GreenSquareAccord Limited (202431242)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202431242

GreenSquareAccord Limited

19 August 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 sent 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 the resident’s reports of damp and mould and related repairs.
We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident has lived in the property as an assured tenant since February 2018. The resident lives with her children, who have vulnerabilities. The property is a 2-bedroom house.
The resident reported a leak in her bathroom that damaged the kitchen ceiling on 18 September 2023. The landlord visited the same day and found the cause was loose bathroom tiles. It raised a job to replace the tiles with an aqua panel.
On 11 October 2023 the resident complained about delays to the repairs. She said she was waiting for the landlord to deal with damp and mould, and it had not fitted the aqua panel.
In its complaint response on 9 January 2024 the landlord apologised for the delay. It said it would contact the resident in the next 10 working days to arrange an appointment. It offered £350 compensation. The resident escalated her complaint the same day.
The landlord sent its final response on 6 February 2024. It said it would inspect the resident’s home on 14 February 2024. It increased the offer of compensation to £950.
On 26 March 2024 the resident contacted the landlord and said she had heard nothing about the repairs since the survey on 14 February 2024. The landlord responded and said it would follow this up.
The resident’s MP contacted the landlord on 22 May 2024 and asked it to investigate the resident’s concerns about damp and mould. The MP said the resident was concerned whether her home was safe for her children.
The landlord spoke with the resident about the MP’s contact on 7 June 2024. The resident told the landlord there was damp and mould and outstanding repairs. She said the situation was affecting her children’s health. The landlord raised a new complaint.
In its complaint response on 30 July 2024 the landlord apologised for the delay in responding. It accepted it had not raised the work following the survey and said there had been “poor record keeping”. It apologised for inconvenience caused and said it had arranged a new inspection for 16 August 2024. It offered £200 compensation.
The resident escalated her complaint on 30 July 2024. She said the landlord had done surveys, but she now had to wait for another before it did the repairs.
In its final response on 3 September 2024 the landlord apologised that it had not fixed the problem and for the effect on the resident. It said the appointment on 16 August 2024 did not take place because the resident had gone to work. It said she would need to rebook an inspection. It said there had been poor communication and delays. It offered a further £200 compensation.
The resident escalated her complaint to the Ombudsman. She said despite 3 surveys, there had been a problem for over a year. She said she had been through the complaints process twice. She wanted the work completed and compensation for the effect on her children’s health and the stress caused.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

In her complaint, the resident said damp and mould affected her children’s health. The Ombudsman has decided not to consider this part of the complaint. This is because the Scheme says we may not investigate complaints that concern matters where we consider it more effective to seek a remedy through the courts. While the Ombudsman is an alternative to the courts, in this case we are unable to prove whether the landlord’s actions affected health. Because of this, we cannot consider personal injury aspects of the complaint.
However, while we cannot consider the effect on health, the Ombudsman will consider any general distress and inconvenience experienced.
The Ombudsman usually deals with each complaint that went through the landlord’s complaints process as a separate investigation. In this case, the Ombudsman has seen that the resident went through the landlord’s complaints process, about the same issue, twice in less than 12 months. Because of this, the Ombudsman will consider the landlord’s final responses on 6 February and 9 September 2024 in one investigation.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and related repairs

The landlord is responsible under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for keeping in repair the structure of the property and installations for sanitation. This means the landlord has an obligation to repair leaks and ceilings. The landlord did not dispute it had responsibility for the repairs.
The landlord’s damp, mould, and condensation procedure says following a report, a surveyor will inspect the property to find the cause. The surveyor will set out any actions needed. The landlord will then raise work orders and provide the resident with a report within 48 hours of the visit.
The policy also includes timescales for repairs. It says it will complete emergency repairs, which present an immediate danger or will result in severe damage to property, within 24 hours. It will attend urgent repairs within7 days. These are issues that need urgent attention to prevent future damage to property, and where there is no immediate danger to the resident. It will do routine repairs within28 days.
Records provided by the landlord show the resident reported a leak from the bathroom affecting her kitchen ceiling on 18 September 2023. The landlord attended the same day as an emergency. It found loose tiles in the bathroom that were allowing water to leak into the kitchen. The landlord raised a job on 19 September 2023 to refix the tiles. It did the work on 20 September 2023 and raised a job the same day to replace tiles with an aqua panel.
The Ombudsman has found the landlord’s response at this stage was reasonable. This is because it responded in line with its policy, dealt with what it thought was the cause of the leak, and raised a job to do more work.
On 20 September 2023 the resident called the landlord about the damage to the kitchen ceiling and said she was concerned there was a second leak. In response the landlord said it would inspect within 7 days. The resident chased for an update on 2 October 2023, as she had not heard from the landlord. The landlord said it would attend within 48 hours. On 5 October 2023, the resident contacted the landlord again as no-one had attended. The landlord raised another 48-hour response call.
On 11 October 2023 the resident complained about the lack of response. She said she was waiting for the landlord to deal with damp and mould behind the bathroom tiles, remove water marks from the ceiling, and fit the aqua panel.
The Ombudsman has seen no evidence of contact from the landlord until it sent its complaint response on 9 January 2024. As the resident had raised concerns about damp and mould, she could have reasonably expected the landlord to have arranged an appointment in line with its damp, mould, and condensation procedure. The landlord did not do this, and because of this the Ombudsman has found the landlord did not follow its policy. It also did not communicate with the resident about the repairs. This caused inconvenience and distress, as the resident had to chase the landlord and was concerned about the effect the damp and mould could have on her family.
In its complaint response on 9 January 2024 the landlord accepted it did not follow up the calls after 20 September 2023. It said it would contact the resident in the next 10 working days to arrange an appointment to fit the aqua panel and repair the ceiling. It apologised for the delay and for the distress and inconvenience caused. It offered £300 compensation for its failures in the handling of the reports of damp and mould and related repairs. This included:
1. £100 for delay in repairing the bath panel and ceiling.
2. £100 for time waiting for landlord to fix damp and mould in the bathroom.
3. £100 for poor communication.
4. The landlord said it would pay the compensation to the resident’s rent account, as she was in arrears.
On 9 January 2024 the resident escalated her complaint. She said the landlord told her on 20 September 2023, there was mould behind the shower and under the bath. She said she had been waiting for a survey since then. She said the leak had damaged her possessions, and the landlord had not checked whether the electrics were safe. She said the landlord had contacted her that day to arrange to fit tiles, and she had to explain again that fitting tiles would not solve the damp and mould. She said her rent was not in arrears.
On 11 January 2024 the landlord requested a damp and mould survey of the property. It also asked the resident to provide photos of damaged items. It said it would pay compensation directly to the resident.
In its final response on 6 February 2024, the landlord acknowledged the effect the leak had and said it had let the resident down. It said it was unacceptable that it had not given the resident an assurance her home was safe or let her know when it would do the repairs. It said it would contact her that day to arrange an electrical test. It said it had arranged a survey for 14 February 2024. It apologised that it contacted the resident to try to arrange work before the survey and said it would ensure this did not happen again. It increased the offer of compensation for failures in its handling of reports of damp and mould and related repairs to £800. This included:
1. £250 for distress and frustration caused by the failure to resolve the leak and do testing and repairs.
2. £250 for the delay in arranging a survey.
3. £100 for inconvenience caused by contacting the resident to arrange an appointment before the survey.
4. £150 for poor communication.
5. £50 for not offering to pay compensation directly.
6. It also said it would consider reimbursement for damaged items.
The Ombudsman has found that this was generally a reasonable response. This is because the landlord apologised for and accepted its failures. It offered a reasonable amount of compensation for each failure. It also gave details on when it would do the survey and said it would do all the identified repairs.
However, the Ombudsman has seen that the landlord did not explain why it took 5 months to arrange the survey. The response did not set out what the landlord would do to prevent this happening in future. In addition, when the resident reported a concern about the electrics on 9 January 2024, the landlord should have dealt with this as an urgent matter. Instead, it waited until it sent its final response, a month later, to arrange an appointment. The Ombudsman has not seen evidence of whether the landlord reimbursed the resident for damaged goods. Because of this, the Ombudsman cannot determine whether the landlord met this commitment.
Records provided by the landlord show the survey took place on 14 February 2024 as arranged. The survey recommended a new aqua board, replacement of tiles, and painting the kitchen ceiling. The Ombudsman has noted that these appear to be the repairs the landlord was aware of in September 2023.
On 26 March 2023 the resident told the landlord there had been no contact since the survey. The landlord responded on 28 March 2024 and said it would give an update as soon as possible. The resident chased the landlord again on 9 April 2024. On 10 April 2024 the landlord said it did not have an update.
In its final response on 6 February 2024 the landlord made a clear commitment that its head of repairs would ensure it did any necessary work. Although the response did not set out timescales, the landlord’s damp, mould, and condensation procedure has clear timescales for repairs. The resident could have reasonably expected the landlord to do the repairs in line with this, which would have been within 28 days. Instead, she had to chase the landlord for updates, which caused her inconvenience. The landlord was not able to give an update. The Ombudsman has found this was a failure by the landlord to meet the commitment it made in its final response and follow its policy.
On 11 April 2024 the landlord contacted the resident to arrange to paint the kitchen ceiling. The resident told the landlord she was waiting for it to do the work in the bathroom first. On 12 April 2024 the landlord told the resident it had decided it did not need to replace the tiles. It said it would replace the bath panel on 29 April 2024 and decorate the ceiling on 3 May 2024. It asked the resident to let it know if the appointments were not convenient.
It is unclear from the records what happened next, as there is a difference in dates between the landlord’s complaint response on 30 July 2024 and the records provided to the Ombudsman. But on either 24 or 29 April 2024, the landlord went to the resident’s home to replace the bath panel. The landlord’s records say the resident said it needed to fix the tiling before it repaired the bath panel. It said the resident refused the repair. On 3 May 2024 the landlord’s records say it went to decorate the ceiling, but the resident said it could not do the work as the ceiling was damaged.
The Ombudsman is unable to decide whether there were any failures relating to the appointments at this time as the records are unclear. As the survey said the landlord should replace the tiles, it is unclear why the landlord then decided it did not need to do this, and whether it gave reasons to the resident. It was reasonable for the landlord to arrange to do repairs in an order where it dealt with the cause of the leak before it dealt with damage. However, when the work did not go ahead on 24 or 29 April 2024, the landlord should have considered rearranging the appointment on 3 May 2024.
Following contact from the resident’s MP, the landlord raised a new complaint on 7 June 2024 about damp, mould, and outstanding repairs. The resident said there was damp and mould in her bathroom and it was a “constant battle to get anything done”.
In its complaint response on 30 July 2024 the landlord said its poor record keeping meant it had not done the work it agreed. It acknowledged this caused stress and had a detrimental effect on the resident and her family. It apologised for the service failures and distress and inconvenience caused. It said the level of service provided did not meet the resident’s expectations and it was working to improve the way it delivered services. It offered £125 compensation for poor record keeping. It said it would repair the ceiling on 8 August 2024 and do a damp and mould survey on 16 August 2024.
The Ombudsman has found it was reasonable for the landlord to acknowledge poor record keeping and offer compensation for this. It recognised the distress and inconvenience caused and apologised for its failures. However, the survey took place in February 2024, and the landlord had not completed the work 5 months later. In mitigation, there appears to have been some no access appointments, but the reasons for this are unclear. While the landlord offered reasonable compensation in February 2024, it is the Ombudsman’s view that the compensation offered in July 2024 was insufficient for a further 5-month delay. The resident also had the inconvenience of another survey.
The resident escalated her complaint on 30 July 2024. She said she was in the same position as she was in September 2023 and was now having to wait for another survey.
In its final response on 3 September 2024 the landlord accepted the resident first reported a leak in September 2023. It said it had booked a ceiling repair for 8 August 2024, but when it arrived, the resident said she did not want the work done until after the survey on 16 August 2024. It said when the surveyor attended on 16 August 2024, the resident was not at home. It said she would need to arrange a new appointment. It said the resident had experienced poor communication and long delays. It apologised for this and offered a further £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
The resident told the Ombudsman in August 2025 that she informed the landlord on the morning of 16 August 2024 that she would not be at home that day, but the surveyor still turned up. She said a survey then took place in September 2024, and the landlord fixed the leak but the date to do the related repairs was not until August 2025.
Overall, the Ombudsman has found there was a significant failure by the landlord in the way it dealt with the resident’s reports of damp and mould and related repairs. This amounted to maladministration. This is because there was a considerable delay in doing repairs between the first report of a leak in September 2023 and the final response in September 2024. The Ombudsman considers the £800 compensation offered for the 5 months delay between September 2023 and February 2024 was reasonable.
However, there was then a further 6 months delay between February and August 2024. The landlord offered £325 compensation in its final response in August 2024. This was:
1. £125 for poor record keeping.
2. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
It is the Ombudsman’s view that this was insufficient in the circumstances. This is because in this offer, the landlord did not consider that the inconvenience and distress caused between February and September 2024 was greater than that caused between September 2023 and February 2024. It also did not recognise the communication failures and the inconvenience caused by further surveys.
In February 2024 the landlord offered £250 compensation for distress and frustration caused by the failure to do the repairs. As the delay between February and September 2024 was longer, it is the Ombudsman’s view that £300 compensation for distress and frustration would be reasonable for this period. Compensation for the other failures must be the same as offered in February 2024. Because of this, the landlord must pay the resident £675 compensation for the period February to September 2024 as follows, inclusive of the £325 already offered:
1. £125 for poor record keeping, already offered.
2. £300 for distress and inconvenience caused by the delay in agreed repairs, inclusive of £200 already offered.
3. £100 for the inconvenience of further surveys.
4. £150 for poor communication.
The resident told the Ombudsman in August 2025 that the landlord had still not completed some related repairs. Because of this, the Ombudsman recommends the landlord considers whether to pay further compensation from the time of its final response in August 2024 until the date it completed repairs.
The landlord must also provide evidence on how it met the commitment it made in February 2024 to reimburse the resident for damaged possessions.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord’s complaints procedure says it will respond to a complaint in 10 working days. When a resident escalates their complaint, it will send a response in 20 working days. The procedure says all stage 2 responses must include details on how the resident can escalate their complaint to the Ombudsman. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
The procedure says if a member, such as a MP, express dissatisfaction on behalf of a resident, the landlord must give the resident an opportunity to make a complaint. It says it will contact the resident and confirm if they want it to investigate, and if they do it will respond as a stage 1 complaint.
Records provided by the landlord show the resident first complained about a leak on 11 October 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 24 October 2023. It said it usually aimed to respond within 10 working days, but due to demand, it could take 20 working days. It said the resident would receive a response by 21 November 2023.
The landlord sent its complaint response on 9 January 2024. It apologised for delays in acknowledging the complaint and providing a response. It offered £50 for the delay in responding.
The Ombudsman has found it was reasonable for the landlord to acknowledge the delay in responding. However, the landlord did not respond until 91 working days after the resident complained. This was significantly outside the timescales in the landlord’s policy. The landlord had told the resident there would be a delay until 21 November 2023, but it sent the response a significant time after that date. There is no evidence the landlord gave further updates. Because of this, it is the Ombudsman’s view that the compensation was insufficient.
The resident escalated her complaint on 9 January 2024, and the landlord acknowledged it the same day. It said she would receive a response by 6 February 2024. The landlord sent its final response on 6 February 2024. It increased its offer of compensation for the delay in responding to £150. It gave the resident details on how to refer her complaint to the Ombudsman.
It is the Ombudsman’s view that the increased offer of compensation was reasonable.
On 22 May 2024 the resident’s MP contacted the landlord about the resident’s concerns about damp and mould. The landlord replied to the MP on 29 May 2024 and said it would investigate. The landlord’s records show it spoke to the resident on 7 June 2024 about the MP’s enquiry. The records say the resident wanted “to go down the complaint route”. It raised a new stage 1 complaint.
The landlord sent a complaint acknowledgement to the resident on 17 June 2024. It said she would receive a response by 1 July 2024. On 1 July 2024 the landlord called the resident and left a message saying she would receive a response by 9 July 2024. The resident chased the landlord for a response on 24 July 2024. The landlord replied to the resident the same day. It said the complaint was in a backlog and the resident would receive a response no later than 30 July 2024.
The landlord sent a complaint response on 30 July 2024. This was 54 working days after it spoke to the resident about the MP’s enquiry and said it would raise a complaint. The landlord apologised for not providing a response within its timescale and for not keeping the resident updated about the delay. It offered £75 for the delay in providing a complaint response. It is the Ombudsman’s view that the apology and compensation was reasonable in the circumstances.
The resident escalated her complaint on 30 July 2024, and the landlord sent an acknowledgement on 5 August 2024. The landlord sent its final response on 3 September 2024. This was 22 working days after the landlord acknowledged the complaint, and slightly outside the timescales in its policy.
Overall, the Ombudsman has found the compensation of £225 was reasonable redress for the delays in responding to the resident’s complaints. However, in August 2025, the resident told the Ombudsman the landlord advised her in June 2024 that the complaint route was “the best way forward” after her MP contacted the landlord. The Ombudsman has seen the landlord provided clear information to the resident about contacting the Ombudsman in its final response on 6 February 2024. The Ombudsman cannot comment on what the landlord may have said to the resident in June 2024 about raising a new complaint. However, because of the feedback from the resident, the Ombudsman recommends the landlord reviews what advice it gives after a final response, to ensure residents are signposted to the Ombudsman.

Determination

In line with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord on its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and related repairs.
In line with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord on its handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord must apologise to the resident for the failures found in this report.
The landlord must pay the resident £1,475 compensation for its failures in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and related repairs. This is inclusive of £1,125 already offered. The landlord must pay compensation directly to the resident and not offset it against any arrears.
The landlord must review its actions in this case to identify why it did not progress the repairs following the survey in February 2024. It must set out what actions it will take to reduce the risk it repeats the failures.
The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence on how it met the commitment it made in February 2024 to reimburse the resident for damaged possessions.
The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends the landlord reoffers the £225 previously offered for complaint handling failures if it has not already paid it to the resident.
The Ombudsman recommends the landlord considers whether to pay further compensation from the time of its final response in August 2024 until the date it completed repairs.
The Ombudsman recommends the landlord reviews what advice it gives after a final response, to ensure residents are signposted to the Ombudsman.