A2Dominion Housing Group Limited (202505563)

Decision
Case ID	202505563
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	A2Dominion Housing Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	29 October 2025

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of a 3-bedroom ground floor flat in a purpose-built block. The resident reported a leak into her property on 9 January 2025. The landlord attended but it failed to stop the leak.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about:

a. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a leak into the property.

b. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

We have found that:

a. There was severe maladministration in how the landlord handled the resident’s reports of a leak into the property.

b. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a leak into the property

The landlord did not carry out repairs to the leak into the property in line with its repairs policy. The landlord accepted it should have acted more promptly to address the leak, and it offered compensation for this during its complaint process. Although the landlord has taken some actions to address the leak and the damage it caused following the resident’s complaint, the remedial works to address water damage remain outstanding.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

The landlord responded to the resident’s complaint in line with its complaints policy timescales.

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 specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 27 November 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,450 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of her report of a leak into the property. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure the sum of £450 offered during its internal complaints process, if already paid.	No later than 27 November 2025
3	Completing the works The landlord must take all steps to ensure the work is completed promptly and inspected by the due date, and that the resident is notified of when she can return to the property. If the landlord cannot complete the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date: Why it cannot complete the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will finish the works; or Explain the steps it has taken to ensure the works were completed and provide supporting evidence. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot.	No later than 13 November 2025

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
9 January 2025	The resident reported to the landlord there was a leak coming into her property. The landlord attended the same day but did not stop the leak.
25 January 2025	The resident complained to the landlord. She said the landlord had failed to repair the leak.
14 February 2025	The landlord sent its response to the resident at stage 1 of its complaints process. The landlord accepted it had not completed the repairs following a leak into the property and offered £250 compensation to the resident.
16 February 2025	The resident escalated her complaint to the landlord as she was not happy with its response.
21 March 2025	The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. The landlord apologised and increased its compensation offer to £450 compensation for not repairing the leak. It confirmed it would carry out repairs to the stop the leak and the damage it caused in the property.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred her complaint to us as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of her complaint.

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 response to the resident’s reports of a leak into the property.
Finding	Severe maladministration

The landlord’s records show the resident first raised a leak coming into her property on 9 January 2025. The landlord’s operative attended the same day and said the leak was coming from the flats above. It recorded on 15 January 2025 the leak was causing damage to the resident’s property ceiling.
The landlord’s repairs policy states an emergency repair is a problem that must be fixed within 24 hours before it causes serious damage to the property. Although the landlord’s operative attended within its policy timescale, they did not stop the leak, nor did the landlord take any action to arrange to repair the leak.
On 25 January 2025 the resident complained to the landlord. She said it had not stopped the leak, and water was coming through the walls of the property.
The landlord’s contractor attended the property on 30 January 2025 and established the leak was coming from the water tank in the building’s attic. The landlord did not record if its contractor stopped the leak, nor did it arrange for further action to be taken to address the issue.
The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 14 February 2025. It said its contractor would attend on 17 February 2025 to carry out repairs. The landlord said all works to address the leak and any damage it caused should be completed by 28 March 2025, although follow on works may be required. The landlord apologised to the resident and offered £250 compensation for its poor communication and the distress and inconvenience the matter caused her.
A review of the landlord’s complaint response shows it accepted it had taken too long to that point to repair the leak affecting the resident’s property. The landlord apologised and offered compensation for its failings, and it arranged to carry out repairs and remedial works to address the issues caused by the leak.
The resident escalated her complaint to the landlord on 16 and 17 February 2025 as she remained dissatisfied the leak had not been repaired.
The landlord’s contractor did not attend the property as scheduled. Instead, the contractor attended on 25 February 2025, yet they did not repair the leak. The contractor told the landlord the leak caused damage to the property’s flooring and the bathroom, and there was mould on bedroom walls.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy states it will contact residents within 5 working days of mould being reported and arrange to visit the property to inspect the issue within 21 working days. The landlord did not take any action to address the report of mould in the resident’s property.
On 21 March 2025 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It said specialist contractors would attend to repair the leak on 25 March 2025, and it aimed to carry out remedial works to the damage caused by the leak and inspect them by 22 April 2025. The landlord apologised to the resident and increased the compensation offer to £450 for the delays in carrying out repairs and its contractor not attending on 17 February 2025.
A specialist contractor attended the property on 25 March 2025, however, the landlord’s records say the water tank was not repaired until 11 June 2025, along with a damaged waste pipe which they found was also leaking into the resident’s property.
On 19 June 2025 the landlord temporarily relocated the resident due to the water damage and the damp and mould in the property caused by the leak. The landlord told her it expected the remedial works in the property would be completed within 2 months. However, the resident remains in temporary accommodation in October 2025 while the landlord carries out the outstanding remedial works, which following the resident having to make specific requests to do so, includes replacing damaged flooring. The landlord has told us it aims to complete the works by the end of October 2025.
When failures are identified, as in this case, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily. In considering this, we take into account whether the offer of redress was in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right, and Learn from Outcomes, as well as our own guidance on remedies.
When considering the landlord’s compensation offer against the criteria set out in our remedies guidance, its offer of £450 when it was made, may have been proportionate to its failings in the previous 2 months since the leak was reported. However, for the matter to be fully resolved it would also have required the landlord to take action to stop the leak, and, put right the damage the leak had caused as a result of the landlord’s failure to fix it in a reasonable timeframe.
The evidence shows it took a further 3 months to repair the leak following its stage 2 response, and it did not take any action regarding the reports of damp and mould. The resident has remained in temporary accommodation for over 4 months, despite the landlord telling her it would take 2 months.
Although the landlord had to source a specialist contractor to address the leak from the building’s water tank, it took 5 months to carry out the repair. This was far outside of the timescale the landlord’s repairs policy allows. The leak led to significant damage in the resident’s property, and she has been relocated for several months while repairs are carried out. There has been a significant impact caused to the resident by the landlord’s ineffective initial response to contain the leak and the subsequent delay to put things right.
These failings lead to a determination of severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s report of a leak into her property. The landlord is ordered to pay £1,450 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its failings. This amount is calculated in line with our remedies guidance and reflects that there has been a significant failure and impact on the resident. In addition, the landlord is ordered to complete the necessary repairs in the property and make good any damage to fixtures within the property which resulted due to its failure to take effective action within a reasonable time.

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

The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. Its complaints policy states it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days from when it is raised. It should respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days. It should acknowledge stage 2 complaints within 5 working days of the escalation and respond to them within 20 working days.
The resident complained to the landlord on 25 January 2025. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 3 February 2025, and it sent its stage 1 response on 14 February 2025, which were within its complaints policy timescales.
On 17 February 2025 the resident escalated her complaint. The landlord acknowledged this on 24 February 2025 and replied to the resident at stage 2 of its complaints process on 21 March 2025. These were sent within its policy timescales.
The landlord acknowledged and replied to the resident’s complaints at each stage of the complaints process within the timescales prescribed in its complaints policy. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord demonstrated sufficient record keeping in respect of the matters we have investigated in this case.

Communication

There were periods from when the landlord was aware of the leak that it did not contact the resident and provide updates on when it would carry out repairs. This lack of communication contributed to the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and is reflected in the compensation order above.