Brighter Places (202527096)

Decision
Case ID	202527096
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Brighter Places
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	26 February 2026

 

Background

1. The resident has reported leaks from the property above hers since 2022. In October 2024, she raised additional concerns that her property was cold, which she said was causing damp and mould. The landlord installed an extractor fan in the bathroom in 2024 and carried out works in February 2025 to repair the leaks and the resulting damage. The landlord identified an issue with the resident’s heating system but has not provided evidence of the actions it took to resolve this. The resident remains unhappy with the landlord’s response to her concerns and is seeking further compensation for the distress and inconvenience she has been caused.

 

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about leaks affecting the property, the internal temperature, and damp and mould.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

 

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about leaks affecting the property, the internal temperature and damp and mould.
5. We have found service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

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

 

Summary of reasons

6. The landlord failed to evidence that it carried out repairs to the resident’s heating system. As a result, we cannot conclude that this issue has been resolved.
7. The landlord’s complaint handling was poor. It did not respond to the resident’s initial complaint about her property being cold and did not answer all her concerns in her subsequent complaint.

 

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	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection of her heating system. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. 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 heating system in the resident’s property and produce a written report with photographs. The survey report must set out: The most likely cause of any issues with the heating. A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective repair to the issues.	No later than 23 April 2026
2	Apology order   The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for its failures in its handling of the associated complaint. The landlord must ensure:   The apology is provided.  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 23 April 2026

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
8 October 2024	The resident complained to the landlord. She said that her property had poor insulation and was excessively cold, which had caused damp and mould. She said the mould had affected her daughter’s health and had led to damage to furniture that she had needed to replace.
2 December 2024	The resident complained to the landlord again. She said: There had been leaks from the property above hers since July 2022. The landlord had not addressed the underlying cause of these leaks and had not remedied the subsequent damage to her property. She had discovered a further leak on 30 November 2024, affecting her living room and the bathroom. She reported this to the landlord; however, it told the resident her neighbour needed to report the issue. She wanted to know what the landlord would have done had her neighbour not reported the leak. She reported the leak again 2 more times on 1 December 2024, however on both occasions the landlord said it could not find her previous report on its systems.  A plumber fixed the leak on 1 December 2024 around 10pm. The leak had caused significant damage to ceilings, walls and flooring in her property. There was damp and mould in the property which was affecting her daughter’s health. She had started a mutual exchange process; however, this had fallen through as the person interested in exchanging properties with her was concerned about the unresolved issues at her property. She wanted the landlord to address the leak and repair the damage in her property. She asked it to provide her with regular updates.
20 December 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It apologised to the resident and acknowledged its communication with its repairs contractor had been poor. It said it had put plans in place to determine the source of the ongoing leaks. Its contractors had installed a new fan in the resident’s property on 4 December 2024. It had arranged an appointment for 6 February 2025, for its contractors to repair the living room and bathroom ceilings. It asked the resident to resend photos she had sent it previously of mould on her bathroom tiles.
26 December 2024	The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process. She said the landlord’s response was just a repetition of an earlier complaint response.
3 March 2025	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It apologised to the resident for any distress and inconvenience caused. It said: It had visited her property on 15 January 2025 but there was no evidence of damp in the bathroom. It had now remedied the leak from the property above, and it had completed the associated repairs to the bathroom and lounge and had redecorated. It had asked its damp and mould team to keep the resident informed of any repairs that may be required following the contractors visit. It would arrange repairs to the heating system. It said these were likely to be quite extensive and could require new pipework to the radiators. It offered the resident £2500 compensation as she had requested.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident complained to the Ombudsman on 25 September 2025. She said the leaks into her property had caused her and her family ongoing disruption. She said her daughter’s asthma had got worse. She wanted the landlord to offer her permanent alternative accommodation and increased compensation for the inconvenience and disruption, and the impact on her and her family’s health.

 

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 response to the resident’s concerns about leaks affecting the property, the internal temperature, and damp and mould.
Finding	Maladministration

8. On 8 October 2024, the resident complained to the landlord that her property had poor insulation and was excessively cold, which she said had caused damp and mould. We accept that she did not escalate her concerns about insulation or the property being cold to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure. However, she continued to report damp and mould and had previously expressed her concern that this was related to the internal property temperature. The landlord said it had installed an extractor fan in the bathroom and that it would arrange repairs to the heating system. This was reasonable. However, the landlord has since told us that it cannot locate records showing what action, if any, it took regarding the heating system. This was a failing by the landlord. It had identified repairs but failed to ensure that they were resolved. As such, we have made an order above for the landlord to address this.
9. In her complaint the resident raised a concern that damp in her property was affecting her daughter’s health as she had asthma. The resident also told the landlord her own doctors had advised she may also have asthma, and they were worried this may have been as a result of conditions in her property. We have not investigated this aspect of the resident’s complaint as it is fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim in relation to any impact on health. The courts or liability insurers are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice on the cause of any health condition and how long it will last. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience. On this occasion we have not awarded additional compensation as the landlord’s earlier offer of compensation was sufficient, as explained in more detail below.
10. The resident told the landlord she had reported leaks into her property since July 2022. We expect residents to raise complaints with their landlords within a reasonable time. This is usually within 12 months from the date a resident became aware of a problem. Not only does this ensure that evidence to investigate the complaint is available, but also that effective steps can be taken to put things right. We asked both the landlord and the resident to provide evidence of any reports of leaks during the 12‑month period before the complaint in December 2024. Neither party was able to provide this. However, the available evidence indicates it was not in dispute that the leaks had been ‘ongoing’.
11. As the landlord has not provided any records relating to reports of leaks between December 2023 and December 2024, we have not been able to assess what actions it took during this period. This absence of records is a failing. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and accessible records to provide an effective audit trail. When we investigate a complaint, we request the landlord’s records. If no audit trail is available, we may be unable to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its repairs policy. The landlord may wish to review its record‑keeping systems to ensure it can demonstrate that it has met its repair responsibilities and provide evidence of any works carried out when required by the Ombudsman.
12. The resident reported a leak from her neighbour’s property to the landlord on 30 November 2024. The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will respond to emergency repairs within 2 hours to make the issue safe. The policy sets out that it will complete urgent maintenance within 7 days and routine repairs within 28 calendar days. In its stage 1 complaint response of 20 December 2024, the landlord said that “plans were in place to fully inspect and determine the source of this ongoing problem”. However, the landlord has not provided evidence to show what was causing this leak nor what steps it took to repair it, or when it did so. We accept that when the source of a leak is in another property, the landlord may not have been able to disclose details to the resident, due to reasons of confidentiality. However, it would have been appropriate for it to provide this information to our Service for us to assess whether the actions it took to remedy the issue were reasonable. The fact that it has not done so, is a failing.
13. The landlord offered compensation of £2500 based on a request by the resident. It was pragmatic for the landlord to make an offer in line with the resident’s request. However, it would have been reasonable for it to have explained how it had concluded that this was a fair offer in the circumstances. This was a missed opportunity. Our guidance states that compensation over £1000 is appropriate where a resident has been significantly affected by the landlord’s errors, often over a long period of time. Given the circumstances of the complaint, and in the absence of evidence of any further detriment, we are satisfied that the landlord’s offer covering matters up until the stage 2 response, was fair and reasonable.
14. However, we have kept in view the fact that the landlord has not completed repairs to the resident’s heating system. The reason for this is unclear; however, we have ordered the landlord to take this action now. If the resident remains unhappy with the landlord’s handling of the heating system repairs, she may wish to raise a new complaint about this.
15. On 11 September 2025, the resident raised a new complaint to the landlord about a further leak into her kitchen, reimbursement for damaged belongings and requested that the landlord offer her permanent alternative accommodation. This complaint has not yet exhausted the landlord’s complaint procedure. On 9 March 2023, the resident said that there had been an issue with her boiler which meant that she had not had hot water. She said that this issue had now been resolved. In the interest of fairness, the landlord should be given the opportunity to consider these matters through its complaints procedure and issue a final response on them. If the landlord has not done so already, it should ensure that a final response has been issued. If the resident has received a stage 2 response, but remains unhappy with the outcome, she may refer these matters to us as a new complaint.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint
Finding	Service failure

16. Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code), published on our website, sets out our expectations for landlords’ complaint handling. The Code states that landlords must have a 2 stage complaints process. They should acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. Landlords must respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days, of acknowledging the complaint. The Code states if landlords need more time to investigate a complaint, any extension must not exceed a further 10 working days at stage 1, or 20 working days, at stage 2.
17. On 8 October 2024, the resident complained to the landlord. We have not been provided with evidence to show that the landlord responded within 10 working days. This was inappropriate. As a result, the resident was inconvenienced by having to complain again on 2 December 2024. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 20 December 2024, which was within the timeframes set out in our Code for responding to stage 1 complaints.
18. However, the landlord failed to address her concerns about heating and internal temperatures in the property. Similarly, the landlord failed to address the resident’s concerns about what would happen if her neighbour did not cooperate and report the leak, and concerns raised in her escalation request about a mutual exchange that had fallen through. The Code states that landlords must address all points raised in a complaint, and the landlord did not respond to this concern, nor has it evidenced that it investigated the issue. The landlord may wish to consider staff training to ensure it responds to all points raised in residents’ complaints. The landlord’s lack of response to the resident’s concerns will have likely caused her inconvenience, as she was left without clear information.
19. The landlord did not acknowledge any failings in its handling of the resident’s complaint. It should reasonably have done so and should have offered an apology for the inconvenience that the resident had been caused as a result. This was a missed opportunity, and we have ordered it to apologise now.
20. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure on 26 December 2024. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 13 January 2025. On 12 February 2025, the landlord told the resident that it needed more time to respond to her complaint. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 3 March 2025. This was within the timescales set out in our Code, considering the festive period and the landlord’s request for an extension.

 

Learning

21. Given the complaint handling issues identified by this investigation, the landlord may wish to carry out staff training, or issue relevant staff with a reminder, about the requirements of the Code. Namely that a response should be provided in relation to all complaints raised.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

22. The landlord’s records in this case were inadequate. It has not been able to provide records as to what action it took in relation to the resident’s heating system. We cannot establish what repairs it carried out to resolve the leaks, nor what date it carried these out. The landlord may want to consider reviewing its record-keeping systems so that it can satisfy itself that it has fulfilled its repair responsibilities and can provide dates and evidence relating to any works it, or its contractors, carry out, when required to do so by the Ombudsman.

Communication

23. The landlord acknowledged that communication between it and its repairs contractor had been poor. However, it did not explain what steps it would take to prevent this from happening in future. The landlord may wish to review its processes to improve communication with its repairs contractor.