GreenSquareAccord Limited (202433034)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202433034

GreenSquareAccord Limited

30 July 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 regarding the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.  

Background

3. The resident has been an assured tenant of a 1-bedroom flat since August 2012.
4. On 5 May 2022 the landlord received pre-action correspondence from the resident’s solicitor. The solicitor claimed there had been water ingress which caused damp and mould in the property.
5. The landlord’s surveyor found mould in the property following an inspection carried out on 19 August 2022.
6. The resident told the landlord on 7 December 2023 there was water leaking into the property from the roof.
7. The resident emailed the landlord on 18 and 25 April 2024. He said there had been mould on the property ceilings for at least 12 months. The landlord inspected the roof on 20 May 2024 and found a leak, which it said could have contributed to the damp and mould.
8. The resident complained to the landlord on 22 August 2024 about its handling of his reports of damp and mould. The landlord acknowledged this on 30 September 2024.
9. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 11 October 2024. It upheld his complaint and offered £900 compensation for its handling of his reports of damp and mould in the property.
10. The resident asked it to review his complaint on 18 October 2024. On 4 November 2024 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It offered an additional £190 compensation for its handling of his reports of damp and mould in the property.
11. The resident contacted us on 28 November 2024 as he remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of his complaint.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

12. The resident has told us of the impact the damp and mould and leaks from the roof had on his health. Whilst this Service is an alternative to the courts, we are unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Matters relating to personal injury or damage to health are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. However, we can consider any general distress and inconvenience caused where there has been a failing by the landlord.
13. The landlord’s records from 2022 show it was aware of mould in the resident’s property. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlord in a timely manner. This is because our Scheme states we may not investigate complaints that were not brought to the landlord’s attention as a complaint within a reasonable time, normally 12 months from when the issue is first raised.
14. When deciding the scope of this investigation we have considered that the issue in dispute is the same throughout the whole timeline. Although the resident did not formally complain to the landlord until August 2024, the evidence shows the landlord was made aware of the issue in May 2022 and the resident engaged with it from then onwards.
15. As such we have exercised our discretion, and it is appropriate for this investigation to focus on the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould in the property from May 2022 onwards.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould at the property

16. On 5 May 2022 the landlord received pre-action correspondence from the resident’s solicitor. The solicitor said there was damp and mould in the property due to water ingress. The landlord has not provided any evidence to confirm if the resident had reported damp and mould in the property prior to it receiving the correspondence from the solicitor.
17. Landlords need to make sure their homes are safe, warm, and free from hazards. When a resident reports a risk such as damp and mould, the landlord should quickly inspect the property to check for hazards. They must determine if the home is safe and fit to live in. Ignoring hazards can lead to serious consequences for everyone involved.
18. The landlord’s damp and mould policy states it will ensure it provides and maintains dry, healthy homes for its customers. It also states it will undertake effective inspections and implement all reasonable remedial repair solutions and improvements to eradicate damp. When damp and mould is reported the landlord will refer the matter to a surveyor or external contractor to inspect the property. Although the policy does not provide a timescale for when the inspection will be carried out, it is reasonable to expect it will be carried out within 28 days, which is the timescale it uses for routine repairs. If it is established a mould wash is required, the landlord’s policy states it will be completed within 7 days.
19. The landlord’s surveyor carried out an inspection of the resident’s property on 19 August 2022. They said there was mould on the kitchen ceiling, but they could not confirm what was causing it. The surveyor recommended the landlord carry out a mould wash, install a humidistat fan in the kitchen and top up the loft insulation. The inspection was carried out over 3 months after the reports of damp and mould, which was outside of the 28 days routine repairs timescale. The landlord did not carry out the remedial works as per its surveyor’s recommendations.
20. The landlord told the resident’s solicitor on 6 January 2023 it would carry out the repairs as per the surveyor’s report within 56 days. The landlord did not carry out any repairs to the property, and the resident has told us no further action was taken by the solicitor.
21. On 7 December 2023 the resident reported to the landlord there was a leak coming into the property from the roof. The resident sent the landlord pictures and videos of water running down internal walls. The landlord’s repairs policy states it should repair a leaking roof within 7 days. The landlord took no action to inspect or repair the roof within this timeframe.
22. During April 2024 the resident and the landlord exchanged emails about the damp and mould in his property. The resident said the situation was causing him stress and his GP had prescribed him medication for it. He also said he suffered from a cough, which was affected by the damp and mould.
23. On 20 May 2024 the landlord’s surveyor inspected the property. They confirmed there was a leak from the roof and there had been damp and mould on every ceiling in the property for at least 12 months. The landlord’s records say it attempted to visit the property again on 31 May and 10 June 2024, but it could not gain access. The resident emailed the landlord on 9 July 2024 to try to re-arrange the appointment, but the landlord took no further action to arrange repair works.
24. On 22 August 2024 the resident sent a complaint email to the landlord. He said his property had been in poor condition for over 18 months.
25. The landlord inspected the resident’s property on 4 September 2024. It recorded the roof was leaking and each ceiling in the property needed a mould wash. The landlord did not arrange a mould wash within 7 days, as per its policy.
26. On 23 and 25 September 2024 the resident told the landlord water was pouring into the property from the roof leak. The landlord’s roofing contractor attended the property on 30 September 2024. This was within its policy timescale for attending a roof leak. The contractor said the leak should be treated as an urgent repair, but the repair needed to be carried out by a specialist contractor as the roof contained asbestos.
27. The landlord sent a response to the resident at stage 1 of its complaints process on 11 October 2024. It upheld his complaint. The landlord accepted it had failed to arrange an inspection of the property within reasonable timescales. The landlord said it was concerned about the resident’s living conditions and once it had established the repair timescales it would support a temporary move for the resident if necessary. It said a surveyor would inspect the property on 14 October 2024 and establish the required repairs and remedial work.
28. The landlord also apologised to the resident for its delays in taking action to address the damp and mould in his property. It offered £850 compensation, which comprised of:
    1. £200 for the delays taking action.
    2. £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
    3. £150 for the time and trouble taken to pursue the matter.
29. A review of the landlord’s stage 1 response shows it accepted its failure in not responding to the reports of damp and mould in the property. The landlord apologised and offered compensation for its failings and arranged to take action to address the outstanding issues.
30. The landlord’s surveyor inspected the resident’s property on 14 October 2024. They found holes in the roof causing leaks and which allowed pigeons to enter the loft. They said the walls in the property were damp and the loft had low levels of insulation. The surveyor said the resident did not need to be re-located to another property while the repairs were carried out.
31. The resident escalated his complaint on 18 October 2024. The landlord acknowledged the escalation the same day.
32. The landlord’s contractor attended the property on 1 November 2024 to complete a mould wash. However, the contractor said the ceilings were about to fall down, so they were unable to carry out the works.
33. On 4 November 2024 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. The landlord apologised the roof repairs had not been carried out and said it had been referred to a specialist contractor. It said it had arranged for extractor fans to be installed in the kitchen and bathroom on 4 December 2024.
34. The landlord offered a further £190 compensation to the resident, which comprised of:
    1. £20 for the lack of progress since the stage 1 complaint response.
    2. £20 for the time and trouble spent chasing progress.
    3. £50 for its poor communication.
    4. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
35. Although the landlord offered compensation for the further delays in carrying out repairs, it did not provide a timescale for when the roof would be repaired.
36. On 28 November 2024 the resident contacted us as he was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of his complaint.

Events after the stage 2 complaint response

37. The resident continued to complain to the landlord about the holes in his roof and the damp and mould in the property. He instructed a new solicitor, and on 21 November 2024 they sent pre-action correspondence to the landlord, as the repairs remained outstanding.
38. On 16 January 2025 an independent surveyor inspected the property, as arranged by the resident’s solicitor. The surveyor recorded the roof was in visible disrepair, allowing water ingress and for pigeons to enter the loft. It said the water ingress had damaged the ceilings and caused damp and mould throughout the property.
39. The resident’s solicitor sent a general damages settlement request to the landlord on 5 February 2025. A settlement of £2,840 was agreed with the landlord.
40. The landlord has completed all outstanding repairs. On 14 April 2024 the landlord recorded the roof had been repaired. The landlord relocated the resident to a service apartment on 17 May 2025 while the internal repair works were carried out. On 18 June 2025 the landlord inspected the property and confirmed all works had been completed, and the resident returned to the property.
41. Throughout the timeline of the resident’s complaint, the evidence shows there were substantial delays by the landlord to effectively address the resident’s reports of damp and mould. It took over 3 years to complete the repairs and remedial work. There were significant failings by the landlord and failures to comply with its policies throughout the timeline.
42. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances.
43. The landlord’s failings led to a significant impact on the resident which occurred over a prolonged timeframe. In such cases our remedies guidance suggests we should consider compensation of more than £1,000 where such serious failings have occurred. In this case the landlord’s compensation payment of £2,840 and its completion of the outstanding work is aligned to the compensation we would offer in these circumstances. It represents reasonable redress for the identified failings.

Complaint handling

44. The landlord’s complaints policy states it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It aims to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days of acknowledging them and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
45. The resident sent a complaint to the landlord on 22 August 2024. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 30 September 2024. This was outside of its policy timescale.
46. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 11 October 2024. It apologised and offered £50 compensation for the delay in replying to the complaint. Although the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response was outside of its policy timescale, it recognised this in its response and if offered compensation.
47. The resident escalated his complaint with the landlord on 18 October 2024. It acknowledged the complaint the same day.
48. On 4 November 2024 the landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. This was within its policy timescale.
49. The landlord’s offer of £50 compensation and its acknowledgement of the delay at stage 1 aligns to an award of redress we would typically arrived at in similar circumstances and when using our remedies guidance. However, the landlord’s failure to resolve the issues via the complaint procedure meant the resident was put to more time and trouble instructing a solicitor.
50. The complaint procedure is supposed to be a mechanism to resolve disputes in their entirety. In this case, however, the resident had to take steps to instruct a solicitor, and it was only then the landlord agreed compensation at an appropriate level and agreed to complete the works. That should not have been necessary and indicates a significant failure by the landlord’s complaint team to arrange an inspection, works and fair compensation.
51. Although it is positive the landlord agreed reasonable compensation with the resident, this was not until after the stage 2 response and was only when he took the time and trouble to instruct a solicitor on his behalf. Therefore, the landlord failed to effectively put things right during the complaints process. It also missed an opportunity to learn lessons at the time of its original investigation.
52. The landlord therefore did not investigate the resident’s concerns appropriately through its complaints process. If it had, it could have reasonably avoided the impact, and time and trouble caused to the resident. It also could have resolved the issues with the damp and mould much sooner. As such, the landlord did not act in line with our dispute resolution principles. Due to this, the resident understandably lost confidence in the landlord’s ability to manage the repairs. For these reasons, we have found service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

53. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
54. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders and Recommendations

Orders

55. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord will:
    1. Provide the resident with a written apology for the identified failings in this report.
    2. Pay £150 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures. The landlord may deduct the sum of £50 awarded during its internal complaints process, if already paid. The compensation must be paid directly to the resident and not offset against a rent or service charge account.
56. The landlord should conduct a review of the complaint handling failures identified in this report. This review should focus on why the landlord failed to fully address the resident’s complaint until after its internal complaints process. Within 8 weeks the landlord should present this review to its senior leadership team and provide us with a report summarising its identified improvements.

Recommendation

57. It is recommended that the landlord should, if it has not already done so, pay the resident the £2,840 agreed as a settlement for its handling of reports of damp and mould at the property.