ForHousing Limited (202339136)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202339136

ForHousing Limited

17 October 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 repairs following a leak.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 1-bedroom flat. The landlord has a record of the resident’s hearing impairment.
3. On 19 December 2022 the resident reported an uncontainable leak in the attic, which caused extensive damage to the lounge and kitchen ceilings, along with damp. The landlord attended the following day and made safe the property. On 20 December 2022, when logging the repair again, the resident disclosed her hearing impairment and requested confirmation of an operative’s attendance by telephone. The scheduled inspection on 18 January 2023 did not go ahead due to no access.
4. On the same day the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord. She was dissatisfied that the operative had failed to attend despite a scheduled appointment and 3 text messages indicating the operative was enroute.
5. On 26 January 2023 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It acknowledged the missed inspection due to no access and the failure to leave a calling card. The landlord offered £25 compensation for the inconvenience. It rebooked the inspection for 3 February 2023.
6. On 6 February 2023 the resident requested escalation of her complaint. She expressed dissatisfaction with the compensation and missed appointment due to her hearing impairment. She added that this delayed repairs, prolonged damage to the property and affected her health.
7. On 10 March 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 response. It reiterated its apology and confirmed that it had reminded operatives and surveyors to follow the no access procedure. It confirmed the £25 compensation offered at stage 1. The landlord stated it had added a hearing icon to the resident’s account to alert staff to her impairment and ensure reasonable adjustments, such as knocking loudly. It also acknowledged outstanding repairs and provided completion dates for April 2023. These works were completed on 7 November 2023.
8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and referred the complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated that the leak caused damage and requested redecoration and compensation for the inconvenience.
9. During a case review, the landlord acknowledged poor communication, issues with workmanship, 8 month delay in repairs and inconvenience. It offered a further £600 compensation for these issues.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

10. The resident raised concerns about the prolonged damage to the property caused by the landlord’s delay in service delivery, and how this may have impacted her health. The Ombudsman is unable to make a determination that the actions or omissions of a landlord have had a causal impact on a person’s health. Such a determination is more appropriate through an insurance claim or by a court. Should the resident wish to pursue a personal injury claim she has the option to seek legal advice. The Ombudsman has, however, taken into account any general distress and inconvenience that the landlord’s service delivery may have caused.

The landlord’s handling of repairs following a leak

11. On 18 January 2023, an operative failed to gain access to the property and did not follow the correct no access procedure. They had run out of no-access cards and were therefore unable to leave one as required. The resident was not updated following no access and therefore she raised a complaint about a missed appointment. The operative could have used an alternative method to update the resident but did not. The landlord acknowledged the service failure and offered £25 compensation for the inconvenience. It also accepted the resident’s account that the door was open as the operative’s photo was inconclusive. This was reasonable. Additionally, the landlord confirmed it had reminded operatives to follow the no-access procedure, which was appropriate.
12. On 20 December 2022, the resident disclosed her hearing impairment when logging the repair and requested confirmation of the operative’s attendance. This was recorded in the repair request. Furthermore at stage 2, the landlord explained it added a hearing icon to her profile. This was appropriate given the inconvenience it acknowledged the missed appointment had caused her. However, it would have been reasonable that this adjustment had been applied prior to the appointment and when the resident originally reported her needs in December 2022.
13. The overall handling of repairs was unreasonable with significant delays. The damp inspection was scheduled on 18 January 2023 following the resident’s reports of damage from the leak on 20 December 2023. This exceeded the 10-working-day target set out in the landlord’s damp and mould procedure.This was further delayed due to the no access issue. Regardless, the rescheduled appointment should have been booked sooner.
14. In her escalated complaint on 6 February 2023, the resident raised concerns about delays in addressing damage caused by a leak. The resident reported ongoing deterioration to the property and we have seen evidence of repairs needed to the kitchen and living room ceiling and walls, damaged floorboards, and other internal issues. While we have not seen the outcome of the inspection from 3 February 2023, at stage 2 on 10 March 2023, the landlord acknowledged outstanding works. It planned plastering work for April 2023. However, it did not complete the works until 7 November 2023.
15. The landlord appropriatelyprovided a timeline of the works. However, it failed to fully explore the impact of the delays on a vulnerable resident or take steps to rectify it by following up and keeping to the timeframes set out in its stage 2 response. The works were completed almost 11 months since the leak occurred. This was contrary to the landlord’s damp and mould procedure which states that remedial works should be completed within 40 working days. As such, theresident endured poor living conditions during an extensive period of time.
16. Following our request for information on 11 December 2024, the landlord conducted a case review. It informed us that it had found failures in communication and repair handling and offered a further £600 in compensation in recognition of these failures. The landlord missed earlier opportunities to proactively reassess the length and impact of the delays, or take learning during its complaints process in March 2023 and after completing the repairs in November 2023. Instead, it reviewed the matter only after our involvement, over a year later, and failed to demonstrate learning which was inappropriate. Furthermore, we have not seen evidence that this offer was communicated or paid to the resident and the resident confirmed the same to us.
17. The landlord’s failings caused prolonged inconvenience and distress to a vulnerable resident. While it acknowledged a missed appointment and improved its records regarding the resident’s vulnerabilities, it failed to follow up on the plan of works or complete them within a reasonable timeframe, and as per its final response. Compensation was not provided promptly after the works were completed, and we found no evidence of a post-inspection or any learning taken. We have therefore made a finding of maladministration.
18. However, the total revised compensation offer of £625 is in the high end of maladministration as per the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance. It is as such  proportionate for the delays experienced by the landlord’s failures identified in this report and the impact on the resident having to chase repairs and live with the damage to the property for a prolonged period of time.
19. Although the landlord confirmed completion of repairs, the resident reported lingering damp patches, a smell in the carpet, and the need for redecoration. While the landlord is not responsible for internal wall decoration, the resident reported that the damage had resulted from the delayed leak repairs for which it was responsible. We have seen evidence of a note from an operative which confirmed the resident’s decoration was significantly affected by the December 2022 leak. We have therefore ordered the landlord to conduct an inspection of the property to identify any outstanding work, and provide us this its findings along with a timeline of any schedule of works identified.

Determination

20. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs following a leak.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

21. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
    1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident a total compensation of £625 offered prior to this investigation and if not paid already, to recognise the failures in its handling of repairs following a leak.
    3. Carry out an inspection of the property to identify any outstanding work, and provide us and the resident with its findings along with a timeline of any schedule of works identified.
22. Within 6 weeks from the date of this report, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to consider the failings identified in this report and complete a case review into its handling of repairs to identify how it can prevent similar failings happening again. The landlord should provide the outcome of the review to the Ombudsman and the review should have a particular focus on:
    1. How it responded to the repair and what was the reason for the delayed works.
    2. What steps it should take to improve its services in relation to the above.
23. Contact the Service and provide evidence of compliance with the above orders within their respective timeframes.