Muir Group Housing Association Limited (202412069)

Decision
Case ID	202412069
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Muir Group Housing Association Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Shorthold Tenancy
Date	28 November 2025

Background

1. The resident raised a number of concerns about insulation within the property, the condition of the windows and damp and mould. While the landlord took some steps to respond to his concerns, the resident remains unhappy.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
   1. Concerns about loft insulation.
   2. Request for insulation to the wall on the second floor.
   3. Concerns about replacement windows.
   4. Reports of Damp and mould.
3. We have also assessed the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about loft insulation.
   2. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for insulation to the wall on the second floor.
   3. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about replacement windows.
   4. Maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
   5. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Concerns about loft insulation

5. The landlord delayed raising the relevant job order and failed to complete the works in accordance with its policy.

The handling of the resident’s request for insulation to the wall on the second floor.

6. The landlord delayed in obtaining quotes and providing reassurances to the resident about the need for the repair.

The replacement windows

7. The landlord failed to complete the repairs in a timely manner.

Damp and mould

8. The landlord failed to complete action in a timely manner. It delayed in raising repairs to treat the cause of damp and mould.

The handling of the complaint

9. The landlord’s overall handling of the complaint was not appropriate.

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: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 07 January 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,100 made up as follows: £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to the resident’s concerns about lot insulation. £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to the resident’s request for insulation to be installed. £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to the resident’s concerns about the replacement windows. £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould. £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the complaint. 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.	No later than 07 January 2026
3	Damp and mould inspection order We have made an inspection order because the resident has told us there is some mould in one of the rooms  What the landlord must do  The landlord must contact the resident to arrange a damp and mould inspection. The landlord must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. A suitably qualified person must complete the inspection. 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.

 

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
Consider how it may better support the resident with his concerns about heating and with reporting repairs, given his vulnerabilities.

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
3 April 2023	The resident complained as no repairs had been logged since an inspection on 10 January 2023 to investigate heat loss in the property. He said he was promised that additional loft insulation would be installed as well as repairs to the windows.
17 April 2023	The landlord provided its stage 1 response. It acknowledged there were outstanding repairs to the loft insulation, the mould in his son’s bedroom and windows, delays and a lack of completed repairs. It said it expected to complete all repairs by 30 May 2023, except the windows which would likely take 8 weeks. It offered £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused.
1 October 2023	The resident attempted the loft insulation repair himself.
8 April 2024	The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 as it had been 1 year since he complained and issues had not been resolved. He said he had: Attempted to install the loft installation himself but injured himself in the process. He cleaned the mould in his son’s bedroom himself. Some of the new windows installed were of poor quality. An inspection in January 2023, highlighted that the second floor needed insulation. He was concerned about the impact of all the issues on his health and wanted compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused.
23 May 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response. It apologised and accepted its service had not been up to its standard. It acknowledged the inconvenience caused to the resident having to report issues multiple times and by not completing work. It accepted it should have completed repairs sooner and kept him better informed. It agreed to: Inspect the property in relation to the wall insulation. Replace the windows on 23 May 2024. Inspect the damp and mould. It offered a further £500 compensation, totalling £600 for its failings. It also added that it had since removed the contractor who was contributing to a backlog of repairs.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained unhappy that it had taken so long to fix the boiler, which related to a separate complaint. He also stated that it had failed to update his loft insulation, the wall insulation. He said the new windows were of poor quality and there was new damp and mould. He also felt the compensation offered was not enough.

 

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	Concerns about loft insulation
Finding	Maladministration

10. The evidence shows the resident raised concerns about insulation in the property in November 2022. Following this the landlord inspected the property on 10 January 2023. While this was not significantly delayed, we recognise the Christmas period may contributed to the time taken to complete the inspection. However, we have not been provided with a copy of this inspection report despite asking for it. Therefore, it is unclear what was found on inspection and what the landlord agreed to do. This information should reasonably have been recorded.
11. The resident chased the landlord for updates relating to this in April and May 2023. The evidence shows that the landlord failed to respond to him. This was not appropriate and the lack of updates from the landlord understandably caused him worry and distress. This was apparent as he offered several times to install the insulation himself if the landlord could supply the insulation rolls. This was not appropriate as the onus should not be on the resident to complete repairs that the landlord is responsible. It was only when he complained in April 2023 and contacted his member of parliament (MP), that the landlord said it would install the loft insulation. This was inappropriate and the cause of distress and inconvenience which could reasonably have been avoided.
12. The landlord’s repairs log is not clear about when it attempted the installation of loft insulation. The landlord in its review of the complaint said it completed this in August 2023. However, this is not reflected in its repair records and is inconsistent with the resident’s version of events indicating poor record keeping.
13. The resident explained that the contractor attended in August 2023. He could not fit into the loft and was not comfortable with doing the work without a light in the loft. Instead, the contractor returned later in the day and left the insulation rolls at the resident’s home. It is not clear why this was done, but it was not appropriate. It is also unclear why the landlord was unaware that the job was not completed on this day. While it had been outsourced, the landlord retained responsibility of the repair and should have continued to monitor it accordingly.
14. The resident’s concerns about how the cold was impacting his health were well documented in several calls to the landlord. The lack of insulation had understandably caused him to worry as he felt this was the cause of the coldness his property. He said he decided to install it himself in October 2023, before the onset of winter. The landlord was aware of his health conditions and his vulnerabilities. It should have reasonably prioritised this repair and handled it in a more proactive way. It was a failing that it did not do so.
15. Overall, the landlord failed to ensure that the repair was completed in a timely manner. It also failed to keep the resident updated causing him time and trouble chasing it. It is positive that the landlord recognised its failings in its complaint responses. It offered an overall amount of £600 but has not provided a breakdown for what factors it considered to arrive at this figure. As such it has not been possible for us to establish what amount was awarded for the distress and inconvenience linked to the handling of this repair. We have therefore made the decision to replace the landlord’s compensation offer. In line with our Remedies Guidance, we order the landlord to pay £300 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the loft insulation repair.

Complaint	Request for insulation to the wall on the second floor
Finding	Maladministration

16. The resident raised concerns about insulation in November 2022. As above we do not have the report from the inspection carried out on 10 January 2023. As such we do not know what the landlord concluded from its assessment. However, on receipt of the resident’s complaint the surveyor acknowledged that orders had not been raised for the recommended works. It then promptly arranged to obtain a quote for upgrading the cavity wall insulation.
17. While this was reasonable, we have not seen evidence that shows that any further action was taken by the landlord. On 28 April 2023, the resident chased the landlord for updates. The evidence does not suggest that the landlord responded. The resident raised this again a year later on 8 April 2024, as it remained outstanding. It is unclear why the works were not progressed. We have seen nothing to suggest that the landlord was actively pursuing quotes or making arrangements for the work to be undertaken. This was inappropriate.
18. When the landlord responded to the complaint at stage 2, it said that it could not find a record of this issue. It is unclear why this was the case but demonstrates a lack of monitoring and oversight by the landlord. It has since informed us it obtained an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) on 27 June 2024. Following this it has determined that no cavity insulation is needed. While the landlord is entitled to rely on the results of the EPC, it was a failing that it took over 1 year to establish this. During this time, the resident was waiting for a solution and was left with an expectation that certain work would be completed.
19. If the landlord was unclear about the need for the recommended works in January 2023, it should reasonably have sought a second opinion sooner. It is unclear why it did not. However, as a result of its handling of this matter, the resident has been caused avoidable distress and inconvenience. As above, in line with our Remedies Guidance, we order the landlord to pay £150 compensation.

Complaint	Concerns about replacement windows
Finding	Maladministration

20. The landlord established in December 2022, that the windows should be replaced. The resident stated the windows were included in the January 2023 inspection. It is unclear why this was the case if the need for replacement had already been established. Nevertheless, following this inspection, we cannot see that the landlord took any action to progress the replacement works. The landlord also failed to keep the resident updated during this period.
21. The landlord records indicated it wanted to assess the windows on the following occasions:
    1. In April 2023, to understand which needed repairing or replacing. There is no evidence it did so.
    2. In July 2023, after the resident’s MP became involved. There is no evidence it did so.
    3. In November 2023. However, the landlord said it completed an overhaul of the windows on 6 November 2023 indicating it checked and serviced them, potentially as a remedial measure. That this is not reflected in its repairs log indicates a record keeping failure.
22. The landlord received the window quote on 14 March 2024 and replaced them on 23 May 2024. While the replacement works were carried out promptly after the quote was received, it is noted that as a result of the repeated inspections it took 18 months from when the landlord first identified that the windows needed to be replaced until the works were completed. The evidence suggests that the replacement works could reasonably have taken place sooner and that the repeated inspections caused avoidable delay. It is also noted that the landlord’s communication with the resident during this period was poor.
23. For that reason, we have found that there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the replacement window works. In line with our Remedies Guidance, we order the landlord to pay £300 compensation.

Complaint	Reports of damp and mould
Finding	Maladministration

24. The resident reported severe damp and mould throughout the property on 12 December 2022. The property was inspected by the landlord on 10 January 2023. Again, as we have not been provided with the inspection report, it is unclear what was found on inspection and what remedial work, if any, was identified. We note that the resident chased the landlord about this in February and April 2023. It was a failing that the landlord did not take any action or respond to the resident about his concerns.  
25. The landlord surveyed the property for mould on 18 April 2023 following the resident’s complaint. While it was reasonable for the landlord to respond in such a manner, it is unclear why no action was taken following the previous inspection. As per our Spotlight report on damp and mould, landlords should adopt a zero-tolerance approach to responding to reports of damp and mould. It was inappropriate that no action was taken after the January inspection and that the resident was left to chase the matter. It is also noted that during this time the resident’s heating broke down understandably adding to his concerns and worries about the ongoing presence of damp and mould.
26. The survey confirmed the presence of mould in the bedroom and ceiling. It was suggested that the loft insulation be reviewed, that a Positive Input Ventilation (PIV) system be installed in the loft and that the kitchen extractor fan should be replaced. The landlord raised a job for this on 24 April 2023, however at the resident’s request it was cancelled as he felt replacing the loft insulation would be a better fix. It was a shortcoming that it did not fully engage with the resident about this issue to explain why it was beneficial to install the PIV system. Particularly so as the resident had told it he would clean the mould and install the loft insulation himself. It is understandable that the given the delays, he grew more frustrated at the lack of progress. However, it was a missed opportunity for the landlord to explain the proposed works and engage with him in a meaningful way to progress repairs. In addition, the landlord could have reasonably agreed to monitor the situation after the installation of the insulation and then decided whether a PIV system was still needed.
27. The resident continued to chase the landlord for mould cleaner in April and May 2023. There is no evidence that the landlord responded to any of these requests which is a failing. It seemingly closed the job once the resident had declined the proposed works. Following its stage 2 response it said there was no record about this but that it would inspect the damp and mould. Given the resident’s vulnerabilities and that its records showed his desire to clean the mould himself, it was unreasonable it did not follow up.
28. During this time, the resident said he purchased mould cleaner and applied it himself. He has told us that some mould has returned but he does not have any faith that the landlord would respond. It is concerning he feels reporting it will not result in action. This may explain why he cancelled a damp and mould inspection in June 2024. While we understand the resident’s frustrations, we encourage the resident to cooperate, so the landlord can investigate any potential damp and mould.
29. In line with our Remedies Guidance, we order the landlord to pay £300 compensation. This is to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in raising jobs, its poor communication in handling this repair balanced with the resident’s own actions to decline repairs and inspections. As part of the remedy, we will order the landlord to inspect the property for damp and mould.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

30. Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out best practice for how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant version of the Code in this case is the April 2022 edition for the stage 1 response and the April 2024 edition for the stage 2 response. The landlord’s complaints policy is Code compliant.
31. The landlord acknowledged the complaint and escalation in a timely manner. It also responded with its stage 1 response in accordance with the Code. It took 32 days to issue its stage 2 response, which was outside of the 20-day timescale in its policy and the Code. However, we can see that it agreed an extension with the resident and issued its response within that timeframe, in line with the Code.
32. However, as we noted, the overall compensation was not broken down for each repair. Where a complaint refers to multiple repairs or defects, we would encourage the landlord to provide a breakdown as to how any compensation has been calculated. Not only is such practice transparent, but it demonstrates the factors that have been taken into consideration and may result in a complainant feeling more accepting of any offers that are made.
33. We noted that the resident included his concerns about his boiler breakdown in his escalation request. The landlord has informed us that it dealt with this as a separate complaint which was resolved at stage 1. Therefore, it was a shortcoming that it did not include a reference to this in its response for completeness.
34. We have noted errors in the stage 2 response. It stated that the landlord found no records relating to some repairs. However, within our investigation we have seen that there are historic records for them which showed a failure to raise jobs and follow up with quotes. As such we cannot conclude its overall handling of the complaint was appropriate and in line with our Remedies Guidance we will order £50 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings.

Learning

35. It is positive that the landlord completed a review of its complaint handling and overall handling of the repair. It explained it had implemented a number of changes to improve processes for the future.
36. It should consider reviewing its handling of repairs with vulnerable residents and how it can improve this, where there may be challenges in progressing repairs.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

37. There are some gaps in the records. For example, despite requesting a copy of an inspection report it was not provided. This also resulted in a failure in raising jobs. This indicates it is not recording data accurately.

Communication

38. Its communication with the resident was poor, it should consider how it can make improvements particularly with its vulnerable residents.