East Riding of Yorkshire Council (202447441)

Decision
Case ID	202447441
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	East Riding of Yorkshire Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	31 October 2025

Background

The resident lives in a 3-bedroom, semi-detached house. The landlord recorded that she has vulnerabilities related to her mobility. She first reported damp in her property in April 2024 and raised a complaint in June 2024 about the landlord’s handling of this.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and associated repairs.
We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

We have found that:
1. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and associated repairs.
2. There was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Damp and associated repairs

In summary, we found that the landlord failed to:
1. Follow its damp and mould policy by delaying an inspection.
2. Demonstrate it had provided advice and guidance to the resident on controlling damp and mould in line with its policy.

Complaint handling

The landlord failed to follow its complaints policy by not escalating the resident’s complaint when it should have done.

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	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 01 December 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £250 made up as follows: £200 for any distress or inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to follow its damp and mould policy. £50 for any distress or inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to follow its complaints policy. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid as offered in its complaint responses.	No later than 01 December 2025
3	Starting the works The landlord must take all steps to ensure it can provide a start date for the outstanding works by the due date. If the landlord cannot start the works, it must explain to us, by the due date: Why it cannot start the works and provide evidence to support its reasons. Whether suitable alternative accommodation is necessary and will be made available to the resident.	No later than 15 December 2025

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
30 April 2024	The resident contacted the landlord to report damp in her living room.
19 June 2024	The resident raised a complaint about damp in her living room, hallway, kitchen and under her stairs. She said this had been a problem for 9 years and was affecting her health.
25 June 2024	The landlord sent a stage 1 response. It said it had inspected her property on 4 June 2024 and that it had arranged for repairs to be carried out on 26 July 2024.
26 September 2024	The resident raised a further complaint. She said she had just discovered that the whole of her ground floor was “riddled with damp”. She added that she was unhappy she had been left in a property in that condition.
2 October 2024	The landlord phoned the resident to discuss her complaint. It followed this up with another stage 1 response. In this it said that it had arranged for a Chartered Building Surveyor to attend the property and produce a “specific defect report”. It added that it would contact her after receiving the report to discuss the next steps.
7 November 2024	A surveyor acting on behalf of the landlord carried out an inspection and recommended a number of works to address the damp.
21 January 2025	The resident contacted the landlord to escalate her complaint. She reiterated that her property was “covered in damp”. She said that the landlord had told her it would start works on 2 December 2024 and had put up scaffolding. However, she said that nobody had turned up. She added that she wanted to move into a new bungalow in the same area.
17 February 2025	The landlord issued a stage 2 response. It said that, although the surveyor had deemed the property habitable, they recommended the resident move to temporary accommodation due to the amount of works that were needed. It had offered her 3 suitable properties to move into on a temporary or permanent basis, but she had declined these in preference of a new build. It added that properties in her area of choice rarely became available and advised her to reconsider the offer it had made. It confirmed it had an appointment on 26 February 2024 to visit her and discuss the matter further.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman. She said that although the landlord had inspected her home and found damp, it had taken no action since. She stated this was affecting her health and that she wanted the landlord to move her into another, suitable property.

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	The handling of the resident’s reports of damp and associated repairs
Finding	Maladministration

The resident stated that her property has had a damp issue for the last 9 years. We encourage residents to raise complaints within a reasonable time of when they were aware of the issue, which is usually within 12 months. This is because evidence may be unavailable, making it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out. Taking this into account, and the availability of evidence, we have used our discretion to focus on the period from 30 April 2024. This was the date the resident first reported damp that led to her raising a formal complaint.
Throughout the complaint and in communication with this Service, the resident said the condition of her property had a detrimental impact on her health. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
The landlord inspected the property on 4 June 2024. This was 35 days after the resident first reported damp in her living room on 30 April 2024. The reason for the delay is unclear. However, this was outside of the timescales in the landlord’s damp and mould policy which require it to investigate the causes of damp and mould within 12 days from the date it is reported.
Although not excessive, the landlord’s delay in assessing the issue was a failure to treat the resident’s report with the appropriate urgency. This likely caused the resident distress and inconvenience in waiting longer than necessary for her report to be acted on.
There is no indication the landlord provided the resident with advice and guidance on managing damp and mould. The landlord’s failure to demonstrate it had taken these actions was not in line with its damp and mould policy. This says that it aims to ensure residents are provided with advice and guidance on controlling condensation, damp and mould in their homes.
The landlord has not provided any record of the inspection taken at the time. It is therefore unclear if it carried out a full, specialist damp survey with the use of instruments or photos. We therefore cannot conclude that the landlord met its policy requirement to carry out an effective investigation and make an accurate diagnosis “by use of an evidence-based approach”.
The landlord raised a number of repairs to address the damp. These included replacing damp or rotten floorboards, repointing brickwork and replastering of sections of wall affected by damp.
The records suggest the landlord had originally booked the repairs for 27 July 2024. This would have been in line with its repairs policy, which requires it to complete works of this type within 56 working days. It is unclear why this appointment was cancelled. However, the records show the landlord made attempts on 1 August, 9 September and 1 November 2024 to carry out the repairs. The operatives who attended were unable to gain access to the property.
One of the resident’s responsibilities as a tenant is to provide the landlord and its contractors with reasonable access. This is so it can meet its repair obligations. We acknowledge the disruption works can cause. However, delays in resolving repairs because of difficulties gaining access are outside the landlord’s control. Unless it can have reasonable access to the property, the landlord cannot carry out required works in a timely manner.
The landlord has a responsibility for keeping its properties in good repair. It would therefore have been reasonable for it to remind the resident of her obligations under the tenancy agreement, and any actions it could take to ensure it completed the repairs.
The landlord took reasonable steps at stage 1 to resolve the resident’s ongoing concerns about damp and mould. It arranged for a Chartered Building Surveyor to carry out an independent survey. The inspection found damp in various parts of the property, including the flooring and walls. It also identified various repair issues and recommended a number of works to address these.
Given the scale and nature of the required works, the surveyor recommended that the resident vacated the property to facilitate the necessary repairs. The landlord could have explored whether it was able to carry out the works while the resident remained in the property. However, it acted reasonably by following the recommendations of a suitably qualified professional. It is also noted that the resident had asked to be moved into smaller property, specifically a bungalow, due to mobility and affordability issues.
The evidence shows the landlord made the resident 3 offers of accommodation, one of which was a bungalow in her desired area. This was appropriate, and in line with its allocations policy. Furthermore, it gave her the choice to accept the property as either temporary or permanent accommodation. The landlord also acted appropriately when it tried to manage the resident’s expectations with regard to availability of properties in her area of choice. The resident’s decision not to accept those properties delayed the landlord from starting the works. This was beyond its control.
The landlord initially failed to follow its damp and mould policy and failed to acknowledge this in its complaint responses. This was not in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles of be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. We have made an order of compensation for any distress or inconvenience caused to the resident by the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould at the outset. This is in line with our Remedies Guidance for failures which have had an adverse effect on the resident, which may include distress, inconvenience or time and trouble.
Following the initial inspection, the landlord made reasonable efforts to find the source of the damp and complete works to address the issue. The landlord should continue to work with the resident to find a mutually beneficial solution so it can complete the necessary repairs.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

Our Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case is the 2024 edition (April 2024). Our findings are:
1. The landlord has a published complaints policy which at the time complied with the terms of the relevant Code in respect of timescales.
2. The landlord responded at stage 1 within 4 working days (26 September 2024 to 2 October 2024). Furthermore, it issued its stage 2 response within 19 working days of the resident’s escalation request (21 January 2025 to 17 February 2025). This was compliant with the timescales set out in the Code.
3. The landlord had already responded to a stage 1 complaint the resident made on 19 June 2024 about her reports of damp in her property. It issued its response on 25 June 2024. It is unclear therefore why it logged a further stage 1 complaint about the same issue 3 months later, on 26 September 2024. It ought to have advised the resident that it would escalate her complaint to stage 2 at that point. Instead, it unnecessarily lengthened the process for the resident, which caused her avoidable inconvenience.
The landlord’s failure to properly follow its complaints process and the Code in this instance was a service failure. It did not acknowledge this failing in its stage 2 response. This was not in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles, and we have made an order of compensation for any distress or inconvenience caused to the resident. This is in line with our Remedies Guidance.

Learning

Access issues and communication

In cases where the landlord cannot gain access to a property to carry out necessary works, this can lead to lengthy delays. The delays can put both residents and the property at risk. The landlord should therefore consider whether introducing an access procedure would be appropriate in such instances. This would provide steps for staff to follow should they be unable to gain access to complete works.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord did not provide any records to show it gave the resident advice and guidance on how to control the damp in her property. It should look at ways of ensuring this information is captured so it can demonstrate it has followed its damp and mould policy correctly.