Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

Abri Group Limited (202433137)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202433137

Abri Group Limited

29 September 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 handling of damp and mould at the resident’s property.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The resident has health vulnerabilities which the landlord is aware of.
  2. The resident has said there had been damp and mould issues within her property for several years. The resident’s most recent report to the landlord of the damp and mould in 2023.
  3. In July 2023, the landlord’s contractor carried out a mould wash at the resident’s property.
  4. On 28 November 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and reported that damp and mould had come back in her bathroom.
  5. On 27 January 2024, the landlord’s surveyor carried out a ventilation survey at the resident’s property. On the same day the landlord’s contractor carried out a damp and mould wash at the resident’s property.
  6. On 6 August 2024, the resident contacted the landlord and submitted a complaint. She stated she wanted to complain about the continuous damp and mould issues in her property. The resident stated she was mentally at breaking point and could no longer live in the property due to the condition and explained she wanted to be rehoused. She said her personal items had been damaged by damp and mould.
  7. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 20 August 2024. It acknowledged damp and mould had been a persistent problem for many years at the resident’s property. The landlord explained it had previously attended to treat and remove mould several times. However, it stated it was evident there was underlying issues which needed to be identified to prevent the damp and mould from coming back. The landlord confirmed it could have done more to determine the cause of the damp and mould and apologised for this. It explained it had passed her request to move property to the relevant team to review. The landlord also stated the resident’s bathroom and kitchen ventilation would be upgraded on 9 September 2024 and a damp and mould survey would be carried out on 12 September 2024. In addition, the landlord stated if the resident could provide any photographs or receipts of her damaged items, it could log a compensation claim for her.
  8. On 3 October 2024, the resident contacted the landlord and requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process. The resident stated the bathroom, and bedroom was still covered in the mould after the landlord carried out a mould wash. She stated the damp, and mould was impacting her and her son’s health and explained her son had asthma. The resident stated the landlord failed to offer any compensation or apologise for its handling of the damp and mould.
  9. On 10 October 2024, the landlord’s surveyor carried out a damp and mould survey at the resident’s property. The following works were recommended from the survey:
    1. Replace wall-mounted positive ventilation PIV unit with a new unit.
    2. Upgrade bathroom extractor fan to a humidity- controlled fan.
    3. Replace internal bathroom door and furniture.
    4. Reduce ground level externally outside of lounge.
    5. Remove foam insulation boarding to bedrooms and make good.
  10. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 7 November 2024. It explained it had carried out a leak detection survey as it appeared a leak was coming from a neighbour’s property. The landlord confirmed it located the leak, and it was repaired. In addition, it stated a damp and mould survey was completed and there were several recommendations from the survey. The landlord stated it thoroughly investigated the resident’s concerns in its stage 1 response and came to a suitable and correct outcome.
  11. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated she wanted to receive compensation for the distress and inconvenience by the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould.
  12. On 23 February 2025, the resident permanently moved to another property via a management move approved by the landlord. The landlord covered the costs for moving the resident’s belongings to the new property and also recarpeted the new property. The total spent on these costs was £4,689.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has mentioned as part of the complaint that the damp and mould impacted her and her son’s health. She stated her son had asthma and this was impacted by the damp and mould. We acknowledge this has been a very difficult time for the resident and her son. However, it is outside the Ombudsman’s role to determine whether there is a direct link between the landlord’s actions or inaction and any specific impact on the resident and her son’s health. It would be more appropriately suited for a court or liability insurer to investigate this as a personal injury claim. Courts can award damages in a different way to the Ombudsman and review medical evidence. However, it is generally accepted that damp and mould can pose a significant health risk, particularly for those with respiratory conditions such as asthma. This service can consider the general risk, and distress and inconvenience caused by any errors by the landlord as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her and her son’s health.
  2. The resident raised concerns that there have been issues with damp and mould at her property for several years. The Ombudsman acknowledges the resident’s comments about the length of time the issue has been ongoing for. We acknowledge it is a longstanding issue. However, there is no evidence of her raising a formal complaint to the landlord until August 2024. In view of the time periods involved in this case and considering the availability and reliability of evidence, this report will not consider any specific events approximately more than 12 months prior to when the resident submitted her complaint to the landlord in August 2024. This is because paragraph 42.c. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (available on our website), explains that this service may not investigate complaints that were not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, normally within 12 months of the matters arising.

Policies and Procedures

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy states the landlord is responsible for repairing the structure and exterior of a property.
  2. In addition, the landlord’s repairs policy includes the following response timescales for the following repair categories:
    1. Emergency repairs – the landlord will attend within 24 hours.
    2. Routine repairs – the landlord will attend within 20 working days.
    3. Programmed works – the landlord will attend within 60 working days.

Assessment

  1. In July 2023, the landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property and carried out a mould wash. However, 4 months later the resident contacted the landlord in November 2023 and reported that the damp, and mould had returned in her bathroom. As the damp and mould had returned it would have been reasonable for the landlord to carry out an inspection to identify the cause of the damp and mould.
  2. The landlord’s records indicate an inspection was carried out after the resident’s report, as the resident confirmed this in an email to the landlord. However, the landlord told the resident in January 2024 that the surveyor who carried out the inspection no longer worked for the landlord. The delay by the landlord was unreasonable and it is evident the landlord only took action after the resident contacted it for an update on the damp and mould works.
  3. Shortly after, the landlord’s surveyor carried out a ventilation inspection at the resident’s property on 27 January 2024, which was an appropriate step taken by the landlord. The landlord’s contractor also carried out a mould wash at the property on the same day as the inspection. This was a reasonable action to take to manage the damp and mould until the installation of the extractor fans could be completed.
  4. The landlord failed to install the extractor fans in the resident’s bathroom and kitchen as agreed. Due to this, the damp and mould remained present in the resident’s property and the landlord had to carry out a damp and mould wash in May and August 2024. We recognise it would have been very difficult for the resident and son living in the property with damp and mould.
  5. The landlord acknowledged in its stage 1 complaint response that it could have done more to determine the cause of the damp and mould and apologised for this. It is positive the landlord apologised for its failure to handle the damp and mould correctly. However, considering the landlord only completed mould washes and failed to carry out any other works to resolve the damp and mould, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to offer compensation at this point to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused.
  6. The landlord also explained in its stage 1 complaint response if the resident could provide any photographs or receipts of her damaged items, it could log a compensation claim for her. It was reasonable for the landlord to request supporting evidence so it could consider a claim for the resident’s belongings damaged by the mould.
  7. Shortly after the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord carried out a leak detection survey and it identified a leak coming from the property located above the resident’s property. The landlord arranged for the neighbouring property to fix the leak and this was fixed promptly which was positive. The landlord’s contractor and surveyor attended the resident’s property to install the extractor fans and carry out a damp and mould survey. However, they could not gain access to the property, we recognise this would have been outside the landlord’s control.
  8. The landlord’s contractor managed to gain access to the resident’s property on 25 September 2024 and attempted to renew the bathroom extractor fan. However, the position of the boiler flue prevented the landlord’s contractor from carrying out the renewal of the extractor fan. As the extractor fan had been outstanding for several months at this point, we would have expected the landlord to arrange the necessary repairs to the boiler flue quickly.
  9. In October 2024, the landlord’s surveyor attended the resident’s property and carried out a damp and mould survey. A mould wash was also carried out on the same day. The survey was a necessary step taken by the landlord to identify the cause of the damp and mould. However, considering the damp and mould had been an ongoing issue and the mould washes were not resolving the problem, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to carry out a damp and mould survey much sooner than it did.
  10. Following the survey, the landlord sent a letter to the resident confirming the recommend works which included installing extractor fans, replacing the bathroom door, reducing the ground level, foam insulation works and boarding to bedrooms. The landlord also provided its stage 2 complaint response and confirmed the resident could discuss her management move request with its tenancy team, which was reasonable.
  11. After the damp and mould survey there were delays in the landlord carrying out the recommended works. The delay was unreasonable, and we would have expected the landlord to complete the necessary works promptly given the length of time the damp and mould had been going on for.
  12. In December 2024, the landlord’s contractor informed the landlord that the resident would need to be decanted (temporarily moved) between 1-2 weeks for the works to be caried out. Shortly after it was confirmed a decant was required for the damp and mould works to be carried out, the landlord confirmed in January 2025 that the resident’s management move had been approved and she would be permanently moving to another property soon. The landlord decided it would be appropriate to carry out the damp and mould works once the resident had moved out the property and it was empty. This was a reasonable approach for the landlord to take as the resident was moving property within the next month, and it would be more disruptive to arrange a temporary move and then a permanent move a few weeks later.
  13. The resident permanently moved to an alternative property on 23 February 2025. The landlord covered the costs associated with moving the resident’s belongings to the new property and also paid to fully recarpet the new property, which it was not obliged to do. The landlord has provided us with a copy of the relevant invoices confirming the amount it spent on moving and carpet costs. The landlord spent £1,092 on moving the resident’s belongings and £3,597 on the recarpeting of the property. Therefore, the landlord spent a total of £4,689. We would consider this amount as compensation as the landlord was not required to cover these costs and therefore did more than it was obliged to do to help the resident.
  14. The Ombudsman’s approach to compensation is set out in our remedies guidance (published on our website). The remedies guidance suggests awards of £1,000 or more where there have been serious failings by the landlord, which had a significant long-term impact on the resident. The amount the landlord spent on moving the resident’s belongings and recarpeting the new carpet was more than reasonable, and more than the Ombudsman would have awarded in this instance for the failings we have identified.
  15. The Ombudsman recognises the landlord identified that the resident had experienced delays in the damp and mould works being completed at her property and offered substantial redress for this, by paying for the costs associated with moving her belongings and recarpeting her new property. However, the landlord only recently paid these costs in February 2025. It is the Ombudsman’s role to consider the landlord’s handling of complaints through its internal complaints process and, in assessing this, we consider the reasonableness of any offers made during the complaints process. Where a landlord makes a reasonable offer of compensation after the end of its complaints process, the Ombudsman may make a finding of maladministration by the landlord as the offer should have been made during the complaints process.
  16. In this case, the resident moved to an alternative property in February 2025. However, considering the landlord did not cover the costs for moving the resident’s belongings and recarpeting her new property until after the complaints process ended, and there was no offer of reasonable compensation during the complaints process, there has been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould at the resident’s property. It would be appropriate for the landlord to review the resident’s case to identify any areas for improvement with a focus on its delay in its completion of repairs to resolve the damp and mould prior to the resident moving property.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould at the resident’s property.

Orders

  1. We order the landlord to review the resident’s case to identify any areas for improvement with a focus on its delay in its completion of repairs to resolve the damp and mould prior to the resident moving property.
  2. The landlord must comply with the above order within 8 weeks of the date of this report, providing evidence to the Ombudsman that it has done so by the same date.