Moat Homes Limited (202345791)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202345791 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
Moat Homes Limited |
|
Landlord type |
Housing Association |
|
Occupancy |
Assured Tenancy |
|
Date |
28 November 2025 |
Background
- The resident lives with her 4 children who are either neurodivergent or awaiting diagnoses. The resident also has vulnerabilities which the landlord is aware of. However, it has not provided any evidence that it has recorded these or the children’s vulnerabilities. The resident has complained that she has been unable to use her back garden for years due to flooding. She said this impacted her children as they were unable to use the garden.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
- flooding in the resident’s garden.
- the associated complaint.
Our decision (determination)
- We found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
- flooding in the resident’s garden.
- the associated complaint.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
Summary of reasons
The landlord’s handling of flooding in the resident’s garden
- The landlord delayed by almost 18 months to start work in the resident’s garden. During this time, it failed to keep records of surveyor’s inspections which meant that it had to complete further inspections, following which it did not take any action. It delayed in visiting the resident’s property by almost 4 months after saying it would do this in its stage 1 response. It provided contradictory information to the resident, did not start work when it told the resident it would or keep her updated.
The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint
- The landlord delayed in providing its stage 1 response. There was then a significant delay in it escalating the resident’s complaint to stage 2 of its complaint process. It did not contact the resident as stated in its stage 2 acknowledgement.
Putting things right
Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.
Orders
Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.
|
Order |
What the landlord must do |
Due date |
|
1 |
Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure:
|
No later than 07 January 2026 |
|
2 |
Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,000, made up as follows:
This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid as previously offered. |
No later than 07 January 2026 |
|
3 |
Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor:
The survey report must set out:
|
No later than 07 January 2026 |
Recommendations
Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.
|
Our recommendations |
|
We recommend that the landlord discusses the vulnerabilities in her household with the resident. It should then keep these on record. |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
4 December 2023 |
The resident requested an update on her garden. She explained her children had vulnerabilities and said 3 surveyors had attended but the landlord had not contacted her. She said she was frustrated with not being able to use her garden. She said if the landlord did not act, she wanted a rent review as she was paying for something she could not use.
The landlord said it had asked a contractor for a quote to complete the work and had chased them that day. It said as soon as it received a response it would update the resident. It apologised for the delay in resolving this. |
|
11 December 2023 |
The resident said the landlord had known about this for a year and her garden had been “a swamp” for 7 years due to astro-turf being installed in a neighbouring garden. She said the landlord had not met its timeframes and she wanted to complain. |
|
20 and 21 December 2023 |
The landlord left a voicemail for the resident. It said it should have the quote for the drainage works by 22 December 2023 and it would start these in the new year.
It called the resident again to discuss her complaint. It said clay soil was likely the cause of the flooding and not astro turf. It agreed to call her in the new year to arrange a surveyor’s visit. |
|
17 January 2024 |
The resident said that she had not heard from the landlord since 21 December 2023 and she was continuously chasing the issue with her garden. |
|
19 January 2024 |
The landlord apologised for not contacting the resident sooner. It said it would update her the following week. |
|
26 January 2024 |
The landlord provided its stage 1 response. It said the surveyor’s report advised that the resident’s garden required a soakaway and additional drainage to control the ground water. It said it would arrange for a project manager to attend with its contractor to see if the drainage suggested was the best option or if it could manage the issue using other methods. It would then discuss this with the resident and agree the best solution before instructing its contractor to complete the required work. |
|
29 February 2024 |
The resident said she was still waiting for the landlord to contact her about the garden. She said she wanted compensation as her children had been unable to access the garden for years. She said that the landlord had forgot about her and did not care. |
|
10 and 17 May 2024 |
The landlord apologised as it had not resolved the issue. It arranged to visit on 23 May 2024. |
|
10 June 2024 |
The resident requested an update on her garden and a call back. |
|
8 and 17 July 2024 |
The resident asked about the works in her garden. The landlord said it would update her. The resident was upset about how the landlord had handled the issues in her garden. |
|
1 August 2024 |
The resident chased the garden works again. She said at times the garden was flooded up to the door.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint. It said it would contact her within the next 3 working days and respond on or before 30 August 2024. |
|
30 August 2024 |
The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It said it had completed the works in early August and hoped this would resolve the issue. However, it would need to re-assess after a period of wetter weather. It said the issue had been ongoing for a significant period, and a further significant period passed after the stage 1 response. As such it offered £250 to compensate for the delays the resident experienced, and any distress caused. |
|
21 November 2024 |
The landlord increased its compensation offer to £600 as the resident was dissatisfied with the amount offered at stage 2. This was made up as follows:
|
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident referred her complaint to us because the issues had been ongoing for years, were impacting her children’s health and she had been paying full rent without the use of a garden. She said the landlord had completed some work, but the issue returned shortly after, and her garden was unusable. She wanted the landlord to resolve the issues in her garden and compensate her for the period she had been unable to use it. |
What we found and why
The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.
|
Complaint |
The landlord’s handling of flooding in the resident’s garden |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
What we did not investigate
- The resident told us that the issues impacted her children’s health conditions. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any negative impact. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any issue and how long it will last. We have not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
What we did investigate
- The landlord was aware of issues with flooding in the resident’s garden on 20 January 2023. It would be unreasonable to consider this a routine repair for the landlord to complete within the 21 calendar days as set out in its repairs policy. However, the landlord did not start work until 5 August 2024, almost 18 months later. This was a considerable and unreasonable delay in the circumstances.
- The documentary evidence indicates that a surveyor inspected the garden around the end of February 2023. However, the landlord did not keep a copy of this report, which meant that it had to conduct another inspection. This record keeping failure likely contributed to the delays in the landlord starting work in the garden.
- The landlord told the resident it would start work at the end of May 2023. It did not do this. The landlord completed a further inspection on 29 August 2023. Its report noted that it needed to install land drains to assist with removing water from the garden. However, there is no evidence that the landlord took any action following this.
- The landlord provided contradictory information to the resident. It said on 4 and 20 December 2023 that it had chased its contractor and should have its response by 22 December 2023. However, on 21 December 2023 the landlord said it would arrange a surveyor’s inspection. It has provided no record of it contacting a contractor for a quote. It is also unclear why it did not request a response sooner. Additionally, the landlord did not contact the resident to arrange an inspection as it said it would. On 19 January 2024 it told the resident it would provide an update from its contractor the following week after she had contacted it on 17 January 2024. It did not do this.
- The landlord’s stage 1 response indicated that it had completed a further inspection. It has not provided a record of this, although it is unclear if it was referring to the inspection completed in August 2023. The landlord said it would attend with its contractor to find the best option to resolve the issue and discuss this with the resident. The landlord did not arrange to visit the resident until 23 May 2024. This was an unreasonable delay. Additionally, it has not provided a record of this visit.
- The resident called for an update on 10 June 2024. She requested a call back. The landlord did not respond or update the resident. The landlord told the resident on 8 July 2024 that it would “get somebody to update her”. Although it sent internal emails regarding this, there is no evidence that the landlord updated the resident.
- In its stage 2 response the landlord said it had completed works in early August 2024. It acknowledged its delays and offered compensation. The landlord completed further work in the resident’s garden in October 2024. The landlord increased its compensation offer in November 2024. This has been noted and assessed. However, landlords should undertake a sufficient investigation and review all circumstances of the case at stage 2 of their complaints process. The resident has confirmed the landlord has deducted the increased compensation from her rent arrears.
- Our remedies guidance allows for awards of £600 to £1,000 where there had been failures which had a significant impact on the resident. The landlord’s increased figure was not within this range and did not adequately recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and her family by the identified failures. The landlord did not acknowledge all its failures in its complaint responses as detailed in the Summary of Reasons above. The resident has also told us that the issues with flooding in her garden remain unresolved. Therefore, we have ordered the landlord to apologise, pay additional compensation and take action to put things right.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
- The landlord operated a 2-stage complaint process that complied with the Complaint Handling Code (the Code) published in March 2022. The resident said she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s actions on 4 December 2023. The landlord’s complaint policy stated that a complaint was an expression of dissatisfaction however made. The landlord did not raise a complaint. However, it did so after the resident requested this on 11 December 2023. It logged the complaint on 19 December 2023. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 26 January 2024. The Code required landlords to provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days of logging a complaint. The landlord took 25 working days.
- The resident expressed dissatisfaction again on 29 February 2024 and repeated her concerns about the garden on 10 June, 8 and 17 July and 1 August 2024. The landlord did not acknowledge the escalation until 1 August 2024, over 5 months after the resident had first contacted it following the stage 1 response. It said it would contact the resident within the next 3 working days. It did not do this.
- The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 30 August 2024 meeting the 20-working day timeframe in its complaint policy from the date of acknowledgement. It did not acknowledge the delay at stage 1, although it acknowledged the delays since then. However, it did not stipulate if it had considered this in its compensation offer.
- Even so, the landlord made a further offer of compensation for its complaint handling in November 2024. Our remedies guidance allows for payments of £100 to £600 were there had been a failure which had adversely affected the resident but there had been no permanent impact. Although the landlord’s increased offer of compensation was within this range it did not adequately reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the failures outlined in the Summary of Reasons above. Therefore, we have ordered the landlord to pay additional compensation.
Learning
Knowledge information management (record keeping)
- The landlord did not maintain adequate repair records. This included failing to keep surveyor’s inspection reports, which led to it duplicating work. At times this made it difficult to assess its actions.
Communication
- The landlord failed to keep the resident updated or contact her as it said it would. The landlord demonstrated a lack of oversight of its contractors, which may have contributed to the failings identified.