From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202445847)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202445847

A2Dominion Housing Group Limited

26 August 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 complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  2. This report has also considered the landlord’s:
    1. complaint handling
    2. record keeping.

Background

  1. The resident lives in a 2-bedroom, ground floor flat that the landlord, which is a housing association, owns and manages. The landlord let the property to the resident as an assured tenancy in 2011. The landlord is aware the resident has vulnerabilities related to her mental health. She was represented in making her complaint by a family member who, for the purposes of this report, will be referred to a ‘Ms J’.
  2. The resident reported damp and mould in her property on 4 April 2024. The landlord inspected the property sometime in May 2024 and raised a number of works to address the issue.
  3. Ms J complained to the landlord on 1 November 2024 that no repairs had been carried out since April 2024. She wanted to know why the landlord had not provided the resident with any updates and asked for an action plan with a start date.
  4. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 5 November 2024, and replied to Ms J on 18 November 2024. It upheld her complaint and apologised for the time it had taken to progress the works. It stated it would ensure it completed the works “to a good standard” in a timely manner. It committed to provide the resident with an update “no later than 29 November 2024”. The landlord acknowledged the number of times she had to contact it about the repairs and offered the resident £450. This was in recognition of her time, trouble, distress and inconvenience, and its poor communication.
  5. Ms J escalated the resident’s complaint on 11 December 2024. She said she had been trying to get “a clear update” on the repairs but had not managed to get through to the landlord or received any calls back. She stated that, as per the landlord’s stage 1 response, she should have received an update by 29 November 2024, but nobody had contacted her. She added that she felt it had “dismissed” the complaint, which it had failed to resolve.
  6. The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 complaint on 17 December 2024, and it sent a final response to the resident on 21 January 2025. It upheld her complaint and:
    1. acknowledged it had not provided her with any further updates following its stage 1 response, despite numerous calls by Ms J.
    2. said it was waiting for a senior manager to approve the works.
    3. offered its “sincere apologies” for its poor service.
    4. stated it would be in contact with her by 28 January 2025 with an update.
    5. made an increased offer of £850 compensation for its failings.
    6. provided details of actions it had taken as a result of her complaint. This included providing further staff training on record keeping, and reminding its contractor of its expected service levels.
  7. On 14 May 2025, Ms J asked the Ombudsman to investigate her complaint. She stated the resident was vulnerable and that the condition of the property was affecting her emotionally. She added that another member of the household had previously contracted pneumonia and no longer slept in the bedroom because of the damp and mould.
  8. On 13 August 2025, Mr J told us that the repairs were still outstanding, and that no further work had been done since the stage 2 response. She stated that the last contact she had with the landlord was on 18 July 2024. It told her that, due to the cost of the works, it had to seek further approval for them and that this process may take up to 21 days.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. Ms J has told us that the condition of her property had adversely affected the health of the resident and other family members. We acknowledge her comments. However, we are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process. These are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer (if it has one) as a personal injury claim. We have, however, considered whether any failings by the landlord have been the cause of distress and inconvenience to the resident.

Damp and mould

  1. The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Act 2004 to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties This is informed by the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord needs to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
  2. The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation policy published on its website states that it will take a proactive approach to the identification and resolution of damp, mould, and condensation. It commits to:
    1. communicating clearly with residents, keeping them informed at every stage.
    2. providing honest timeframes and updates where issues become more complex, or delays occur.
    3. investigating all reports of damp and mould within 14 calendar days of receiving the report.
    4. providing a written summary of the inspection findings to residents within 2 calendar days of the investigation being completed (no later than day 16).
    5. beginning all necessary repairs/remedial works within 7 calendar days of issuing the inspection summary (no later than 23 days).
    6. completing emergency repairs, where there is a risk of serious harm, within 24 hours.
  3. The records show that the landlord inspected the property in May 2024 following the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property on 14 April 2024. This was outside its timeframe of investigating reports of damp and mould within 14 calendar days.
  4. The landlord’s policy states that the resident should be given a written summary of the investigation findings within 2 calendar days of the investigation being completed. There is no evidence this happened. The landlord has not provided us with an inspection report from that visit. We were therefore unable to establish the exact date it took place, or the extent of the damp and mould it had found. The landlord’s stage 1 response states that the inspection had identified several issues. These were:
    1. the flooring in both bedrooms and the bathroom smelt of damp and mould.
    2. damp around the windows and walls in the living room.
  5. The landlord’s repair logs indicate that the inspection in May 2024 recommended repairs to:
    1. replace the bathroom extractor fan.
    2. pressure test and fix pipework.
    3. strip out walls and remove flooring throughout the property and install a dehumidifier for 4 weeks.
    4. install dampproof render over walls before replastering them.
    5. install vents in the living room and bedrooms.
    6. install a new bathroom.
  6. It is not disputed by the landlord that the repairs remained outstanding when it issued its stage 2 response on 21 January 2025. This was around 8 months following the inspection. The only explanation it provided was that it was waiting for a senior manager to approve the works. The excessive delays in completing the repairs were a significant departure from its service level agreement in its damp, mould and condensation policy. This states that the landlord will begin any necessary repairs within 7 calendar days of issuing its inspection summary. It has not provided any records of its attempts to comply with its timescales.
  7. The landlord was unable to demonstrate that the delays were unavoidable. The resident has suggested that delays were caused by the cost of the works and delays in approving them. Landlord should ensure they have adequate resources in place to meet their repair obligations. Furthermore, it ought to ensure that its processes for approving repair quotes do not adversely impact its service to residents.
  8. Furthermore, when a landlord is aware of a household’s vulnerabilities, it would be reasonable for it to take these into account when considering whether to prioritise a repair or inspection. The landlord’s lack of action in this regard would only have supported the resident’s belief that it was not taking her concerns seriously or responding to them with the appropriate urgency
  9. According to its repair logs, the landlord carried out a mould wash and treatment in the property on 10 December 2024. This was appropriate. However, the work was carried out around 7 months after it had inspected the property.
  10. There are no records showing the landlord gave any advice or support to the resident on how to minimise the impact of the damp. There was no indication it had offered to supply dehumidifiers to help reduce the damp within the property. This was a departure from its damp, mould and condensation policy. This aims to ensure residents have access to and/or are provided with comprehensive advice and guidance on managing and controlling damp and condensation.
  11. In its stage 1 response, it committed to provide the resident with an update on the repairs by no later than 29 November 2024. It was unreasonable that the landlord did not do this. It should not have been necessary for the resident to have escalated her complaint before the landlord took further action.
  12. The landlord could have considered appointing a single point of contact to provide updates and respond to queries. This would have helped provide the resident with consistent communication and reassurance, which was significantly lacking in this case.
  13. The Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles are: “Be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes”. We apply these principles when considering whether any redress is appropriate and proportionate for any maladministration identified.
  14. In its stage 2 response, the landlord upheld the resident’s complaint and offered her £850 compensation. This was in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its lack of action and poor communication.                                             Furthermore, it gave details of actions it had taken as a result of the complaint. This demonstrates that it had learnt from outcomes.
  15. However, it did not provide a satisfactory explanation for the excessive delays in responding to the resident’s reports of damp and mould, or for why it could not have completed the repairs any sooner. We acknowledge the landlord’s attempts to put things right. However, we do not consider that is offer was proportionate to the failures we have identified. For this reason, we have made a finding of severe maladministration and will order that the landlord pays further redress.
  16. There is no evidence any part of the property was uninhabitable during the period relating to the complaint. However, the extensiveness of the repairs recommended from the inspection indicate that the resident’s enjoyment of her property would likely have been adversely affected by the issues she had reported. Furthermore, the repairs remained outstanding 15 months following the inspection.
  17. The resident has paid approximately £608 per month (taking account some annual incremental increases) in rental payments during the period of the landlord’s failures. We can reasonably consider this to have started in May 2024.
  18. Taking into account the rent paid by the resident over the period, we consider it appropriate for the landlord to pay £4,560 compensation for the loss of enjoyment of her property for 15 months. This figure has been calculated as approximately 50% of the total rent during the period in question. While the Ombudsman acknowledges that this is not a precise calculation, we consider this to a be a fair and reasonable amount of compensation taking all of the circumstances into account.

Complaint

  1. The evidence shows that it took the landlord 11 working days to respond to the stage 1 complaint, and 26 working days to respond at stage 2. The delays were not excessive. Furthermore, there is no indication this had any adverse impact on the resident. However, there is no evidence it contacted the resident to explain the reason for the delay, or that it provided the details of the Ombudsman during this time. This is a departure from the Code.
  2. The Code requires landlords to track any actions outlined in complaint responses through to completion. In its stage 1 complaint the landlord stated it would ensure the repairs would be completed “to a good standard within the timeframe”. However, the repairs remained outstanding when it issued its final response. Furthermore, it did not give any commitments in its stage 2 response with regard to when it would complete the damp and mould works. This is a failing and a further departure from the Code.
  3. For the reasons stated above we have made a finding of service failure and will order it to pay the resident £100 in recognition of its poor complaint handling.

Record keeping

  1. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) states that “good knowledge and information management is crucial to any organisation’s ability to perform and achieve its mission.
  2. In response to our request for evidence, the landlord has provided limited records. It has not provided any inspection reports and its repair logs were inaccurate. They stated works were completed when they remained outstanding. Furthermore, there are limited communication logs between the landlord and resident, and the landlord and its contractor. It is unknown whether this evidence does exist, and if the landlord has failed to provide it, or if it failed to keep appropriate records. It has therefore been difficult for us to establish what steps the landlord took to address the resident’s reports of damp and mould. Overall, the quality of the evidence supplied by the landlord hampered the Ombudsman’s investigation.
  3. The landlord’s poor record keeping would have contributed to the landlord’s poor repairs management. It would also explain its failure to complete the outstanding repairs and its poor communication, and lack of updates. The Ombudsman has taken this into account when reaching the overall finding that there was maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping. We note that, following the complaint, the landlord took action to address this and provided staff with further training on record keeping. This was appropriate.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. apologise to the resident in line with the our guidance on making apologies. The apology should come from a senior member of staff.
    2. pay the resident £4,960 compensation comprising of:
      1. £4,560 in recognition of the loss of enjoyment of her property due to its failure to follow its damp, mould and condensation policy.
      2. £300 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by lack of action and poor communication.
      3. £100 in recognition of the landlord’s poor complaint handling.
    3. this replaces the offer of £850 compensation it made in its stage 2 response. If it has already paid this to the resident, it should offset this against the total compensation ordered by us.
    4. the landlord must arrange an inspection of the property to determine the current condition of the property. It must write to the resident with the dates on which it will carry out the inspection, and any remaining outstanding repairs. It must send the Ombudsman a copy of its letter within the above mentioned timescale.