Amplius Living (202509644)

Background

1. The resident moved into a 2-bedroom bungalow in October 2021. Soon after, she reported dampness in the main bedroom. The landlord tried to determine the reason for the damp and mould.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Report of damp and mould.
   2. Associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the:
   1. Residents report of damp and mould.
   2. Associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

Reports of damp and mould

4. The landlord acknowledged the delays, distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident. For this it apologised and made a reasonable and proportionate compensation award. However, it failed to respond to the resident regarding her claim for her damaged belongings.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord failed to meet its published complaint handling targets causing distress and inconvenience to the resident.

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.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

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.

6. The landlord acknowledged in its complaints review it failed to communicate and respond to the resident’s report of damp and mould made in 2022. The landlord accepted it had closed the case in error. This was not reasonable as the landlord has an obligation to assess whether it had a responsibility to undertake works to keep the property in repair.
7. The resident said the damp and mould in the property slightly improved and was intermittent. This accounted for a gap of about a year until the resident made contact in October 2023 about the damp and mould. The landlord took 34 days to inspect the property. This was not reasonable as it was outside its published routine repair standard of 28 working days.
8. The inspection found damp and mould in the main bedroom. Mould was identified above the window, and this was assessed as condensation from a lack of ventilation. A recommendation was made for the drainage to be checked and the bedroom mould washed and stained blocked. This was in line with the landlord’s damp and mould action plan which said following its triage survey a mould wash would be carried out. The landlord said in in its stage 1 complaint response that it completed the drainage survey on 18 December 2023 and the mould wash on 23 February 2024. The drainage survey did not find any issues with the drainage pipework.
9. The resident told us the damp and mould in the property impacted her health. While we are an alternative to the courts, we are unable to establish legal liability. Also, whether a landlord’s action or lack of action had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. We are unable to consider the personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint as these matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or a personal injury case. Nevertheless, we will consider any distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident.
10. The landlord accepted in its complaints review the communication between it and the resident was poor resulting in the resident having to chase it for updates. We expect landlords to demonstrate good communication with residents by keeping them informed, expectations managed and being transparent about the outcomes of inspections. It was reasonable for the landlord to send the resident a copy of the inspection report with its stage 1 complaint response. This allowed the resident to know the investigations and outcomes from the tests it had undertaken.
11. It is reasonable to expect any quality inspection of damp and mould to include an assessment of all causes of the damp such as leaks, rising damp, penetrating damp and condensation. This involves checking the fabric of the building for faults including the brickwork and external drains. In line with this the landlord undertook multiple surveys of the drains and dug inspection pits. The landlord also instructed a structural engineer in September 2024 to test and review the samples from the inspection holes. The landlord also considered whether there was a defect to the floor membrane and the possibility of installing a soakaway linking to another property. It also determined there was no subsidence to the property. In addition, the cause of the dampness could be the soil below the property or the trees around the property.
12. A delay in repairs is not always considered a failure, particularly if the issue is complex as it appears to have been in this case. The landlord assessed in February 2025, the inspection pits were not identifying the reason for the reported damp. By May 2025 it had determined the reported damp was not caused by damaged pipework and a referral to its insurers was necessary.
13. We expect landlords to set out how they will deal with claims for damage they received. The resident on several occasions informed the landlord her belongings had been damaged. The resident was initially informed to make a complaint about this and the link to its complaint procedure was provided. This was reasonable and in line with its compensation guidance which says compensation is payable for damage or loss of belongings due to the landlord’s action or inaction. However, in its complaints review the landlord did not assess whether it was liable for the resident’s damaged belongings or whether the request should be referred to its liability insurer. This was not reasonable, and an order has been made regarding this.
14. One of our Dispute Resolution Principles is to learn from mistakes. The landlord told us it had done so and was reviewing its procedures regarding its handling of claims for damaged belongings. It intended to introduce a process to handle requests for compensation for damaged belongings from its residents. This is reasonable.
15. The landlord in its complaint responses recognised the impact of its delays in handling repairs and its communication failures. For this it apologised and made a compensation award of £1000 for its service failures. This was in line with its compensation policy and our Remedies Guidance which states that awards of £1000 are appropriate for significant long-term impact to residents. The compensation award is considered reasonable and proportionate.
16. The resident has told us she is dissatisfied with the length of time taken to identify and resolve the mould in her property. The landlord’s insurer attended to carry out its inspection of the damp and mould in the property and in August 2025 advised the landlord it was unable to give its position regarding liability for the repairs. While the insurance claim is being progressed, we expect the landlord to keep the resident updated until the insurance claim is determined. An order has been made about this.
17. Overall, the landlord took reasonable steps to identify the reason for the damp and mould in the main bedroom. The resident found the time taken including the various tests prolonged and frustrating. Once the landlord determined it could not identify the reason for the damp and mould it made a referral to its insurer for resolution. However, it did not completely adopt a resolution focused response as it did not assess the resident’s claim for damage to her belongings. As the compensation award is considered reasonable, it has not been increased, and a finding of service failure had been made.

18. The resident complained to the landlord on 16 December 2024 about the damp and mouldin the bedroom. The landlord’s complaints procedure says it will respond within 10 working days at stage 1 of its complaints procedure. The landlord did not meet its published time targets as it took 17 working days to provide its stage 1 complaint response.
19. The resident escalated her complaint on 30 January 2025. However, the landlord said it did not receive the escalation request. On 19 March 2025, the resident resent it to the landlord. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 26 March 2025.
20. The landlord’s complaint procedure states it will respond to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. Our Complaint Handling Code tells landlords to request an extension if they cannot meet their published complaint handling time targets. The landlord decided it required more time to obtain more information from a survey report and requested an extension with the resident on 24 April 2025.
21. We expect landlords to provide residents with its position on the complaint at the earliest opportunity, following up with the resident to provide necessary updates. Overall, the landlord took 39 working days to provide its stage 2 complaint response on 22 May 2025.
22. The landlord in its complaint review did not acknowledge the total time take to provide its complaint response. The complaint process is its opportunity to build trust with its residents. It is also its opportunity to acknowledge any inconvenience and distress experienced by the resident for not meeting its time targets.
23. Overall, the landlord did not meet its complaint handling targets, which caused frustration and distress to the resident. For those reasons, additional compensation of £100 has been awarded, and a finding of service failure has been made.

Learning

24. The landlord recognised the need to introduce a policy outlining how it handles claims for damaged belongings from its resident.

Communication

25. The landlord to improve communication between its housing management and home ownership team to improve response times to shared owners.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

26. The landlord recognised the case management of its records hindered its investigations into the resident’s concerns. Good record management would allow it to evidence the actions taken and provide an earlier resolution for its residents.