NSAH (Alliance Homes) Limited (202402870)

Decision
Case ID	202402870
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	NSAH (Alliance Homes) Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	22 January 2026

Background

The resident lives in a house. The resident has multiple sclerosis. She reported damp in her living room to the landlord sometime around the start of 2023. The landlord completed works to remedy the damp in December 2024 and replaced cavity wall insulation in January 2025.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about damp on the gable end of the resident’s property.
We have also considered the handling of the associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the damp on the gable end of the resident’s property.
We have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord accepted that there were delays in it raising works to address the damp and in it responding to the resident’s complaint. It offered the resident £200 compensation for these delays but did not provide a breakdown of this amount. We have therefore allocated £100 for the delay in addressing the damp and £100 for the errors in its complaint handling. The landlord’s offer did not fully reflect the time, trouble, and inconvenience these errors likely caused the resident. We have therefore ordered the landlord to pay additional compensation.

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	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident additional compensation of £400 to recognise the distress and inconvenience of its errors in this case, made up as follows: · £300 compensation for its errors in its handling of the damp in the resident’s property. · £100 compensation for its errors in its handling of the associated 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 should also pay the resident the £200 compensation it offered her through its complaints process, if it has not done so already.	No later than 19 February 2026
2	Instruction order The landlord must respond in writing to the resident’s query about the steps it will take when residents disclose health conditions to it.	No later than 19 February 2026
3	Instruction order The landlord should pass on its insurer’s details to the resident now so she can make a claim if she wants to, for the damage to her furniture and decoration.	No later than 19 February 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
10 January 2024	The resident complained to the landlord. She said: It had agreed there was a damp problem to the gable end of her property in February 2023. She had made numerous calls to the landlord, but it had not contacted her until October 2023. It had carried out some works on 8 November 2023, but this had not resolved the problem, and her walls were still wet, and the damp was still present. She had been living with her belongings in boxes.
12 November 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It apologised to the resident. It said: It had visited the property again on 26 January 2024. It had found that there was moisture coming through the damp proof course (DPC) caused by a defect in the rendering. It would carry out repairs including renewing the rendering, filling cracks at the front of the property and checking a drain for leaks. It would also fit new cavity insulation as part of its major works programme due to take place in the financial year April 2025-March 2026. It had wrongly assumed its contractor had carried out the work as the resident had not contacted it. It had had problems with its previous contractor so had now allocated the repairs to a new contractor. The work would start on 2 December 2024. The member of staff dealing with the resident’s complaint had left its employment and this had led to delays in it responding. It had made changes to prevent delays in future. It had employed additional members of staff and had changed its processes. It recognised that it should carry out post-inspections of work carried out by its contractors. It offered the resident £200 compensation for the delay in it carrying out repairs and in it responding to the resident’s complaint.
15 November 2024	The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure. She said: She had lived with black mould in her dining room for 21 months. She had multiple sclerosis, and damp posed a risk to someone with her condition. She asked the landlord whether it had a system for prioritising repairs for vulnerable tenants. If it did, she asked that it send her details. If it did not, she asked it to confirm whether it would be implementing one. She wanted the landlord to replace the cavity wall insulation at the same time as the other repairs. The landlord had not confirmed the scope of the work, how long the work would take, what access its contractor would need and whether she would need to be at home whilst the contractor was on site. She wanted the landlord to visit the property on the day the repairs started and finished to ensure its contractor had completed the work thoroughly. She also asked that the landlord monitor the property after its contractor completed the work to ensure the damp did not return. The £200 the landlord had offered was not sufficient compensation for the damage caused by the damp to her furniture and decoration, nor for the risks to her health.
17 December 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said it would make sure that the repairs were carried out on time and would ensure clear communication. It said it would carry out an inspection of the property on 6 January 2025.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident complained to the Ombudsman on 31 March 2025. She said the landlord’s contractor had completed the work, but the landlord had not inspected the property. She reiterated that the compensation the landlord had offered did not cover the damage the damp had caused to her furniture, flooring and paintwork.

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 the damp to the gable end of the resident’s property.
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord’s repairs policy states that it will complete non-urgent repairs within 30 days. The policy states that the landlord will prioritise a repair if the resident identifies that they or a member of their household have a specific vulnerability. The policy states the landlord will make every attempt to identify any individual circumstances at the first point of contact with a resident to ensure reasonable adjustments can be made.
The resident reported damp in her property at the start of 2023. There is no evidence that the landlord asked her about her individual circumstances at that time to establish whether she had any vulnerabilities or health conditions that might require it to prioritise repairs. This was a failing. The landlord may wish to consider providing staff training to ensure that when residents report repairs, staff establish whether they have any vulnerabilities.
The landlord completed works to address the damp at the resident’s property in December 2024. This was more than 18 months after the resident first reported the issue in 2023. The delay was significant and likely caused the resident considerable time, trouble, and inconvenience. It is concerning that, because it had not heard from the resident, the landlord assumed its contractors had completed the work. The landlord may wish to review its record‑keeping processes to ensure it can confirm that repairs have been completed, rather than relying on residents to confirm whether this has been done.
It was reasonable for the landlord to explain to the resident that it would replace the cavity wall insulation in 2025–2026. This was because it had identified that the damp was due to a breach in the DPC at the gable end of the property, and there was no evidence that the damp was caused by an issue with the cavity wall insulation. The landlord was entitled therefore to schedule the replacement of the cavity wall insulation as part of its major works programme. The landlord replaced the insulation in January 2025.
In her stage 2 complaint, the resident told the landlord that the damp in her property had damaged furniture and the decoration in her property. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to refer the resident to its liability insurer (if it has one), to establish whether it had any liability for damage in this case. The landlord should pass on its insurer’s details to the resident now so she can make a claim if she wants to, for the damage to her furniture and decoration. If the landlord assesses the claim internally and the resident is dissatisfied with its decision regarding the claim, she may be able to raise a new complaint about this to the landlord. She may be able to refer any complaint to us for a separate investigation once the complaint has exhausted the landlord’s complaint process. If the landlord’s insurer is a separate organisation from the landlord, we would not comment on its insurer’s actions or the likely outcome of an insurance claim if one is made, as the Ombudsman cannot look at the actions of insurers, only at the actions of the landlord.
The resident mentioned in her complaint that her health was affected by the landlord’s handling of the repairs. We do not doubt the resident’s comments about her health. However, it would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance (published on our website) sets out our approach to compensation. The remedies guidance states that compensation of £100-£600 may be appropriate where a resident has been adversely affected by the landlord’s errors, and the landlord has not acted to fully put things right. The compensation the landlord offered does not fully reflect the time, trouble, and inconvenience the delay in it remedying the damp likely caused the resident. We have therefore found maladministration and ordered the landlord to pay the resident additional compensation of £300 for this aspect of the complaint.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord’s complaint policy at the time of the complaint states that it will acknowledge all complaints within 5 working days. The policy states that it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days, of acknowledging the complaint. The policy states if the landlord needs more time to investigate a complaint, any extension must not exceed a further 10 working days at stage 1, or 20 working days, at stage 2.
The resident complained to the landlord on 10 January 2024. The landlord acted in-line with its policy in acknowledging her complaint on 15 January 2024. However, it did not issue its stage 1 complaint response until 12 November 2024. This was over 9 months outside of its timescales for responding to stage 1 complaints. This was a failing that will have likely caused the resident time, trouble, and inconvenience as she was kept waiting for an answer to her complaint for much longer than she should have been.
The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaint procedure on 15 November 2024. The landlord issued it stage 2 complaint response on 17 December 2024. This was within the timeframes set out in its complaint policy for responding to stage 2 complaints.
Our Complaint Handling Code sets out our expectations of landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law and good practice where appropriate.
The landlord told us it was not aware of any vulnerabilities at the time of the resident’s complaint. However, in her stage 2 complaint, the resident informed the landlord of her health condition and asked whether it prioritised repairs for vulnerable residents. She also asked the landlord to confirm whether it intended to introduce such a process if it did not already have one. The landlord did not address this query in its stage 2 response. This was a shortcoming, as it left the resident without an answer to her question. We order the landlord to respond to the resident’s query about the steps it takes when residents disclose vulnerabilities. The landlord has provided evidence that it has now added the resident’s health conditions to its systems.
The amount of compensation the landlord offered is not sufficient to fully address the time, trouble, and inconvenience the errors in its complaint handling will have likely caused the resident. We have found maladministration and have ordered the landlord to pay the resident additional compensation of £100 for this aspect of the resident’s complaint, in-line with our remedies guidance, as set out above.

Learning

The landlord may want to consider carrying out staff training to ensure that it establishes whether residents have vulnerabilities it needs to take into consideration when prioritising repairs.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord may wish to review its record-keeping systems so that it can satisfy itself that it has fulfilled its repair responsibilities, rather than relying on residents to inform it as to whether repairs have been completed.

Communication

The landlord has accepted that its communication was poor in this case. It is positive the landlord has committed to making changes to prevent delays in future, including employing additional members of staff and changing its processes.