Teign Housing (202504718)

Decision
Case ID	202504718
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Teign Housing
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Shorthold Tenancy
Date	23 June 2026

Background

1. The landlord removed kitchen floor tiles containing asbestos in the resident’s former property in April 2024. This was part of a planned kitchen refurbishment it agreed to in 2023. The resident complained to it about this in March 2025.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of kitchen floor tiles removal.
3. We have also considered its complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found that there was:
   1. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of kitchen floor tiles removal.
   2. No maladministration in its complaint handling.

We have made orders for it to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Kitchen floor tiles

5. The landlord completed the work to remove the asbestos kitchen floor tiles in line with its asbestos policy and procedure. However, it failed to take photographs of the work in line with its risk assessment. It also did not show it explained the works and safeguards to the resident.

Complaint handling

6. The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint in line with its complaint’s policy. While it failed to notify her of her right to escalate the complaint to us this caused her no detriment.

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. It must ensure: its apology is provided by a senior person its apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic it has due regard to our apologies guidance	No later than 21 July 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £50 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the kitchen floor tiles removal. This must be paid directly to her by the due date. It must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 21 July 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
19 March 2025	The resident complained to the landlord about it potentially exposing her household to asbestos following its removal of flooring.
1 April 2025	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response and agreed to ask its contractor to investigate its management of the removal of kitchen flooring.
7 April 2025	The resident escalated her complaint, and alleged contractors told her there was no asbestos and it took no precautions.
30 April 2025	The landlord said in its stage 2 complaint response it carried out work to the kitchen correctly and the resident’s partner expressed satisfaction with the work.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident told us that she did not believe the landlord acted competently in removing the asbestos kitchen tiles. She would like it to offer an apology and pay compensation. She signed a tenancy for a new property in December 2024 and moved.

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 kitchen floor tiles removal
Finding	Service failure

7. The landlord completed an asbestos management and targeted refurbishment survey on 25 March 2024. This was to enable it to manage the potential asbestos risk associated with its planned kitchen refurbishment work. This identified the presence of asbestos in the resident’s property, including in her kitchen floor tiles. Its survey recommended it manage this or remove this if affected by works.
8. The landlord also completed a risk assessment on 10 April 2024 which contained details of how it must complete the work to remove these tiles. This was in line with its asbestos policy and procedure. This assessment stated it had to create separate areas to include a decontamination and respirator zone to enable it to safely complete the work. This involved the use of signs, tape to seal off the kitchen from other areas, and spray to supress any asbestos fibre release. This was in line with the Health & Safety Executive guidance for the removal of asbestos tiles.
9. The landlord instructed a licenced asbestos contractor to do this work which completed on 11 April 2024. It also provided the resident with a copy of a certificate stating her property was fit for habitation following the removal of the floor tiles. This certificate confirmed it had thoroughly cleaned her property following completion of the work, so it was safe to re-occupy. It also provided her with a certificate to confirm its contractor removed the asbestos waste safely.
10. The resident disputed the cleanliness of the property and alleged the landlord did not complete the work or remove the asbestos in line with the risk assessment requirements. She specifically told us that the contractor left dust and that the contractor told her partner there was no asbestos. We have not seen evidence of this, but it failed to take photographs of the worksite in line with its risk assessment. It also failed to show it communicated with her over its reason for removing the tiles or the safeguards it put in place during this work.
11. These failures likely caused her distress. We have ordered the landlord to apologise for this and to pay her £50 compensation. This is in line with its compensation policy and procedure where there has been a failure to meet required standards which caused distress. This is also in line with our compensation guidance where there is a service failure which it did not fully acknowledge.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of the complaint
Finding	No maladministration

12. The landlord’s complaint policy at the time of the complaint complies with the definition of a complaint in our Complaint Handling Code (April 2024). The timescales in the landlord’s complaint procedure complied with the Code.
13. The landlord acknowledged and responded to the resident’s complaint at both stages of its complaint’s procedure in line with its complaint’s policy. Its stage 2 complaint response did not provide her with details of how to escalate her complaint which was not in line with our Code. However, there is no evidence of her experiencing a detriment because of this and so we have found no maladministration. We identified learning it can take in the section below.

Learning

14. The landlord’s complaint handling staff can access e-learning on our Complaint Handling Code through our learning hub. This can help identify key points of the Code which includes offering residents a right to refer to us.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

15. The landlord’s record keeping was good. It provided key documents relating to its asbestos removal work.

Communication

16. The landlord’s communication with the resident over the work and safeguards was lacking. This meant it missed an opportunity to manage her expectations and provide reassurance. Our learning from severe maladministration report (March 2025) discusses the importance of open communication and providing accurate information to residents (page 25). Our severe maladministration report (March 2026) also states landlords should ensure communications are empathic (page 11).