From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

Citizen Housing Group Limited (202427458)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202427458

Citizen Housing

20 June 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 response to the resident’s request for compensation for damaged possessions.

Background

  1. The resident had a secure tenancy with the landlord at the time of the complaint. He lived at the property until May 2025 when he terminated his tenancy. The landlord was aware the resident had some mental health vulnerabilities.
  2. The resident first reported damp and mould on 5 December 2018. On 20 September 2021 the resident raised a disrepair claim against the landlord. The resident reached an out of court settlement with the landlord in May 2023 in respect of its handling of repairs. The settlement outlined that the landlord was to undertake a structural survey
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 24 June 2024. He said he wanted compensation for belongings that had been damaged by damp and mould at the property.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 3 July 2024 It:
    1. Stated it would make contact regarding the structural survey
    2. Referred him to its compensation policy. It told him that it had found no evidence of service failure and therefore compensation would not be awarded.
    3. Said the resident’s tenancy agreement did not include home contents insurance.
  5. The resident escalated his complaint on 17 July 2024. He was unhappy the landlord would not award him compensation for his damaged possessions.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 10 September 2024. It provided a chronology of events and reiterated its investigation had found no service failure and therefore no compensation for damaged possessions would be awarded.
  7. The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated his complaint to this Service.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. This investigation has focused on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for compensation for his damaged possessions. This is because, although the resident’s original complaint raised 2 issues, the resident only chose to escalate the request for compensation, to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process. We have therefore not considered the landlord’s handling of the reports of damp and mould. This is because we can only consider matters which the landlord has had the opportunity to fully investigate through its own internal complaints procedure.
  2. The resident stated that he considers the landlord’s actions and omissions had an impact on his health. This Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed through the courts or a personal injury insurance claim.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for compensation

  1. The landlord’s compensation procedure sets out the various types of financial redress it may consider offering to residents. This includes discretionary compensation where there has been a complaint investigation and the landlord accepts there was service failure.
  2. In its stage 2 response on 10 September 2024 the landlord provided a detailed summary of events. It said it had fully investigated the case and was satisfied there had been no failing in its service. It stated it was unable to offer compensation for any items that had been damaged as residents were responsible for purchasing their own home contents insurance. This was in line with its compensation policy.
  3. The landlord did not consider there had been a failing in its service. However, the resident told us he disputes this. For clarity, it is not the role of the Ombudsman to determine liability for the damage to the resident’s belongings. However, we may investigate whether the landlord acted fairly and reasonably, and in line with its policies and procedures. In this instance, as there was a dispute regarding liability, it would have been fair for the landlord to provide the resident with its insurance details.
  4. In its stage 2 complaint response on 10 September 2024 the landlord referred to the resident’s responsibility to hold their own home contents insurance, as specified in the tenancy agreement. While it is the case resident’s are responsible for arranging their own insurance cover, it is also important to note that contents insurance will only usually cover sudden and unexpected damage. There is often a standard exclusion called the ‘gradually operating cause’ exclusion. The Financial Ombudsman Service’s website states: “Policy exclusions will explain under which circumstances you won’t provide cover – these often include damage that’s been caused gradually. Some damage to a home or its contents happens gradually over time. For example, mould isn’t usually something that suddenly appears.”
  5. Therefore, even if the resident had a contents insurance policy, the claim for damaged contents, such as a mattress, clothes and bedding, may not have been covered. There was no evidence the landlord considered providing its public liability insurance details as an alternative option for the resident.
  6. Additionally, the landlord was aware the resident had some mental health vulnerabilities. In this particular situation the landlord should have considered referring the matter to its liability insurer and offering the resident support to make a claim.
  7. In summary, we have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for compensation for damaged possessions. Given particular circumstances of the case, it was not appropriate for the landlord to dismiss the resident’s request for compensation without considering all of the options. The landlord should reasonably have provided the resident with details of how he could raise a claim through its own liability insurance. An order has been made to pay the resident £75 compensation to acknowledge the inconvenience caused to him.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme we find service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for compensation for damaged possessions.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £75 compensation for the inconvenience and delays identified in this report.
    3. Provide the resident with its insurance details and support him to make a claim.