlord’s records indicate that its drainage contractor carried out the survey on 7 April 2025. On 25 May 2025, the resident’s representative informed the landlord the survey had identified the drain was blocked and the downpipe did not fit correctly; however, the resident had not heard further. The representative also stated the kitchen floor needed sealing with silicon at the edges. He also noted the resident had reported a self-levelling compound that had been laid in the kitchen had overspilled to the bathroom floor; however, the landlord had not responded.
  4. Again, the issues of broken kitchen tiles, the handling of the drainage survey, the resealing of the kitchen floor, and the damage to the bathroom floor occurred after and were not considered during the complaints process. Therefore, we will not be considering further the landlord’s handling of these works. However, they are related to the substantive issue of damp and mould. We therefore recommend the landlord raises a new complaint to investigate its handling of these works. It should take into account the guidance on complaint handling in the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handing Code when investigating the complaint.

Damp and mould

  1. The landlord’s records indicate it carried out repairs to the guttering at the joint with the neighbouring property to resolve a leak in June 2019. The resident has advised us the landlord had broken the end stop when carrying out roof works in 2018. The records indicate the resident also raised requests for the landlord to inspect for damp in his living room in 2021 and 2022. On neither occasion did the landlord inspect; on the first occasion, there was no access, so it left a card, and it cancelled the second report. It is therefore evident the resident has reported that leaks and damp have been recurrent issues. Indeed, in his complaint, the resident referred to leaks and damp since 2019.
  2. On 30 October 2023, the landlord inspected the resident’s property. Its internal correspondence confirms it noted rising/penetrating damp in the living room. It noted perished plaster and damp/salting at the lower level, in particular to the right of patio door. It identified the cause to be a leaking gutter at the back of the private, neighbouring property to the righthand side. The landlord agreed with the resident to plaster the lounge, then the hallway and kitchen after Christmas.
  3. The landlord’s current Damp Policy states, “We will investigate all reports of DMC (Damp, Mould and Condensation) and will inform tenants of the findings at the time of the visit, including identifying the possible causes of damp, recommending effective solutions, all necessary remedial works, and the estimated timescales to complete the works”. At the time of the inspection, the landlord was in the process of formulating its damp policy. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect the landlord to take these actions when dealing with damp and mould cases. Moreover, these actions are consistent with recommendations in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report of Damp and Mould. This includes the recommendation, “Landlords should identify where an independent, mutually agreed and suitably qualified surveyor should be used, share the outcomes of all surveys and inspections with residents to help them understand the findings and be clear on next steps. Landlords should then act on accepted survey recommendations in a timely manner.”
  4. On 21 November 2023, the landlord loosened electrical switches and sockets to allow for plastering. The landlord completed plastering works on 14 December 2023, and related joinery works to skirting boards, architraves, and window cills. However, it did not raise an order to refix the electrical switches. This was an unreasonable and significant omission as it meant that electrical cables were exposed which presented a possible health and safety risk. The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) notes the disrepair of installation such as sockets, light fittings, or switches are “relevant matters affecting likelihood and harm outcomes”. There is no evidence that the landlord considered health and safety guidance such as the HHSRS. Moreover, the landlord’s failure to refix switches and sockets indicates that it did not identify all necessary works to make good the property.
  5. The landlord’s phone records indicate the resident phoned on 29 January 2024 to request an inspection of damp and the electrics. On the same day, it raised an order to inspect for an “ongoing problem” of “rising damp”. However, it did not respond to the resident’s reports about the electrics. It thereby missed an opportunity to mitigate the delay in making good the switches and sockets.
  6. On 4 March 2024, the resident raised a formal complaint. He noted that the landlord had completed the plastering of the living room in November 2023, but electrical switches and sockets had been hanging off the walls since. He provided supporting photos.
  7. On 11 March 2024, the landlord raised an order to refix the switches and sockets. Its records indicate it completed the works on 9 April 2024. Ultimately, it took 5 months for the landlord to complete the works and only after the resident pursued the works through his complaint. This was an unreasonable and avoidable delay.
  8. The landlord inspected the resident’s property again on 12 March 2024 for rising damp. Following this, it raised orders to damp proof and plaster a wall in the hall, after removing a radiator, and to install skirting in the hall. The landlord had previously identified that it needed to replaster the hallway, due to damp, some time after Christmas. Its repairs policy states it should complete non-urgent repairs by appointment within 30 working days. It was therefore unreasonable and outside the timeframe for non-urgent repairs that it did not even raise an order for these works until March 2024.
  9. The landlord had completed the plastering works in the living room before Christmas 2023. It provided no explanation to the resident why it did not proceed with the plastering works elsewhere in the property sooner. This indicates that that the landlord lost oversight over the full scope and progression of the works. As a result, there was an avoidable delay in addressing the damp and mould throughout the property.
  10. In the stage 1 response of 18 March 2024, the landlord advised it had contacted the resident about outstanding works. It stated, after the resident returned from holiday, it would arrange a date to finish plastering works and all required electrical works. Its records indicate it completed the works in the hall on 25 and 26 April 2024. It renewed and refixed switches and sockets in the lounge on 9 April 2024.
  11. While the landlord completed works in the hall and to switches and sockets, the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code highlights resolving a complaint can involve apologising, acknowledging where things have gone wrong, and providing an explanation. The landlord did not take these actions. It did not acknowledge or explain the delays in resolving the damp and mould. In fact, its response to the complaint was brief and without detail of the substantive repair works.
  12. Moreover, the resident had referred to damp since 2019, which he attributed to a broken gutter. The landlord did not investigate this. This was a significant omission as it therefore failed to put the resident’s complaint into its historical context. At the very least, it should have confirmed to the resident the cause of the damp in its view, and the remedial action it had taken. Its repair records indicate it supplied and fitted a gutter stop on 21 December 2023, although the resident has advised the Ombudsman he is not aware of the landlord ever repairing the gutter. As such, the landlord missed an opportunity to use the complaint process to inform and reassure the resident about how it had sought to resolve the cause of the damp and mould.
  13. On 9 August 2024, the landlord acknowledged a complaint escalation from the resident. It advised it would respond in 20 days. However, it did not send the stage 2 response until 9 August 2024, which was 4 months after the due response date. It did not acknowledge, apologise, or offer redress for the delay. This was not in line with good practice in complaint handling as set out in the Complaint Handling Code.
  14. Moreover, the stage 2 response again failed to fully investigate the landlord’s handling of the substantive repairs. It simply noted that it had completed works without assessing any delays and how it had communicated with the resident. It also again did not confirm whether it had resolved the source of the damp.
  15. The landlord had also identified works in the kitchen on 30 October 2023. The landlord’s records do not show any further works after April 2024. As such, there is no evidence that it completed damp-proofing, plastering, or other repairs in the kitchen when investing the resident’s complaint. Again, the landlord failed to use the complaints procedure to confirm how it would resolve this aspect of the resident’s damp and mould case.
  16. On 12 September 2024, the landlord raised an order to damp proof and replaster in the hallway and kitchen, install skirting to the hall and kitchen after plaster repairs, repair a floor tile damaged during previous works, and fit 2 air vents. This is the first instance of the landlord specifying works in the kitchen. This was 11 months after its inspection of the kitchen on 30 October 2023. This further indicates that that the landlord lost oversight over the full scope and progression of the works, which exacerbated its delays. The landlord completed the works between 4 and 8 October 2024.
  17. In summary, the landlord delayed in completing works to remedy the damp and mould in the resident’s property after its inspection of 30 October 2023. Specifically, it delayed in refixing switches and sockets in the living room. It also delayed in completing works in the hallway and kitchen. The landlord also missed an opportunity to use the complaint process to inform and reassure the resident about how it had sought to resolve the cause of the damp and mould. Specifically, it did not confirm whether it had repaired the gutter. It also failed to fully investigate the details of the resident’s complaint and offer redress. This includes putting the resident’s complaint into the context of his previous reports of leak and damp. While the Ombudsman has not had full sight of the extent of the damp and mould in the property, we note that the resident has redecorated and has expressed concern that he may need to do so again.
  18. As redress, the Ombudsman orders compensation of £900 for the resident’s distress and inconvenience from the delays in the completion of damp and mould works. This is calculated at £75 per month for the period between the landlord’s inspection of 30 October 2023 and the works of October 2024. We also award the resident £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to investigate the full details of the resident’s damp and mould case and formal complaint.
  19. We also note the works identified on 30 October 2023 did not permanently eradicate the damp and mould, and the landlord has further investigated the cause(s) since responding to the resident’s complaint. The resident has advised us that the leaking gutter is on the side of his house where the living room is, while the kitchen and bathroom is on the other side, where there is a shared drain. We therefore order the landlord to confirm the outcome of drainage survey, provide a schedule of any further works to resolve the damp and mould with a timeframe for completion, and outline what mitigations are appropriate. It should also set out how it intends to ascertain the effectiveness of the works completed.

 

 

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of reports of damp and mould throughout the resident’s property.

 

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord, within the next 4 weeks, to:
    1.        Pay the resident £1,050 compensation, comprising:
      1. £900 for his distress and inconvenience from the delays in the completion of damp and mould works. This is calculated at £75 per month for the period between the landlord’s inspection of 30 October 2023 and the works of October 2024.
      2. £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to investigate the full details of the resident’s damp and mould case and formal complaint. It also reflects the delay in the stage 2 response.
    2.        confirm the outcome of drainage survey, provide a schedule of further works to resolve the damp and mould with a timeframe for completion while the damp and mould is resolved, and outline what mitigations are appropriate. Identified works must be completed within 8 weeks of the date of this report. It should also set out how it intends to ascertain the effectiveness of the works completed.
  2. The Ombudsman orders the landlord, within the next 6 weeks, to undertake a review of this case. At a minimum, it should consider the below list of failings and identify what improvements might be made and brought into its day-to-day operations:
    1.        The delays in completing all works and inspections, and how it could have avoided or mitigated them.
    2.        Whether it could have better updated and communicated with the resident about the works in his property.
    3.         The failure to investigate the resident’s complaint fully and therefore use the complaint process to resolve the substantive repair issues.
    4.        Whether there are additional issues and learning from this case that can inform and augment any future strategic review of the repairs service.
    5.        The review of the case must be completed within 6 weeks of the date of this report and shared with the Ombudsman.

Recommendations

  1. The Ombudsman recommends that:
    1. the landlord makes its offer to the resident of £650 for the damage to his carpet, if it has not already done so. Alternatively the landlord should assist the resident to make a claim against its insurers for the damages if he requests this.
    2. the landlord raises a new complaint to investigate further issues raised by the resident, namely:
      1. broken kitchen tiles.
      2. the handling of the drainage survey.
      3. the resealing of the kitchen floor.
      4. the damage to the bathroom floor.