Torus62 Limited (202329098)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202329098

Torus62 Limited

15 April 2025

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

1. The resident’s complaint is about:

a.     The landlord’s handling of repairs to external areas of the property.

b.     The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould.

2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

3. The resident occupies the property under an assured tenancy agreement. The property is a 2-bedroom bungalow which the resident has occupied since June 2022. The resident has told this Service they have disabilities.
4. On 20 June 2022 the resident moved into the property. Concerns were raised about external areas of the property, so the landlord started repairs to the roof and rendering. On 7 November 2022 the resident told the landlord there was mould present in the property. The resident chased the landlord for the progress of repairs and said the damp and mould was getting worse and damaging their belongings.
5. On 26 May 2023 the resident complained to the landlord, and said:

a.     Multiple surveyors had inspected the property, but there was still an issue with damp.

b.     The landlord had not fixed the roof soffits.

c.      The landlord said they would repair the rendering but had only replaced a small area.

d.     The damp was damaging their belongings, and this was affecting their physical and mental health.

e.     They felt the landlord was uncommunicative.

f.        They wanted the outstanding repairs to be completed.

6. On 26 June 2023 the landlord produced a stage one response which said:

a.     A surveyor had inspected the property on 20 June 2023. They had logged a repair to remove and replace the render to the front of the property, to replaster internal walls and to clear the loft.

b.     The landlord said it was chasing up the other repairs the resident had raised.

c.      The landlord apologised for the distress and inconvenience the resident had experienced.

d.     The landlord had assigned a singular point of contact to oversee the planned repairs.

7. On 29 August 2023 the resident escalated their complaint as the works included in the landlord’s stage one response had not been progressed.
8. In its stage 2 response on 21 July 2023 the landlord:

a.     Recapped the outstanding repairs to the property. This included repairs identified by the surveyor on 20 June 2023, and additional internal repairs the resident had discussed with the landlord.

b.     Said it upheld the resident’s complaint due to the delays they had experienced.

c.      Offered the resident £600 compensation for the distress and inconvenience they had experienced.

9. The resident has confirmed to this Service that the damp and mould issues have now been rectified.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

10. The resident has raised concerns with this Service about the landlord refusing to make adaptations to the property to allow for off street parking.
11. A key part of the Ombudsman’s role is to assess a landlord’s response to a complaint. Therefore, it is important that the landlord has had an opportunity to respond to all the complained of matters the Ombudsman considers. The resident’s concerns around parking adaptations will not be investigated by the Ombudsman as the matter was not included in the resident’s complaint, or discussed in the landlord’s complaint responses.
12. The landlord has confirmed to this Service it will discuss logging a complaint about the parking issues with the resident if they remain dissatisfied.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to external areas of the property

13. The landlord’s repairs policy says it will aim to complete all repairs within a reasonable timescale, but the requirement to use specialist contractors and equipment can impact this. The landlord aims to complete emergency repairs within 24 hours. If a matter is not urgent the landlord will arrange a repair via an appointment-based system and aim to complete the repair within 20 days.
14. When a repair is complex, requires planning or is non-urgent the landlord will aim to complete such repairs within 60 days. Alternatively, the landlord can opt to add the repair onto future planned cyclical works.
15. The landlord’s compensation policy says it can offer discretionary compensation when a resident has experienced inconvenience, distress, damage or harm which could have been avoided. When considering offering compensation the landlord will assess any detriment experienced, if its actions have contributed to or mitigated harm, alongside the resident’s circumstances.
16. On 8 July 2022 the landlord booked an appointment for 18 July 2022 to conduct partial repairs to the property’s fascias, bargeboards and soffits. This timeframe was appropriate and in-line with the landlord’s repairs policy.
17. On 23 September 2022 the landlord raised a repair appointment for 7 October 2022. During this appointment the landlord conducted additional repairs to the roof fascias, bargeboards and soffits. This was appropriate and in-line with the landlord’s repairs policy
18. On 7 October 2022 the landlord conducted a brickwork survey to assess the property’s exterior rendering. Following this survey the landlord completed partial rendering repairs on 14 October 2022. Considering the nature of the repair the Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord completed the repair in a reasonable timeframe.
19. The landlord was unable to fully complete repairs to the rendering and roof prior to the resident filing a complaint. This was because one of the property’s exterior walls ran adjacent to the boundary of a local school. The planned repairs required the landlord to access the school to erect scaffolding. To complete the repair the landlord needed to obtain permission from the school to access its land, and it could only do so outside of school term times.
20. Any delays associated with the property’s position were outside of the landlord’s control. However, the landlord could have better managed this challenge with adequate planning, by managing the resident’s expectations and by communicating with the school.
21. On 24 November 2022 a surveyor attended the property and noted that additional rendering repairs should be completed. On 13 December 2022 the landlord booked an appointment for repairs to the rendering and roof gables for 17 May 2023. This appointment was later cancelled, and the work was completed in June 2023 and July 2023. The landlord could have attempted to complete this repair over the Easter holidays or the May half term to try an expedite this repair. However, conducting the works over the summer holidays would have allowed the landlord a longer period to complete the repair if there were delays or poor weather.
22. On 26 May 2023 the resident complained to the landlord. In this complaint the resident said the landlord had not completed repairs, and it was not communicating with them. Due to the challenges associated with the location of the resident’s property, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to ensure its communication with the resident was proactive. It should have ensured the resident understood its plans to complete the repairs, and the reason behind any delays.
23. In its stage one response the landlord apologised for the stress and inconvenience it had caused the resident, this was appropriate. Its response could have been improved by explaining to the resident in simple terms when they could expect the repairs to be fully completed.
24. On 20 June 2023 the landlord arranged for a surveyor to inspect the resident’s property to assess the progress of the external repairs, and to see if any further repairs were required. In its stage one response the landlord included the surveyor’s findings, and its planned timescales for completing the repairs. This was appropriate.
25. In its stage 2 response dated 25 September 2023 the landlord outlined the outcome of a further inspection. It also included details of additional repairs it had identified for the interior and exterior of the property, and it included the estimated completion date for these repairs. This was fair and reasonable.
26. In its stage 2 response the landlord said there had been delays in it completing the complained of repairs and it acknowledged this would have caused the resident distress and inconvenience. To address this the landlord offered the resident an apology and £600 in compensation. The Ombudsman finds this offer of redress to be fair and reasonable after considering:

a.     The location of the property being situated next to a school affected the landlord’s ability to complete the repairs in a standard timescale.

b.     The landlord apologised for the stress and inconvenience the resident had experienced.

c.      The landlord apologised to the resident for the delays they experienced.

d.     The landlord offered the resident compensation which was in-line with what the Ombudsman would expect to see given the nature of the failings in this case.

The landlord’s handling of reported damp and mould

27. The landlord produced a damp and mould policy in 2023. Prior to this the landlord’s repairs policy would have covered its damp and mould repairs obligations. This policy is outlined in paragraphs 12 and 13 of this report.
28. Under the landlord’s damp and mould policy when a resident raises concerns about damp and mould the landlord commits to conduct various actions. These include checking for any undiagnosed leaks, considering if there are any issues with the fabric of the property and assessing if there is adequate ventilation.
29. The landlord’s compensation policy says it can offer discretionary compensation when a resident has experienced avoidable inconvenience, distress, damage or harm. The landlord will not compensate a resident for damage which could be covered by contents insurance.
30. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould provides recommendations for landlords, including that they should:

a.     Adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions.

b.     Regularly communicate with residents about actions it is taking to resolve reports of damp and mould.

c.      Identify where an independent and suitably qualified surveyor should be used.

d.     Share the outcomes of all surveys and inspections with residents, and act on survey recommendations promptly.

31. The resident first raised concerns about damp and mould on 7 November 2022. A surveyor inspected the property on 24 November 2022 and suggested thermal board insulation should be installed.
32. Following the survey the landlord conducted repairs to gable plastering on 29 December 2022. It also planned to install internal thermal insulation boards and add damp proof tanking to interior walls on 31 January 2023. However, the resident was not at home on this date, so this work was rescheduled to occur from 20 to 22 February 2023.
33. It was appropriate for the landlord to complete such repairs. However, it should have ensured the repairs were completed within a reasonable timeframe considering the resident had first raised concerns about damp and mould on 7 November 2022. The landlord’s failure to act in a prompt manner meant the resident was living with concerns about damp and mould for 107 days before the landlord fully addressed the repairs highlighted in its survey.
34. On 6 January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord asking for help, and said the home was unliveable due to the damp and mould. On 10 January 2023 the landlord arranged for an additional damp and mould survey to occur on 24 February 2023. This was 50 days after the resident told the landlord the damp and mould had got worse. This timeframe was unreasonably long.
35. Prior to the resident’s complaint the landlord had conducted two damp and mould surveys. The surveyors who completed the surveys did not produce a report outlining the actions they had conducted, any possible sources of damp/mould or advice given to the resident. Notes from the damp and mould surveys only included brief descriptions of the damp and mould identified. The records made during the damp and mould surveys were insufficient and lacked required details about possible causation, areas inspected, and advice given.
36. The limited records the landlord kept meant it, and later the Ombudsman, could not be sure that the damp and mould had been addressed in-line with the landlord’s policies, as actions taken were not recorded. The lack of written records would have limited the landlord’s ability to track its own progress and to update the resident. Considering the guidance in the Ombudsman’s spotlight report, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to keep sufficient records of the outcomes of surveys, and to share these with the resident.
37. In their complaint the resident said the damp and mould had damaged their personal possessions. The landlord did not directly address this concern, and it should have referred the resident to its liability insurers so the resident could consider making a claim. It was reasonable that it did not offer to compensate the resident for any damaged items considering the content of its compensation policy. However, it should have addressed this area of the complaint and identified from the resident’s reports that the damp and mould could be getting worse, and acted accordingly.
38. In its complaint responses the landlord failed to address the resident’s concerns about damp and mould. In both its stage one and stage 2 responses there was no mention of damp and mould although the resident had clearly expressed dissatisfaction about this issue in their complaint. In both responses the landlord listed its planned repairs without context or explanation. It could be that some of the listed repairs were linked to damp and mould concerns, but this was not explicitly outlined to the resident. This was inappropriate, and it would have caused the resident to feel unheard and frustrated.
39. The Ombudsman finds maladministration occurred in the landlord’s handling of the reported damp and mould after considering:

a.     The landlord did not complete repairs to address the damp and mould in a reasonable timeframe.

b.     When conducting damp and mould surveys the landlord did not produce effective records outlining its actions, or its assessment of the possible cause of any damp and mould.

c.      The landlord failed to address the resident’s concerns about damp and mould in its complaint responses.

d.     The landlord did not offer the resident any redress for its handling of the reported damp and mould.

40. The Ombudsman has made an order for the landlord to pay compensation of £300. This figure is reflective of the landlord’s failure to address the reported damp and mould, and that it did not identify this failing in its complaint responses.

The landlords complaints handling

41. The landlord’s complaints policy outlines the timescales in which it will respond to a complaint. The landlord commits to acknowledging complaints within 2 working days, and to provide its stage one response within 10 working days of the acknowledgement. The resident can escalate their complaint to stage 2 if they feel their complaint has not been resolved. Escalation requests will be acknowledged within 2 working days, and the landlord will provide its stage 2 response within 20 working days of the acknowledgement.
42. The resident complained to the landlord over the phone on 26 May 2023. After this, the landlord did not formally acknowledge that it had logged a complaint. This was inappropriate as it was not in-line with the landlord’s complaints policy.
43. The landlord provided its stage one response 21 working days after the resident filed their complaint. This was outside the timescales outlined in the landlord’s policy. Sometimes complaint handling delays can be reasonable, but when this occurs the Ombudsman expects delays to be fully explained to the resident. The landlord providing its stage one response late, and not acknowledging or apologising for this was inappropriate, and it would have caused the resident frustration.
44. The landlord did not formally acknowledge the resident’s escalation request, which was inappropriate. However, it did provide it’s stage two response within the timescales outlined in its policy which is positive.
45. The Ombudsman finds a service failure occurred in the landlords complaints handling after considering:

a.     The landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s complaint or escalation request.

b.     The landlord did not provide its stage one response in-line with its policy.

46. Poor complaints handling can cause frustration, but the harm it can cause a resident is limited. Considering this, the Ombudsman has made an order for the landlord to pay £50 compensation to the resident. This amount is in-line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance and reflects a lower service failure.

Determination

47. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Scheme, the landlord offered the resident reasonable redress in respect of its handling of repairs to the exterior of the property.
48. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of reported damp and mould.
49. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was a service failure in relation to the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders and recommendations

50. Within 4 weeks of this determination the landlord is ordered to pay compensation of £350 to the resident. The compensation is broken down as follows:

a.     £300 in recognition of the distressed caused by the landlord’s handling of the reported damp and mould.

b.     £50 in recognition for the landlord’s complaint handling failures.

51. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with this order within 4 weeks of the determination date.

Recommendations

52. The determination of reasonable redress is made on the understanding that the compensation previously offered of £600 is paid to the resident if the landlord has not yet paid this amount.
53. The landlord should review its practices for conducting and recording damp and mould surveys in-line with the recommendations outlined in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould.