Paragon Asra Housing Limited (202315709)

Decision
Case ID	202315709
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Paragon Asra Housing Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	26 June 2026

Background

1. The resident said the issues with her property and garden had been ongoing for over 5 years. The property is a terraced house with a shared access path to the rear garden.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Concerns it had not completed works to her rear garden which it promised in 2021.
   2. Report of damp in her bathroom.
   3. Concerns about subsidence of the property.
   4. Associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns it had not completed works to her rear garden which it promised in 2021.
4. There was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s:
   1. Report of damp in the bathroom.
   2. Complaint handling.
5. There was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s concerns about subsidence of the property.

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

Summary of reasons

6. In summary, we found:

Concerns it had not completed works to her rear garden which it promised in 2021

7. There was no evidence the landlord promised to complete works to the resident’s garden in 2021. The landlord failed to investigate the concerns raised by environmental health in October 2023. There were long periods when the resident did not proactively raise her concerns with the landlord about this issue. The landlord made reasonable attempts to complete a home survey of the resident’s property.

Report of damp in the bathroom

8. The landlord delayed in inspecting the damp in May 2023. It failed to request support from its tenant solutions team to progress the damp inspection. It failed to investigate the concerns raised by environmental health in October 2023. Since the resident’s complaint it has made reasonable attempts to arrange a damp and mould inspection.

Concerns about subsidence of the property

9. It was reasonable that the landlord should wish to inspect the property to establish its current condition.

Complaint handling

10. The landlord failed to recognise the resident’s expression of dissatisfaction in September 2024. It failed to respond in line with the Complaint Handling Code (the Code) at both stages of the resident’s complaint. It failed to log a new complaint about its handling of an alleged racist incident.

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 manager. 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 13 May 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £500 made up as follows: £50 for distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns it had not completed works to the garden from 2021. £300 for distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp in the bathroom. £150 for the distress and inconvenience and time and trouble caused by the landlord’s handling of the complaint. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date and not offset against any rent arrears of debts owed. 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 13 May 2026
3	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange a full inspection of the property, garden, fencing, garden wall, paths, and outbuilding. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. 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 all areas of the property including the garden and produces a written report with photographs The surveyor report must set out: Any outstanding repairs to the property, garden, fencing, walls, paths, and outbuilding Whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards The most likely cause of the damp Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issues together with reasons where it is not responsible A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issues (if the landlord is responsible) The likely timescales to commence and complete the work Whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works	No later than 13 May 2026
4	The landlord must log a new complaint about the resident’s dissatisfaction with the landlord’s handling of her report about an alleged racist incident involving its staff. It must then respond in line with its policy and the Code. It must provide this Service with evidence it has responded to the complaint by the required date.	No later than 13 May 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
The landlord should consider any structural issues as part of the inspection order above.
The landlord should contact the resident to discuss how it can support her by adjusting its service delivery to ensure she is available for appointments.
If the landlord is unable to gain access to the property it should consider using its formal access policy, if it has one, to allow it to inspect the property and assess for hazards.
The landlord must ensure that prolonged access issues are escalated internally and considered in line with its policies and repairing obligations.

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
11 February 2025	The resident complained that there had been repair issues in her property and garden for over 5 years. She said the landlord had not: completed works to her garden, which she said it promised in 2021 investigated the damp in her bathroom investigated her concerns the property was subsiding
5 March 2025	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint.
19 March 2025	The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response. It said it had been trying to arrange a home survey and a damp and mould inspection, without success. Both inspections would identify any outstanding works including any structural issues. It asked the resident to contact it to arrange a suitable appointment.
9 September 2025	The resident escalated her complaint. She said the landlord had not responded to all the elements of her complaint. She included a new issue about an alleged racist incident involving 2 staff members.
10 September 2025	The landlord wrote to the resident to outline which parts of her complaint it had excluded and the reasons for its decision. It said it would deal with the issue concerning the staff members through a different internal route. It would update the resident with the outcome of its investigation.
11 September 2025	The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation.
14 November 2025	The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response. It said it could not find any evidence it had agreed to complete the works to her garden in 2021. It had asked its damp and mould and asset teams to contact the resident to arrange inspections. It said it would pick up any outstanding repairs when it inspected the property. It offered £50 compensation for the delay in sending its stage 2 response.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained dissatisfied and asked us to investigate. As an outcome she wanted the landlord to complete the works to her property, the garden and inspect the property for subsidence. She also wanted compensation for the distress caused and the time she spent chasing the landlord.

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 resident’s concerns the landlord had not completed works to her rear garden which it promised in 2021.
Finding	Service failure

11. We will not look at complaints which have not completed the landlord’s complaint procedure. In February 2025 the resident said the issues with her garden had been ongoing for 5 years. She submitted an earlier complaint about this issue in June 2021. This earlier complaint did not complete the landlord’s complaint procedure so we have not looked at it. 
12. However, the resident has provided evidence which shows the landlord agreed to assess works in her garden in July 2021. So it’s fair that we look at issues concerning the garden from July 2021 until 14 November 2025. This is when the landlord finished dealing with the resident’s February 2025 complaint. We may refer to earlier issues where they provide context.
13. In June 2021 the resident reported broken fence panels along the shared access path and a damaged gate. The landlord attended and found the fences to be safe. But said the overgrown vegetation had damaged the fences. Land registry plans showed the trees, which had caused the damage, grew from land the resident was responsible for. On 30 June 2021 the landlord confirmed this by email and said it would issue an untidy garden notice giving the resident 21 days to begin clearance. We have not seen this notice or evidence of what happened next.
14. On 22 July 2021 the landlord texted the resident agreeing to visit and assess removing a bush and tidying the communal path. This was in line with the tenancy agreement which said the landlord will maintain paths and access routes. However, poor records mean we cannot confirm whether the visit took place or what decision the landlord made.
15. In October 2023 the local council’s environmental health team inspected the property and wrote to the landlord. It raised concerns about an overgrown garden, an unsafe outbuilding, a gap in the fencing that allowed access, and ivy growing on the gable wall. The tenancy agreement makes the resident responsible for maintaining the garden and fencing between neighbouring properties. The landlord’s maintenance policy says it must maintain boundary fences next to public roads and any brick‑built outbuildings it has provided. We cannot confirm whether the damaged fence was a boundary fence. However, it is our understanding the outbuilding existed when the resident moved in, which makes the landlord responsible for maintaining it. We have not seen any evidence the landlord investigated the safety concerns about the outbuilding or the fencing at that time.
16. In September 2024 the resident discussed property issues with the landlord. Records do not show whether she raised garden concerns at this time. In its email of 11 October 2024, the landlord said it had tried to arrange a home survey since January 2024 to identify any repair issues. A home survey would include the garden. It asked the resident to agree a date. We have not seen evidence that the resident responded.
17. On 6 February 2025 the landlord emailed the resident after a surveyor noticed her garden was overgrown while visiting a neighbouring property. It asked whether the resident planned to tidy the garden and offered support. The resident raised her complaint after this contact.
18. When investigating complaints, we consider whether the landlord failed, whether this caused detriment, and whether it took reasonable steps to put matters right and learn from the outcome.
19. The landlord tried to put things right by offering to inspect the property and garden and raise any necessary repairs. Records show it contacted the resident by phone on 8 January 2024 and by email on 11 October 2024 to arrange this. It also made further attempts during the complaint process. These attempts did not result in access.
20. As outlined above, there is no evidence the landlord agreed to carry out works to the resident’s garden in 2021. In addition, the resident was responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of her garden. However, based on the evidence we have seen, we cannot be satisfied the landlord inspected the fencing and outbuilding in October 2023.
21. This leads to a finding of service failure. The landlord should pay compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused. The resident has had to wait for the landlord to investigate these issues.
22. When setting compensation, we consider whether the resident contributed to the situation. There were long gaps, July 2021 to October 2023, October 2023 to September 2024, and September 2024 to February 2025, when the resident did not raise further concerns to the landlord. She also did not respond to inspection requests.
23. In line with our Compensation Guidance, the landlord should pay £50 compensation. This reflects a minor service failure which did not affect the overall outcome for the resident. It also reflects situations were there are mitigating factors linked to the resident’s lack of engagement.
24. We have ordered the landlord to inspect the resident’s garden, fencing, garden wall, paths, and outbuilding. It must then clearly confirm to the resident which works it will carry out under its repair responsibilities and which works the resident must manage.
25. The resident has told us that, due to her work commitments, she is limited on when she can be available for appointments. We have recommended the landlord contact the resident to discuss how it can support her by adjusting its service delivery to ensure she is available for appointments.

Complaint	The resident’s report of damp in the bathroom.
Finding	Maladministration

26. The resident previously complained about damp and mould through her MP in April 2023. The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 20 April 2023. The MP told the landlord the resident remained unhappy. The landlord tried to clarify her reasons but the resident did not respond. It did not escalate the complaint. As the complaint did not complete the landlord’s complaints process we will not look at it. We have decided its fair to consider the landlord’s handling of damp reports from April 2023 onwards, referring to earlier events only where relevant.
27. The landlord received a report of damp on 14 April 2023. Its damp and mould procedure says it will carry-out an inspection for all new reports. It does not give a timescale for this. The landlord set a target to inspect the property by 5 May 2023 (15 working days) but did not attend until 17 May 2023, which was 7 working days later. The visit did not go ahead due to no access, but the landlord still missed its own target.
28. Where there is no access the landlord should take reasonable steps to rearrange the appointment. The landlord’s damp and mould procedure requires surveyors to seek support from the tenant solutions team if they struggle to contact a resident. We have seen no evidence the landlord did this.
29. As outlined above, in October 2023 the environmental health department visited the resident’s property. The report shows they found mould on 3 walls and the ceiling of the bathroom. It said the ivy was growing in the gutters and causing water to run off onto the wall, which could be the cause of the mould. It recommended remedial action by a damp and mould specialist and repointing of the damaged wall. We have not seen any evidence the landlord took any steps following receipt of this report.
30. In October 2024 the landlord told the resident it had received a request for a damp and mould inspection in April 2024 and had tried to contact her several times to rearrange it. The landlord did not record this repair request or the contact attempts on its systems, which shows poor record keeping.
31. During the complaint process, the landlord tried to arrange a damp and mould inspection. Records show it contacted the resident at least 6 times, including in February 2025, August 2025, and November 2025, using phone calls, texts, letters, and emails. The evidence suggests the resident did not respond. This is despite it being an obligation of her tenancy that she allow reasonable access for inspection and repairs.
32. In summary, the landlord delayed inspecting the property in May 2023, failed to follow its own process to progress the inspection, and failed to investigate the damp and mould in October 2023. These failures meant the resident continued to experience damp. This amounts to maladministration. However, we also considered the resident’s lack of engagement when assessing compensation.
33. In line with our Compensation Guidance, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £300 compensation. This reflects the landlord’s failures while also recognising that the resident did not respond to repeated attempts to arrange a damp and mould inspection after making her complaint.
34. The resident has told us the damp and mould is still an issue and it has moved to other rooms in her property. We have therefore ordered the landlord complete an inspection of the resident’s property. It should then raise any identified repairs and complete them within its repair timescales. If the landlord is unable to gain access to the property, we have recommended it consider using its formal access policy, if it has one.

Complaint	The resident’s concerns about subsidence of the property.
Finding	No maladministration

35. The resident said she had a 2010 surveyor’s report which stated her property was subsiding. She said the landlord had ignored this when she previously raised it. Due to the age of the report, we cannot reliably assess what happened at the time. We have therefore focused on what the resident raised in her complaint and how the landlord responded, referring to earlier events only where relevant.
36. In September 2024 the resident raised concerns about long‑standing issues with her property. This included possible structural damage. After reviewing its records, the landlord emailed the resident on 11 October 2024. It said it could not find any repair reports from her about this issue. It also explained it had tried to arrange a home survey since January 2024 without success. The landlord told the resident that an inspection would assess any structural concerns and asked her to agree a date so it could decide next steps.
37. While the resident’s concerns were understandable, it was reasonable for the landlord to want to inspect the property to assess its current condition rather than rely on a report that was 15 years old.
38. The landlord tried to resolve the issue through its complaints process by agreeing to inspect the property and raise any necessary works. Although we have not seen evidence of every attempt, records show the landlord telephoned the resident on 8 January 2024 and emailed her on 11 October 2024 to arrange an inspection. It also continued to try to arrange access during the complaint process, but these attempts were unsuccessful.
39. Based on the evidence, we have not found any failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about subsidence. This results in a finding of no maladministration.
40. We have recommended the landlord consider any structural issues as part of the inspection order.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Maladministration

41. The landlord has a published complaints policy which complies with the terms of the Complaint Handling Code (the Code) in respect of the definition of a complaint and timescales.
42. The resident expressed dissatisfaction in September 2024. The landlord did not recognise this as a complaint. This was not in line with its policy.
43. The landlord did not acknowledge the stage 1 complaint in line with the timeframes in its policy.
44. After receiving the resident’s request to escalate the complaint, the landlord wrote to her to explain it would not consider inspections and works which were over 12 months old. Although the landlord’s decision aligned with its policy, the environmental health report from October 2023 was relevant to the resident’s complaint.
45. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s stage 2 complaint in line with the timeframes in its policy.
46. The resident raised concerns about an alleged racist incident involving the landlord’s staff in her escalation. This was not part of her stage 1 complaint. The landlord failed to raise this as a new complaint. We have ordered it to log a complaint and provide a response to the resident.
47. In its complaint responses, the landlord acknowledged the delay in issuing the stage 2 response and offered £50 compensation. However, it failed to identify the other failings set out above. This amounts to maladministration. We have ordered the landlord to increase the compensation to £150. This amount recognises the distress, inconvenience, and time and trouble experienced by the resident in pursuing her complaint and includes the £50 already offered.

Learning

48. The landlord needs to understand why it did not recognise the resident’s dissatisfaction in September 2024 and if its staff require more training to ensure they can recognise a complaint.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

49. The landlord’s records were incomplete. The absence of clear and complete records made it difficult to understand what actions the landlord had taken. Our Spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management emphasises the importance of maintaining accurate, accessible records that provide a clear audit trail.

Communication

50. We have not identified any issues with the landlord’s communication in respect of the issues we have investigated.