One Housing Group Limited (202413150)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202413150

One Housing Group Limited

30 April 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 report of damp and mould in the property.

Background

The resident has been an assured tenant of the landlord since May 2011. The property is a ground floor 2 bedroom flat. The landlord is a housing association and has no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident. The resident lives at the property with her teenage daughter. The landlord informed this service that the resident said that damp and mould was affecting her daughter’s health.
On 30 March 2023 the resident reported her bathroom fan was not working. The landlord said it repaired it on 25 August 2023.
On 23 August 2023 the resident said that there was damp and mould in her bathroom. 2 days later, the landlord applied mould wash to the affected areas. On 14 September 2023 it cut back the plant overgrowth, which prevented the bathroom window from opening. Its operative reported back to the landlord that an overflow pipe was constantly running, causing damp on the external wall. The resident said the landlord fixed it on 23 April 2025.
On 8 December 2023, the resident reported damp and mould in her bathroom had returned. On 14 December 2023 the landlord tried to apply mould wash to the affected areas, but the resident refused the treatment. She said that it had previously applied a mould wash to the area, but the mould had returned, and she wanted a more permanent resolution to the problem.
The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 19 February 2024. Her complaint was about reoccurring damp and mould in her property. She also raised concerns about the impact damp and mould may have on hers and her daughter’s health.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response to the resident’s complaint on 18 March 2024 and said:
1. It provided a timeline of the resident’s damp and mould reports and remedial repairs it had completed.
2. It recognised that although it carried out remedial repairs, it had not resolved the problem. It said that it would contact the resident to inspect the damp and mould in her property and find the underlying causes or contributing factors.
3. It partially upheld her complaint and apologised to the resident for the inconvenience caused to her by the reoccurring damp and mould in her property.
On 25 June 2024 the resident reported broken tiles in her bathroom with mould around them. The landlord said it completed the remedial repairs.
On 6 August 2024 the resident reported damp and mould in her hallway, the bathroom and kitchen windows and the bedrooms.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response to the resident’s complaint on 29 August 2024 and said:
1. Following the resident damp and mould report in December 2023, it attended to apply mould wash, but the resident refused this because she wanted a more permanent solution.
2. It then contacted the resident to discuss her concerns and agreed to apply a mould wash to the affected area in the first instance. It also scheduled an inspection with its damp and mould specialist team for 5 September 2024.
3. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint because she had refused the proposed remedial repairs in December 2023. It elaborated that it needed to apply the mould wash in December 2023 to establish the severity of the problem and arrange for follow up remedial works if needed.

After the landlord’s internal complaint process

On 5 September 2024 the landlord applied mould wash to the areas affected by mould and carried out a damp and mould inspection. Its surveyor recommended to inspect the external walls and repair any cracks. They also said that the landlord should prioritise the windows for an upgrade because they may no longer be effective at keeping the moisture out. Additionally, they recommended to clean the mould behind the radiator in the hallway, in the bedrooms, around the bathroom and kitchen windows and provide the resident with an “air humidifier” for 2 weeks to clear the air. The landlord noted it completed the remedial repairs on 17 September 2024 and 2 October 2024. It said it also applied mould resistant paint to the bathroom window frame.
The resident informed this service in April 2025, that following its inspection in September 2024, the landlord did not provide her with the air humidifiers as agreed. She also said that the landlord had not replaced any of her windows.
The resident explained that after she made further reports, the landlord completed another 3 inspections, one in December 2024, one in January 2025, and the other in March 2025. She explained that following each inspection the landlord had completed remedial works but did not resolve the problem and the mould returned. She also saidthat following its latest inspection the repairs to the kitchen and bathroom windows remained outstanding and the damp and mould in the bedrooms was on going.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

We recognise that the presence of damp and mould at the property has caused the resident some distress. The resident expressed concerns about the potential impact on her family’s health. We sympathise with the resident. However, unlike a court, we cannot establish what caused a health issue or determine liability and award damages. This would usually be dealt with as a personal injury claim.

Damp and mould

Over the past few years, there has been an increased awareness of the risks to health from damp and mould. It is understandable that residents would be concerned if damp and mould were present in their property. The issue can cause considerable distress to residents, especially residents who have children. We also recognise that the present of damp and mould in a property does not automatically amount to a service failure by a landlord. However, when a resident reports damp and mould, landlords should act promptly to assess the issue and complete any remedial repairs.
Landlords must consider the condition of properties using a risk assessment approach called the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). HHSRS does not specify any minimum standards, but it is concerned with avoiding or minimising potential hazards. Damp and mould are potential category one hazards that fall within the scope of HHSRS. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under HHSRS. It is the landlord’s responsibility to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amounts to a hazard that may require remedy.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) recommends that landlords should ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue. Landlords should consider appropriate timescales for their responses to reflect the urgency of the case and set these out clearly for residents so that it can manage their expectations. They should also ensure that they clearly and regularly communicate with the residents on actions taken to resolve damp and mould.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy says that it will promptly investigate damp and mould reports. Following a damp and mould inspection it will share its findings with the resident including the cause of the problem, when it will complete remedial repairs and keep the resident updated throughout the process. It will complete any remedial repairs in line with its responsive repairs policy and complete urgent repairs within 5 days and routine repairs within 28 days. The policy adds that it will provide guidance to residents on how to minimise damp and condensation in their properties.
In this case, the resident has made several damp and mould reports to the landlord since August 2023. The evidence shows that overall, the landlord promptly acted on her reports and took actions to resolve the problem.
For example, she reported damp and mould in her bathroom in August 2023, and the landlord inspected the problem and applied a mould wash 2 days later. It also removed overgrowth to enable her to open her bathroom window 22 days after she reported the problem. Those were reasonable actions by the landlord. It showed that it acted with a sense of urgency in keeping with the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould recommendations and its damp and mould policy. It also showed that it completed the remedial repairs in keeping with its responsive repairs policy published timeframe.
Additionally, following her reports in December 2023, it attended 6 days later and offered to apply a mould wash, which we understand the resident refused. Nevertheless, once the resident reported the problem, the landlord promptly attended the property and offered remedial repairs. It showed it acted with a sense of urgency in proposing the remedial repairs. Its actions were in keeping with the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould recommendations and its damp and mould policy.
On 6 August 2024 the resident reported damp and mould had spread to other areas in her property. She said that damp and mould was present in her bathroom, the hallway, the bedrooms, the bathroom and kitchen windows. The evidence shows that it completed a damp and mould inspection 30 days after she reported the problem. While we recognise this was 2 days outside its published timeframes, it was a short delay and did not amount to a service failure by the landlord. It was also reasonable for the landlord to carry out a damp and mould inspection in keeping with its damp and mould policy.
We recognise that the landlord has struggled to find the root cause of the problem. However, the evidence shows it did not automatically blame the resident or her lifestyle. It showed that it looked at the property and considered what it could do address the problem. It then completed the remedial repairs recommended by its surveyor. Those actions were reasonable and in keeping with the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould to not automatically blame residents for damp and mould in their properties.
However, we also found some failings by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s damp and mould reports.
For example, the resident reported her bathroom broken fan on 30 March 2023. Adequate ventilation is key in managing the levels of humidity in a property. In this case, the evidence shows that the landlord repaired the bathroom fan approximately 5 months after the resident reported the problem. We saw no evidence that it explained the reason for its delays or kept the resident updated. This was unreasonable from the landlord. It did not do the repairs within its published timeframe of completing such repairs within 28 days. This was also a missed opportunity in preventing damp and mould developing further.
Furthermore, in September 2023, it attended to carry out remedial repairs to the property. The evidence shows that following these repairs, its operative reported back to the landlord that an overflow pipe was constantly running, causing damp on the external wall. The landlord did not show that it had acted on this report and it did not book a follow up repair appointment to address the problem. Its failings to act left the issue unresolved. This was unreasonable and not in keeping with its responsive repairs policy to promptly book a follow up repair when needed.
Additionally, the resident informed us that the landlord repaired the overflow pipe on 23 April 2025. This was approximately 1 year and 7 months after it knew about the problem. This was unreasonable from the landlord. It should have acted sooner and completed the repairs within 28 days in keeping with its responsive repairs policy. In addition, while we cannot determine the overflow pipe contributed to the damp and mould in the resident’s property, the landlord should have satisfied itself it was not a factor in the damp and mould. This was also a missed opportunity in preventing damp and mould becoming a problem.
We understand that in December 2023, the resident refused the proposed remedial repair, which was to apply a mould wash to the affected areas. She said this was because the landlord had applied this in her bathroom before, but the mould had returned. While it was reasonable for the landlord to promptly offer a mould wash, it should have also investigated further. It should have tried to understand why the mould had returned and found the root cause of the problem. The landlord did not act in keeping with its damp and mould policy of “dealing with the cause of the damp and not just the symptom”. Its failings to thoroughly investigate the problem caused inconvenience to the resident who had to raise a formal complaint about it.
In its stage 1 response to the resident’s complaint, the landlord said that it would be in touch to book a damp and mould inspection to investigate the reoccurring nature of the mould and find the root cause of the problem. A key aspect of dispute resolution is for landlords to keep the promises they make during the complaint process. However, we saw no evidence that the landlord followed this through. This was unreasonable from the landlord, its failings to inspect the problem as agreed caused inconvenience to the resident who had to raise the issue as a stage 2 complaint. This was also a missed opportunity to rebuild trust with the resident, find the underlying cause of the problem and resolve the matter.
We understand that following its damp and mould inspection in September 2024, its surveyor recommended remedial repairs. While the evidence shows it completed the remedial works within its published timeframe, the resident said it did not provide her with “air humidifiers” as agreed. It is unclear whether this was a typo error, and the landlord meant to provide dehumidifiers instead of air humidifiers. Nevertheless, its failings to provide them was unreasonable from the landlord. It should have made good of its promise and provide the dehumidifiers or air humidifiers as recommended. Furthermore, because of its failings, the resident had to purchase her own dehumidifiers, which was unreasonable.
In September 2024, its surveyor said that the windows may no longer be efficient at keeping the moisture out and recommended to prioritise them if they were due for an upgrade. We saw no evidence that the landlord liaised with its planned works team to establish when the windows were due for an upgrade. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to do this. Especially because the property had reoccurring damp and mould and although it had completed remedial repairs, it had not resolved the problem.
Additionally, its surveyor identified that the windows may be contributing to the issue. We cannot determine whether the landlord should renew or repair the windows. However, as the resident informed this service the damp and mould has reoccurred several times and despite doing remedial repairs, the landlord has not resolved the matter. Therefore, we make an order for the landlord to inspect the windows to decide whether they are contributing to the damp and mould and confirm the actions it will take if it concludes this is the case.
We are unable to assess the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould beyond its stage 2 complaint response as it has not had the opportunity to do so itself, through its internal complaints procedure. This would normally require the resident to log a new complaint about these events for the landlord to consider.
We understand the landlord carried out a damp and mould inspection in March 2025 and completed some remedial repairs. The resident informed this service that it had completed 6 of the recommended repairs and 2 remained outstanding. Therefore, we are not making an order to carry out another damp and mould inspection. However, we are making an order for the landlord to complete the outstanding remedial repairs and monitor the situation to ensure the issue is resolved.
The Housing Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on damp and mould says that landlords should recognise that damp and mould can have an ongoing detrimental impact on the health and well-being of residents. In her stage 1 complaint, the resident had reported that her daughter had visited her GP because of breathing difficulties, and she believed damp and mould in the property had caused her being unwell. We saw no evidence the landlord had considered this or assessed the risks. The landlord did not show it acknowledged the resident’s concerns about her daughter’s health in relation to the damp and mould problem which was inappropriate and unreasonable.
The Housing Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report says that landlords should share the outcomes of all surveys and inspections with residents to help them understand the findings and be clear on next steps. The resident informed this service that the landlord had not share the outcome of its damp and mould inspection and findings with her. This was unreasonable and not in keeping with of the Ombudsman’s recommendations or its damp and mould policy to inform residents of the findings of its investigations.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy says that it will provide guidance to residents on how to minimise damp and condensation. We understand the landlord focused its investigation on the structure of the property, which was appropriate. However, we saw no evidence that it had offered advice to the resident on managing the humidity in her home. Because of the reoccurring nature of the problem and its difficulties in establishing the underlying cause, it would have been beneficial for the landlord to provide guidance to the resident on managing humidity levels in the property. This is not to suggest the resident is solely responsible for this, however it may have helped towards resolving the problem. This would also have been in keeping with its damp and mould policy.
Considering the above, we have determined there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of damp and mould at the property. We recognise the landlord promptly acted on the resident’s reports, investigated the issue and completed remedial repairs. However, there were several missed opportunities in resolving the problem sooner such as investigating the root cause of the problem when she first reported damp and mould in the property. There were also significant delays in completing the repairs to the bathroom fan and the overflow pipe. Additionally, the landlord did not show that it had shared its damp and mould findings with the resident or considered the risks to her daughter’s health.
In keeping with our remedies guidance which is published on our website, we order the landlord to pay £450 compensation directly to the resident reflect the impact of its failings on her. This is equivalent to:
1. £200 for the impact of the delays in completing some of the repairs, its failings in sharing its finding with the resident and its planned works team and not doing a damp and mould inspection sooner.
2. £200 to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
3. £50 for not considering the risks to the resident’s daughter health.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of this report, we order the landlord to:
1. Provide a written and detailed apology to the resident for the failings found in this report.
2. To pay £450 in compensation directly to the resident to reflect the impact of its failings on her.
3. To assess the risks from damp and mould to the family. Its risk assessment is to include the measures it will take to mitigate the risks to the family (if any). The landlord is to share the outcome of its risk assessment and actions to mitigate the risks (if any) with this service.
4. To confirm the outstanding repairs with the resident and agreed a reasonable timeframe for completion of those. It is to provide a copy of its work schedule with this service.
5. To inspect all the windows within the property. The landlord is to share the outcome of its inspection and the schedule of work for any remedial repairs it found (if any) with the resident and this service.
6. The landlord is to provide guidance to the resident on managing the humidity levels in her property and confirm to this service when it has done or is planning to do this.

Recommendations

We recommended that the landlord monitor the success of the remedial repairs at regular intervals. If the damp and mould returns, we recommend for the landlord to promptly carry out an in depth damp and mould survey to find the root cause of the problem and take appropriate remedial actions.