Richmond Housing Partnership Limited (202450616)

Decision
Case ID	202450616
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Richmond Housing Partnership Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	9 December 2025

Background

The resident lives in a 1-bedroom ground floor flat in a purpose-built block. The landlord has vulnerabilities recorded for the resident. Including health conditions and significant mobility issues. The resident complained about repairs, a leak, damp and mould.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. a leak.
2. damp and mould.
3. repairs.
4. the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
1. a leak.
2. damp and mould.
3. repairs.
4. the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord has not completed the repairs to the leak or the damp. There were unreasonable delays and poor communication.
The landlord did not complete repairs in line with the timescales its repairs policy. The delays were unreasonable and the communication about appointments was poor.
The landlord took too long to respond at stage 2. It failed to remedy this.

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 15 January 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £2350 made up as follows: £1500 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of a leak. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of damp and mould. £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of repairs. £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling. 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 15 January 2026
3	The landlord is to pay the resident compensation of £50 per week from the date of this report until repairs are completed.	No later than 26 February 2026
4	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by an externally appointed independent surveyor with expertise to complete the type of inspection required. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: Inspects the leak, bathroom, damp and mould throughout, and the kitchen, 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 issues. 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 repair 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 15 January 2026
5	The landlord is to start the works identified in the above inspection no later than 6 weeks after the date of the inspection.	No later than 26 February 2026
6	Learning order The landlord is to complete a review of its handling of the repair. To include the delays, its communication and its oversight of the repair.	No later than 03 February 2026

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
The landlord should review its staff training needs in regard to communicating with residents throughout the repairs process.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
24 September 2024	The resident complained to the landlord about outstanding repairs, a leak in the bathroom, and damp and mould.
15 October 2024	The landlord responded at stage 1. It upheld the resident’s complaint due to the time it had taken to complete repairs. It had rescheduled appointments due to staff sickness. The landlord offered £180 compensation. It confirmed it would manage the repairs to completion.
22 January 2025	The resident escalated her complaint.
9 May 2025	The landlord provided its final response. It explained that the delay to the leak repair was due to no access. As a result, it could not repair the bathroom. It made arrangements to carry out other repairs. It acknowledged delays, and poor communication about appointments. It would review compensation when all the work was competed.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s final response and compensation offer. She said most repairs were still outstanding.

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	The landlord’s handling of a leak.
Finding	Maladministration

The resident raised a complaint to the landlord in 2023. The complaint exhausted the landlord’s complaint procedure on 7 December 2023. The resident raised a complaint to us on 12 March 2025. At this time, she had a new complaint with her landlord that at completed stage 1. The landlord completed its stage 2 response on 9 May 2025 and this is the complaint that we have investigated. Our scheme rules states we may not investigate complaints that are referred to us normally more than 12 months from the date of the final response. We have not investigated the complaint from 2023. This related to previous reports about damp and mould, extractor fans, and a shower drain which were not included in the current complaint.
The resident complained by phone on 24 September 2024. The landlord contacted the resident on 1 October 2024 to discuss issues, which included outstanding repairs to a leak and her bathroom.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord said the leak was raised in August 2024. However, records show the resident reported a ceiling leak on 14 May 2024 with photos. The landlord’s records show a note on 26 May 2024 stating the photos showed an active leak which needed to be investigated urgently. There is no evidence it raised an urgent inspection of the leak. The landlord aims to attend emergency repairs within 3 hours with an objective of completing the job within 24 hours. Even if we were to deem the repair as general and not emergency the landlord aims to complete this within 10 working days.
The repair records show the landlord raised repairs to its contractors on 2 August 2024. This confirmed it was waiting for access from the flats above to inspect the stack pipe for leaking. It also raised the repairs to the bathroom. However, the job records stated it could not repair the bathroom damage until the leak was repaired. A contractor attended on 13 November 2024 but could not complete the repairs because the leak was not resolved.
Complex repairs can take time. The landlord did not confirm ownership of the flats above. Records show it was seeking access from a leaseholder. However, it is unclear what action it took when access was significantly delayed.
The landlord’s repairs policy says it has an emergency access procedure. This says it will seek and obtain a legal injunction granting access to the property wherever necessary to ensure the health and safety of residents or others.
The landlord also failed to consider what actions it could take to mitigate the effects of the leak on the resident. Such as dehumidifiers, temporary repairs to the resident’s bathroom or any other reasonable measure.
In its stage 2 response on 9 May 2025, the landlord said it attended as an emergency on 6 March 2025. It had no access to the neighbouring property to identify the leak source. It admitted it had not followed this up, leaving the leak unresolved.
The landlord had previously instructed contractors to investigate and repair the leak and bathroom. Contractors could not repair the bathroom ceiling while the leak was ongoing. It took no further action until 7 May 2025, when it booked an appointment for 21 May 2025 to trace the leak. This shows a failure to maintain oversight of the repair, despite the resident and her representative following up.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord said it would work with neighbouring flats to secure access and arrange bathroom repairs. It noted an asbestos survey was required before work could start. It completed this on 8 May 2025. This was nine months after raising bathroom repairs. This delay was unreasonable.
Our 2019 spotlight report on repairs recommends landlords act promptly when issues significantly impact residents. The landlord had recorded the resident’s health and physical vulnerabilities. The landlord’s vulnerable customer policy defines vulnerability as including physical disabilities. It says it conducts individual risk assessments to identify specific repair and maintenance needs if a resident is identified as vulnerable. It also says priority can be given to repairs required for the health, safety, and well-being of a resident. It failed to show that it considered this policy in its handling of the leak.
The landlord also failed to keep the resident appropriately updated. The evidence shows the resident and representative chased it multiple times from May 2024 onwards. This was poor customer service.
The leak and bathroom damage has persisted for over 18 months unresolved. The landlord has continued investigations, delayed by lack of access to neighbouring properties. Further checks in September and 23 October 2025 concluded the leak was not from the communal stack pipe. Investigations are ongoing. Due to the prolonged delay to the leak and bathroom repairs we have ordered an independent inspection.
At stage 1, the landlord offered £180 compensation for all repair issues. Without a breakdown, it is unclear how this was allocated. In stage 2, it said it would review this after works were completed. This did not resolve the issue for the resident.
The resident has faced an ongoing leak and unresolved bathroom repairs. This has likely caused her distress and inconvenience. The landlord failed to complete repairs within a reasonable timeframe. While access issues contributed to delays, it did not show sufficient effort to gain entry or carry out investigations sooner. It lacked oversight and failed to keep the resident updated. Its compensation offer was not proportionate to the failings and continued delays.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of damp and mould.
Finding	Maladministration

During a call about her complaint, the resident reported damp and mould in several rooms. The landlord had completed a damp and mould survey in April 2024. As the new report came six months later, it was appropriate for the landlord to open a new case.
The damp and mould policy requires applying a severity rating to determine response times and actions. There is no evidence the landlord did this or considered the resident’s vulnerabilities. This was despite receiving a GP letter on 5 October 2024 about health impacts. It failed to follow its damp and mould, and vulnerable customer policies.
The policy sets severity ratings from urgent treatment (within 5 working days) to minor (within 28 days). At stage 1, the landlord said it had instructed a survey and mould wash, with contact expected within 14 working days. At stage 2, it acknowledged the contractor did not attend until 9 January 2025. This was not in line with its damp and mould policy.
We have not seen copies of the damp and mould inspection or details of affected areas. There is no evidence these were shared with the resident. This was again not in line with its policy. This says it will keep resident’s informed of any diagnosis of issues.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord said it found “little to no mould, only damp from the active leak.” A damp specialist attended on 15 April 2025 and identified the bathroom leak as a roofing issue. A contractor attended on 30 June 2025 and confirmed the leak was not from the roof. This appointment was delayed due to a contractor cancellation. The damp and mould policy states where a property inspection is undertaken, it will identify and resolve root causes. This has not happened.
In its final response, the landlord said it would address damp and mould after completing repairs. However, the bathroom leak has remained unresolved. It would have been reasonable to consider another mould wash in the meantime. There is no evidence this was done or that it monitored the damp and mould after the complaints process ended. We have therefore included damp and mould in our inspection order.
The landlord failed to complete damp and mould inspections and repairs within a reasonable timeframe. At stage 2, it admitted delays in its contractor picking up the case but did not remedy this failure.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of repairs
Finding	Maladministration

The resident has raised complaint issues which have occurred since the complaint exhausted the landlord’s complaint procedure. We have no power to investigate complaints which the landlord has not had the chance to put right first. There is no evidence the resident raised concerns in her complaint about an outside tap, ramp, cleaning a kitchen vent, kitchen flooring, windowsill painting, further cancelled repair appointments, and a shower. Therefore, we have no power to investigate these further issues.

Vent covers

At stage 1, the landlord confirmed it raised a repair on 2 August 2024 to install vent covers on hallway cupboard doors. Records show this repair was originally raised in June 2023 following a surveyor’s visit. The resident chased it in September 2023. It attended on 21 November 2023 but noted a subcontractor was needed. A further appointment on 24 January 2024 was marked as no access, with no evidence the landlord followed up to rebook or inform the resident.
The landlord said the 15 August 2024 appointment was cancelled due to staff sickness and rebooked for 28 October 2024. It took over 15 months to complete this. This failed to meet the timescales in its repairs policy of 10 working days.

Garden door

The garden door repair was also delayed. The landlord initially raised a repair on 1 June 2023. It completed the work on 28 October 2024. It is unclear when the resident reported the gate repair had failed. The landlord raised another repair on 14 April 2025 and completed it on 29 April 2025.

Kitchen

At stage 1, the landlord confirmed it raised a new repair for kitchen cupboard doors and drawers. At stage 2, it said it was waiting for the leak to be resolved before scheduling this work. It did not explain why. Records show a kitchen cupboard repair was raised in March 2023. It completed an overhaul of the units in July 2023. It is unclear if this resolved the issue. A note on 3 January 2024 stated an operative requested a surveyor assessment of the kitchen in December 2023.
The landlord attended to repair kitchen drawers and cupboards on 24 October 2024. The resident’s representative chased completion in November 2024, February, and April 2025. Records show repairs were completed on 15 September 2025. A further appointment for kitchen unit replacement was booked for 20 October 2025. The issue took over 2 and half years to resolve. The resident and her representative had to continue to follow up on this until the repair was complete.

Clearing debris

On 16 April 2025, the resident told the landlord that operatives left rubbish from a previous job and she could not move her disability scooter around this. Her representative told the landlord on 24 April 2025 that the items left outside were making it difficult to access her home with a walker. In its stage 2 response, the landlord said it had raised a request for it to be removed that day. This was 23 days after the resident raised the issue. The HHSRS identifies 29 common hazards, including those from falls on level surfaces such as floors, yards or paths. Landlords must ensure homes are hazard-free. The landlord did not act quickly enough to remove the debris. Again, it failed to consider the resident’s vulnerabilities.

Toilet

The resident reported a toilet repair on 5 February 2025. The landlord completed this on 18 February. However, the representative later reported ongoing issues on 24 April 2025. At stage 2, the landlord said it raised an emergency repair. Its records show the contractor returned on 21 May to fit a new part. This did not meet its timeframe for completing an emergency repair of within 24 hours or the follow up work in a reasonable period of time.

Windows

A call note on the landlord’s records from 29 January 2024 noted window seals to be changed. There is no evidence of the landlord raising this work until 14 April 2025. It attended on 25 April 2025 and ordered glass. It returned on 24 June 2025 and installed this. However, the resident’s representative reported on 7 August 2025 that seals were still incomplete. The landlord completed this on 26 August 2025. This took over 18 months.

Repairs summary

Overall, repairs took too long. The landlord failed to complete them in line with its repairs policy. Multiple appointments were rearranged, causing the resident inconvenience and distress. Communication was poor. The resident had to repeatedly chase incomplete repairs and missed appointments. The landlord acknowledged delays and poor communication in its complaint responses.
The landlord confirmed it completed repairs and promised to complete the outstanding ones. Part of these took additional time to complete. The resident and the representative had to continue to follow up after the end of the complaints process. The overall compensation offer was not proportionate to the failures we have found.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Maladministration

The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. Landlords need to acknowledge complaints within 5 working days, respond to stage 1 within 10 days, and stage 2 within 20 days. The landlord’s complaints procedure complies with these timescales.
The landlord acknowledged and responded on time at stage 1.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord said the resident escalated her complaint in an email on 22 January 2025. We have not seen this escalation request. The landlord confirmed to the resident’s representative on 23 January 2025 that it had escalated the stage 1 complaint from 15 October 2024. It sent a stage 2 acknowledgement to the resident on 27 January 2025. This was within 3 working days.
On 24 February 2025, the landlord emailed the resident to extend the complaint by 20 working days to 24 March. This was in line with its policy and the Code. However, it issued its stage 2 response on 9 May 2025. This was 72 working days after acknowledgement. This was not inline with the Code or its policy. There is no evidence it provided further updates. The resident was unaware of when to expect a response.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord failed to acknowledge or apologise for its delay at stage 2. It therefore failed to remedy its poor complaint handling.

Learning

We have asked the landlord to complete a learning review. The landlord failed to retain an oversight of the repair to ensure that it met its repair timescales. The landlord needs to know why these failures occurred.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord has not provided evidence of the damp and mould inspection reports. We expect landlords to maintain a robust record of repairs. This is because clear and accurate records provide an audit trail and enhance its ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise.

Communication

The landlord failed to appropriately keep the resident updated on the progress of the repair, delays and appointments. A recommendation has been made for it to review its staff training.