Bromford Housing Group Limited (202332382)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202332382

Bromford Housing Group Limited

14 November 2024

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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the residents’:
1. Reports of damp and mould.
2. Reports of repairs to the windows that were causing high electricity bills.
3. Reports of repairs to the extension.
4. Reports of damage caused to a wheelchair.
5. Complaint.

Background

The residents are joint tenants of the landlord, a housing association. The property is a house. For the purposes of this investigation, both residents are mainly referred to as ‘the resident.’ One resident who is disabled and is a wheelchair user is sometimes referred to as ‘resident A.’ The property has an extension which was built in 2018 to accommodate resident A’s needs.
The residents moved into the property in 2014. The same year, a repair was raised for a mould wash and painting the kitchen, in 2016 repairs were raised for windows, and in 2019 a stock condition survey assessed that the windows were due for renewal in 2030.
In July 2022, the resident requested an inspection of a bedroom, as they suspected that water had entered through pointing and caused mould. The same month, the resident also reported that the windows were blown and had degraded seals. The outcome to these are unclear, but the resident has referred to walls being painted with anti mould paint and contractors saying that glazing units or seals needed to be replaced.
In December 2022, the landlord raised a repair for damp in a bedroom, after which the gutters were cleaned. The same month, the landlord inspected and noted that damp, mould and condensation were present around windows, and upstairs radiators were single ones. It subsequently made a referral for the damp and mould, and made a major works referral to its home investment team for the windows and heating.
In late January 2023, the resident requested an inspection of the extension, due to issues that included uneven flooring and grouting.
In late March 2023, a damp and mould contractor inspected. They noted issues that included mould and moisture ingress to windows, mould below gutters, mould to a ceiling and wall in a bedroom, and damp to a cupboard ceiling. They noted that the main causes were penetrating damp due to poor mortar to the lounge and extension, leaking gutter joints, the chimney/roof connection, and windowsills having damaged pointing. They recommended a number of urgent actions including to make rainwater goods more watertight, replace windows, replace tiled window sills with modern window sills, repoint window surrounds, mould treat and redecorate areas, install a kitchen extractor, do a thermographic survey of cavity wall insulation to identify any wet areas, and investigate pointing to the extension and above rear patio doors. They also noted various vents were covered and closed, and recommended for a ventilation strategy to be agreed with the resident.
In late May 2023, a contractor recommended for a structural engineer to inspect the extension, which the landlord confirmed to the resident would be arranged.
In June 2023, the resident queried the status of the other works. They reported that mould affected resident A’s asthma, they had thrown out furniture, and a wheelchair was not usable anymore. The landlord arranged for a mould wash the same month, said it would provide start dates for works after contractors provided a quote, and said it would visit about the wheelchair.
In mid July 2023, a structural surveyor inspected the extension. Their report confirmed issues with a wall bowing and with the mortar, which likely did not meet requirements, and recommended for the mortar to be tested further.
In early August 2023, the landlord told the resident that it had asked the contractor to investigate the mortar, and it had asked for an update about the wheelchair. In mid August, a contractor inspected cavity insulation as recommended by the March report, and said no works were required. The same month, the landlord internally discussed progressing the works. In late August, it internally noted that the contractor had been to start works and it was agreed that if the windows were not resolved the damp, condensation and mould would return immediately. Following this, it inspected and made a further major works referral to its home investment team for the windows.
In August and September 2023, the landlord chased the contractor about testing the mortar, and in September 2023 the resident reported a missed appointment. In late October 2023, the landlord noted issues progressing the mortar testing, and made a major works referral to its home investment team for the investigation of the issues with the mortar, pointing and guttering.
Around this time, the local authority issued an improvement notice for a category 2 hazard in respect to damp and mould. They noted mould around windows due to perished window seals, a small patch of mould to a floor and wall junction in the kitchen/dining room, a small patch of mould to a floor and wall junction in a bedroom, and a damp patch to the underside of the hall staircase. They noted that the guttering appeared to be leaking and causing water to run down the front of the property. They asked the landlord to, within 8 weeks, ensure all radiators were working, repair the windows, investigate and repair the leaking guttering, install mechanical ventilation in the kitchen, and ensure there was adequate loft insulation.
On 27 October 2023, the resident made a number of complaints.
1. They said that there had been mould issues before they moved in, and the landlord had not dealt with this as it had promised. They said that they understood that the landlord was going to start work but there had not been any contact about the issue for months. They said their bed and carpet had been affected by mould, there were mould mites on walls, furniture and clothing, and resident A’s asthma had been affected.
2. They said that the windows let in draughts and water, which had resulted in an increase in mould and heating bills. They raised dissatisfaction that the issue was first reported 2 years prior and requested for the windows to be replaced and to be compensated for heating bills.
3. They noted that there were issues with the extension built 5 years prior, and that they did not know what was happening after a structural survey had been done.
4. They said that resident A’s wheelchair was unusable. due to the landlord’s negligence dealing with the damp and mould. They noted that they had not heard anything since they had responded to an offer of £3,000sayingtheywere seeking£4,485, the amount that the wheelchair had cost.
On 10 November 2023, the landlord provided a stage 1 response.
1. It said that repairs had been raised for the March recommended works, but noted that the resident had refused damp and mould works as they wanted the windows replaced first. It encouraged them to allow the damp works to start, and said that it would reattend after the windows were replaced if it needed to. It noted that the resident had requested copies of reports, and said it was unable to share these. It apologised that there had been a lack of communication and some failed appointments and said it had discussed this internally to improve future service.
2. It said that an internal team had picked up the windows issues in September 2023 and planned works had been raised for them to be replaced. It asked the resident to provide bills for the last 12 months and said it would look to provide compensation for anything over the average cost for a property of the resident’s property’s size.
3. It said that surveys had been completed and recommendations had been submitted for issues with the extension. It said that an internal team was managing these and aiming to complete the works as a priority.
4. It said that the wheelchair compensation issue sat with its insurance team, and they would contact the resident to discuss a resolution.
5. It concluded that the complaint would remain open and be monitored until works were completed and said that it would assess compensation once all works were complete or started to give a fair reflection of the resident’s journey.
The resident subsequently raised dissatisfaction with the response, including that this said they had refused damp and mould works because they wanted window works first.
Later in November 2023, the landlord completed the window replacement works, a contractor pre-inspected for the mortar testing, and a contractor did a survey using a thermal imaging camera. The resident says that this showed cold spots all over the place, walls floors and ceilings, and that the contractor said either the plaster or pointing had failed, or both.
In December 2023, the contractor tested the mortar, the damp and mould team confirmed their works were complete, and the landlord internally discussed progressing works to replace gutters. The residents were also told that their claim of £4,485 for the wheelchair would be paid.
In January 2024, the landlord visited the property, after which it made internal enquiries about support it could offer for damp mite issues the resident experienced, and asked the resident to send information about mould and mite damaged items. The same month, it was noted that the gutters needed to be done before internal works and would be replaced before the end of March.
On 2 February 2024, the landlord provided a stage 2 response.
1. It noted that the window replacement had now been completed. It apologised that it had not resolved the windows in a timely manner, and confirmed this was being internally discussed to improve future service.
2. It said that the gutters would be addressed by the end of March 2024, and it would contact the resident about dates. It noted that these were a primary contributor to the damp and mould issue and the works were expected to significantly improve matters. It said that after internal consultation, it did not disclose property reports, but it had emphasised internally that the Ombudsman recommend this. It detailed further works which it said were planned once the external works were completed. These reflected recommendations in the March 2023 report and were to:
  1. test and assess the pointing to the extension and above rear patio door.
  2. thermographic survey to identify wet areas of cavity wall insulation.
  3. improve the front and rear rainwater goods, to make these more watertight and ensure a front pipe was properly fixed.
  4. reduce rear gravel ground level to below the damp proof course.
  5. replace windows, replace tiled sills, and repoint window surrounds.
  6. check roof and insulation for ingress, replace any insulation where necessary, and insulate and draught proof a loft hatch.
  7. install bathroom humidistat fan, replace a bathroom louvre vent cover, and install kitchen humidistat fan.
  8. treat and redecorate areas in all rooms showing signs of mould
3. It said that issues had been identified with the mortar to the extension, and the appropriate course of action would be determined after receipt of a report, which would be communicated to the resident. However, it said that all problematic mortar would be removed and redone, and the course of action may involve significant measures for the resident and his family for which dates and a timeline were being chased.
4. It acknowledged delays and communication issues with the wheelchair compensation, and the impact on resident A’s wellbeing. It confirmed it had now reimbursed what they paid for the wheelchair.
5. It apologised for the length of time it took to escalate the complaint, and confirmed this was being internally discussed to improve future service.
6. It apologised for issues with communication and delays and the significant frustration and distress caused to the residents. It awarded £3,790, which comprised £750 for communication, £750 for distress and inconvenience, £120 for a 3 month delay issuing compensation, £420 for a 13 month delay replacing the windows, £500 towards mould mites and cleaning, £1,200 towards furniture replacement, and £50 for delay escalating the complaint. It said that calculating compensation for the furniture was challenging and a claim could be made through its insurance if this was not acceptable.
The landlord completed roof and gutter works later in February 2024, after which it decided to temporarily relocate the residents and their family for internal works, due to their circumstances and a continued mould mite issue. The landlord also received a consultant report about the mortar testing. This found that the mortar and brickwork did not meet durability requirements and recommended for the outer brickwork of the extension to be removed and rebuilt. It found that no action was required for the pointing to a wall above rear patio doors.
The landlord decided to focus on the internal works, and treatment and redecoration of the property commenced in early March and were completed in mid March. Following this, a pest contractor attended and said treatment to treat the mould mites would not work as damp and black mould was still present. The resident also queried whether damp and mould had been addressed, and raised concern about dampness, mould, mites, damage to carpet, and ingress via the pointing.
In late March and April 2024, the landlord’s surveyor inspected multiple times. They were satisfied that there was no evidence of damp, mould and condensation, and that gutter replacement, new extractor fans and new windows would improve the issue. In late April, the pest contractor carried out mould mite treatment, and around this time, the landlord carried out a mould wash and carpets were cleaned. It is also understood that the loft was insulated.
In May 2024, the resident continued to raise concerns. They requested an action plan for the extension. They said that walls needed to be replastered to fully remove mould. They said that works had not been done for the external window reveals, internal window sills and kitchen fan in line with the stage 2. They were concerned that non mouldy items would be affected by mould due to being mixed up with mouldy items by contractors. They were also concerned that the mould mite issue would return when belongings affected by mould mites were moved back into the property from storage.
Following this, the landlord said that the extension work was still being finalised, but it summarised what it intended to do and said that the external window reveals, and any repointing would be included in these. It said that the treatment and painting it had done would help prevent mould regrowth. It said that the window sill works would be done in July. It said that its surveyor did not consider a kitchen fan to be required as another fan was 5 metres away. It asked the resident to keep a list of damaged items to include as part of a compensation claim. It said that mould mites will not have survived in storage and would not return in the current conditions.
In June 2024, the landlord agreed to damp treat then recarpet the floors. Following this, laying of upstairs carpet was completed, but downstairs was suspended around August 2024 due to concerns about an area of floor and potential rising damp, after which it fitted humidity sensors and surveyed the drains.
In September 2024, the landlord carried out some follow up drain works and then completed the laying of the downstairs carpet. The same month, it also fitted a kitchen fan, calibrated other fans, capped the chimney, carried out some decorating for historical leaks, patched some damaged plaster in a bedroom cupboard ceiling, did a heat loss survey, and fitted additional radiators.
In October 2024, the landlord asked its contractor to try to find and remedy faulty pointing, and the resident confirms that some pointing work was done to the extension and around French doors. It told the resident that this and the chimney capping was due to high humidity readings in a bedroom. In mid October 2024, the residents’ items in storage were brought back to the property. The resident says their temporary accommodation has currently been extended to 27 November 2024, after which it is understood they are expected to move back into the property.
The resident brought the complaint to the Ombudsman. They are concerned whether the property is safe to move back into, particularly given resident A’s health issues. They are concerned that pointing could let in ingress, and that the August 2024 floor issue is not resolved as mould has started to grow on a nearby wall. They are concerned that the humidity at the property will impact resident A’s asthma when they move back in. They have been told the extension works will be progressed in 2025, but do not feel the landlord has given sufficient assurances about the safety of the extension. They are unhappy that the landlord said it would clean their belongings of mould and mould mites but have since told the residents to clean these themselves, which they have concerns about doing due to health issues.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The resident has raised concerns that damp issues have been unresolved since before they moved in. The evidence does not show that the issue has been ongoing since 2014, and under paragraph 42.c. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme we expect complaints to be brought within a reasonable period of the events complained about, normally 12 months. Our main focus is therefore events since October 2022, 12 months before the complaint.
The resident has expressed dissatisfaction with events after they were temporarily relocated and the handling of their temporary accommodation. The main focus of this investigation are the original complaints that the resident made and the landlord responded to. The resident has the option to ask the landlord to respond to additional issues as complaints, and they have confirmed they intend to progress a separate complaint about this issue.

The reports of damp and mould

In December 2022, the resident reported damp and mould, after which the landlord cleared gutters, and made referrals for damp and mould, a heating survey, and windows replacement. The referral for damp and mould appeared to result in the damp contractor’s March 2023 inspection, which identified a number of issues and recommended works classed as requiring “Immediate Action.”
In June 2023 the resident queried the status of works due to the impact mould was having on resident A’s asthma and their belongings, and the landlord did a mould wash and said it awaited a quote. In August 2023, the contractor attended to start works and agreed that damp and mould issues would return if the windows were not resolved. In October 2023, the resident complained about a lack of contact about the works and impact of damp and mould on belongings and health, after which the landlord’s stage 1 said they had refused damp works as they wanted the windows replaced first.
Following this, in November 2023 windows were replaced, in February 2024 roof and gutters were replaced, and in March 2024 the landlord moved the residents out of the property for internal works. Since then, the residents have been living in temporary accommodation, and the landlord has carried out various works.
The resident has had continued concerns since March 2024 about whether damp and mould has been resolved, and whether the property is safe to move back into at the end of November 2024 (when their temporary accommodation has been extended to). The Ombudsman understands the resident’s concerns, but we should note that it is not in our expertise to make definitive decisions about whether there are damp and mould issues in a property, or whether the property is habitable. Our main focus is on how a landlord has responded and whether this is reasonable.
The landlord has done extensive works to try to address damp and mould at the property. It is understood that its position is these will have greatly improved matters, and it does not consider there to be a significant damp and mould issue. We understand the resident’s concerns about moving back in, but the landlord’s position does not seem unreasonable. The Ombudsman is not party to all the recent events, but the evidence shows that the landlord has been committed to doing any necessary works.
The landlord shows that it has been making decisions in a reasonable manner, after considering the resident’s concerns and first-hand inspections by its staff, whose professional opinion the landlord is entitled to rely on. The Ombudsman cannot see evidence for a similar professional view that shares the resident’s concerns that the property may not be habitable and continues to have a significant damp and mould issue.
The resident is noted to have concerns that treatment and painting has not addressed damp and mould, and they requested for walls to be replastered. The landlord considered this and set out a position that what it has done would help prevent mould regrowth. Again, the Ombudsman understands the resident’s concerns about this, but the landlord’s position does not seem unreasonable, as it shows it reached this after considering the concerns and carrying out first hand inspections.
The resident is noted to have concerns that the original part of the property requires repointing or rendering to address damp and mould. The reports seen have noted issues with pointing on the extension and by rear French doors, but they do not seem to note issues with the wider pointing at the property. The February 2024 consultant report later found that no action was required for pointing to the wall above rear doors. The landlord has confirmed that it is taking action for the extension pointing in 2025, and in the interim its contractor has repointed some areas, understood to have included by the rear patio doors. This seems reasonable given the evidence.
The resident has referred to a thermal imaging survey in November 2023, where they say many cold spots were observed. A thermographic imaging survey of cavity wall insulation was recommended by the March 2023 damp report, which was done in August 2023 and identified no issues or follow on works. The landlord also carried out inspections in April 2024 where it was satisfied walls were sufficiently dry. The Ombudsman has not seen a report for the November survey, and do not know the context in which it was done, but the landlord shows it has reasonably considered the walls condition.
The resident has referred to the impact on health and belongings, and also to a broken promise by the landlord to clean all their belongings when the moved back in. The resident was informed prior to the investigation that we do not make definitive decisions about liability for the impact on health and belongings, but we can consider if a landlord’s response was reasonable.
The landlord was positive in its stage 2 response to offer £1,500 towards damage to furniture, as well as to offer £750 for distress and inconvenience. It has said that the resident could make a claim to its insurance if the compensation was not sufficient. It has replaced carpet at the property and is understood to have paid £500 for the resident to buy new bedding and towels. This seems a reasonable response, as the landlord has attempted to offer immediate solutions, but signposted the resident to an appropriate liability claims procedure if they are dissatisfied.
The Ombudsman notes that the landlord said “it will be possible to clean furniture and items once it is put back into the house.” The landlord has since apologised if the resident understood this to mean it would clean all personal things, and has said that any damaged items could be added to a claim. The resident says that all their belongings that have been in storage need cleaning of mould and mites, and raises concern at their being expected to do this when imminently moving back in, particularly resident A who has asthma.
The Ombudsman understands the resident’s concerns at having to carry out extensive cleaning to items through no fault of their own. However, while the landlord is initially expected to consider what it may do to assist, this seems an issue of liability and negligence. The evidence shows that the landlord confirmed it would establish what a surveyor’s assessment was for the issue, which seems reasonable.
While most recent actions and positions seem reasonable, the landlord’s handling has not always been satisfactory. The progress to address damp and mould issues at the property was slow, after the March 2023 survey as well as a local authority improvement notice around October 2023. The landlord’s stage 1 response was inappropriate to suggest that the resident was delaying damp works because they wanted windows to be replaced first. The resident has complained that they felt left in the dark by the landlord, and its communication has not been as effective and timely as it would have been expected to be.
The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould recommends for landlords to clearly communicate with residents and share results from reports. While the landlord was within its rights to decline the resident’s request for reports, it should be clear in its communication, which is not evident throughout the complaint. The landlord’s February 2024 stage 2 response appears to be the first time an action plan was communicated to the resident, but this comes across as confusing. The landlord’s repairs records about when works were raised and completed are also confusing until the end of August 2024, when the landlord started to maintain a supplied works tracker.
The landlord’s approach seems to have meant that the residents’ understanding of what needed to be done has often been informed by various contractors who have attended, rather than by a clear written action plan from the landlord. The stage 2 response noted that dates were not provided due to the external works such as roof and gutters, but the effective communication of a clear action plan after these were completed would have been beneficial for the resident’s understanding, as well as for the landlord’s own understanding and management of the works.
The stage 2 response detailed that windows would be replaced, and that window sill replacement and window surround repointing would be done during the window replacement works. The windows were replaced in November 2023 so this did not reflect current circumstances. The sill and surround works do not appear to have formed part of any works until chasing from the resident in May 2024, when the landlord said it would do the sill works in July and repointing of surrounds when it did the extension works (scheduled for 2025). It is understood that neither have yet been done.
The Ombudsman would have liked to see clearer evidence for the consideration of the recommendation for the sills and surrounds, and a clearer basis for why they were deprioritised, as the sills and surrounds were identified by the March 2023 damp report as some of the potential means of penetrating damp that was causing the issues.
The stage 2 response detailed works to reduce a rear gravel ground level area to below the damp proof course. This does not seem to have formed part of any works, and has not been done according to the resident. This is not entirely satisfactory, as this reflected a recommendation in the March 2023 report.
The stage 2 response detailed works to carry out a thermographic survey. This was already carried out in August 2023, as noted above, and so it would have been more helpful and clear to confirm this and the outcome.
The stage 2 response detailed works to install a kitchen humidistat fan, which reflected the March 2023 damp report that noted there was no fan in the kitchen. The landlord’s handling of this comes across as unclear. In April 2024, the landlord internally said kitchen fan works were completed. However, in May 2024, the resident reported that there was still no fan in the kitchen, and the landlord’s surveyor said that in their view, one was not needed. The landlord subsequently installed a kitchen fan in September 2024. The Ombudsman would have liked to see clearer evidence for the consideration of the recommendation for the kitchen fan, that clarified the approach to this recommendation from the start.
The landlord also does not show it always had a clear regard for its own investigations of the damp and mould. The landlord made an internal referral for a heat loss survey in December 2022. However, it was not until September 2024, 21 months later, that it carried out a heat loss survey and fitted larger radiators in a bedroom and bathroom. The heating at the property was upgraded in 2019, and the detriment caused by this is not entirely clear, however this seems a further example of issues evident such as delayed action and lack of clear regard to previous recommendations.
The landlord’s stage 2 response was appropriate to acknowledge a number of issues, and it is evident that its handling improved after around this time, as after the windows were replaced it replaced the roof and rainwater goods to ensure these were resolved before internal works. It is evident that it sought to give regard to the resident’s circumstances, concerns and distress due to issues such as mould mites, as it visited them, internally discussed matters and decided to temporarily relocate them for the internal works. It is evident that staff monitored matters to ensure that any later issues and concerns were dealt with in a timely manner.
The landlord’s stage 2 response was also positive to make a total award of £3,790 for the resident’s complaint. However, this is not clear how it sought to specifically address the damp and mould issues in the complaint, apart from compensation for furniture damage and mould cleaning. The damp and mould delays were not compensated in the same way as the window delays, where a specific amount was awarded. The £1,500 for communication issues and distress and inconvenience is shared with the other issues, which equates to £500 for the damp and mould. This does not seem to go far enough given the majority of works took around 15 months to start. While many aspects of the landlord’s response has been positive, this and issues evident leads to a finding of maladministration in its response about damp and mould.

The reports of repairs to the windows that were causing high electricity bills

In 2019, the windows were recorded as being due for renewal in 2030. In July 2022, the resident made a report about deteriorated seals, and says that contractors said glazing units or seals needed to be replaced, while the outcome is unclear in the landlord’s supplied records. In December 2022 and August 2023, the landlord then referred the windows for major works to its home investment team, and they were finally replaced in November 2023.
The resident complained that the windows were in disrepair, and had led to high heating bills. The landlord acknowledged that there had been a 13 month delay and awarded £420 for this. It also invited the resident to provide bills for the last 12 months in order for it to consider if these were more than average.
The evidence shows that the resident reported the windows in July 2022, which the landlord could have given regard to, however this did occur 17 months before the complaint. The evidence then shows that after the windows were referred to the landlord’s major works team in December 2022, there was a lack of action until a further referral was made in August 2023. This meant that the November 2023 window replacement was 11 months after the December 2022 referral. The landlord was therefore right to acknowledge that there were delays, and the £420 for this element seems reasonable for the delays based on the landlord’s compensation policy and our remedies guidance.
The evidence is unclear about the wider impact on heating bills, and notes of a December 2022 visit say that the resident was also unsure about how much high bills were attributable to issues at the property. The landlord’s offer to review bills therefore seemed a fair response to this aspect.
Overall, in the Ombudsman’s view, the landlord responded reasonably about the windows. It took action to replace the windows, acknowledged delays, and offered reasonable remedies for the delays and potential increased heating bills.

The reports of repairs to the extension

In January 2023, the resident requested an inspection of the extension due to concerns which included uneven flooring. In March 2023, a damp and mould contractor recommended investigating the pointing of the extension as well as the mortar used for the load bearing structure of the extension. In May 2023, it is understood that a contractor recommended a structural engineer to inspect. In July 2023, a structural surveyor found that the mortar likely did not meet regulations and recommended for it to be tested to confirm its composition and strength. In December 2023, the mortar was tested after the landlord experienced issues with a previous contractor.
In late February 2024, the landlord was provided a report about the mortar testing. This found that the mortar and brickwork did not meet durability requirements and recommended for the outer brickwork of the extension to be removed and rebuilt. In late March 2024, the resident was told that the report for the extension had been received, next steps were being considered, and it had been confirmed that it was structurally safe. In May 2024, the landlord summarised what it intends to do, and the resident has been told that the works will be progressed in 2025 and may involve a temporary relocation.
The evidence shows that after it was reported in January 2023, there were issues progressing investigation of the extension, including a wrong contractor initially attending in July 2023, and a lack of response from a contractor between around August and October 2023 about testing the mortar. There was also a lack of effective and timely communication about the issue. However, after the complaint, the landlord acknowledged and compensated for communication issues and distress and inconvenience. It has also progressed and communicated about the investigation of the extension in a reasonably timely manner, given it needed time to consider findings.
The resident has raised concern about the current structural safety of the extension, and we understand their desire to ensure that the property is safe for them and their family. The landlord confirmed that it considered the extension to be structurally safe in March 2024, which it could have confirmed earlier if it did not, but structural safety does not seem to have been specifically raised until around that time. The Ombudsman does not have the expertise to make definitive decisions about structural safety, but the landlord’s position seems reasonable from the evidence. The Ombudsman cannot see any immediate structural safety concerns in various reports, and the landlord’s consultant confirmed that there were no concerns about the inner part of the extension that was bearing the load of the roof.
Overall, in the Ombudsman’s view, the landlord responded reasonably about the extension. It progressed the issue, acknowledged delays and communication issues, and offered reasonable remedy for these.

The reports of damage caused to a wheelchair

In June 2023, the resident said that resident A’s wheelchair was unusable due to damage from the damp and mould issues. Following this, it is evident that the landlord visited the resident and referred the issue to its insurance team, who offered £3,000 to settle the claim.
The resident later complained about the insurance team’s lack of reply to a request for £4,485 to settle the claim. The landlord’s November 2023 stage 1 said that the insurance team would contact the resident, after which the resident was paid £4,485 around December 2023. The landlord acknowledged delays and communication issues for the wheelchair compensation and awarded £120 for this.
The landlord appropriately referred the wheelchair damage to its insurance procedure, as that is the appropriate procedure to consider matters of negligence and liability. The insurance procedure is separate to the complaint procedure, but the landlord should progress claims in a timely way and communicate about them effectively, which it is not evident it had been doing from around the time the resident complained. Therefore, while the evidence suggests that the claim was settled around a month after the landlord’s stage 1 took action to progress matters, the stage 2 was right to acknowledge delays, and the £120 for this element seems reasonable.
Overall, in the Ombudsman’s view, the landlord responded reasonably about the reports of damage caused to the wheelchair. It helped progress the matter under its insurance procedure, acknowledged delays and communication issues, and offered reasonable remedy for these.

Complaint handling

The landlord responded at stage 1 in a timely manner. However, it inaccurately said that the resident had refused damp works as they wanted the windows replaced first, and the landlord’s stage 2 response was delayed by 2 and a half months. The landlord subsequently acknowledged and apologised for misrepresenting events and awarded £50 for the response delay. This leads the Ombudsman to find reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling, as it reasonably acknowledged, apologised and compensated for the issues evident with its complaint handling.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the residents’ reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the residents’:
1. Reports of repairs to the windows that were causing high electricity bills.
2. Reports of repairs to the extension.
3. Reports of damage caused to a wheelchair.
4. Complaint.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord is ordered to, within 4 weeks, pay the resident £600 compensation for the issues identified with damp and mould. This is in addition to its offer of £3,790, which it should take steps to pay if it has not already.
The landlord is ordered to, within 4 weeks, liaise with the resident about the works and set out in writing a position on the current status of the works. This should include its position on the humidity levels at the property, and details of an action plan to monitor damp and mould issues at the property for a period after the residents have moved back in.
The landlord is ordered to, within 4 weeks, review the March 2023 damp report, and:
1. consider the current status and urgency for the window sill replacements and window surround repointing. It should then set out a position on this to the resident including if and when these will be done.
2. consider the current status and urgency for the reduction of a rear gravel ground level area to below the damp proof course, taking into account concerns from the resident that water falls from gutters to this area. It should then set out a position on this to the resident including if and when this will be done.
The landlord is recommended to, if it has not already, establish the extent of cleaning that may be required to belongings in storage, review any support it can offer or support services the resident can use, and set out a written position on this to the resident.
The landlord is recommended to re-offer to review utility bills for the period before the windows were replaced, to consider if these were higher than average.
The landlord is recommended to review the March 2023 damp report in respect to ventilation, and consider the recommendation to agree a ventilation strategy with the resident.
The landlord is recommended to make enquiries about the November 2023 survey that involved a thermal imaging inspection, in order to consider whether this identified any issues which require current action.
The landlord is recommended to review how it considers reports such as the March 2023 damp report, to ensure that it progresses and communicates about works arising from them in a more effective and timely manner.