Peabody Trust (202535798)

Decision
Case ID	202535798
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Peabody Trust
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	31 March 2026

Background

The resident lives with her daughter. She was unhappy about the delays and the way the landlord’s contractor handled the boiler and heating repairs, as well as the damp and mould issues in her home. At the time, the resident had a brain tumour and her daughter had a heart condition, and she was worried about how these issues might affect their health.

What the complaint is about

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of boiler and heating repairs.
2. Reports of damp and mould.
3. Associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We found service failure for the landlord’s handling of
1. The boiler and heating repairs.
2. Damp and mould.
3. The resident’s associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord apologised and offered compensation for delays in completing the boiler, heating, and damp and mould repairs. The amount offered appropriately reflected the time, trouble, distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and was sufficient for the failings identified in this investigation. However, the landlord has not provided evidence that it completed the repairs needed to resolve the boiler issues or the damp and mould in the bathroom, despite stating in its complaint responses that these works would be carried out.
The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response was issued on time. There were delays in the landlord acknowledging the complaint and issuing its stage 2 response. The landlord did not recognise these delays in its complaint handling and therefore failed to provide suitable redress or demonstrate that it had learned from the 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	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: A senior member of staff provides the apology. 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 28 April 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1200 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures identified in this investigation. This is broken down as: The £1150 the landlord offered to the resident during the complaints process. An additional payment of £50 for the landlord’s complaints handling. This must be paid to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of the payment. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 28 April 2026
3	Review order The landlord must contact the resident to review and discuss any increase in her energy bills caused by delays in repairing the boiler’s hot water pipe. It should explain whether it will consider reimbursing her for any additional costs from November 2025 until the repairs are completed. The landlord must set out its decision to the resident in writing, including the reasons for its decision.	No later than 28 April 2026
4	Repairs order The landlord must take all steps to ensure the following works are started no later than the due date: Repairs to the boiler’s hot water pipe. Replacement of the carpet damaged by the boiler leak. Repair or replace the bathroom extractor fan. Repairs to the underfloor heating. If the landlord cannot start the works in this time or believes the works have already been completed, it must provide to us and the resident, by the due date: Evidence it has completed the repairs and reasons why it has not replaced the bathroom extractor fan or the underfloor heating pump. Reasons why it cannot start works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will start and finish the works; or The steps it has taken to start the works and documentary evidence of its attempts to ensure the works were started by the due date. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot. Whether suitable alternative accommodation is necessary and will be made available to the resident.	No later than 28 April 2026
5	Inspection order We have made an inspection order as the landlord has not demonstrated that it has inspected the damp and mould in the resident’s bathroom to determine the cause or considered works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution. What the landlord must do The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. The landlord must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. A suitably qualified person must complete the inspection. 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.	No later than 28 April 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
5 July 2025	The resident complained to the landlord about unresolved boiler repairs and damp and mould in her bathroom. She reported burning her finger on a leak from the boiler and said the damp and mould were damaging her belongings and affecting her health. She also expressed concerns about the poor service provided by the contractors.
16 July 2025	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response, in which it: Said it would investigate the lack of communication and professionalism from its contractor. Said a surveyor would inspect the damp and mould. Raised jobs to investigate the issues with the boiler, to replace the silicone around the bathroom tiles and replace bathroom fan if necessary. Apologised for the delays and impact this has had on the household and offered £400 compensation.
14 August 2025	The landlord agreed with the resident to increase its offer of compensation to £700 due to the resident burning her finger and the continuous delays with repairs.
15 October 2025	The resident asked to escalate her complaint due to issues with her underfloor heating. She said the constant delays and miscommunication was unacceptable.
25 November 2025	The landlord issued its stage 2 response, in which it: Said the boiler and underfloor heating repairs were not completed as promised leaving the resident without heating and unresolved issues for an extended period. Said the household vulnerabilities and upcoming surgery were not adequately considered. Asked its central monitoring team to monitor and manage the heating and hot water jobs. Raised a job to treat the mould. Apologised and awarded an additional £450 compensation.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate her complaint as she said the repairs were still outstanding. She wanted the landlord to provide an explanation for the delays and to pay more compensation.

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	Boiler and heating repairs
Finding	Service failure

The resident reported a leak from her immersion tank on 19 March 2025. The landlord attended the same day in line with its emergency repair timescale. It resolved the leak but said follow‑up repairs were needed to the hot water pipe. The evidence shows the resident could use her immersion heater for hot water and her heating was not affected at this time.
When the resident made a complaint in July 2025, 4 months later, the landlord acknowledged that it had not arranged the follow‑up repairs. It replaced the resident’s boiler in August 2025. The works were incomplete due to missing parts and the repair to the hot water pipe was not carried out.
Although the landlord raised this job several times with its contractor between March and November 2025, we have not been given evidence that the works were completed. At the time of this investigation, some of the works had been outstanding for a year. This was significantly outside the landlord’s agreed 28‑day timescale for routine repairs.
The landlord also agreed to replace the resident’s carpet because it was damaged by the boiler leak. It arranged an appointment to measure the carpet. However, no evidence has been provided to show the carpet has been replaced.
When the boiler was replaced, further issues were identified with the underfloor heating. In October 2025 the resident reported that the contractor turned the heating off. It was repaired in late November 2025. The resident told the landlord that the contractor said it had carried out a temporary fix to the heating pump and that it would need replacing. We have not been provided any evidence of the outcome of the inspection of the underfloor flooring. Therefore, it is unclear if the repairs carried out were temporary or resolved the issues. The landlord should have responded to the resident about her concerns and there is no evidence it did this.
The landlord’s final complaint response acknowledged that the resident experienced delays and poor communication regarding the boiler and heating repairs. The delay was serious given the household’s vulnerabilities. The resident said she had unreliable heating and hot water between March and November 2025. There is no evidence that the landlord carried out a risk assessment, considered temporary measures such as heaters, or identified what support the resident needed while waiting for repairs. The landlord acknowledged it did not consider the household’s vulnerabilities or the resident’s surgery or offer sufficient support at the time.
During the complaints process the landlord offered the resident a total of £1150 compensation. The evidence shows this was apportioned as:
1. £450 delays with boiler repairs and the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience caused.
2. £100 for increased energy costs due to needing to use the immersion heater for hot water.
3. £100 for personal injury due to the boiler leak.
4. £500 delays with damp repairs and the time, trouble, distress and inconvenience caused.
The resident said she wanted further compensation for the impact on her and her daughter’s health. We recognise the inconvenience the household experienced due to issues with heating and hot water. However, it would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We have not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
The landlord apologised and offered the resident in total £650 compensation for delays and poor communication with the boiler and heating repairs, personal injury and increased energy costs up to November 2025. This amount is in line with the landlord’s compensation and remedies policy for extensive distress and inconvenience. Our remedies guidance states that £600–£1000 is appropriate where a failure has had a significant impact and substantial redress is needed. We are satisfied that the offer of compensation reflected the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience caused to the resident and was proportionate to the failings identified up to the end of the complaints process.
However, as the landlord has not shown that it has carried out or taken reasonable steps to arrange the works promised in its complaint responses. This includes the hot water pipe, the replacement of carpets and the underfloor heating pump. We have therefore made a finding of service failure. We order the landlord to apologise to the resident and contact her to discuss if these works are outstanding and if necessary,provide a timescale for completing them.
It is unclear from the evidence whether the resident continued using the immersion heater for hot water after November 2025, which may have increased her energy costs. We have not ordered the landlord to increase its compensation offer. However, we have ordered it to contact the resident to discuss any increase in energy bills due to delays with the boiler repairs and whether it will consider reimbursing her. The landlord should set out its decision regarding the energy costs to the resident in writing, including the reasons for its decision. If the resident is dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, she can raise a new complaint about this.

Complaint	Damp and mould
Finding	Service failure

The resident reported damp and mould in her bathroom in 2024. On 5 July 2025 she made a complaint, explaining that despite previous mould washes the problem was getting worse. The landlord acted appropriately by referring the issue to its damp and mould team, advising that a surveyor would visit, and raising jobs to replace the silicone around the tiles and inspect the extractor fan.
On 23 July 2025 the landlord’s records show that it cancelled the surveyor visit because the contractor was already carrying out works. However, the landlord knew the resident was concerned that it had not investigated the root cause of the damp and mould. Given that the resident said the problem was worsening and affecting both her and her daughter’s health, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to proceed with an inspection.
On 13 August 2025 the resident informed the landlord that the contractor had replaced the silicone and serviced the extractor fan, but additional parts were required. The landlord chased the contractor in September 2025. In its final response in November 2025, it said it had raised a job to ensure the mould was treated. However, there is no evidence that the extractor fan works were completed or that the damp and mould issue was fully resolved.
The landlord apologised and offered £500 compensation for delays in addressing the damp and mould. This is in line with its compensation and remedies policy and our remedies guidance, which recommends £100–£600 where a failure has negatively affected the resident but caused no permanent impact. We consider this amount proportionate to the distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble experienced by the resident up to the end of the complaint process.
However, because the landlord has not demonstrated that it completed, or reasonably attempted to arrange, the works promised in its complaint responses, we have made a finding of service failure. We order the landlord to inspect the property to identify the cause of the damp and mould in the bathroom and complete any outstanding works to the extractor fan.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The landlord uses a two‑stage complaint process. It aims to acknowledge complaints at both stages within 5 working days. It should issue a formal response within 10 working days at stage 1 and within 20 working days at stage 2. This is in line with our Complaint Handling Code.
The resident submitted a complaint on 5 July 2025. The landlord acknowledged it on 15 July 2025, which was 7 working days later and outside its timescale. It issued its stage 1 response on 16 July 2025, which was within its 10‑day timescale.
The resident asked to escalate the complaint on 15 October 2025. The landlord acknowledged this the same day in line with its policy. It issued its stage 2 response on 25 November 2025, which was 30 working days later and outside its agreed timescale. There is no evidence it explained the delay or kept the resident updated.
The landlord did not acknowledge its delay in accepting the complaint or issuing the stage 2 response. It did not take steps to put things right or show learning from the complaint. However, the delays were short and the landlord remained in contact with the resident about the repairs during this time. The landlord’s compensation and remedies policy states it will offer between £50 and £150 compensation where it has failed follow its policy and there is a low level impact on the resident. We have ordered the landlord to apologise to the resident and pay £50 compensation in line with its policy. This is in line with the landlord’s policy and our remedies guidance, as referenced above.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord did not manage the repairs effectively. Its repair records were poor; for example, there was no record confirming whether the boiler had been replaced or what further works were required. Landlords must keep robust records of all contacts and repairs to provide a clear audit trail and to ensure they can identify and address issues promptly.

Communication

The landlord did not communicate effectively with its contractors, and the evidence shows it relied on the resident to provide updates about outstanding works. The landlord may wish to review its process for raising repair jobs and ensure it has systems in place to monitor contractor appointments and progress. Stronger oversight would help prevent repair orders from being closed incorrectly and support quicker resolution of issues.
The landlord also failed to keep the resident informed about the status of the repairs, resulting in the resident having to chase updates repeatedly. It should have shared the outcomes of its investigations and provided a clear schedule of works with expected timescales. Its communication lacked transparency, particularly around the contractor’s recommendations for the boiler parts and whether the underfloor heating pump required repair or replacement.