South Derbyshire District Council (202440948)

Back to Top

 

Decision

Case ID

202440948

Decision type

Investigation

Landlord

South Derbyshire District Council

Landlord type

Local authority

Occupancy

Secure tenancy

Date

30 January 2026

Background

  1. The resident complained to the landlord about leaks, damp, and the time it took to fully resolve the leaks and associated repairs. She also complained about the impact the leaks were having on her household.

What the complaint is about

  1. The resident’s complaint is about how the landlord responded to her reports of leaks and the associated repairs.
  2. We have also considered how the landlord dealt with the resident’s complaint.

Our decision (determination)

  1. We have found there was maladministration by the landlord in how it dealt with the resident’s reports of leaks and the associated repairs.
  2. We have found there was no maladministration by the landlord in how it dealt with the resident’s complaint.
  3. We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

  1. The landlord did not follow its repairs policy, as there were delays in doing the repairs. It did inspections and repairs but did not find the cause of the damp until it arranged a specialist inspection after its final response.
  2. The landlord responded in a prompt way to the complaints throughout the process.

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 found in this report. The landlord must ensure:

  • The apology is specific to the failures found in this decision, meaningful, and empathetic.
  • It has due regard to our apologies guidance.

No later than 27 February 2026

2

Compensation order

The landlord must pay the resident £1,150 compensation for failures in how it dealt with reports of leaks and the associated repairs. This is made up of:

  • £400 for distress and inconvenience caused.
  • £700 for damages already offered.
  • £50 voucher for decorating costs already offered.

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 made.

No later than 27 February 2026

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date

What happened

30 August 2023

Following the resident’s reports of damp in her living room, the landlord said the roof needed an inspection.

2 April 2024

In her complaint about damp, the resident said the landlord’s repairs had not solved the problem. She wanted it to fix the leak and compensate her for damage caused.

12 April 2024

In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord said following its visit on 8 April 2024, it would fit a chimney vent and repair the neighbour’s gutters. It said it would also do work to the damp proof course.

4 December 2024

The resident complained again. She said she had damp in her home for 3 years. She said the landlord had tried to fix the damp but had not investigated the cause. She said the situation had caused her distress.

10 December 2024

In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord said when it visited to replaster on 6 December 2024, it found the cause of damp, which it dealt with. It apologised for inconvenience and distress caused and offered a £50 decorating voucher.

16 December 2024

The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint. She said she did not believe it had fixed the damp. She said it had only replastered the chimney breast when it had promised her it would do the whole living room. She said it should compensate her for inconvenience.

9 January 2025

In its final complaint response, the landlord said it had only agreed to replaster the affected area. It apologised if it had not made this clear. In April 2025, it settled a damage claim with a payment of £700.

Referral to the Ombudsman

The resident escalated her complaint to us. She said the situation had affected her mental health. She said the landlord had done repairs, but it had not resolved the damp. She wanted an investigation into the cause and compensation for 3 years of distress and inconvenience.

 

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

How the landlord responded to reports of leaks and the associated repairs

Finding

Maladministration

What we have not investigated

  1. The resident complained that she had damp in her home for 3 years. Our Scheme says we may not investigate matters that a resident did not refer to the landlord as a complaint within a reasonable time. This is normally 12 months. The first complaint about damp was in April 2024. Because of this, we will investigate events from April 2023.

What we have investigated

  1. The occupancy agreement makes it clear that it is the landlord’s responsibility to repair the structure of the building. Its repairs policy says it will do emergency repairs within 24 hours, urgent repairs in 3 calendar days, and routine repairs in 20 calendar days.
  2. On 30 August 2023 the landlord’s records said there was a high damp reading on the chimney breast in the resident’s living room, and it needed to inspect the roof. It raised a job to erect scaffolding on 12 September 2023. On 18 October 2023, it visited the resident’s home again. Its records said there was damp around the chimney breast and the carpet was damp. It said the external chimney appeared to have missing pointing. It said it needed to put up scaffolding to investigate further.
  3. The landlord’s records said it put up scaffolding on 7 November 2023 and repaired the chimney on 13 November 2023. However, in her complaint the resident said the landlord put up scaffolding at the beginning of December 2023 and did not complete the work until January 2024. Because of the conflicting information, it is unclear when the landlord did the repairs. However, the evidence showed it did not follow its repairs policy as it should have done a routine repair within 20 days. The earliest it did the work was November 2023, which was over 2 months after the resident reported damp.
  4. On 15 February 2024 the resident reported damp again. She wanted the landlord to inspect her home. We have not seen a record of an inspection, but it raised a job to treat mould in the living room and do internal repairs on 27 February 2024. We have found this was reasonable, as it appears it did an inspection and raised repairs within 20 days. However, from the records we have seen, it is unclear when the landlord did the repairs.
  5. The resident complained on 2 April 2024 about how the landlord had dealt with her reports of damp since 2022. She said after it did the repairs following the inspection in February 2024, it told her to call a month later to arrange a moisture reading. She said she arranged an appointment, but the landlord did not turn up and when she rearranged the appointment, it arrived without the damp monitoring equipment. She said it had not done the repairs correctly as her carpet was still wet. She wanted better communication from the landlord and compensation for damage to her carpet and internal decoration.
  6. In its complaint response on 12 April 2024, the landlord said it visited the resident’s home on 8 April 2024 and then raised repairs to fit a chimney vent and do work on the damp proof course. It also said it would repair the neighbour’s gutters within 20 working days. It said once it had completed the work, it would visit to discuss further repairs.
  7. We have found that it was reasonable for the landlord to arrange a visit following the resident’s complaint and then tell her what repairs it would do. However, its response did not deal with the resident’s concerns about a missed appointment, communication, or damage to her home. Because of this, we have found there was failure as the complaint response did not adequately deal with the resident’s concerns.
  8. The landlord’s records appear to show it completed repairs to the damp proof course on 11 June 2024. It fitted a chimney vent on 5 August 2024 and replaced damaged roof tiles at the same time. Although it was positive that the landlord did an extra repair when it found damaged roof tiles, we have found there was a failure. This is because it did not meet the timescale it promised in its complaint response. We have not seen evidence of when it completed the repairs to the neighbour’s gutters.
  9. On 24 September 2024 the resident reported further problems with damp. She said the dehumidifier the landlord had provided was not controlling the moisture in her home. The landlord asked for an inspection on 26 September 2024, but this did not take place until 11 October 2024. Although this took place within 20 calendar days, it is our view that the landlord should have done this sooner in the circumstances. The inspection found it needed to repair damaged plaster in the living room following a leak from the chimney. However, it said the leak “looks to have been resolved”.
  10. The resident made a second complaint on 4 December 2024. She said she had had rainwater coming into her home for 3 years. She said the landlord had tried to fix the leak but had not investigated the cause. She said during August and September 2024, she tried to contact the landlord, and it told her she would get a call back. She said it was only after she contacted a councillor that someone called her. She said when it eventually visited, it told her the repairs it had done had stopped the leak. She said her living room carpet still felt wet and the way the landlord had dealt with her had caused distress.
  11. The landlord did repairs to the plasterwork in the living room on 9 December 2024. Its records said it needed to return to fit skirting boards.
  12. In its complaint response on 10 December 2024, the landlord said when it visited on 11 October 2024, it used a moisture meter which showed damp on the left side of the chimney. However, the right side, where it had done repairs, was dry. It said following this, it raised a job to replaster the damp area. It said when its plasterer attended on 6 December 2024, it found an old back boiler that seemed to be causing the damp. It said it removed this and sealed the brickwork. It said it had completed the plastering work and would return to fit skirting. It apologised for inconvenience, distress, and confusion over the appointments and said it would raise this with the repairs team. It said it would arrange a £50 decorating voucher.
  13. We have found it was reasonable for the landlord to apologise and say it would learn from the complaint. However, it is our view that a £50 decorating voucher was insufficient compensation for the inconvenience caused by leaks and delayed repairs over the previous year.
  14. The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint on 16 December 2024. She said she was not happy with how the landlord had dealt with the repairs and did not believe it had fixed the leaks. She said it had promised it would replaster the whole of the living room. She said because of the problems with damp for over 3 years, she should have a back payment of rent for the inconvenience and time taken to deal with it.
  15. In its final response on 9 January 2025, the landlord said it had only agreed to replaster the affected area of the chimney breast. It apologised if it had not made this clear.
  16. Following the final response, the landlord arranged for a specialist contractor to inspect the property on 10 March 2024. This found damp coming from the solid floor in the living room. It recommended internal repairs and a damp proof course for the floor. Although we cannot say whether earlier repairs to the chimney stopped the leak or whether it was a contributing cause, we have seen the contractor did not recommend works to the roof or chimney. However, it is unclear why the landlord did not find the damp floor sooner.
  17. Overall, we have found there was maladministration by the landlord in how it dealt with the resident’s reports of leaks and the associated repairs. Although there are gaps in the information available to us, we have seen that the landlord did not follow its repairs policy, as there were delays in doing repairs. This was the case even after it responded to the resident’s complaint. The landlord felt the repairs it did would resolve the damp, but it is clear from the inspection in March 2024, that its earlier inspections were not effective. In this case, we have found that it was reasonable for the landlord to only replaster the damaged area of the living room.
  18. The resident complained that she had damp for 3 years. Our investigation has not gone back that far. However, the resident lived with the effects of damp in her home for a considerable time, which caused her distress. The landlord also caused her inconvenience as she had repeat appointments and had to regularly make reports of damp and chase appointments.
  19. We have seen the landlord offered a £50 decorating voucher and settled a damage claim by paying £700. It is our view that this is insufficient as it does not recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays. Because of this and in line with our remedies guidance, the landlord must pay the resident £400 for distress and inconvenience.

Complaint

The handling of the complaint

Finding

No maladministration
  1. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process. It says it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It will then respond at stage 1 within 10 working days, and at stage 2 within 20 working days.
  2. The resident originally complained on 2 April 2024. We have seen no evidence that the landlord acknowledged the complaint. However, it sent its complaint response on 12 April 2024, which was within its timescales.
  3. When the resident complained again about the same issue on 4 December 2024, the landlord decided to treat it as a new complaint. It is our view that it could have dealt with this as an escalation request and shortened the complaints process.
  4. We have seen no evidence the landlord sent an acknowledgement to the resident, but it sent its complaint response to her on 10 December 2024, which was within its timescale.
  5. When the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint on 16 December 2024, it sent its final response on 9 January 2024, which was again within its timescale.
  6. Overall, we have found there was no maladministration by the landlord in how it dealt with the complaint. It could have dealt with the second complaint as an escalation request, and we have seen no evidence of acknowledgements. However, it responded in a prompt way to the complaints throughout the process.

Learning

  1. The landlord should ensure it acknowledges all complaints in line with its policy.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

  1. We found the landlord’s record keeping was lacking on repair records it provided to us. Our spotlight report on knowledge and information management provides guidance that can help landlords with this.

Communication

  1. The landlord apologised for confusion over appointments in its final response. It was positive that it said it would raise this as learning with the repairs team.