Bromsgrove District Housing Trust Limited (202517937)

Background

1. The resident has lived in the property, a 2-bedroom ground floor flat, since November 2023. The landlord is aware of the resident’s partner’s mental health conditions and that another occupant has autism. The resident says damp and mould has affected the property since she moved in.

What the complaint is about

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

Our decision (determination)

3. We found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
4. We found service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

5. While the landlord was responsive to the resident’s reports of damp and mould, it took too long to address them.
6. Although the landlord dealt with the resident’s stage 1 complaint in line with its complaints policy and our Complaint Handling Code (the Code), it delayed the stage 2 response.

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.

7. The first record of reported damp and mould was on 13 December 2023. The landlord completed remedial work to the roof 2 days later. The resident complained about the landlord’s handling of her report and it responded in February 2024. It agreed to carry out further work which it completed and monitored. The resident confirmed in May and August 2024 that damp and mould had not recurred.
8. We have not seen that the resident escalated that complaint. In the interests of fairness, and considering the availability of evidence, we have only assessed the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould identified on 29 October 2024. Any reference to damp and mould prior to this is for context only.
9. The landlord aims to carry out appointed work, such as mould treatments, within 21 working days. Following the resident’s report of damp and mould in a hallway cupboard on 29 October 2024 the landlord surveyed the property and arranged a remedial treatment for 30 December 2024. This was 42 working days after the resident’s report and outside the appointed repair time limit.
10. The treatment was rescheduled to 2 January 2025, at the resident’s request. After receiving her complaint, the landlord inspected the property on 15 January 2025 and offered TA while it investigated and completed larger works.
11. It is positive the landlord agreed to further investigate and update the resident it its stage 1 response. Its compensation policy says it will consider awarding compensation for damage to belongings caused by its service failures. Therefore, its invite to evidence the cost of any damage was appropriate. The resident went on to do so. She accepted the landlord’s offer to replace carpets and pay £1,286.93 for quantifiable damage to personal belongings. It is also positive the landlord acknowledged the impact of delays remedying damp and mould.
12. The landlord investigated and found extensive moisture at the back of the property from an unknown source. It excavated an outside area within its 21 day repair time limit but found no standing water. It told the resident this on 6 February 2025. It also said it planned to improve ventilation and replace the bathroom and windows to reduce condensation. It said it would be another 2 weeks before it could confirm when it could complete work and she could return to the property.
13. The resident contacted the landlord again on 17 February 2025 as she was unhappy with the lack of progress or updates. The landlord replied that day and acknowledged it should have acted more urgently. While it had previously told the resident it could not provide a completion date for 2 weeks, we understand why she wanted to know when work would be completed. She later reported the household was negatively affected by being in TA, particularly the occupant with autism.
14. Records show the landlord removed the bathroom on 18 February 2025 and replaced it later that week. It updated the resident on 3 and 7 March 2025. It explained there were delays manufacturing the windows and the time taken to measure, manufacture and install them was usually 6 weeks. However, on 13 March 2025 it confirmed it had replaced the windows the previous day.
15. Records also show it installed environmental condition monitors to detect humidity and treated damp and mould in the bedroom, although we do not know when. The landlord replaced windows outside the 21 working day time limit that it aims to complete larger work. However, the short delay was reasonable given the windows needed to be manufactured.
16. The landlord arranged for the resident to view the property on 19 March 2025 and confirm completed work was satisfactory. Although she agreed to return on 26 March 2025, further work was outstanding. This included snagging repairs in the bathroom, ventilation improvements and testing the efficiency of heating.
17. The landlord did not schedule the outstanding work until 14, 15 and 17 April 2025. The resident reported that the contractor failed to attend on 14 April 2025. She said she declined a trip away to facilitate the visit. We have not seen why the landlord did not complete work within the 21 working day repair time limit and while the resident was in TA. This caused the resident further distress and inconvenience. She had already told the landlord she did not have any annual leave to take further time off from work.
18. It is positive the landlord acknowledged its failure to complete work while the resident was in TA in its stage 2 response. It also acknowledged she needed to facilitate ongoing appointments and that it had not assessed data from environmental condition monitors that may have reduced further inconvenience.
19. The landlord’s compensation award of £662 for distress and inconvenience caused by these failures and the loss of irreplaceable items was appropriate. The resident told us the issue affected her health and that of her family. However, we are not medical experts and cannot assess if something impacted health or not. The resident could seek independent advice regarding this aspect. She could also consider a claim through the landlord’s liability insurance or the courts. While we cannot determine impact on health, we have considered the impact of the landlord’s failings including the distress and inconvenience caused. The landlord’s award exceeded the range detailed in our remedies guidance for when failures adversely affect a resident with no permanent impact.
20. In its April 2025 complaint response, the landlord offered appropriate compensation and made significant efforts to treat mould, identify the cause of any damp, and reduce condensation. However, it did not appropriately resolve the complaint as it did not complete the agreed works to a satisfactory standard until September 2025. This meant the resident facilitated more appointments (although some went ahead without her needing to be present). While the landlord completed the heating efficiency assessment on 17 April 2025, it did not replace the radiators until 12 June 2025. This was nearly 6 months since the resident moved to TA to allow such work to be completed.
21. The further work to make-good affected areas and address snagging issues from earlier work was not completed until nearly 8 months after the resident moved to TA. This was significantly outside of the 21-day appointed repair time limit. The landlord has not acknowledged or apologised for this. Therefore, we find there has been maladministration. We order the landlord to apologise for this. We do not order it to pay any more compensation than it has already offered. We are satisfied the overall award is sufficient to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures identified in this investigation.
22. We understand the resident’s frustration that she continues to experience damp and mould. However, the landlord was responsive to the report of damp and mould of 29 October 2024. It committed to significant works to remedy this in its stage 2 response. In the interest of fairness, we have limited the scope of this investigation to issues raised and identified up to that point. This is because the landlord needs a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to new issues before our involvement. The resident can address issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint directly with the landlord and refer to us if she remains dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response.
23. We cannot assess the landlord’s ongoing efforts to address damp and mould after it completed work in September 2025. However, we know it arranged an external survey on 25 November 2025. This found no mould but ineffective ventilation and damp in the hallway cupboard believed to be coming from the property above. While the landlord told us it treated mould and upgraded ventilation it has been unable to confirm if it investigated whether the property above was contributing to damp. Therefore, we order it to investigate the findings of the survey now and provide a schedule of work.

24. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process and aims to acknowledge complaints within 5 working days at both stages. It aims to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of acknowledgement. This is in line with the Code.
25. The landlord dealt with the stage 1 complaint in line with its complaint process. However, due to a delay acknowledging the stage 2 complaint, the landlord’s stage 2 response was issued 13 working days late. This resulted in the resident spending time and trouble progressing the issue. She believed this delayed resolving the substantive matter.
26. The landlord has not apologised for this and has missed an opportunity to put things right, in line with our dispute resolution principles. We order it to do so now and pay the resident £50 compensation. This is in line with our remedies guidance for when there has been a service failure that resulted in time and trouble and delays getting matters resolved.

Learning

27. The landlord has a good complaint response template. It includes clear sections to ensure it considers complaint issues and puts any failures right. It also has a helpful action plan section and a return slip, offering the complainant the option to escalate the matter or ask to discuss the complaint.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

28. The landlord provided sufficient records to enable us to reach a determination.

Communication

29. The landlord did not regularly updated the resident on planned work and when it would complete it. Our spotlight report on ‘Repairs and Maintenance’ explains landlords can avoid failures when they let residents know what to expect regarding repairs and provide a clear schedule for repair visits.