Jigsaw Homes Group Limited (202415155)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202415155

Jigsaw Homes Group Limited

7 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 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 the resident’s:
1. reports of pests at the property.
2. rent enquiry.
3. associated complaint.

Background

The resident has been an assured tenant of a 2-bedroom terraced house since October 2013. The landlord is a housing association. The resident has physical and mental health conditions that they reported to the landlord.
The resident raised concerns about pests in the property between 23 June 2023 and 28 February 2024. In that time, pest control recommended to cover holes around the neighbour’s external vent to prevent pests. On 4 April 2024 the resident contacted the landlord about pests in the property again.
The resident complained to the landlord on 28 April 2024 as there were still pests in the property. They said they were “terrified to live in the house” and that they “can’t sleep or get a good night’s rest.”
The next day the landlord asked pest control to confirm what earlier inspections had found. It said it found pests were moving between the terraced properties. It said the landlord should remove insulation and items in the roof space to block entry points and cover the neighbouring properties vent.
Between 29 April to 14 May 2024 the landlord sent 2 warning letters to the neighbour to keep the garden in good condition. The landlord sent its stage 1 response to the resident on 15 May 2024. It said:
1. it completed a CCTV survey of the resident’s drains and found no issues.
2. pest control inspected the property in 2023 and 2024 and recommended ways for the landlord to deter pests.
3. it agreed to repair entry points in the residents and neighbour’s property, including the resident’s roofline, the neighbouring properties’ vent, and to arrange a CCTV survey of the neighbours drains.
4. it had contacted the neighbour to improve the condition of the garden to prevent pests, and said the resident should respond to the landlord in 14 days if there had been no improvement.
On 4 June 2024 the resident escalated their complaint to the landlord. They said the landlord had not inspected the neighbouring property to minimise pests. They wanted the landlord to cover the holes in the property and to remove rubbish from the neighbouring property. They said the landlord had not responded to their complaint that they had been overcharged for rent.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint escalation on 12 June 2024. On 25 July 2024 it provided its stage 2 response. It:
1. apologised it had not proactively addressed the cause of the pests and offered £300 compensation for the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused.
2. said the rent charged to the resident since 2013 was part of the “affordable rent scheme” and was subject to annual increases. It said it cannot comment on the neighbour’s rent.
The resident referred the complaint to this Service on 6 May 2025 and spoke with us on 21 July 2025. The resident said:
1. the landlord repaired holes to the outside of the property in 2024, including the neighbours vent and it had arranged for CCTV of the neighbour’s drains.
2. their neighbour had not been cooperative to repair their property to prevent pests, and the landlord had not resolved the pest issue.
3. the landlord charged them higher rent compared to their neighbours.
4. the landlord categorised their property from a 3-bedroom to a 2-bedroom property and the council therefore calculated their bedroom tax incorrectly.
5. the landlord offered to refund part of their rent, but the resident wants the landlord to speak to housing benefit about this.
6. they had not accepted the landlord’s offer of £300 compensation. They want part of their rent refunded, and for the landlord to resolve the pest issue.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The resident complained to the landlord that it charged them higher rent compared to their neighbours. The Ombudsman cannot review complaints that concern the level of rent, or the increase of rent. However, we can assess whether the landlord’s overall communication with, and responses to the resident’s enquiries about their rent were appropriate, fair and reasonable.
Complaints that relate to the level, reasonableness, or liability to pay rent are within the jurisdiction of the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber). The resident may wish to seek independent legal advice in relation to how to proceed with a case, if they choose to do so.
The resident referred to concerns about the size of their bedroom and the impact of this on bedroom tax. These matters did not form part of the original complaint. The resident queried the bedroom size after the complaint had exhausted the landlord’s internal complaint procedure. It is unclear whether the resident raised this issue as a separate complaint with the landlord.
This investigation will only consider the issues raised to the landlord and addressed in its complaint responses up until the final stage 2 response it sent on 25 July 2024. The resident can raise any new issues with the landlord as a formal complaint, if needed.

Pests at the property

The resident reported pests in the walls of the property on 23 June 2023.
The tenancy agreement says:
1. the landlord will repair and keep in proper working order the structure and exterior of the property (including drains, the roof, and external pipes).
2. the resident will keep the inside of the property free from pests and vermin.
The landlord’s repair policy says:
1. it is responsible for pest control in communal areas and tenants are responsible for pests in gardens.
2. it will complete:
  1. emergency repairs within 24 hours.
  2. urgent repairs within 5 working days.
  3. routine repairs within 15 working days.
  4. non-routine repairs within 90 working days.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) says hazards in properties can include pests due to infections they can bring. Part 15 of HHSRS sets out that the property should have preventative measures in place to reduce the risk of infection from pests, such as reducing entry points, and to seal drainage openings and inlets.
On 27 June 2023 pest control confirmed there was no evidence of pests in the property. The landlord had arranged inspection of the pests to understand ways it could alleviate the issue. This was appropriate. The inspection recommended to cover the hole around the neighbour’s external vent.
On 2 August 2023 the resident reported pests in the property. The landlord contacted pest control for its earlier findings.
There is no evidence the landlord arranged to cover the holes around the external vents as pest control had previously recommended. It would have been reasonable for it to have set out a plan of action and keep the resident updated as to when it would complete repairs to mitigate the pests. However, it had not done so since pest control recommended the repairs in June 2023. This was unreasonable.
On 6 and 7 December 2023 the resident reported pests in the property. The landlord arranged a pest inspection. There is no evidence of a copy of the inspection and its findings. This is a failure of its record keeping. However, on 14 December 2023 the resident explained to the landlord that the inspection found holes to the structure of the neighbour’s property, including the vent.
The evidence does not show the landlord repaired the hole around the vent that pest control recommended in June 2023. This was inappropriate and outside of its repair timescales.
On 19 February 2024 the resident explained to the landlord that pest control had laid bait in the property, although there is no evidence when this happened. The landlord confirmed pest control would return to the resident’s property on 22 February 2024. The resident contacted the landlord on 28 February 2024 as pest control had not returned. There is no evidence that pest control returned to the property at this time. It was unreasonable the landlord had not kept oversight of the pest issue with pest control to mitigate the problem.
The resident reported pests in the property on 4 April and 28 April 2024, as well as the condition of the neighbouring property. They said there were holes in the property, pests were entering the drains, and there was waste left outside. They said they “are terrified to live in this house, I have chronic fatigue, I have had a massive heart attack 4 weeks ago”. The resident said they felt distressed as the pest issue was unresolved.
On 29 April 2024 pest control explained it had visited the property multiple times. It said pests had taken bait before but had not done so recently. It suggested that pests were moving between the properties. It recommended to block entry points in the roof and to cover holes around the neighbour’s vent.
On 30 April and 14 May 2024 the landlord notified the neighbouring property of the condition of the garden and asked them to clear it. This was appropriate to try to remedy issues in the garden and mitigate pests in the area.
The landlord arranged to inspect the resident’s drains. On 15 May 2024 a contractor finished surveillance of the resident’s drains and told the landlord there were no pest issues found. The contractor asked to inspect the neighbours drains. The landlord agreed to:
1. inspect and repair entry points in the neighbours drains and property.
2. repair any holes in the roof.
3. repair the hole around the neighbour’s vent.
The landlord updated the resident on 22 May 2024. It said it contacted the neighbour to resolve the condition of the garden and waste around the property. On 4 June 2024 the resident confirmed the neighbour had not cleared the garden and that this contributed to pests in the property.
On 25 July 2024 the landlord provided its stage 2 response to the resident. It apologised and said it could have been proactive in finding the root cause of the pests. It offered £300 compensation to the resident for the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused.
There is no evidence by this time that the landlord adhered to pest control’s recommendations to cover the hole around the neighbour’s vent, repair any holes in the roof, and complete surveillance of the neighbours drains. This was inappropriate, did not pay due regard to HHSRS, and was not in line with its repair policy and the tenancy agreement.
Since that time, the landlord had:
1. visited the neighbour about pests on 26 July 2024.
2. inspected the drains at the neighbouring properties on 6 August 2024.
3. inspected the roof and found evidence of pests in the walls, ceiling, and loft on 25 October 2024.
The resident told us that the landlord had completed repairs to the holes in the external parts of the neighbours property and arranged for CCTV of the neighbour’s drains in 2024.
When a landlord has accepted a failing, it is the role of the Ombudsman to consider if redress offered by the landlord had put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily. The Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress and commitments to remedy issues, have been in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
There is no evidence the landlord completed all pest control recommendations to mitigate pests. The landlord had not:
1. inspected and repaired any holes in the resident’s roof.
2. set out the results and any recommended actions from the survey of the neighbouring drains.
3. set out a plan of action to complete any further recommended repairs to prevent pests.
The amount offered of £300 was reasonable and proportionate for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of pests. However, there is no evidence that it has completed all recommended repairs to prevent pests entering the property. We therefore cannot confirm that the landlord has resolved all of the issues reported by the resident. Therefore, we find there has been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of this element of the complaint.
The landlord should reoffer the £300 compensation to the resident if this has not already been paid. This amount is in line with our Remedies Guidance for a finding of maladministration. It must be paid directly to the resident and not credited to the rent account, unless otherwise agreed with them.
The landlord should share with the resident the pest control’s recommendations to prevent pests in the property. It should also evidence that these recommendations have been carried out and/or set out a plan of action to complete any outstanding recommendations to mitigate pests at the property within a reasonable timeframe.

The resident’s rent enquiries

On 4 June 2024 the resident explained in their complaint escalation to the landlord that their neighbours had been paying less rent than them.
The tenancy agreement confirms the resident is under an “affordable rent” arrangement. The rent policy says:
1. affordable rent properties have a yearly increase applied in line with the requirements detailed in the Rent Standard or other Government advice.
The landlord’s privacy notice for tenants and customers says it will not share tenant and customer information outside of an official capacity, such as with a local authority, social services, and police.
In the landlord’s complaint response to the resident on 25 July 2024 it confirmed the resident has an affordable rent tenancy. It explained what the rent was when the tenancy began in 2013. It said over time the rent has been subject to annual increases. This was appropriate for the landlord to explain and in line with the rent policy.
The resident was concerned their neighbours were paying less than them. The landlord explained in its response to the resident on 25 July 2024 that it cannot comment on the neighbours rent accounts. This was appropriate for the landlord to explain and in line with its privacy notice.
In summary the landlord’s explanation about the resident’s type of tenancy agreement and rent arrangement was appropriate. It was also appropriate to explain it cannot comment on the neighbour’s rent. Therefore, we find there has been no maladministration in its handling of the resident’s rent enquiry.

The associated complaint

Under the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), landlords must ensure they:
1. acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days of receiving it.
2. respond to the complaint within 10 working days of acknowledging it.
  1. if the landlord needs an extension, it should communicate the timescale to the resident, and that it is no longer than a further 10 working days.
3. acknowledge the request for escalation to stage 2 within 5 working days of receiving it.
4. respond to the complaint within 20 working days of acknowledging it.
  1. If the landlord needs an extension, it should communicate the timescale to the resident, and that it is no longer than a further 20 working days.
The landlord’s complaint policy is aligned with the Code.
The resident complained to the landlord on 28 April 2024. The landlord had until 7 May 2024 to acknowledge the complaint. It acknowledged the complaint on 7 May 2024. This was appropriate and in line with the Code and the landlord’s complaint policy.
The landlord had until 21 May 2024 to provide its stage 1 response. It sent its stage 1 response to the resident on 15 May 2024. This was appropriate and in line with the Code and the landlord’s complaint policy.
The resident escalated the complaint to stage 2 on 4 June 2024. The landlord had until 11 June 2024 to acknowledge the complaint. It acknowledged the complaint on 12 June 2024. This was a day late and a shortfall of its service.
The landlord had until 10 July 2024 to provide its stage 2 response or request an extension to respond. It contacted the resident on 4 July 2024. It acknowledged the resident had requested a call about the complaint on 1 July 2024 and that they would not be at the property for a while. The landlord said it would send a stage 2 response when they are back.
The landlord spoke with the resident about the complaint and pests in the property on 15 July 2024. Following this, the landlord sent the resident its stage 2 response on 25 July 2024.
The landlord sent the stage 2 response 31 working days after the resident escalated the complaint. It communicated to the resident there would be an extension until they returned to the property and had the opportunity to discuss the complaint further. This was reasonable in the circumstances.
Considering the above, there had been no maladministration in how the landlord handled the resident’s complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of pests.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s rent enquiry.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Orders

Within 28 days of the date of this determination the landlord should:
1. write to the resident and apologise for the failures set out in the report and explain how it has learnt from these to prevent them happening again.
2. pay the resident £300 compensation offered in its complaint responses, if it has not done so already.
3. share with the resident and this Service the pest control recommendations to prevent pests.
4. evidence to the resident and this Service that the pest control recommendations have been completed and/or set out a plan of action to complete outstanding recommendations to mitigate pests at the property within a reasonable timeframe.
The landlord should provide evidence of compliance with the above orders within 28 days of the date of this determination.