Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (202341851)

Decision
Case ID	202341851
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	20 May 2026

Background

The resident reported damp and mould in his property in November 2023 and said that the mould in the bedroom caused health problems for his adult son. The landlord completed a damp and mould survey and raised repairs. The resident was unhappy with its handling of the repairs and raised a complaint.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to:
1. The resident’s reports of damp and mould
2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

There was maladministration by the landlord in its response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
There was service failure by the landlord in its response to the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

While the landlord did some works within the timescales set out in its repairs policy, there were significant delays in completing other repairs. It took approximately 10 months to complete some external repairs and internal works, which was excessive in the circumstances. The landlord did not communicate effectively with the resident. It failed to provide a clear schedule of works or regular updates. In addition, it did not cut back the trees as agreed or explain to the resident why it would not do so.
The landlord failed to correctly log the resident’s initial complaint. It handled his subsequent complaints in line with its complaints policy.

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 specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 17 June 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay £300 compensation to the resident. This is made up as follows: £250 for the inconvenience caused to him by its handling of his reports of damp and mould. £50 for the inconvenience caused to him by its complaint handling. The landlord must pay this directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 17 June 2026
3	Inspection order We have made an inspection order because we did not see evidence that the landlord clarified which trees it would cut or explained why it would not do so. If the landlord has already completed this, it must provide us with evidence of the outcome of its inspection and evidence that it either did the identified works or a proposal of when it will complete these. Otherwise, the landlord must do the following: Contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure it completes the inspection 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 do so no later than the due date. What the inspection must achieve: The landlord must inspect the property and assess the required trees works (if any). The landlord must provide evidence to us and the resident of its inspection, the outcome and proposed resolution (if applicable) with clear timescales.	No later than 17 June 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
27 February 2024	The resident complained to the landlord about its handling of mould in his property. He said that, although the landlord carried out treatment for the mould internally, it failed to address the underlying external cause. He reported that his son was hospitalised with breathing difficulties. He also explained that he had submitted a formal complaint on 18 January 2024, but the landlord did not log this as a complaint.
26 March 2024	The landlord provided its stage 1 response. It said: The resident reported damp and mould on 21 November 2023. It inspected the property on 27 November 2023 and raised repairs. It apologised for the delay in treating the mould, which it did on 9 January 2024. It explained the delay was due to resourcing issues, which it was addressing. It completed the subsequent decorating on 30 January 2024. On 12 March 2024 it proposed to install a French drain, repointing some of the brickwork and some tree works. It explained that there were delays identifying the required works due to the complexity of the works and resourcing. The delay in completing the external repairs did not have a significant impact as the mould had not returned and it could not have completed the works sooner due to the weather conditions. It apologised for not communicating adequately with the resident during that time. It expected to complete the external works in April or May 2024 and would be in touch with the resident about this. It apologised for not logging his complaint in January 2024 and explained it had incorrectly categorised it as a “prevent” complaint.
2 April 2024	The resident escalated his complaint because, although the landlord planned to do some external repairs the following week, it had not completed the works.
25 April 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response and reiterated its stage 1 response findings. It said that it had appropriately investigated the stage 1 complaint and apologised for the failings identified. It also confirmed that it had arranged further repairs to ensure it resolved the matter to the resident’s satisfaction.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident brought the complaint to us because he was unhappy with the landlord’s response and its handling of the matters. He suggested that compensation should be paid and tree works remained outstanding.

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	Reports of damp and mould
Finding	Maladministration

Focus of the investigation

The resident reported that his adult son, who lived at the property, was hospitalised with breathing difficulties. We cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, any impact on health. The courts can decide on personal injury claims as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide the cause of any injury, how long it might last, and the liability for any injury. This means we will not assess any reports of personal injury as part of this investigation.

Damp and mould

The resident reported damp and mould to the landlord on 21 November 2023, and it carried out a survey 6 days later. It identified remedial repairs, which it promptly raised. This was reasonable by the landlord and demonstrated that it acted with a sense of urgency as recommended in our Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021).
After completing the damp and mould survey, the landlord identified several repairs. The survey recommended both internal and external works to address the bedroom mould. The landlord completed some of the remedial works in line with its repairs policy timeframe of 28 days for routine repairs.
For instance, it raised the job identified by the surveyor within 6 working days. It replaced the storage heater within 28 days, cladded a windowsill within 38 days, and inspected the cavity wall and damp membrane within 16 days. It also referred the resident for financial support within 2 days of completing the survey. These actions were reasonable by the landlord. While it slightly exceeded its timeframe for completing the windowsill repairs, it completed this within a reasonable timeframe. We did not see this short delay adversely affected the resident. The landlord showed that it acted promptly on the surveyor’s recommendations.
We understand that some of the works required multiple trades and depended on matters out of the landlord’s control such as weather conditions and wall drying. The co-ordination of such repairs could reasonably add to the landlord’s time for completing them and cause it to exceed its published timeframe. In such cases, we would expect the landlord to provide the resident with a work schedule and regular updates.
In this case, the landlord did not show it provided a work schedule or expected completion timeframes for the repairs. There is no evidence it kept the resident adequately informed through regular updates about delays. For example, during the complaints process, the landlord said it completed the bedroom repairs within 70 days of the resident reporting the issues, citing delays due to wall drying and the involvement of multiple trades. However, it did not demonstrate that it had communicated these delays to the resident in that period or provided an expected completion date. This was unreasonable and caused inconvenience to the resident who had to chase the landlord for updates.
In addition, the landlord failed to maintain adequate oversight of the bedroom repairs, which contributed to further delays. Although it had planned to apply stain block to the bedroom walls in January 2024, it later identified it had not done this and needed to return. It attended again in April 2024, then July 2024, and only completed the repairs on 19 August 2024, around 8 months later than planned. It completed decorations on 17 September 2024, approximately 10 months after the resident first reported damp and mould in the room. There is no evidence to reasonably explain these delays. The landlord’s lack of oversight caused inconvenience as the resident reported having to move furniture several times to facilitate access and repairs.
There were also delays in completing external works. Following the resident chasing updates on 5 March 2024, the landlord agreed to install French drains. It completed the works in June 2024, which was reasonable given weather constraints and the need for suitable conditions. However, from its own admission in its complaint responses, the landlord failed to adequately communicate with the resident.
We acknowledge that the groundwater ingress was complex and required input from multiple trades to identify an appropriate solution, as outlined in the complaint responses. However, there is no evidence that the landlord took proactive steps or sought to explore potential solutions before its visit in March 2024. It identified the issue in November 2023 but did not consider possible solutions in the intervening period. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that it did not maintain adequate oversight of the repair or progress the external works at the earliest point. This was unreasonable and resulted in inconvenience to the resident, who had to contact the landlord to pursue progress and seek a resolution.
Furthermore, although the landlord inspected the cavity wall and damp-proof membrane in December 2023, and identified the need for remedial works, it did not complete these until September 2024. While we acknowledge that the works required several visits to complete, the landlord did not provide an explanation for the delay. We recognise that these were external repairs and did not significantly affect the resident’s day-to-day living conditions. However, the prolonged delay, combined with a lack of updates, likely caused inconvenience and ongoing anxiety for the resident, who remained concerned about the potential recurrence of mould in the bedroom.
The damp and mould surveyor reported concerns with foliage to the relevant team in November 2023. In March 2024 the landlord confirmed that it would cut back certain trees as part of the damp and mould works. We understand the landlord disputed that it had committed to complete the works prior to 8 April 2024, as the resident believed. Without evidence to support either account, we cannot determine there was a failure by the landlord.
Nevertheless, the resident advised us in May 2026 that these works remain outstanding. He explained that, while it does not own some of the trees and the owner is unknown, others do fall under the landlord’s responsibility. Despite this, the landlord has not evidenced it cut these back, nor has it provided an explanation for why it would not proceed with these works. This was unreasonable and caused inconvenience to the resident who chased the landlord for a resolution.
In summary, the landlord completed some repairs in line with its repairs policy timeframes. However, it took 10 months to complete some of the remaining works. Thiswas excessive, particularly the delays in completing the internal bedroom works, addressing cavity wall and brickwork repairs and cutting the trees. In addition, and by its own admission, the landlord failed to adequately communicate with the resident on. It acknowledged its failingsduring the complaint process and made some attempt to put things right, but its apology alone was not proportionate to the failings identified by our investigation.
Therefore, in line with our compensation guidance, we order the landlord to pay £250 to the resident to reflect the impact of its failings on him. The landlord’s failings adversely affected the resident, causing him inconvenience, time and trouble. This also reflects that the delays in completing some of the external repairs, such as tree cutting, caused inconvenience but did not significantly impact the resident’s enjoyment of his home.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The landlord reviewed its complaints policy in March 2024, bringing it into line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). The landlord handled the resident’s stage 1 complaint under the previous policy.
During the complaint process, the landlord acknowledged that the resident first complained on 18 January 2024. Its policy allowed informal resolution within 3 working days to prevent escalation into a formal complaint. However, in this case, the landlord incorrectly recorded the complaint as resolved and closed it without taking appropriate action. This failure caused inconvenience to the resident, who contacted us for support and raised the complaint again a month later.
The resident made a stage 1 complaint in February 2024, which the landlord acknowledged and responded to in line with its complaints policy published timeframe at the time. It then responded to the resident’s stage 2 complaint in line with the Code, which became statutory in April 2024. The landlord’s complaint handling from February 2024 was reasonable.
In line with our compensation guidance, we order the landlord to pay £50 compensation to reflect the impact of its complaint handling failings on the resident. This award recognises the inconvenience caused by incorrectly closing the January 2024 complaint. It also reflects that the impact was minimal, short in duration and the landlord demonstrated learning by its handling of the resident’s subsequent complaints.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord’s repair logs demonstrate that it maintained detailed and accurate records. It also generally managed repairs effectively, and operative notes were particularly helpful in explaining the works completed or why they did not proceed. However, as an area for improvement, the landlord would benefit from implementing a system to track weather-dependent repairs to ensure it does not overlook or delay them unnecessarily. In this case, it could have completed the repairs to the bedroom, cavity wall and French drains sooner if there had been a system in place to maintain clear oversight and timely follow-up.

Communication

Clear and timely communication is essential when managing repairs. The landlord must give regular updates, so the resident does not need to chase for information. When booking work, it should share a schedule of works with the resident. Good practice includes explaining what work will take place and when. Consistent communication builds trust and prevents unnecessary inconvenience. The landlord should ensure it is able to deliver this kind of service.