Mid Suffolk District Council (202339671)

Back to Top

 

Decision

Case ID

202339671

Decision type

Investigation

Landlord

Mid Suffolk District Council

Landlord type

Local Authority / ALMO or TMO

Occupancy

Secure Tenancy

Date

26 February 2026

Background

  1. The resident has reported damp and mould in the property for the past 3 years. Some repairs have been completed but the resident is unhappy with the length of time taken and the landlord’s communication.

What the complaint is about

  1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of damp and mould
    2. Formal complaint.

Our decision (determination)

  1. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of damp and mould.
    2. Formal complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

  1. There were delays in the repairs process and failures in communication.
  2. There was a significant delay providing the stage 1 response.

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

Specific action order

The landlord must provide evidence it has arranged an inspection of the property to establish whether any sources of damp and mould remain. If so, the landlord must provide an action plan with clear timescales and explain it to the resident.

No later than

25 March 2026

2

Compensation order

The landlord must provide evidence it has paid the resident directly £750 compensation as follows:

  • £650 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the damp and mould (less the £550 previously offered if already paid).
  • £100 for the stress caused by its complaint handling delays.

No later than

25 March 2026

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date

What happened

15 January 2024

The resident complained that the landlord had not sufficiently addressed damp and mould issues. He was particularly unhappy with the lack of communication.

20 May 2024

The landlord gave its stage 1 response. It apologised for the delayed repairs and its lack of contact. It said it had completed the following (which were contributing to the damp and mould):

  • Replaced missing roof tiles that were allowing rainwater penetration.
  • Replaced the kitchen extractor fan, although this needed to be swapped with a different model.

It would arrange for damaged internal walls to be re–plastered and a survey of potential rising damp.

 

The date and basis of the stage 2 escalation is unclear from the evidence.

2 July 2024

The landlord gave its stage 2 response. It said 16 jobs had been raised over 18 months regarding damp and mould (no details given). It apologised some were delayed, and confirmed all were now either complete or in progress. It offered £550 compensation for the impact caused.

Referral to the Ombudsman

The resident remains unhappy with the landlord’s response and says the issue is ongoing.

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

Handling of damp and mould repairs

Finding

Maladministration
  1. According to the landlord’s policy, it should take a proactive approach to damp and mould and carry out reasonable repairs to eradicate it. Our Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (2021) says good practice is for landlords to take a zero tolerance approach. This includes investigating reports and finding causes of the problem. While the landlord accepted its responsibility to investigate and resolve damp and mould, the effectiveness of the actions it took is unclear from the evidence provided.
  2. In November 2022 the resident reported his bathroom was damp due to a leak from the roof above. He chased the landlord 5 times without receiving a meaningful response. In the stage 2 response the landlord said 16 repair jobs were raised in the 18 months that followed. We have not been provided with the details of each of these repairs.
  3. Tiles on the flat roof above the bathroom were replaced on 24 May 2023. This exceeded the 90 working-day timescale set out in the landlord’s repair policy. A damp and mould survey took place on 3 May 2023 and identified various issues, including: inadequate ventilation, poor air circulation due to the storage of belongings, condensation, and faulty extractor fans. The contractor noted they had given the resident advice on opening windows to improve ventilation and air circulation, and maintaining heating levels.
  4. The landlord’s damp and mould policy says residents must be informed of survey findings and kept updated. The landlord did not do so in this case. The resident requested updates multiple times, believing there were outstanding repairs. Apart from the extractor fans being replaced, it is unclear whether the landlord had any other outstanding repairs at that stage. This highlights the failure in communication and the fact the resident did not understand the current position.
  5. Throughout 2023 the resident made numerous reports that the damp and mould was persisting. He believed there were underlying causes that had not been identified or addressed. The landlord did not respond. This was a failure and not in line with its policy. The lack of communication was persistent in this case.
  6. In its stage 1 response of May 2024 the landlord said the brickwork needed to be repointed around the damp proof course. Following this there was no further information provided and it is unclear when this was completed.
  7. A repair log entry in December 2024 said another damp and mould survey had found missing mortar around the brickwork. This was completed in May 2025, slightly over the 90 working-day target timescale. There was again no evidence of the survey or required works being explained to the resident and he was not kept updated. This caused him further stress and frustration.
  8. The resident said his personal belongings had been damaged by mould. The landlord asked for photographs as evidence. The resident sent photographs of bagged up items mixed with household waste in plastic bags. The landlord said it would not offer compensation for the items as they were not clear or identifiable. It asked for further evidence which the resident did not provide. This decision was in line with the landlord’s compensation policy, which says evidence of specific loss or damage must be provided.
  9. The landlord accepted its failures in its stage 2 response of July 2024 and gave assurances that any outstanding repairs would be completed. However, it was not clear exactly what repairs were outstanding or the timescales involved.
  10. Following the complaints process and into 2025, the resident continued to report damp and mould. There is further evidence of him chasing the landlord and its communication not improving. The resident told us on 2 February 2026 that the damp remains. The landlord told us on 18 February 2026 there are no outstanding jobs specific to damp and mould. This miscommunication is clearly having an impact on the resident and his enjoyment of the property.
  11. The landlord offered £550 compensation at stage 2. This was in line with its policy for a high impact service failure that caused significant distress and inconvenience. While this was proportionate at that time, communication failure has continued. We do not know the extent of any outstanding repairs, so our remedy is focused on the ongoing uncertainty and lack of clarity around next steps. The landlord is ordered to pay an additional £100 compensation for the further detriment its lack of communication is causing the resident.
  12. There are conflicting accounts regarding the current status of the damp and mould but the resident’s stress and inconvenience is ongoing. The landlord must, therefore, arrange an inspection to ensure there are no outstanding sources of damp and mould. If any are detected, it must produce an action plan with clear timescales and explain it to the resident.

Complaint

The handling of the complaint

Finding

Maladministration
  1. The resident made the stage 1 complaint on 15 January 2024 but did not receive a response. In May 2024 we reminded the landlord of its obligations under our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). We asked it to respond by 9 May 2024. This was extended to 16 May 2024 but the landlord failed to respond and had to be chased. The stage 1 response was provided over 4 months after the complaint was made. This was much longer than its 10-working day target. The landlord failed to comply with its complaint handling policy and the Code.
  2. It was unreasonable and unfair that it took our intervention for the resident to receive a response. The fact we also had to chase the landlord shows how frustrated the resident must have been, causing him time and inconvenience.
  3. Due to the landlord failing to respond to the initial complaint, there was confusion about escalation to stage 2. The resident requested escalation on 6 February 2024, before receiving the stage 1 response. It was unfair that he did not understand what was happening, due to poor communication from the landlord.
  4. It is not possible to accurately calculate the timescales involved in providing the stage 2 response as there is no clear date when escalation was recorded or acknowledged after stage 1. This does not affect the assessment or determination regarding complaint handling as failure was evident from the handling of stage 1.
  5. At stage 1 the landlord apologised for the delay in providing a response, but did not offer any compensation. Its compensation policy says discretionary payments are available where a complaint has been handled poorly and the landlord has failed to follow policy. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to offer compensation at that stage in recognition of the stress caused to the resident.
  6. At stage 2 the landlord apologised further for the lack of stage 1 response. It offered a total of £550 compensation but did not specify an amount for complaint handling. A separate compensation payment of £100 is in line with our remedies guidance for a failure that adversely affected the resident without permanent impact. It is appropriate to recognise the added stress the delays in complaint handling had on the resident. We therefore make an order in that regard.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

  1. There were sufficient records to allow for this investigation but it was difficult to establish exact dates regarding the complaint process.

Communication

  1. The communication between the landlord and the resident was consistently poor and forms the basis of the complaint.