East Midlands Housing Group Limited (202400148)

Decision
Case ID	202400148
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	East Midlands Housing Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	24 June 2026

Background

1. From 2022, the resident reported multiple repair issues with her property to the landlord, including a leak from the roof, damp and mould, issues with several windows and issues with the boiler. She was unhappy with its handling of each issue so complained in February 2024.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:

a)     Reports of damp and mould, including damage to internal walls.

b)     Reports of issues with several windows.

c)     Reports of a roof leak.

d)     Reports of issues with her boiler.

e)     Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There landlord offered the resident reasonable redress for its handling of her reports of damp and mould, including damage to internal walls.
4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of issues with several windows.
5. The following issues are outside the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman to investigate:

a)     Reports of a roof leak.

b)     Reports of issues with her boiler.

6. There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

Landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould including damage to internal walls

7. There were delays in completing works to address the damp, mould, and internal damage. However, on the whole, these were due to the complex nature of the works. The landlord acted on the reports, sought specialist advice, and completed the recommended works. It acknowledged the delays it was response for, apologised and offered reasonable compensation.

Landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of issues with several windows

8. The landlord completed repairs to both windows outside the timescales set out in its repairs policy. There were significant unexplained delays over the winter period which it only partially addressed and remedied.

Landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak and issues with her boiler

9. While the resident raised these issues in her original complaint, she did not then escalate either of these issues at stage 2. As such, neither issue has completed the landlord’s internal complaints process and therefore is outside our jurisdiction to investigate.

Landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

10. There were complaint handling delays at both stages of the landlord’s internal complaints process. While it acknowledged these delays at stage 1, it failed to do so at stage 2.

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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £535 made up as follows: £400 for the distress caused by the additional failings identified in this determination around its handling of the resident’s reports of issues with several windows. £135 for the additional failings identified in this determination in its handling of the resident’s complaint. These amounts are inclusive of the £200 and £60 already offered by the landlord for the windows and complaint handling issues.   This compensation must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 22 July 2026

 

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
If the landlord has not already done so, it should now pay the resident the £200 compensation and £240 in decoration vouchers it offered the resident in its stage 2 response in regard to its handling of her reports of damp and mould, and damage to internal walls. The finding of reasonable redress is partly based on it doing so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
4 February 2024	The resident complained about the landlord’s handling of multiple repairs, including damp and mould, damage to internal walls, and issues with two windows. She said communication was poor and repairs were significantly delayed.
4 March 2024	The landlord told the resident it needed more time to issue its stage 1 response. It said it would respond by 18 March 2024.
22 March 2024	In the landlord’s stage 1 response it acknowledged failings in its repair and complaint handling, including delays and poor communication. It said it had completed some damp and mould works and was awaiting a full survey. It also acknowledged errors in arranging window repair appointments. It apologised, confirmed upcoming appointments, and offered £170 compensation.
26 March 2024	The resident escalated her complaint, saying the stage 1 response did not reflect how long the window and damp and mould issues had been ongoing or the impact on her. She also said the landlord should redecorate the affected internal walls.
21 May 2024	In the landlord’s stage 2 response, it acknowledged delays in completing the damp and mould and window repairs and apologised. It confirmed the windows were repaired and works were arranged for the damp and mould. It offered £460 compensation and £240 in decoration vouchers.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred the complaint to us. She confirmed the window and damp and mould works had been completed but she felt the landlord should redecorate the affected internal walls. She also wanted assurance it would complete any future repairs within a reasonable timeframe.

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.

Complaint	Landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould, including damage to internal walls
Finding	Reasonable redress

11. In the resident’s complaint she said she reported damp and mould affecting most rooms to the landlord in November 2023. She said it told her it planned to complete required works by 5 December 2023, but instead works did not start until January 2024. She was concerned about damage to the property, particularly a worsening wall in the utility room. She wanted the repairs completed and the damage redecorated
12. In response, the landlord acknowledged some delays in completing inspections and works following the resident’s reports of damp and mould. It attributed this to the need to consult specialist contractors and some difficulties contractors had with arranging appointments with the resident.
13. At stage 1, the landlord said it inspected the issue in December 2023, completed a mould wash in January 2024, and was now awaiting a full survey to see if further works were needed. At stage 2, it acknowledged delays in arranging the works recommended in the survey but confirmed these would now take place at the end of May 2024. It also said it was not responsible for internal decoration, as per the tenancy agreement, but offered £240 in decoration vouchers, along with £250 for time and trouble and £150 for distress across all repair issues covered in its response.
14. As the landlord did not specify exactly how much of the compensation it offered for its handling of the damp and mould, we have attributed half the compensation it offered for the damp and mould specifically We have attributed the other half to issues relating to the window repairs as discussed below. We therefore consider it offered her £125 for the time and trouble and £75 for the distress caused by delays and poor communication.
15. The landlord’s response was reasonable. While it took around 7 months from the resident’s initial report to complete the damp and mould works, it took action throughout this period. There were some further delays, including 39 working days between the December 2023 inspection and the mould wash, which it acknowledged in its response and apologised for.
16. The compensation it offered was reasonable given it caused some avoidable delays but overall was taking appropriate action to deal with the issue. The compensation offered was in line with its compensation policy for the level of failure it was responsible for.
17. Part of the resident’s complaint was that the landlord had told her the damp and mould works would be completed by 5 December 2023. None of the evidence shows it said this. Instead, it arranged an inspection on that date to assess the issue, which was appropriate and in line with its repairs policy.
18. The landlord also sought specialist advice and completed the recommended works. While this contributed to some delays, including in arranging the full survey, this was a reasonable approach for it to take to ensure the works carried out sufficiently addressed the damp and mould.
19. The landlord’s communication with the resident about the damp and mould works was poor. It failed to update her on the progress of works or the outcomes of inspections. However, it acknowledged this in its response, apologised and reflected it in the compensation offered.
20. The resident asked the landlord to redecorate parts of the walls affected by the damp. It declined to do that but gave her £240 worth of decorating vouchers instead. While there were some periods of inaction by the landlord around Christmas 2023, the original problem and the majority of the time needed to resolve it are shown by the evidence to have been beyond its control. Because of that, and given the tenancy makes clear that she is responsible for decorating the property, its decision was not unreasonable.
21. Overall, while it took the landlord 7 months to complete works to the damp and mould, this delay was not due to lack of inaction on its part. Instead, throughout this time it conducted inspections, mould washes and appointed specialist contractors to assess the issue and use their expertise to complete sufficient works to deal with the issue. While there were some avoidable delays, it acknowledged these in its response, apologised and offered a reasonable level of redress in line with its compensation policy.

Complaint	Landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of issues with several windows
Finding	Maladministration

22. In the resident’s complaint, she said she had reported issues with windows in two bedrooms to the landlord however the repairs remained outstanding. She said she reported a broken window in her daughter’s bedroom in November 2023. An operative attended in January 2024 but left during the visit to seek assistance and did not return. She also reported a blown window in the main bedroom in December 2023 however all it had done so far was inspect it. She said it did not understand the impact, including both bedrooms being cold.
23. In response, the landlord acknowledged failings in its handling of both window repairs. Regarding the daughter’s bedroom window, it said it had not correctly logged the repair, which it only identified after the resident chased it in December 2023. It then raised the repair and completed it in February 2024. It apologised for the error and delay.
24. For the main bedroom window, it said it had rearranged a February 2024 appointment at short notice without notifying the resident, and a further delay occurred due to scaffolding issues. It completed the repair in April 2024. It apologised and offered £250 for time and trouble and £150 for distress across all repair issues covered in its response.
25. As explained above, for the purposes of this determination we have attributed half the total compensation the landlord offered to its handling of the window repairs. This equates to £125 for time and trouble and £75 for the distress caused.
26. Our ability to assess the landlord’s handling of the window repairs is limited by a lack of clear evidence and poor record‑keeping. While the resident’s original report is shown, there is little evidence of the landlord’s actions, including of the inspections she said it carried out. This limits our assessment and indicates a record keeping failure by the landlord.
27. However, parts of the landlord’s response were not reasonable. It took approximately 3 months to repair the window in the resident’s daughter’s bedroom. While it acknowledged some avoidable delays, this only covered the period up it identifying the repair had not been logged in December 2023. It failed to recognise the further delay in then completing the repair in February 2024. None of the evidence explained this additional delay. It also failed to acknowledge the impact this delay caused during the winter.
28. Similarly, the landlord took just over 3 months to repair the main bedroom window. While its response acknowledged some of this delay had been caused by it needing to rearrange an appointment and then a subsequent issue with access due to scaffolding, it failed to acknowledge the additional month it took to then finally complete the repair. Again, none of the evidence provides a reasonable explanation for this delay.
29. Overall, the landlord’s response failed to address the full extent of its poor handling of the window repairs. It acknowledged some of the delays, such as the delay caused by not logging the repair correctly, but not all. It also failed to acknowledge the full extent of the impact the issue caused. Nothing in the evidence also explains some of the additional delays.
30. The landlord’s compensation guidance shows it offered compensation in line with issues it felt had a low impact on the resident. This was unreasonable as the compensation offered did not reflect the full extent of its poor handling of the window repairs and the impact this had on the resident. We have therefore ordered the landlord to pay the resident an additional £400 compensation to reflect the distress caused.

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

31. The landlord’s complaints policy says it has a two stage internal complaints process. Its definition of a complaint and its response timescales were in line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
32. There were delays at both stages of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. At stage 1 it delayed logging and acknowledging her complaint. However, it appropriately acknowledged this in both its acknowledgement and stage 1 response. In its response it also apologised and offered £60 compensation..
33. However, the landlord failed to recognise further delays in its stage 2 response. It acknowledged the escalation 18 working days after receipt, which exceeded the 5 working day timescale set out in its complaints policy and the Code. This delay contributed to it taking 38 working days to issue its stage 2 response. While it apologised for the initial delay in acknowledging the complaint, it did not acknowledge the overall delay or offer additional compensation.
34. Overall there were complaint handling delays at both stages of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. It appropriately addressed this in its stage 1 response, but did not acknowledge additional delays in its stage 2 response.
35. The £60 compensation the landlord offered in total did not reflect the full extent of the delays at both stages. We have therefore ordered it to pay the resident an additional £75 compensation in line with our compensation guidance for a complaint handling failing of this nature.

Learning

36. The landlord is reminded of the importance of providing a thorough breakdown of its compensation offer. This will ensure it clearly explains how much it is offering for each issue.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

37. The landlord did not have robust records relating to the window repairs. It is reminded of the importance of producing thorough repair logs and records of inspections and works. For further guidance we recommend it review our spotlight report on knowledge information management.

Communication

38. The landlord’s communication with the resident on the progress of repairs and appointments was poor and led to frustration that was avoidable. Again, it is reminded of the importance of keeping resident’s updated on the progress of repairs and any appointments. For further guidance we recommend it review our spotlight report on communication.