Read our damp and mould report focusing on Awaab's Law

Clarion Housing Association Limited (202410568)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202410568

Clarion Housing Association Limited

7 May 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Repairs to the resident’s property including damp mould, damage to the kitchen floor, repairs to the front door and damage to walls in the communal area.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 2-bedroom flat. The landlord has confirmed that it has ‘mental health or disability and other disability’ recorded for the resident. The landlord has advised that it was only made aware of the resident’s vulnerabilities on 20 December 2024.
  2. On 7 July 2023, the resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord about multiple repairs to her property which she said had been outstanding for over 18 months. The resident said:
    1. The landlord had sent an operative to list all the repairs in November 2022. It had then constantly sent operatives who either did some of the repairs or just took photos and measurements, but the repairs were never booked in.
    2. Between December 2022 and May 2023, she had chased the landlord for a list of repairs to be carried out following the visit by its operative. However, she received no list and her phone calls, emails and messages were not responded to. The resident said that she had still, to date, received no response.
    3. She wanted the repairs completed properly and as soon as possible. She also wanted compensation for time wasted and inconvenience, otherwise she would look to book private contractors to do the works and then charge the landlord. The resident advised that she had to take unpaid time off work for the repairs to be done only for those repairs not to be completed.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 27 October 2023 and its stage 2 on 20 December 2023. In its responses the landlord:
    1. Confirmed that the resident first reported issues with her bathroom and kitchen floors in April 2022. These were inspected in May 2022 and works were raised for July 2022. However, these were missed due to the cyber-security incident which affected its IT systems at the time. Following the establishment of its new systems, these works were not picked up and the issues remained outstanding.
    2. Said, an inspection was carried out in September 2023 and works then raised to attend to the flooring, the kitchen plinth, the mould on the window reveals, and damaged plaster in her hallway on 2 November 2023. The landlord noted that the resident had advised that several works had been attended to, but follow-on works remained outstanding. These included to the front door, kitchen flooring, mould, and communal plastering
    3. Acknowledged that there had been service failures; especially due to the length of time the resident had been waiting for the repairs to be resolved, which it noted was outside of the 28 days set out in its repairs policy.
    4. Acknowledged the lack of communication the resident received and said it had given feedback to its Area Manager so that learning could be taken to improve its services going forward.
    5. Offered a total of £1,050 compensation, in recognition of the identified service failures. This was made up of:
      1. £50 for repairs not being carried out within agreed timescales.
      2. £600 for the delay in the repairs being completed.
      3. An additional £150 for the delays in addressing the flooring works.
      4. £100 for its failure to complete repairs or raise follow on works.
      5. £50 for the resident’s contact of May 2023 not being raised as a formal complaint.
      6. £100 for the delay in its stage 1 response.
      7. £50 for the delay in its stage 2 response.
    6. Noted that an appointment had been scheduled to take place on 8 January 2024 to inspect the outstanding works. These would then either be completed, or follow-on works raised, as necessary. A post inspection would then to be carried out the same day to ensure that all aspects had been addressed correctly. The landlord said that it hoped the resident would be happy for this to be attended now the complaint had been resolved.
    7. Said, with regards to the resident’s concerns about the compensation being paid into her rent account without speaking to her. The landlord said according to its policies it was not necessary for it to gain the resident’s permission to pay this amount to her rent account. As such, the landlord said it could identify no service failure with regards to this aspect of the complaint. However, the payment was reversed on 20 November 2023 and it had instructed its Customer Support team not to make the final payment without first speaking with the resident.

Assessment and findings

  1. The Ombudsman’s role is to assess whether the landlord has followed proper procedure, good practice, and behaved reasonably, taking account of all the circumstances of the case.
  2. When considering how a landlord has responded to a complaint, the Ombudsman considers not just what has gone wrong, but also what the landlord has done to put things right in response to a complaint.
  3. Where the landlord admits failings, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether it resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances and offered appropriate redress. In considering this, we assess whether the landlord’s actions were in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.

Scope

  1. In fairness to the resident, as the landlord considered matters as far back as April 2022, this investigation will also consider matters back to that date. This being 13 months before the resident’s contact of May 2023, which the landlord acknowledged in its complaint responses should have been logged as a formal complaint, but was not.
  2. In general, we would not propose a remedy of compensation to reimburse a resident for their time off work, loss of wages or loss of employment whilst repairs are carried out. Whilst such works will inevitably cause some inconvenience to residents, their occupancy agreement will require them to give access for repairs to be carried out as needed, and it would not be fair or reasonable for us to order a landlord to pay a resident reimbursement for loss of earnings for routine appointments.
  3. However, there may be circumstances when the Ombudsman decides that it is appropriate that a landlord pays compensation in recognition of the inconvenience caused, for example where repair appointments are repeatedly missed or fail to resolve the repair issue.

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s property

  1. Once a landlord is informed of some damage or deterioration in a property, for which it is responsible, it is ‘on notice’ to carry out a reasonable enquiry to determine the cause and complete a repair. What is a reasonable time will depend on all the circumstances of a case.
  2. The landlord’s Responsive Repairs and Maintenance policy states that it will make ‘every effort’ to complete routine repairs within 28 days. The policy goes on to state that ‘from time to time,’ repairs will need to be completed outside of this timescale due to material shortages or unforeseen circumstances. The policy states that these cases will be monitored through performance reporting and it will aim to keep the resident regularly updated until completed.
  3. The landlord has acknowledged that the resident first reported issues with her bathroom and kitchen floors in April 2022. These were inspected in May 2022 and jobs raised in July 2022 but not completed due to a cyber-attack. When its systems had been restored following the cyber-attack, the landlord failed to pick up and complete these repairs.
  4. It was then not until 22 November 2022, that the landlord attended the resident’s property again to identify what repairs were required. At this point, the resident had been waiting for 7 months for the repairs to her flooring to be completed.
  5. Following the inspection on 22 November 2022, the landlord raised a job on 28 November 2022 to renew the flooring in the resident’s kitchen and bathroom, but this job was cancelled.
  6. On 3 February 2023, the landlord raised a number of jobs including to the bathroom flooring, kitchen units and front door.
  7. In her formal complaint of 7 July 2023, and other correspondence that month, the resident raised concerns about the repairs that the landlord raised on the repairs raised on 3 February 2023. These included:
    1. That the bathroom flooring was not replaced until 18 April 2023, 2 months after the job was raised.
    2. An operative attended on 20 April 2023 to renew the kitchen units but was unable to complete the works as the job required 2 operatives. The repair was rescheduled of 2 May 2023. However, no one attended and when she called the landlord she was told the job had been recorded as complete. The resident said she was told that someone would get back to her but they did not. The resident said that, to date, these works had not been completed.
    3. An operative came to her home on 9 June 2023 and assessed the repair to her front door. The resident said the operative told her parts would need to be ordered, and a longer appointment scheduled. However, it was not until 1 July 2023 that she received a text message advising her that a repairs visit had been scheduled for 19 July 2023. But it still had not been fixed.
  8. Given that the resident reported the repair to the bathroom floor in November 2022, this would have meant that the landlord took 5 months to replace the bathroom flooring. Further, we have seen no evidence of the landlord contacting the resident following either the missed appointment for the kitchen on 2 May 2023, nor the cancellation of the repair to the front door.
  9. In addition to the repairs raised on 3 February 2023, the resident also raised concerns with the landlord in July 2023 about a number of other repairs, including:
    1. A toilet leak, reported in June 2022 was not repaired until 31 August 2022, some 2 months later.
    2. A leaking boiler, which she reported on 1 December 2022 was not fixed until 2 May 2023, some 5 months later. The resident explained that during the time the boiler was faulty there had been a lack of running/ hot water coming from the shower. The resident also said the boiler cupboard had been damaged, and all the shelves had been ruined, by the water damage.
    3. That the mould was inspected in May 2023 and she was told that water was coming from the brickwork and vent outside of the building. The resident said the water was ‘running down’ from above her flat and ‘in through gaps in the window causing damp, water marks, mould and wood rot.’ The resident said that, some 2 months later, this had not been addressed.
    4. There were 2 dips in her kitchen floor, which she felt was ‘about to cave in’. The resident said that this was initially report on 2015/16, had not been fixed and had ‘progressively worsened’ over the years.
  10. The resident also said she had requested a list of the repairs following the landlord’s inspection of her property in November 2022, but this had not been sent and her phone calls, emails and messages had not been responded to.
  11. On 8 August 2023, the landlord wrote to resident to explain that it was liaising with its repairs team and with its leaks, condensation, damp, and mould team (LCDM) and anticipated being in a position to provide either a further update or full response by 16 August 2023.
  12. However, by 11 September 2023, the resident had heard nothing and so had to chase the landlord for an update. The resident said she had sent an email the previous week with dates for a visit that week but this was not responded to and so an appointment would now need to be made for the following week.
  13. Despite the resident chasing the landlord for a visit in September 2023, it was not until 2 November 2023, almost 2 months later, that the visit took place. During the visit:
    1. The kitchen floor was confirmed as being ‘uneven’ and when the lino was lifted it exposed holes in the floor. The operative that attended said the holes were filled but ‘waves’ remained and the floor remained uneven. It was suggested that a 2x2sqm area of the floor would need to be replaced.
    2. The ‘multi-function’ lock and handle to the front door was replaced.
    3. The kitchen plinth was fixed.
    4. The kitchen, bathroom and bedroom was mould washed and painted with mould resistant paint (MRP).
  14. Given the landlord acknowledged that issue with the kitchen floor had been reported in April 2022, this would mean that it had failed to address this for 19 months. The front door, which the landlord raised a repair for on 3 February 2023, was not addressed for 9 months. The kitchen repair, which the landlord raised on 14 May 2023 was not completed for 6 months and the mould, which the landlord was aware of as early as 19 July 2023, was not addressed for 4 months.
  15. In its final response of 20 December 2023, the landlord acknowledged that there had been service failures; especially due to the length of time the resident had been waiting for the repairs to be resolved, which it noted was outside of the 28 days set out in its repairs policy. It also offered the resident a total £900. This was made up of:
    1. £50 for repairs not being carried out within agreed timescales.
    2. £600 for the delay in the repairs being completed.
    3. An additional £150 for the delays in addressing the flooring works.
    4. £100 for its failure to complete repairs or raise follow on works.
  16. Having considered the evidence it is our view that, whilst the landlord’s acknowledgement of its failures and its offer of £900 compensation is welcome, this is not sufficient to provide the resident with reasonable redress in this case.
  17. This is because, in addition to the excessive amount of time the resident had to wait for the repairs to be completed, there were repeated appointments made, which were either cancelled or operatives attended but did not complete the works. The resident also had to repeatedly chase works, due to both the lack of progress and the lack of effective and timely communication by the landlord. The poor communication in this case, which was acknowledged by the landlord, meant that the resident was unduly involved in the repairs process. This was unreasonable and would have caused further unnecessary distress and inconvenience.
  18. To put things right, the landlord has been ordered to pay the resident an additional £300, bringing the total payable for this element of the resident’s complaint to £1,200. This being in line with the amounts set out in our remedies guidance for situations where there have been serious failings over a significant period of time, which had a significant impact on the resident.
  19. In addition to apologising and offering compensation, the complaint process provided the landlord with the opportunity to take action to put right the outstanding repairs and to learn from the outcomes.
  20. In this case the outstanding repairs included the kitchen floor, concerns raised by the resident about the mould treatment that had been applied, the door mechanism, the damage to the door frame and outstanding decoration of the communal plaster.
  21. The landlord acknowledged these outstanding works, for which it apologised. It also appropriately scheduled an appointment for an inspection to take place on 8 January 2024. The landlord committed to either completing the outstanding works, or to raising follow-on works, as necessary. It also committed to a post inspection being carried out the same day to ensure that all aspects had been addressed correctly. These were appropriate commitments for the landlord to make.
  22. In this case, the resident contacted the landlord in January 2024, to advise that she would let it know once her annual leave ‘refreshed’ for the remedies on its stage 2 response to go ahead. We also understand that the resident subsequently raised a new formal complaint with the landlord on 17 December 2024 about its ongoing response to the outstanding repairs.
  23. As the resident requested that the works be put on hold and as she has raised a new complaint, the landlord’s actions following its final response will not be considered further in this report. Were the resident to remain dissatisfied with the landlord’s actions following her new complaint, she could then refer her new complaint to us for investigation.
  24. With regards to any learning, the landlord acknowledged the lack of communication the resident received and said it had given feedback to its Area Manager so that learning could be taken to improve its services going forward. This was an appropriate step for it to take. However, we have seen no evidence of the landlord seeking to take any learning from its actual handling of the repairs in this case. As such, a further order has been made for it to review its overall handling of the repairs and to consider what lesson it might learn to avoid a similar situation occurring going forward.

Handling of the associated complaint

  1. The landlord introduced an interim complaints policy on 17 June 2022. This was following a cyber-attack. For complaints received after 17 June 2022, the landlord operated a two stage complaints process:
    1. At stage 1 it would log and acknowledge the complaint within 10 working days of receipt. It would issue the stage 1 response to complaints received within 20 working days.
    2. At stage 2 it would acknowledge a request for an escalation of the complaint within 10 working days and would aim to resolve the complaint within 40 working days.
  2. Whilst we have not seen a copy of the resident’s email of May 2023, in its complaint responses the landlord acknowledged that this should have been logged as a formal complaint, and was not. Given this acknowledgement, it was appropriate for the landlord to apologise and pay the resident compensation.
  3. Having logged the resident’s complaint on 7 July 2023, the landlord would have been expected to have acknowledged the complaint by 21 July 2023, within 10 working days, which it did. The acknowledgment being issued, following a call with the resident, on 17 July 2023.
  4. The landlord would then have been expected to have provided its stage 1 response within a following 10 working days, by 4 August 2023. This being 20 working days from when the complaint was received.
  5. It is noted that the landlord did email the resident on 8 August 2023, to apologise for the delay. However, it said in that email that it would provide its response by 16 August 2023, but again did not do so.
  6. Whilst both the landlord’s own interim complaints policy and our complaint handling code (the Code), allow for an extension to the landlord’s response timescales, this should not be excessive. That the landlord did not issue its stage 1 for another 2 months, on 27 October 2023, was a failure on its part, which it was appropriate for it to acknowledge and offer further compensation.
  7. The resident escalated her complaint on 20 November 2023, which the landlord acknowledged on 23 November 2023. In accordance with its interim complaints policy the landlord should have provided its stage 2 response within 40 working days, which it did. This being issued on 20 December 2023. Whilst we would not have found failing with regards to its response at stage 2, the landlord did and offered further compensation.
  8. The total offered by the landlord for its acknowledged complaint handling failures was £200. This was made up of:
    1. £50 for the resident’s contact of May 2023 not being raised as a formal complaint.
    2. £100 for the delay in its stage 1 response.
    3. £50 for the delay in its stage 2 response.
  9. Overall, it is our view that £200 is fair and proportionate to the level of its failings with regards to the resident’s complaint. As such a finding of reasonable redress has been made for this element of the complaint.
  10. It is acknowledged that the timescales set out in the landlord’s Interim Complaints Policy were not in accordance with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). However, no order has been made for the landlord to review its policy. This is because, the landlord has already done so and its new complaints policy now includes the 10- and 20-day timescales set out in the Code.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of repairs to the resident’s property including damp mould, damage to the kitchen floor, repairs to the front door and damage to walls in the communal area.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord provided reasonable redress in respect of its handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is to:
    1. Apologise to the resident and directly pay her a total of £1,200 compensation for the unnecessary distress and inconvenience caused by the failures identified in this report. The £1,200 ordered includes the £900 previously offered, if this has not already been paid.
    2. Review its overall handling of the repairs in this case and to consider what lesson it might learn to avoid a similar situation occurring going forward. The landlord is to provide us with a copy of its review which is to include an explanation of what actions, it intends to take as result.
    3. Confirm compliance with the above orders.

Recommendation

  1. If it has not done so already, it is recommended that the landlord pay the resident the £200 offered in respect of its handling of the associated complaint. The finding of reasonable redress being dependent on it doing so.