Our online complaint form is temporarily unavailable while we complete planned maintenance. If you need to get in touch, please go to our contact us page.

Notting Hill Genesis (202445735)

Back to Top

Decision

Case ID

202445735

Decision type

Investigation

Landlord

Notting Hill Genesis

Landlord type

Housing Association

Occupancy

Assured Tenancy

Date

19 December 2025

Background

  1. The resident has lived in a 2-bedroom ground floor flat with her young child since July 2021. She raised her concerns about multiple items including damp and mould and window issues in June and October 2023. The landlord told us it has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident. However, she told us that she was diagnosed with cancer in December 2024.

What the complaint is about

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about:
    1. Damp and mould, kitchen extractor fan, heating and window/sliding repairs.
    2. Other repairs.
    3. Damage to her possessions.
    4. A loss of electricity.
    5. Locked rear exit doors.
    6. A debt on her meter from a previous tenant.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

  1. We found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about:
    1. Damp and mould, kitchen extractor fan, heating and window/sliding door repairs.
    2. Other repairs.
    3. Locked rear exit doors.
    4. A debt on her meter from a previous tenant.
    5. Associated complaint
  2. We found:
    1. service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about damage to her personal belongings.
    2. no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about a loss of electricity.

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

Summary of reasons

  1. The landlord failed to:
    1. Take timely steps to address the resident’s concerns about damp and mould, kitchen extractor fan, heating and window/sliding door concerns in accordance with its policies and procedures.
    2. Take timely steps to address the resident’s concerns about other repairs in accordance with its policies and procedures.
    3. Did not communicate to the resident how it had acted to resolve her concern about locked rear exit doors.
    4. Did not address her concern about a debt on her meter from a previous tenant.
    5. Did not ensure actions it agreed in its complaint response were monitored to conclusion.
    6. Did not provide the resident with details of how she could submit a claim to its insurer for damaged possessions.


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 senior member of staff for the landlord.
  • 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

16 January 2026

3

Compensation order:

The landlord must pay the resident £2,900 made up as follows:

  • £1,950 in recognition of the impact of failings in its handling of damp and mould, kitchen extractor fan, heating and window/sliding door repairs.
  • £400 for the impact of failings in its handling of other repairs.
  • £50 for the impact of failings in its handling of her concerns about damage to her possessions.
  • £150 for the impact of failings in its handling of her concerns about locked rear exit doors.
  • £100 for the impact of failings in its handling of her concerns about a debt on her meter from a previous tenant.
  • £200 for the impact of failings in its complaint handling.
  • £50 already awarded for complaint handling failings.
  • Any award already paid to the resident should be deducted from the total.

No later than

16 January 2026

3

The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an independent survey of the property to address her ongoing concerns about:

  • damp and mould.
  • ventilation.
  • heating.
  • windows and doors.
  • leak affecting the living room ceiling.

any related repair issues. It should then provide her with a schedule of any work identified and a timescale for completion in line with its repairs and damp and mould policies.

Any work identified must be started no later than 6 weeks of the inspection report.

No later than

13 February 2026

6

The landlord must contact the resident about increased heating costs due to issues mentioned with the property. It should pay reasonable compensation in line with its compensation policy.

No later than

16 January 2026

7

The landlord must contact the resident to address her outstanding concerns about a debt on her meter from a previous tenant.

No later than

16 January 2026

8

The landlord must contact the resident to communicate the action taken to address her concerns about the locked rear exit doors.

No later than

16 January 2026

9

The landlord must contact the resident to provide her with details of how she can submit a claim to its insurer for damaged possessions

No later than

16 January 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations

We recommend that the landlord contact the resident to ensure it has accurate record of vulnerabilities

We recommend the landlord pay the resident £100 it previously awarded for delays in processing the resident’s transfer application.

We recommend that the landlord pay the £50 previously awarded to the resident for loss of electricity.


 


Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date

What happened

7 October 2024

The resident complained to the landlord about repair issues at the property and the impact these were having on her and her child.

24 October 2024

The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response. It said that its housing team would respond to the resident directly about the outstanding repair work. It apologised for its “sub standard service” and offered the resident £250.

21 November 2024

The resident escalated her complaint. She said that her property was full of condensation, damp and mould. She said her carpet had been damaged and she wanted compensation for this.

24/01/2025

The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It acknowledged that it had not effectively managed mould at the property. It also identified some failings in its handling of repairs. It awarded compensation of £1,050 to the resident. This was in acknowledgement of delays in repairs, and failing to acknowledge her complaint:

Referral to the Ombudsman

The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman as she had outstanding concerns about repair issues. She said that she wanted increased compensation, and for the landlord to make the property more habitable.

 


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

Damp and mould, kitchen extractor fan, heating and windows/doors repairs

Finding

Maladministration

What we did not investigate

  1. The resident said the condition of her property had a negative effect on her family’s health. It would be fairer, more reasonable, and more effective for her to make a personal injury claim for any injury. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.

Damp and mould

  1. The landlord raised a repair for damp and mould on 12 June 2023. It recorded mould on her windows and walls and attached photos it had taken that day. Its contractor attended on 21 June 2023 to complete a mould treatment of affected areas. However, it did not record when issues were reported by the resident. It should have done so. Without this information, it cannot show it attended within 10 days of the report, in line within its damp and mould policy.  In line with this policy, it should have determined the severity of the issue, and where possible the cause. That there is no evidence it took this action is a failing.
  2. The landlord recorded a further report of damp and mould on 13 September 2023. This may not have been necessary had it followed its damp and mould policy in June 2023. Later, on 11 October 2023, it raised a damp and mould survey, noting mould had been treated before. It was appropriate that it arranged a more in-depth inspection. However, in line with its damp and mould policy it should also have arranged for a local officer to inspect issues within 10 days of the initial report of 13 September 2023. It should have determined the severity of the issue and considered any evidence of detrimental impact on anyone in the household.  That it did not do so was a failing which meant it delayed considering interim work, such as a further mould treatment.
  3. The landlord inspected issues on 17 October 2023. That day it requested a survey by a ventilation contractor. It also took appropriate steps to arrange mould treatment and decoration of the property. The landlord’s contractor did not complete this work until 22 November 2023. Records note the contractor was unable to gain access for a pre-arranged appointment earlier in November 2023 and that the resident cancelled another appointment for 20 November 2023. This was an unavoidable delay in the completion of mould treatment and decoration.
  4. Records show the landlord received a quote for ventilation work on 29 November 2023. It recorded the work to upgrade bathroom and WC fans and install a positive input ventilation (PIV) unit as complete on 9 January 2024. Its repairs policy says it will communicate with residents about the timeframe for completing work. But there is no evidence it communicated with her about this and that was a failing.
  5. When the resident complained to the landlord on 7 October 2024, she raised concerns that she was still experiencing mould. The landlord told her in its stage 1 complaint response that it had asked its housing team to contact her about work. However, there is no evidence it raised any repairs or inspections until 21 February 2025.  That is a significant delay in addressing the resident’s ongoing concerns. The landlord should have arranged to attend within 10 days of the concerns she had set out in her complaint of 7 October 2024. While it attended to complete a mould treatment on 24 February 2025, that was 141 days after she raised ongoing concerns about damp and mould.
  6. The landlord acknowledged in its stage 2 response that it had not effectively managed the resident’s concerns about damp and mould. It said it would attend to assess the resident’s concerns and would share this report with a surveyor for advice on action and work. The work order it raised on 21 February 2025 recorded it should consider the cause of issues and any remedies, including ventilation. However, we have seen no evidence it has appropriately done so.
  7. Records show the landlord completed a further mould wash at the property in April 2025. The landlord told us that it had not identified damp and mould at the property during its annual inspection in August 2025. However, the resident has told of her ongoing concerns about reoccurring damp/mould. Given the failings we have identified, we have ordered that the landlord arrange an independent survey of damp, mould and ventilation at the property.

Kitchen extractor fan

  1. The resident told the landlord in her complaint of 7 October 2024 that she was still waiting for a kitchen extractor fan to be installed. The landlord did not address this concern until 24 January 2025. That was a failing and a delay in responding to and resolving the resident’s concern.
  2. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord said it had no prior repair raised for the kitchen extractor fan. Had it appropriately reviewed its repair records, it should have seen that its ventilation contractor had previously stated a kitchen extractor could not be fitted as it would make the only window inoperable. Instead of appropriately considering this information, the landlord raised work on 24 January 2025 to install an extractor to the kitchen window. When the contractor attended on 17 February 2025, instead of completing this work, it installed a cooker hood.
  3. The landlord told us in November 2025 that work its contractor had completed to install the cooker hood was unsuitable. It said this was because it was not responsible for repairs to cooker hoods under its repairs policy. Further, it said the cooker hood was inefficient as it was not externally vented. The landlord said that it did not consider work should have been raised to install a kitchen extractor. It said ventilation requirements were already met by a window. However, there is no evidence that it has communicated this to the resident. That was a failing. She told us she was still waiting for it to install a kitchen extractor. She should not have been left without a clear understanding of outstanding work. That was a failing.

Windows/sliding door concerns

  1. When the landlord raised a damp and mould inspection on 11 October 2023, it detailed the resident’s concerns about the windows/sliding door. It noted it should assess these. However, it did not raise this work until 17 November 2023. This delay meant it could not complete work within the 20 working day target set out in its repairs policy. 
  2. The landlord acknowledged in its complaint responses that it did not manage the window repair effectively. Records show it attended on 12 December 2023. It is clear not all work was completed. The resident contacted it on 9 and 18 January 2024 querying when repairs would be finalised. She said that gaps in the windows were making her property cold. Later, on 7 March 2024 the landlord noted it was to reglaze units. However, it did not complete this work until 31 July 2024. That was 177 working days after the repair had been raised. It was far beyond its repair target timeframe and a significant delay.
  3. The landlord noted in its stage 2 complaint response that it had updated the resident on 18 April and 12 July 2024 about the work. However, we have seen no records of this communication. The landlord should have provided the resident with further updates about timescales for work during the 9 months it was outstanding. That it did not do so was a failing.
  4. The resident told the landlord in her complaint of 7 October 2024 of her ongoing concerns that the window seals needed to be replaced due to draughts and mould. She also said the sliding door was icy and had mould growth. The landlord raised work on 24 January 2025 to repair window seals and trickle vents in the windows and sliding doors. But it should have acted sooner to do so following the resident’s initial complaint. This was a failing which delayed its response to the resident’s ongoing concerns.
  5. A contractor for the landlord attended to the resident’s ongoing concerns about the windows and sliding door on 14 February 2025. It noted it had found no visible gaps but that the frames were cold. It asked that a surveyor or repairs inspector for the landlord attend. An officer for the landlord reviewed the repair on 2 April 2025 and closed the repair. They noted that the contractor had confirmed the windows were fully operational. But there is no evidence a surveyor or repairs officer had attended to inspect the issue, in line with the contractor’s request. That was a failing. The resident told us that she is still concerned about cold from the windows/sliding doors.

Heating

  1. The landlord acknowledged delays replacing radiators at the property. It said this was because it needed to order parts for the repair. But it did not identify or acknowledge the extent of its failings addressing the resident’s concerns about heating/cold at the property.
  2. When the landlord inspected windows on 24 January 2024, it noted the property was very cold and heaters may not be fit for purpose. It detailed then that a heating survey should be completed. Further, the landlord noted that it may need to consider fitting plasterboard with thermal insulation. It noted a heating survey could report back on what was required. However, there is no evidence it acted to appropriately progress this survey.
  3. By 14 June 2024 it noted again that a heating survey was needed. The landlord’s repairs policy does not provide a specific timescale for obtaining a heating survey. But cold is a hazard under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Its repairs policy   states that it will ensure a heating system provides adequate heat. In Iine with its obligations, it should have taken reasonable action in its 20 working days target response time for standard repairs. That it was still outstanding nearly 5 months after identifying a heating survey was required is a failing.
  4. By 12 September 2024 it recorded contact from the resident’s support worker. They said the resident has been waiting for 2 radiators to be replaced. This indicates some level of heating assessment had been completed between January and September 2024. But records we have seen do not contain details. As a result of this it is unclear whether further work, such as fitting thermal plasterboard, was identified.
  5. The resident told the landlord in her complaint of 7 October 2024 that a heating assessment had been completed but she was still waiting for radiators to be replaced. She said her property was cold. In response, on 24 October 2024, the landlord set out that its new heating contractor was due to inspect issues on 4 November 2024. Repair records provided do not show whether this inspection took place. The landlord should have maintained appropriate records to show all action it had taken to address heating concerns.
  6. The landlord’s records do not show the work it completed to install 2 new radiators. That is a further failing in record keeping. However, it said in its stage 2 response that these had been fitted on 10 January 2025, and the resident confirmed this.
  7. Poor records keeping by the landlord means that it is unclear when it identified that 2 new radiators were required. However, it is clear it was aware of this by 12 September 2024. In line with its timescales for completing standard repairs, it should have attended to complete this work within 20 working days. It delayed by at least 63 working days beyond this. Further, it did not appropriately communicate with the resident throughout this time. These were further failings in its handling of heating issues that would have added to the resident’s concerns.

Summary

  1. We have identified maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould, kitchen extractor fan, heating and window/sliding door concerns. The resident has raised repeated and ongoing concerns about mould, cold and condensation issues.  As a result of the absence of records it is unclear what work was identified by the heating assessment. This means the landlord cannot show it has taken all appropriate steps to address the resident’s concerns about heating/cold in the property. Its contractor requested the landlord attend to inspect the resident’s ongoing concerns about windows/sliding door issues. But there no evidence it did so. Given the failings we have identified, we have ordered that the landlord arrange an independent survey of the property.
  2. The landlord awarded the resident £1,200. It awarded £250 at stage 1 for failings in its handling of repairs. In its stage 2 complaint response it awarded a further £950 for failings its handling of heating, window and damp and mould repairs. This included a payment of £100 for increased heating costs due to the delay addressing window repairs.
  3. We have considered all the circumstances, and failings we have identified. We have ordered that it make an increased award to the resident of £1,950. This is made up of:
    1. £650 for the impact of failings in its handling of damp and mould.
    2. £150 for the impact of failings in its handling of kitchen extractor fan concerns.
    3. £500 for the impact of failings in its handling of heating concerns.
    4. £400 for the impact of failings in its handling window/sliding door concerns.
    5. £150 for failings in its handling of kitchen extractor fan concerns.
    6. £100 previously awarded for increased heating costs.
  4. The award set out above is in line with the range set out in the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (the remedies guidance). We have also ordered the landlord to contact the resident about increased heating costs due to window/sliding door repairs. It should offer to consider any further evidence of these and reimburse her in line with its compensation policy.

Complaint

Damage to her possessions

Finding

Service failure
  1. In her reports and during her complaint the resident also told the landlord that her belongings, such as her carpet, had been damaged by damp and mould and a leak. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord directed the resident to any home contents insurance she had. But its compensation policy says that if a resident believes it to be at fault, they can make a claim to the landlord’s insurer. The landlord should reasonably have provided her with information about how she could submit a claim to its insurer. That it did not do so amounts to a service failure. We have ordered it to take this action. With consideration to the circumstances, we have also ordered that it make a payment to the resident of £50 in recognition of the impact of its failure to do so earlier. This amount is in line with the range set out in the remedies guidance.
  2. The landlord acknowledged in its complaint response that the resident had incurred costs purchasing cleaning products. The resident provided no details of costs she had incurred. In the circumstances we cannot comment on whether the award of was reasonable.

 

Complaint

Other repairs

Finding

Maladministration
  1. The resident told the landlord of her concern about its handling of previous shower issues. The landlord reviewed its handling of the resident’s recent reports about blockage of her shower drain of 27 November 2024. The landlord attended on 2 December 2024 and had not identified any blockage or work required. After the resident reported her ongoing concern, on 5 December 2024, the landlord attended again on 27 December 2024 to resolve the issue. These repairs were attended within the landlord 20 working day target response time for standard repairs. However, the resident had expressed her concern on 16 December 2024 that a repair appointment booked for 13 December 2024 had been cancelled by the landlord with no notice. It should have acknowledged and apologised for this. That it did not was a failing.
  2. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response considered the resident’s concern about a faulty toilet light and flush button. The landlord’s repair records show it had previously attended to repair the flush button in January and August 2024. Each of these repairs were attended within its 20-working day timeframe. The resident told the landlord in her complaint of 7 October 2024 that her toilet flush button was not working fully, and that the bathroom light was faulty.
  3. The landlord should have acted to raise further work to inspect and resolve these issues within its repairs target. Instead, it did not do so until 24 January 2025. That was 3 and a half months after the resident’s report.  It completed a repair to the light and toilet flush button on 6 February 2025. But these repairs should have been resolved within 20 working days of the resident’s report, set out in her complaint of 7 October 2024. The landlord unreasonably delayed raising the repair work and that was a failing.
  4. In her complaint of 7 October 2024, the resident also said there had been a leak in 2023 that affected the ceiling in her living room. Repair records do not show the resident’s report of this leak, and the landlord told us it had received no reports. The resident’s complaint did not state the leak was ongoing. However, given she said there had been a leak, the landlord should have checked if there was any remedial work needed. That it did not do so was a failing. The resident told us of her concern that there may still be a leak affecting her living room ceiling. We have ordered that the landlord contact her to resolve her concern about this in line with its repairs policy.
  5. Failings we have identified above in the landlord’s handling of other repairs amount to maladministration. Some of these repairs were attended to by the landlord on more than once occasion. The landlord sets out in its repairs policy that it has procedures in place to ensure the repair is completed within target and to the satisfaction of the resident. Yet there is no evidence it checked the work had resolved the issue reported. We have considered the circumstances. We have ordered that the landlord make an award to the resident of £400 in recognition of the impact of the failings we have identified. This award is in line with the range set out in the remedies guidance.

Complaint

Loss of electricity

Finding

No maladministration
  1. The landlord noted the resident’s concern that she had previously been left without electricity for 8 hours due to not having a key for the electricity cabinet. We have seen no records relating to this matter.  The landlord noted the resident said she previously contacted it via telephone. In its complaint response, the landlord said that it could not find record of her previous contact. However, it apologised for the disruption, distress and inconvenience caused to her and awarded compensation of £50. The landlord also confirmed the resident now had a key for the cabinet.  Its actions were reasonable, and we have found no maladministration in its handling of this issue.

Complaint

Locked rear exit doors

Finding

Maladministration
  1. In her initial complaint of 7 October 2024, the resident told the landlord of her concern that rear exit doors at the property were locked. But the landlord did not address this issue until its stage 2 complaint response of 24 January 2025. It should have responded during its stage 1 consideration clearly setting out what action it would take to address this. It unreasonably delayed in responding to the resident’s concern of a safety hazard.
  2. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord said that it had referred the matter to its fire safety team, who would share findings with the resident’s housing officer. The landlord’s fire risk surveyor appropriately reviewed its fire risk assessment for the building on 31 January 2025.  They noted that a previous fire risk assessment said rear doors in the building were no longer in use. The fire risk assessment recommended that “no escape/no exit” signs should be fitted by 10 April 2026.
  3. The landlord took action to arrange “no exit” signs for rear doors in the resident’s building. It has provided us with photographs showing these are now in place. However, we have seen no evidence it communicated with the resident to explain actions it had taken following the concerns she had raised. She told us she was still waiting to hear from the landlord about this. It should have ensured appropriate action was taken to communicate with the resident. Without this, she has been left unaware of how it had investigated/resolved her safety concerns.
  4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns. With consideration to the circumstances, we have ordered that it make an award to her of £150 in recognition of the impact of its failings. This is in line with the remedies guidance. Further, we have ordered that the landlord clearly communicate to the resident the action it has taken to address her concerns about the locked rear exit doors.

Complaint

A debt on her meter from a previous tenant

Finding

Maladministration

  1. The resident raised her concerns to the landlord on 7 October 2024 about a debt on her meter from a previous tenant. But the landlord did not respond to this concern until 24 January 2025. It should have done so sooner. It unreasonably delayed in addressing the resident’s concerns and that was a failing.
  2. The landlord told the resident in its stage 2 complaint response that it had requested her housing officer contact her within 10 working days to address the matter. It said it would monitor this action. Records show that the landlord’s complaint’s team requested on 31 January 2025 that the housing officer address this concern with the resident. However, we have seen no evidence of action it subsequently took on this.
  3. She told us her concern about the debt from a previous tenant remains outstanding. The landlord should be able to show what it did following the stage 2 complaint response to discuss and resolve the resident’s specific concern. That its records do not show this is a further failing. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about a debt on her meter from a previous tenant. With consideration to the circumstances, we have ordered that the landlord make an award to the resident of £100. This in line with the remedies guidance. We have also ordered that the landlord contact the resident to address her outstanding concerns about this

Complaint

The handling of the complaint

Finding

Maladministration
  1. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. When the resident complained to the landlord in October 2024, the relevant Code was the April 2024 edition. We have found that:
    1. The landlord’s published complaints policy complied with this Code in respect of timescales.
    2. Its stage 1 complaint response was provided within its 10-working day target.
  2. The landlord apologised for failing to acknowledge the resident’s escalation request. The £50 it awarded for this was appropriate. However, its stage 2 complaint response was provided 23 working days outside its target response time. It did not identify or apologise for this delay in its eventual response. That was a failing. Further, there is no evidence it communicated this delay to the resident in advance. In line with the Code, it should have done so. That was a further failing.
  3. As set out earlier in the report, the landlord set out actions it said it would take to address the resident’s concerns. However, despite saying it would do so, it failed to adequately monitor these actions. The landlord should have taken appropriate steps to ensure all issues were monitored to conclusion. It did not do so, and concerns the resident raised remained without full resolution. That was a complaint failing.
  4. Overall, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. We have ordered that it make a further award to her of £200 in recognition of the impact of these failings. This award is in line with the remedies guidance.

Learning

  1. The landlord should ensure that it takes appropriate steps to monitor action it has agreed as part of its complaint response.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

  1. The landlord should maintain full and accurate records to demonstrate how it has responded to address repair issues

Communication

  1. The landlord should communicate to residents timescales for repairs. It should ensure it updates residents when these change.