ForHousing Limited (202445978)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202445978

ForHousing Limited

16 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. repairs to the roof and gutter and the subsequent damp and mould.
2. the associated complaint.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant under an agreement dated April 2022. The landlord is a housing association. The resident lives in a 3-bedroom semi-detached house with their children. A member of the household has asthma, and a member of the household has autism.
On 13 November 2022 the resident reported the roof was unsealed and there was damp and mould in the property. The landlord said it inspected the property on 18 January 2023. It found damp in the property and that the gutters needed to be replaced. The resident chased the landlord about the damp and repairs on 22 March and 30 May 2023.
The landlord inspected the roof on 26 September 2023. It said parts of the roof needed to be replaced, it needed to remove asbestos from the soffits, the mortar needed to be repointed, the gutter needed to be repaired, and it needed to check if there was any damage to the roof tiles.
On 31 January 2024 the landlord inspected the property. It said it needed to complete external roof work and then test the ceiling for asbestos and replaster the bedroom wall. It tried to remedy the damp in the bedroom on 25 March 2024, but this was cancelled as the roof had not been repaired.
On 17 June 2024 the resident complained that the landlord had not completed repairs to the roof to remedy the damp and mould. On 5 August 2024 the landlord recorded that the resident agreed to close the complaint as repairs were planned for the next day. On 31 August 2024 the landlord recorded that repairs were completed, including repairs to the gutter, roof tiles, and mortar.
On 2 September 2024 the resident asked the landlord for an update. They explained there had been no repairs to the roof and the bedroom. They chased the landlord about this again on 15 October 2024. On 18 October 2024 the landlord inspected the property. It was recommended to wash and treat mould in the bedrooms, replace the bedroom windows, install insulation and a thermal board, and fix the roof.
On 13 and 14 November 2024 the landlord repaired the roof tiles and found the soffits and fascia were missing. On that date the resident explained to the landlord they had been sleeping on the living room floor due to the situation. They asked to speak with the complaint officer as they were considering passing the complaint to their solicitor.
On the 11 December 2024 the landlord sent the resident a stage 1 response. It apologised and said it was working to improve its management of the contractor to prevent issues like this happening again. It agreed to conduct work to replace the fascia and soffits on 19 December 2024. On that date it replaced part of the fascia and soffits, and it planned to complete internal repairs but could not access the property.
On 16 January 2025 the landlord measured the bedroom windows that needed to be replaced and replaced the insulation in the loft. On 23 January 2025 it completed repairs to the roof verge, fascia, soffits, gutter, and roof tiles. It said the gutter outlet at the neighbouring property was too high and prevented the gutters from working. It attempted to install a vent at the property on 16 February 2025, however the scaffolding prevented it from doing so.
On 3 March 2025 the resident said as part of their complaint that although parts of the roof were fixed, the bedroom ceiling was cracking, the other bedroom was “disgusting”, they had been sleeping on the living room floor for 7 months and felt ignored. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 17 March 2025. In its complaint response it said:
1. it needed to speak with the neighbour to complete repairs to the gutter.
2. it had taken on board the feedback and was committed to learn from this.
3. it had offered the resident £30 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused.
4. it scheduled to complete a mould wash in one of the bedrooms and install an airbrick for ventilation in March 2025, and scheduled to install a vent, drop lights, and complete replastering of the bedrooms in April 2025.
The resident referred the complaint to us on 19 May 2025. They said that the initial roof repairs were of poor quality, and the landlord had to do this again. They said the landlord had not completed the repairs, they were not kept up to date, and scaffolding is still up at the property. They said the compensation was not enough to cover the cost to redecorate and it did not recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to them and their family.

Assessment and findings

Repairs to the roof and gutter and the subsequent damp and mould

On 13 November 2022 the resident reported that the roof was not sealed and there was damp and mould in the property, including in their child’s bedroom.
The tenancy agreement said the landlord would repair the exterior of the property including the gutters, the roof, and exterior and interior walls. The landlord’s repair policy said within 24 hours it will make the property safe where there is an emergency repair. And it would complete urgent repairs within 7 working days, and this includes a leaking roof.
The landlord’s website at the time said it would address all reports of damp and mould within 10 days. And, in most cases, the landlord expected to resolve the issue within 40 working days.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy said it would complete a health and vulnerability assessment of the household to prioritise works. It said it accepted responsibility to resolve the underlying damp and mould issue, and it would complete a mould wash in advance of required remedial works.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) considers damp and mould as a potential hazard in a property and that the external fabric of a property should be kept in good repair to avoid rain penetration. It says the most vulnerable group affected by this are children under the age of 14 and those with respiratory conditions.
Our Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) Spotlight report sets out recommendations about landlords’ record keeping. This includes keeping clear records, monitoring progress with third parties, and updating residents within a reasonable timescale about the issues it was investigating.
Accurate record keeping helps landlords meet their obligations, including providing information to residents and to us to enable a thorough investigation. In this case, some records were absent and inconsistent. The landlord’s poor record keeping made it difficult to determine if its actions were fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s report of damp and mould on 16 November 2022. It arranged to inspect the property on 15 December 2022. However, this appointment was more than 10 days since the resident reported the issue. This was inappropriate and not in line with its website and damp and mould policy.
The landlord inspected the property on 15 December 2022. It found damp and that the tenant had a respiratory illness. It was appropriate and in line with its damp and mould policy to understand the vulnerabilities in the household so it could consider the priority to remedy the issue.
However, there is no evidence it had set out measures to remedy the damp including what actions it would take to address the issue. The delay to address this was inappropriate and not in line with its damp and mould policy.
The landlord said it inspected the property again on 18 January 2023 and found damp and that the gutters needed to be replaced. There is no record of this inspection from the time, which was a failure of its record keeping. There is also no evidence it responded to the resident’s report from 13 November 2022 that the roof was unsealed, and whether it had inspected the roof for sealing deficiencies in line with the times set out in its repair policy. This was inappropriate.
The resident chased the landlord about the damp in the property on 22 March and 30 May 2023. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have kept the resident updated about the actions it would take to resolve the damp, given it was aware of the issue from 13 November 2022. That it did not, was unreasonable.
The resident contacted the landlord on 5 September 2023 to ask about the roof repairs that were due to take place that day. This suggests that the landlord may have agreed to carry out roof repairs. However, there is no record of this which is a failure of the landlord’s record keeping. This has made it difficult to determine when the landlord inspected the roof, what the repairs were, and if they were carried out.
On 26 September 2023 the landlord inspected the roof and found the gutter was dripping. It found it needed to replace the box ends, it needed to remove asbestos from the soffits, repoint some of the mortar, repair the gutter, and check if there was any damage to the roof tiles. It had taken 10 months to inspect the issue and set out repairs the needed since the resident reported the roof was unsealed. This delay was inappropriate, not in line with the tenancy agreement, its repair policy and did not pay due regard to HHSRS.
On 31 January 2024 the landlord inspected the property again. It found it needed to complete external roof work and test the ceiling for asbestos before it could replaster the bedroom wall to remedy the damp. There is no evidence the landlord had started repairs to the roof and set out interim measures for the damp in the property. The continued delay was inappropriate.
On 25 March 2024 the landlord attended the property to apply emulsion paint in the bedroom where the leak was. This was cancelled by the resident as the roof had not been repaired. There is no evidence the landlord had taken a coordinated approach to ensure the roof and guttering was repaired before repairing the bedroom, as the previous inspection had recommended. This was inappropriate and caused inconvenience to the resident.
On 9 April 2024 the resident reported that the bedroom ceiling was leaking. The next day the landlord found the roof repairs had not been completed, and the bedroom ceiling was leaking and unsafe. It made the ceiling safe that day. It was appropriate and in line with its repair policy to make the ceiling safe within 24 hours. However, the delay to repair the roof caused a potential safety risk to the household and delayed it remedying the damp. This was inappropriate, not in line with its repair policy and damp and mould policy and did not pay due regard to HHSRS.
The resident contacted the landlord on 6 August 2024 to ask about repairs that were due to take place that day. The landlord confirmed the repairs could not take place as it had not removed asbestos from the soffits. The lack of a coordinated approach delayed repairs to the roof to remedy the damp. This delay was inappropriate and inconvenienced the resident who felt they had to contact the landlord to ensure there was oversight of the repairs.
The landlord said it had completed repairs to the roof box ends, gutter, roof tiles, and mortar on 31 August 2024.
On 2 September 2024 the resident asked the landlord for an update as they were not aware repairs had taken place. They contacted the landlord again on 15 October 2024 and said the damp and mould affected their bedroom, a member of their household has asthma, and they had waited 2 years for repairs.
On 18 October 2024 the landlord inspected the property again. It found roof leaks, poor insulation, and damp and mould in all bedrooms. It needed to fix the roof, replace the windows, treat the mould, install insulation and a thermal board. It was appropriate to check the roof repairs. However, this was after the resident had chased the landlord and reported that repairs had not been completed. This was unreasonable and inconvenienced the resident.
The delay to repair the issue from when it was initially reported meant that the property condition had advanced, and the landlord had found mould in the property. The delay to ensure repairs were completed and treat the issue was inappropriate.
Considering the delays to complete the repairs, the vulnerabilities in the household, the serious health and safety concerns, and that the roof repairs were not complete adequately, it would have been reasonable to ensure quality repairs were completed as a priority.
On 13 November 2024 the landlord inspected the property and found water leaking from the roof into the bedrooms. On the same day it fixed the roof tiles, found the previous work completed was of a poor quality, and could not complete repairs to the roof soffit and fascia.
On the same day the resident asked to be temporarily moved from the property as they were sleeping on the living room floor and social workers were aware of this. The landlord spoke to the resident on the same day about the option to temporarily move, however they no longer wanted to do so due to the stress it would cause to the household. It was appropriate to set out this option to the resident. However, the continued delay to repair the property to remedy the damp and mould affected the household and caused distress.
On 27 November 2024 the landlord set out to complete a mould wash and paint the bedrooms. However, it could not access the property. There is no evidence it arranged this with the resident. This was unreasonable.
On 28 November 2024 the landlord replaced the roof soffits and verge, and it was arranged to plaster the bedroom walls on 19 December 2024. It was appropriate to complete the repairs. However, this was 2 years since the issue was reported. The delay was inappropriate and not in line with its repair policy.
On 11 December 2024 the landlord completed a mould wash. This was appropriate. However, the delay to complete this as an interim measure was inappropriate.
On 19 December 2024 the landlord visited the property to replace the windows, treat the mould, install insulation, install a thermal board, replaster and paint it but there was no access to the property. On that day the landlord completed repairs to the outside of the front of the property, including repairs to the gutters and fascia. This was appropriate. However, it was over 2 years since the resident reported the roof was leaking. The delay to complete the repairs was inappropriate.
On 16 January 2025 the landlord replaced wet insulation in the loft. This was an appropriate step to remedy the damp and mould. However, the delay to complete repairs so it could begin to remedy the damp and mould in the property was inappropriate and not in line with its damp and mould policy.
On 23 January 2025 the landlord said the gutter outlet at the neighbouring property was too high and prevented the gutters from working.
On 16 February 2025 the landlord attempted to install a vent in the property, but the scaffolding it had previously erected obstructed access. There was a lack of communication and planning to ensure it could complete works to remedy the damp and mould. This was unreasonable and delayed remedying the issue.
On 3 March 2025 the resident requested the landlord mould wash the property again. They also said they had felt ignored, that their child is autistic and endured the condition of their bedroom, and the resident had spent the last 7 months sleeping on the living room floor due to the bedroom ceiling cracking.
The landlord’s continued delay to remedy the issue and ensure it had completed repairs, including to the bedroom ceiling, undermined the landlord and tenant relationship and caused inconvenience for the household. This was inappropriate, not in line with its damp and mould policy and did not pay due regard to HHSRS.
On 17 March 2025 the landlord contacted the resident as it was at the property to complete a mould wash. This happened whilst the resident was on a school run. They were unhappy as they were not told ahead of time about the appointment. It was appropriate to complete a mould wash. However, it was unreasonable that the landlord had not arranged this with the resident.
On the same day the landlord sent its final complaint response. It acknowledged its lack of communication about the issues and apologised. It said it had taken on board feedback to prevent this happening again and offered £30 for the distress and inconvenience caused. It set out that it would:
1. replace the bedroom windows.
2. complete a mould wash.
3. install a vent, airbrick, replaster the affected bedroom, and rehang the bedroom lights.
When a landlord has accepted a failing, it is our role to consider if the redress had put things right and resolved the complaint satisfactorily. We consider if the landlords offer and commitments to remedy issues, have been in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
Our Outcomes Guidance sets out that where there has been a significant failure or series of significant failures that have caused a seriously detrimental impact on the resident, we may find severe maladministration.
This may include disregard for the landlord’s policies, legislation, and good practice when addressing the issues. The issue remained unresolved for an unreasonable and/or excessive period which was disproportionate to the complaint raised. And this had a serious detrimental impact on the vulnerabilities in the household and caused a level of distress, disruption, or inconvenience.
The landlord’s offer is a start to recognise the issues and impact on the household. However, the landlord had not considered:
1. the delay in inspecting the property initially, and the repeated inspections that took place, where recommendations were not followed up within the timeframes set out on its website, repair policy and damp and mould policy.
2. the repeated failures to repair the roof and guttering and remedy the damp and mould in the property for over 2 years.
3. the lack of oversight and a coordinated approach to ensure appointments could run efficiently and repairs were completed.
4. that it had not followed through with its insight of the vulnerabilities in the household to prioritise the repairs to the roof and guttering and the damp and mould.
5. the excessive delay to complete repairs that contributed to the health and safety concerns of water leaking into the property, damp in the property for a prolonged period, mould developing in the bedrooms, and the safety concerns of the cracking bedroom ceiling.
The landlord had not set out in its complaint responses that it had considered the impact the delays had on the household and the vulnerabilities in the house. This includes asthma, children in the property, the resident feeling as though they may have had to take the complaint to their solicitor, the resident sleeping on the lounge floor due to concerns of the bedroom ceiling and damp and mould.
Considering the above, we find severe maladministration in its handling of repairs to the roof and gutter and subsequent damp and mould.
In accordance with our remedies guidance, we may consider compensation for the impact on the household and loss of enjoyment of the property. Given the severity of the failures identified and the impact on the household, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £1,311.48 compensation. This is equivalent to 12% of the resident’s rent for the period assessed in this investigation up until the stage 2 response. This reflects the distress and inconvenience caused and the loss of enjoyment of the property, whilst the issue remained unresolved.
Since the complaint response the landlord evidenced it had attempted repairs and found similar issues with the lack of quality of work completed to the roof and guttering. It replaced the windows in the bedrooms, installed the vent, and replastered affected areas in the property between March and May 2025.
In June 2025 the resident told the landlord the time taken to complete repairs was making them ill and they had sought counselling. They were concerned they had to source redecoration, but repairs were outstanding.
In July 2025 the landlord arranged repairs to the soffits, verge, installed a vent, and repointed the mortar. However, there is no evidence it had repaired the height of the gutter outlet to ensure it could function properly. There is also no evidence it had installed a thermal board as had been previously recommended.
Considering the above and the repeated lack of quality of work and delay to complete works it committed to do in its complaint responses, the landlord must:
1. arrange an inspection of the roof and gutter repairs and damp and mould in the property to ensure these issues have been resolved. It must provide a copy of these reports to us and the resident.
2. it must set out an action plan to complete any further recommendations following its inspection as to how and when it will complete them and ensure they are completed. This must include repairs to the height of the gutter outlet and installation of a thermal board, unless it is evidenced it had completed these repairs already.
3. consider compensation from the time of its stage 2 response until the time the repairs were completed to mitigate the damp and mould.
The landlord must consider its compensation policy and set out to the resident if it will redecorate affected parts of the property or compensate for the redecoration of affected parts of the property. If it does not do so, it must explain why to the resident.

The associated complaint

Under our Complaint Handling Code (the Code), landlords must ensure they:
1. acknowledged a complaint within 5 working days of it being received and respond to the complaint within 10 working days of it being acknowledged.
2. acknowledged the request for escalation to stage 2 within 5 working days of it being received and respond to the complaint within 20 working days of it being acknowledged.
The landlord’s complaint policy is aligned with the Code.
The resident complained to the landlord on 17 June 2024. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 24 June 2024 and said it would provide a stage 1 response to the resident by 8 July 2024. This was appropriate and in line with its complaint policy and the Code.
The landlord did not provide a stage 1 response to the resident by 8 July 2024. This was inappropriate and not in line with its complaint policy and the Code.
The evidence shows the landlord spoke with the resident on 5 August 2024 who agreed to close the complaint. This was on the agreement that the landlord would start repairs on the property the next day. The evidence shows the landlord had not removed asbestos from parts of the property and so repairs did not start on 6 August 2024.
The resident explained to the landlord on 2 September 2024 they were unhappy that repairs had not started. Considering this and that the resident raised further dissatisfaction, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to discuss the complaint with the resident and reopen it. The fact the landlord did not do this was unreasonable and obstructed the complaint process.
The resident contacted the landlord on 13 November 2024 as they wanted an update about the complaint. The landlord explained to the resident on 2 December 2024 that it would respond to the complaint by 12 December 2024. It provided a stage 1 response to the resident on 11 December 2024.
The delay for the landlord to recognise further dissatisfaction raised by the resident and reopen the complaint was unreasonable. It prevented the resident receiving a stage 1 response within the times set out in its complaint policy and the Code. This was inappropriate.
The resident escalated the complaint to stage 2 on 3 March 2025. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on the same day and sent the stage 2 response on 17 March 2025. This was appropriate and in line with its complaint policy and the Code.
The landlord had not acknowledged the handling of the complaint in its responses. It had not recognised:
1. that the condition and agreement to close the complaint had not been met and it had not discussed this with the resident or re-opened the complaint within a reasonable time.
2. the delay to reopen the complaint when the resident raised further dissatisfaction and chased the landlord for a complaint response.
Considering this we find maladministration for its handling of the complaint.
Taking account of the landlord’s compensation policy and our remedies guidance, it must pay the resident a total of £150 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to them.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the reports to repair the roof and guttering and the subsequent damp and mould in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

Within 28 days of the date of this determination the landlord must:
1. write to the resident to apologise for the failures set out in this report and set out its learnings from this to prevent it happening again in the future. The apology must be made by the CEO to the resident.
2. pay the resident a total of £1,461.48 broken down as:
  1. £1,311.48 to recognise the distress, inconvenience and loss of enjoyment of the property caused by its handling of repairs to the roof and guttering and subsequent damp and mould. It can deduct £30 if already paid to the resident.
  2. £150 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused for its handling of the complaint.
3. consider its compensation policy and write to the resident to set out if it will redecorate affected parts of the property or compensate for the redecoration of affected parts of the property. If it does not do so, it must explain why to the resident.
4. inspect the property to ensure repairs to the roof have been completed and the damp and mould has been remedied.
5. write to the resident to:
  1. set out an action plan to the resident and this Service.
  2. the action plan must:

(1) include when and how it will install thermal boards at the property and repair the height of the gutter to ensure it functions properly, unless its evidenced it has completed these repairs already.

(2) include any further recommendations from its inspection of the property and it must ensure these repairs are completed within the times it sets out in the action plan.

(3) set out when it will remove scaffolding from the property.

The landlord must provide evidence of the above orders within 28 days of the date of this determination.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the landlord considers further compensation, in line with its compensation policy, for the delay to complete repairs to mitigate damp and mould from the time it sent its stage 2 response, up until the time the repairs were completed.