Read our new Spotlight report on repairs and maintenance – repairing trust.

Flagship Housing Group Limited (202332403)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202332403

Flagship Housing Group Limited

28 January 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 handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of damp and mould.
    2. Reports of outstanding and poor-quality repairs.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the property, a 2-bed bungalow owned by the landlord. He lives with his wife and has long-term health conditions.
  2. The resident reported concerns about damp to the landlord as part of his complaint on 25 September and 3 October 2023. He said it was in the bedroom ceiling and affecting his personal belongings. He also reported ongoing issues with a poor-quality repair to flooring and a leak through the front door.
  3. The landlord provided the resident with its stage 1 complaint response on 16 October 2023. It confirmed that it had raised works to renew the latex flooring in the hallway, repair the front door, and complete a damp and mould assessment.
  4. On 31 October 2023, the resident requested that the landlord escalate his complaint to stage 2 of its process. This was related to outstanding repairs from a previous complaint in December 2022 and its repairs manager taking no action regarding his damp and mould concern.
  5. The landlord sent its final complaint response to the resident on 19 December 2023. It confirmed one outstanding repair to the front door due to unavailable parts but that it had requested an update. It stated it would be redoing repairs to his wet room floor due to the standard poor of previous works. It described works it had already completed. It provided a date of 20 December 2023 for a damp and mould assessment and offered £50 compensation for its delayed complaint response.
  6. The resident brought his complaint to this Service for investigation due to his ongoing reports of damp and mould.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. Throughout the period of his complaint, the resident has told the landlord and the Ombudsman that the matters he has reported have impacted on his and his wife’s health conditions. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. This is largely because independent medical experts are appointed to give evidence. They have a duty to the court to provide unbiased insights on the diagnosis, prognosis, and cause of any illness or injury. When disputes arise over the cause of an injury or illness, oral testimony can be examined in court. Therefore, this element to the resident’s complaint is better dealt with via the court.

Damp and mould

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy does not specify its approach to damp and mould. However, it does include routine and complex routine repairs which have a 28 and 90-calendar day response time. Damp and mould investigation and works can be complex and as such it would be fair to expect it to plan for works within this timeframe.
  2. Following the resident’s complaint on 25 September 2023, the landlord called him and discussed his concerns on 3 October 2023. During this call, he told it that the bedroom ceiling was damp and that this had affected his personal possessions, including a guitar and clothing. He said that the air was humid, and that he was constantly running a dehumidifier which was costing a lot.
  3. The landlord visited the resident on 10 October 2023 and then completed its internal damp and mould reporting form to raise an inspection. It attempted to contact him on 12 October 2023 to book this but was unsuccessful. We find that its first response was prompt, and it demonstrated an interest in identifying ongoing issues.
  4. As part of its stage 1 complaint response on 16 October 2023, the landlord asked the resident to contact it to agree a suitable date for it to complete the damp and mould assessment. It attempted to contact him again on 25 October 2023 without success. As it had been unable to reach him, it could not arrange an inspection and determine whether it needed to complete any works.
  5. The resident contacted the landlord to request escalation of his complaint on 31 October 2023. In this conversation he stated that there was damp and mould in his home but that the repairs operative was not interested when he visited. However, as mentioned above, it had requested he contact it to arrange a damp and mould inspection as it had been unable to do so. An inspection is standard practice in these circumstances so a landlord can assess levels of damp and if any works are needed.
  6. When the landlord visited the property on 20 November 2023, it recorded that no mould was present but noted a damp spot where insulation had moved in the loft. It replaced the insulation to rectify this. It completed a further damp and mould reporting form after a further visit on 6 December 2023. It again demonstrated a thorough approach to assessing the reported damp and mould.
  7. On 13 December 2023, the landlord attended the resident’s property to complete a damp and mould survey. The surveyor advised that they had a cold and offered to reschedule the appointment because of this. He asked them to leave following this offer. They noted that he said he did not have any mould. While this was not a successful visit, the surveyor demonstrated a thoughtful approach to the resident’s vulnerabilities despite remaining willing to complete the survey as arranged.
  8. In its stage 2 complaint response of 19 December 2023, the landlord advised the resident that data taken from an installed thermostat suggested that humidity in his home was within the normal range. It confirmed a new date of 20 December 2023 for the damp and mould assessment. It explained that its intention during these visits was to fully understand what the challenges are and what proactive measures it could take. It asked that he be supportive of its operatives during visits. This was a fair and reasonable response as it had tried to visit and showed that it was monitoring humidity within the home.
  9. The landlord attended as planned on 20 December 2023, but the resident was not home. It received press contact on the issue on 4 January 2023 and requested that its surveyor attend on the same day. This was a further example of a prompt and positive response from the landlord.
  10. During its inspection, the landlord found no issues with rising or penetrating damp. It took moisture readings, and these showed that all surfaces were dry. It found that there were high levels of humidity within the home due to factors both in and out of its control, such as incorrect use of dehumidifiers and issues with ventilation. It agreed with the resident to replace the extractor fans with humidity-controlled units and install an air ventilation system in the loft to help manage the humidity. The survey was thorough, and it worked with the resident to find a solution.
  11. In the week after its inspection, the resident raised queries with the landlord about the air ventilation system it planned to install. It called him to discuss this. There were minor delays after this as a situation in the property meant that the landlord was concerned about the safety of its staff members during visits. He chased it for works on 23 January 2023 and it said that it would contact him about this soon. Once it addressed its safety concerns, the landlord raised the necessary works on 9 February 2023 and completed these on 12 March 2024.
  12. In conclusion, the landlord was unable to access the resident’s property to assess for damp and mould until 3 months after his initial report despite attempts to do so. Once it had inspected, it completed works in 68-calendar days. This period included a delay due to concerns for staff safety. It continued to try and address the issue for him, despite facing challenging circumstances.

Outstanding and poor-quality repairs

  1. Between 5 December 2022 and 7 September 2023, the landlord completed various repairs in the resident’s property. These included:
    1. Laying a new wet room floor.
    2. Repairs to the front door.
    3. Removal of asbestos floor tiles and laying of latex on the hallway floor.
  2. When the landlord’s operative completed works to the hallway floor on 7 September 2023, it reported that a section of the latex had dried too quickly and was not as smooth as normal. On 11 September 2023, the resident reported that the floor was a trip hazard. It attended on the same day and sanded down any high or rough areas, removing the hazard. This was a prompt emergency response, in line with its 24-hour response time in its policy.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 25 September 2023 that the hallway flooring latex was wonky, and he could not lay flooring on top of this. He also reported water coming in through the front door and into the hallway from the wet room. Following discussions on 3 October 2023 and a visit to him on 10 October 2023, it raised works to renew latex floor screed and repair the front door.
  4. The landlord attempted to contact the resident to book works on 12 October 2023 but could not reach him. It sent him its stage 1 complaint response on 16 October 2023 and asked him to contact it to arrange an appointment for works. This was a fair response to his complaint as it had been unable to contact him by phone to book an appointment with him. It requested a quote from its contractor to renew the flooring on 20 October 2023.
  5. On 25 October 2023, the landlord tried to contact the resident again but was unable to reach him by phone and could not leave a voicemail. In escalating his complaint on 31 October 2023, he stated that repairs remained outstanding, and he had tripped on the wet room floor that morning, causing him to hit his face. It noted that it did not get enough information from him to complete a health and safety incident report, but it did log his complaint appropriately. In the meantime, it continued working to source the parts needed to repair the front door.
  6. The landlord has provided no evidence to demonstrate that it responded to the resident’s reports that he had tripped because of the flooring, or that it addressed this again before 6 December 2023, when its repairs manager completed a site visit. After this, it requested quotes for works to the wet room floor and indicated that it would need to move him into temporary accommodation for 5 days while it completed this. It noted that it would need to consider his medical needs and pets when arranging this and that due to this and the need to wait for quotes, works were unlikely to begin until late January.
  7. On 7 December 2023, the landlord cancelled works to the resident’s wet room floor upon his request. He requested this as his health condition meant that he could not be without a toilet. He had a specialist wash and dry toilet installed in the property and had spoken to local hotels, none of which could provide these facilities. He stated that the best option would be to offer him and his wife a permanent move.
  8. In the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response of 19 December 2023, it stated that it had requested an update on whether it had sourced parts for front door repairs but anticipated that the repair would take no longer than half a day. It acknowledged that the wet room floor works completed earlier in 2023 were not to its usual standard and it would be redoing this work. It stated that it would be beneficial to complete this while he and his family were absent and that it had currently planned this for early 2024. Its response was factual and based upon information available to its complaints team at the time.
  9. On 18 December 2023, the landlord became aware that it could not source all parts needed to repair the front door. It found an alternative plan and expected materials for this to arrive promptly. It completed these works on 6 January 2024, during an appointment agreed with the resident.
  10. The landlord continued to work with its appointed contractor to find suitable temporary accommodation for the resident in January or February 2024. This was unsuccessful and it visited him on 8 January 2024 to discuss this. Evidence provided by the landlord demonstrates that it continued to negotiate with him to find a suitable and appropriate way to complete the works but that on 19 February 2024, he declined having the works done.
  11. In conclusion, there were unexplained delays in the landlord responding to the resident’s claims that he had fallen in the bathroom due to tripping on the floor on 31 October 2023. However, when it visited and identified necessary works on 6 December 2023, it worked to find an appropriate way to complete these while considering his health and disabilities. Ultimately, the resident refused the works. If he wishes to make a further complaint about matters since this refusal on 19 February 2024, he should contact the landlord to do so.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of damp and mould.
    2. Reports of outstanding and poor-quality repairs.