Clarion Housing Association Limited (202532429)

Decision
Case ID	202532429
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Clarion Housing Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Shorthold Tenancy
Date	29 May 2026

Background

1. The resident reported a leak from an overflow pipe in 2021 and 2024. She also made a report of damp and mould in July 2024. She then complained to the landlord as the leak had not been fixed.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about:
   1. The landlord’s handling of reports of a leak.
   2. The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould.
   3. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of a leak.
   2. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould.
   3. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of reports of a leak

4. While the landlord attended multiple times to inspect for the leak, it did not do so within the timeframes set out in its policy. This meant it took 6 months to resolve the issue. It also failed to identify any failings in its handling of the leak which meant it did not seek to put things right through the complaint process.

The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould

5. The landlord did not complete a damp and mould treatment within its policy timeframe. It did not take steps to find the cause of the damp and mould. While it identified these failings during the complaints process, the steps it took to put the matter right were not proportionate.

The landlord’s complaint handling

6. The landlord’s stage 2 response was outside of its policy timeframe. It said it would compensate the resident but did not do this.

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 26 June 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £800 made up as follows: £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of reports of a leak. £350 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of reports of damp and mould. This is inclusive of the £250 it offered in its complaint response. £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its service failure in its complaint handling. 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 pay deduct from the total amount any compensation it has already paid to the resident.	No later than 26 June 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
The landlord should reissue the paint pack voucher if it has expired.

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
23 August 2024	The resident complained to the landlord. She said there was a leak she had reported several times and damp and mould was occurring.
11 September 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It said: the resident reported the leak on 23 May 2024 it attended on 5 July 2024 and could not see a leak from the overflow pipe. But recorded the guttering was blocked it cleared the guttering on 26 July 2024 it treated the damp and mould on 27 July 2024 and this was outside of its 7 day service level agreement it asked the resident on 4 September 2024 if the leak was still present, she said it was it had arranged for a further inspection for the leak on 19 September 2024   It offered the resident £150 compensation for the delay in carrying out the damp and mould treatment. It also provided details of its insurance if the resident wanted to make a claim against it.
10 October 2024	The resident escalated her complaint. She said the issues had not been resolved.
18 November 2024	The landlord told the resident it needed a 20 working days extension to respond to the complaint. It said it would award her £50 compensation in its response for this delay.
13 December 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It said: the operative that attended the property on 5 July 2024 had not kept a proper record of their findings and had not ordered any follow on works to trace the cause of the damp and mould it attended the property on 19 September 2024 to look for the leak but was unsuccessful it attended again on 28 November 2024 to look for the leak and found it had been repaired during the void stage of the flat above the property it was the resident’s responsibility to redecorate the property under the tenancy agreement, but it had sent a paint pack voucher on 7 November 2024 to help with this   It offered the resident a further £100 compensation for not ordering follow on works after the inspection on 5 July 2024.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident contacted us on 27 October 2025 as she was unhappy with the length of time it took the landlord to fix the leak.

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 reports of a leak.
Finding	Maladministration

7. The landlord is responsible under the tenancy agreement to maintain the exterior of the property and systems for getting rid of water in working order. Its repairs policy says non-emergency repairs should be completed within 28 days.
8. The resident reported a leak from the overflow pipe in January 2021. The landlord attended the property, but its records do not show if any repairs were carried out. The resident made a further report on 23 May 2024. The landlord inspected the property on 5 July 2024. This was not reasonable as it was 16 days outside the landlord’s policy timeframe and as such caused a delay to any repair being carried out.
9. Although the landlord did not find a leak on its inspection it noted moss growing on the wall and a blocked gutter. It raised the gutter repair on the 5 July 2024 but did not complete the repair until 13 August 2024. This was 12 days outside of its policy timeframe.
10. The resident told the landlord the overflow pipe was still leaking when it asked on 4 September 2024. It attended on 19 September 2024 but found no leaks from the flat above. It continued to investigate on 14 and 28 November 2024. It then found the leak had been recently repaired at void stage in the flat above. It was not reasonable that it took the landlord 6 months to locate and repair the leak. This is significantly outside of its repairs policy time frame.
11. The landlord did not identify this delay in its complaint response. As such it did not take steps to put the matter right. We have ordered it to apologise for this failing and pay compensation in line with our compensation guidance. This for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the delay in repairing the leak.

 

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould
Finding	Maladministration

12. The resident reported damp and mould in her living room, kitchen and child’s bedroom on 5 July 2024. The landlord carried out a damp and mould treatment on 26 July 2024. In its stage 1 complaint response it said this was outside of its 7-day policy timeframe. It apologised and offered the resident £150 compensation. This was reasonable by the landlord as it took appropriate steps to put the matter right. The compensation offered is in line with what we would direct for a finding of service failure where there has been a minor delay in carrying out a repair.
13. The resident told the landlord there was still damp and mould as part of her escalation request. The landlord said in its stage 2 response the operative had not completed the inspection form of 26 July 2024 in enough detail. It said there was no record of any works raised to resolve the damp and mould issue or to show if it was linked to the external leak. It identified this as a failing and offered the resident a further £100 compensation. We are not satisfied the amount of compensation offered is proportionate to the failing.
14. The lack of proper record keeping and failure to order follow on works to trace the cause of the damp and mould led to a further delay in the external leak being found and repaired. As such we have order the landlord to pay the resident compensation to account for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by this missed opportunity to find the source of the leak to prevent the damp and mould returning.
15. The landlord also offered the resident a paint pack voucher as part of its complaint response. Under the tenancy agreement the resident is responsible for the internal decoration of the property. This was a reasonable approach for the landlord to take to help the resident redecorate the property. The landlord also appropriately explained in its stage 1 response how the resident could make a claim against its insurance policy.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

16. The timescales in the landlord’s complaints policy are compliant with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
17. The landlord issued its stage 1 response within its policy timeframe. The landlord did not issue its stage 2 response within its policy timeframe. But it told the resident this and explained it needed a 20 working day extension to fully investigate the complaint. This was appropriate as it was in line with the landlord’s policy.
18. The landlord also said it would award the resident £50 compensation in its stage 2 response for this delay. However, the landlord did not take any steps in its stage 2 response to put this matter right. As such we have ordered it to pay the compensation it said it would. We are satisfied this is a proportionate amount for the delay caused.

Learning

19. The landlord identified the learning it took from the resident’s complaint to help prevent the issue happening again. The landlord needs to ensure it checks before it issues its complaint response, if it has already made any offers of compensation to the resident. This can then be fully included and explained in its complaint response.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

20. The landlord’s records allowed us to investigate this complaint satisfactorily. However, it did not always keep a full explanation of its findings in its inspection reports. It needs to ensure its operatives are aware of the level of detail needed when recording the outcome of their inspection.

Communication

21. Overall, we have not seen anything to suggest the landlord’s communication with the resident was not appropriate. However, it did not always take her concerns seriously which resulted in the delay in repairing the leak. It should ensure that it listens to resident’s concerns particularly when an issue is ongoing and previous attempts to resolve it have been unsuccessful.