Stonewater Limited (202319513)

Decision
Case ID	202319513
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Stonewater Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Leaseholder
Date	12 November 2025

Background

The resident lives in a 2-bedroom, mid-floor flat within a block owned by the landlord.

What the complaint is about

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
We have also considered the complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

We have found:
1. There was maladministration by the landlord of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
2. There was reasonable redress by the landlord in how it responded to the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould

The resident reported damp and mould in in his flat in November 2022, but the landlord did not take timely steps to confirm responsibility or carry out a thorough inspection. It did not address the residents’ concerns about disrepair to the external structure of the building, maintain adequate records, or signpost the resident to its insurance team.

The complaint handling.

The landlord failed to follow its own complaints policy and the Complaint Handling Code at both stages of the process, as it did not acknowledge or respond to the complaint within the required timeframes, extended deadlines and failed to address all aspects of the complaint. However, it apology and offer of £200 compensation provides reasonable redress for the time and trouble caused by these failings.

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 provided by a senior member of staff. 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 10 December 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £725 made up as follows: £50 previously offered in its stage 1 response of 15 November 2023 £200 previously offered in its stage 2 response of 19 January 2024 £475 previously offered in August 2024 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 10 December 2025
3	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 residents property and associated areas such as but not limited to, external walls, windows and stairwells to ascertain the cause of the damp and mould within the residents property. 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 damp and mould in the property 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 resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) The likely timescales to commence and complete the work A copy of this report must be shared with the resident and this Service	No later than 10 December 2025
4	Take specific action Further to the survey results, the landlord must write to the resident to confirm its position relative to which party is responsible for the necessary repairs.	No later than 10 December 2025
5	Take specific action The landlord must consider whether it would be appropriate to signpost the resident to its insurer in respect of any internal damage or personal belongings and provide the resident and us with its reasoning in relation to the decision.	No later than 10 December 2025

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We recommend that the landlord considers whether other residents in the building were impacted by similar failings and if so, what does it intend to do.
A finding of reasonable redress has been made in relation to the landlords complaint handling based on the landlord’s offer compensation, the landlord should pay the £200 compensation offered to the resident if it has not already done so.

Our recommendations

We recommend that the landlord considers whether other residents in the building were impacted by similar failings and if so, what does it intend to do.

A finding of reasonable redress has been made in relation to the landlords complaint handling based on the landlord’s offer compensation, the landlord should pay the £200 compensation offered to the resident if it has not already done so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
4 November 2022	The resident reported damp and mould present on the wall of the hallway.
4 September 2023	The resident contacted us about mould and damp. He said this was the second time he had raised the issue since moving into his property. Also stating as follows: He could not redecorate or place furniture against the wall due to damage. He had lost items because of mould. He believed the issue was structural and affected other flats in the block. He wanted a surveyor to inspect, wall cavities cleared and insulated, and communal windows repaired. He said the landlord arranged a surveyor who found debris in the walls, but the report was lost. After delays, the walls were insulated but the debris remained. The landlord also offered ‘polyfiller’, which he felt was inadequate and that the landlord had ignored him, despite photos showing water and moisture in communal areas.
11 October 2023	This Service contacted the landlord to provide a written complaint response within 15 working days by 1 November 2023.
18 October 2023	The landlord contacted the resident to acknowledge the complaint and said it aimed to provide a response by 1 November 2023.
6 November 2023	The landlord contacted the resident to extend the deadline for its response and said it would reply by 15 November 2023.
15 November 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 response, stating as follows: A surveyor inspected the external structure and found no issues. A previous leak from the flat above had been repaired. Internal issues were the leaseholder’s responsibility. External repairs had been completed within appropriate timeframes. Wall cavities were found to be in “sufficient condition.” The request to realign communal windows would be considered. Window replacements would depend on condition and budget. The complaint was not upheld. It apologised for the delay in providing its stage 1 response and offered £50 for this delay.
18 November 2023	The resident contacted his landlord, stating the stage 1 response did not adequately address his concerns and requested escalation to stage 2. He raised the following points: Disputed completion of external repairs; requested inspection evidence. Asked for surveyor’s qualifications and independence. Sought clarity on wall cavity inspections near stairwells. Requested details linking leaks to mould. Asked for 6 years of window inspection records; raised safety concern. Noted leaseholder limits prevent addressing structural issues. Reported similar issues across 3 blocks
7 December 2023	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation and stated it aimed to respond within 20 working days, by 4 January 2024.
5 January 2024	The landlord contacted the resident to extend the stage 2 complaint response time. It said it needed more time and would issue a response by 18 January 2024.
19 January 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 response in which it: Acknowledged delays in resolving the issues. Apologised for poor communication and unclear lease responsibilities. Committed to: Reviewing the lease agreement. Arranging a survey to identify the root cause of damp and mould. Advising on actions based on survey findings and lease terms. Offered £200 compensation, comprising: £50 for poor communication £75 for poor complaint handling £75 for delayed response
28 January 2024	The resident escalated the complaint to this Service. He disagreed with the stage 2 response, stating it lacked timelines for inspection and works. He said the landlord had a history of losing emails, reports, and ignoring requests for evidence. He asked us to assess the credibility of any survey carried out and protect his leaseholder rights. He stated the issue was external and the landlord’s responsibility. He requested set dates for inspections and works, full cost to be covered by the landlord, and compensation for affected residents.
15 May 2024	The damp and mould survey, referred to in the landlord final response, was carried out.
6 August 2024	The landlord contacted the resident about the complaint and acknowledged that a review of the case had identified failings in how it handled the reports. As a gesture of apology, it offered further compensation totalling £475.
6 November 2025	The resident has informed this Service that the damp and mould is still 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	The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
Finding	Maladministration

What We have not looked at

We may not consider complaints about matters that have not exhausted the landlord’s complaints process. However, where the landlord has made commitments as part of its complaint response on 19 January 2024, we will consider subsequent events up until 15 May 2024 when it carried out the damp and mould survey.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Under the terms of the lease, the resident is responsible for repairs within the demised premises, which includes internal walls, surfaces, windows, doors, and ceilings. The landlord retains responsibility for structural elements such as external walls, supporting structures, the roof, and communal areas.
The resident reported damp and mould between August and November 2022, suggesting communal windows were a contributing factor. The landlord attended several times, treated mould in communal areas, and concluded insulation was needed in an internal wall. This was something the landlord considered to be the resident’s responsibility in its internal correspondence in November 2023, although this was not clearly communicated to the resident.
The landlord raised follow-on works on 24 November 2022 for insulation in the bedroom cavity wall and attended on 12 December 2022. It later confirmed that these works were raised in error, as insulation would only be appropriate for tenanted properties. It is unclear whether the resident was informed of this, which would have been necessary to manage expectations.
In its stage 1 complaint response of 15 November 2023, the landlord stated that a surveyor had inspected the external structure and found no issues. However, it was unable to provide any record of this inspection. It later explained that inspections carried out in 2023 were not always documented which raises concerns about its record-keeping.
In its stage 2 response of 19 January 2024, the landlord committed to reviewing the lease agreement, arranging a survey to identify the root cause of the damp and mould, and advising the resident on actions based on the survey findings and lease terms. While these commitments were appropriate, the damp survey was not carried out until 15 May 2024, almost 4 months later. We have ordered a new survey because of the lapse in time since this survey and that the resident reports that the damp and mould is still ongoing.
It is also unclear whether the landlord has since communicated the outcome of the lease review or confirmed its position on responsibility for the required works.
Throughout the complaint, the resident raised specific concerns that the damp and mould may have been caused or worsened by disrepair to the external structure of the property, including poorly fitted or damaged external overflow pipes, debris in cavity walls from previous insulation works, inadequate ventilation in communal areas and windows without trickle vents. Despite these being reasonable and relevant concerns, the landlord failed to demonstrate that it had carried out a thorough assessment of these concerns at any stage of the complaint process.
Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 requires landlords to satisfy themselves whether a repair is their responsibility. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to inspect the property to confirm its position in line with the lease agreement.
As a leaseholder, the landlord is responsible for insuring the building and renewing the policy, which the resident pays for through service charges. Its compensation policy states that residents should claim for damaged belongings through their own contents insurance, and if damage results from landlord service failure, it may cover the policy excess. Given the resident believed structural issues caused the damp and mould and reported loss of items, the landlord should have considered signposting him to its insurance team in line with its policy.
While the landlord has since reassessed the situation and made an additional compensation offer of £475 bringing it in line with this Services remedies guidance, this appears to have been in response to a further complaint and this Service’s request for information and has therefore not prevented a finding of maladministration with an order made for remedy.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case is the 2022 edition (April 2022).
The landlord had a published complaints policy at the time of the complaint which complied with the terms of the Code in respect of timescales.
This Service asked the landlord to provide a stage 1 complaint response within 15 working days, by 1 November 2023. However, the landlord did not acknowledge the complaint until 18 October 2023 (from 11 October 2023), 6 working days later. This was not in line with its complaints policy or the Code, which requires acknowledgement within 5 working days of receipt.
The landlord contacted the resident to extend the deadline for its response and stated it would reply by 15 November 2023. In this case, the landlord made this extension request on 6 November 2023, which was after the original response deadline of 1 November 2023 had passed. Therefore, it did not act in line with the Code.
The landlord said it would provide its stage 1 response by 15 November 2023, which it did. The response appropriately apologised for the delay and offered £50 compensation.
On 18 November 2023, the resident contacted his landlord to escalate his complaint. The landlord acknowledged the escalation request on 7 December 2023, 13 working days later and not in line with its policy which says it would acknowledge the complaint in 5 working days.
In its stage 2 acknowledgement, the landlord stated it would issue its response by 4 January 2024. However, it contacted the resident on 5 January 2024, after the original response deadline had passed to say it would respond by 18 January 24. Therefore, it did not act in line with the Code.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 19 January 2024, 1 day after its stated response date of 18 January 2024. It appropriately apologised for the way in which the complaint had been handled and offered the resident £200. It advised the resident it would review the lease agreement to understand and advise the position of responsibility in relation to the works. The landlord failed to provide any timescales in relation to this promise which was a shortcoming.
The resident raised additional concerns including details on the location of historic leaks and mould within the property, window assessments records in his escalation email. These were not addressed in the stage 2 response, and we cannot see that the landlord offered to raise a new complaint. Therefore, the landlord did not act in line with its policy which says, where customers or their representatives raise additional complaints during the investigation and where the stage 1 response has been issued, we will log the additional issues as a new complaint, which was a further shortcoming.
The amount of compensation offered was within the guidelines set out in our Remedies Guidance. This investigation considers that the landlord’s complaint handling could reasonably have been improved. However, it recognised the impact on the resident and has taken proportionate steps to put things right. As such, an offer of reasonable redress has been made in the circumstances.

Learning

This Service would expect a landlord to keep a robust record of inspections, yet the evidence has not been comprehensive in this case. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures.