One Housing Group Limited (202426945)

Decision
Case ID	202426945
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	One Housing Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	26 November 2025

Background

The resident lives in a 2 bed maisonette. On 9 March 2024 she reported a roof leak which she said had affected her electrics. The resident raised a complaint on the same day saying the reported matters were unresolved. The evidence shows while the landlord attended on 10 March it was unable to remedy the issues and later agreed to the resident being decanted. The resident subsequently said that she was not fully repaid the costs she incurred for temporary accommodation when she had been unable to live at home. The resident then brought her complaint to us as she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response.
The resident has been represented during this process, and we have referred to both the resident and her representative collectively as ‘the resident’.

What the complaint is about

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Roof leak.
2. Reimbursement request.
3. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We found:
1. Reasonable redress for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s roof leak.
2. Maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reimbursement request.
3. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Roof leak

While the roof leak and electrics issue was understandably stressful for the resident, the landlord appropriately acknowledged and apologised for its failings, and compensated her. These remedies were appropriate to resolve the complaint.

Reimbursement

Although the resident provided evidence of a £2600 payment towards accommodation costs, the landlord has not considered if it should reimburse her for this payment.

Complaint handling

The landlord appropriately accepted some failings for which it apologised and offered compensation, but it did not do so for others including failing to acknowledge the resident’s complaint and its stage 1 complaint response delay.

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 £300 made up as follows: £200 to recognise the stress, and time and trouble caused by its handling of the resident’s reimbursement request. £100 for its complaint handling. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date, and the landlord must provide us with documentary evidence of payment.	No later than 05 January 2026
2	Reimbursement review The landlord must consider the resident’s £2600 payment to ensure she has been properly reimbursed in the light of the report findings. It must either pay the resident or explain to her in writing why it believes the reimbursement is not owed by it, and the landlord must provide us with documentary evidence of compliance with this order.	No later than 05 January 2026

Order

What the landlord must do

Due date

Compensation Order

The landlord must pay the resident £300 made up as follows:

£200 to recognise the stress, and time and trouble caused by its handling of the resident’s reimbursement request.
£100 for its complaint handling.
This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date, and the landlord must provide us with documentary evidence of payment.

No later than

05 January 2026

Reimbursement review

The landlord must consider the resident’s £2600 payment to ensure she has been properly reimbursed in the light of the report findings. It must either pay the resident or explain to her in writing why it believes the reimbursement is not owed by it, and the landlord must provide us with documentary evidence of compliance with this order.

No later than

05 January 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
If it has not done so already, the landlord should also now pay the £4327.78 compensation previously offered. This determination is partly based on it doing so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
10 March 2024	The resident complained the landlord had not responded to an emergency report of a roof leak, and concerns about electrics. She said while the roof leak had been ongoing for a year, on 10 March 2024, it had declined to help her when she called it in the early hours, and nobody had attended appointments on the same day, as promised. She said she was vulnerable, distressed and her health conditions (arthritis in back and bad knees) were being exacerbated.
12 March 2024	The resident arranged and moved to temporary accommodation.
9 April 2024	The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response when it upheld the resident’s complaint. It acknowledged and apologised for its poor repairs service and communication as well as the distress caused and impact on the resident’s health. It confirmed she had been supported into alternative accommodation so her property could be fully refurbished. It also set out its accommodation payments and offered to reimburse additional costs if she provided receipts. It offered £610 compensation for, among other things, impact on her of the repair delays and missed appointments.
24 July 2024	The resident remained dissatisfied. She escalated her complaint saying, among other things, she had had to chase the landlord for a repairs update after it visited her property on 10 March 2024. In addition, the landlord had not reimbursed her for all the accommodation costs despite her having sent it invoices on more than one occasion since the start of April 2024.
19 March 2025	The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response upheld the resident’s complaint and confirmed the property repairs were complete. It apologised for its service failures and complaint handling delays and, said it had learnt lessons. It said it had already made a £2100 payment on 8 April 2024 for temporary accommodation (30 March to 12 April 2024). It offered £4327.78 which included energy costs (from 12 March 2024) and the additional cost of alternative accommodation (12 to 30 March 2024).
21 March 2025	The resident set out her dissatisfaction with the landlord’s final response including that the offer of compensation was insufficient. She said on 21 June 2024 she had provided it with details of outstanding accommodation costs and was still awaiting a response.
5 June 2025	The landlord issued a further stage 2 complaint response which repeated its first response in respect of the repairs and reimbursement issues.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate as she remained dissatisfied with the response the landlord provided. She alleged she had incurred additional costs of £2600, which the landlord had not reimbursed her for.

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 roof leak
Finding	Reasonable redress

The resident’s tenancy agreement says the landlord will keep in good repair the property structure such as the roof as well as installations for the supply of electricity.
The landlord’s responsive repairs policy sets out its repair priority timeframes such as emergency repairs within 4 hours.
On 10 March 2024, the resident complained that the landlord had not responded to her reports of a roof leak and unsafe electrics, including it saying there was nothing it could do when she initially called it at 1am. After a second call at 8am, she said it failed to send a promised electrician and plumber within its time frames of 4 hours. She said she had been emptying buckets throughout the night, and the water was pouring over her electrics in both bedrooms and her kitchen. She said she was distressed, and it was exacerbating her health conditions.
In its initial complaint response of 9 April 2024, the landlord acknowledged its repair delays and failures around resolving the roof leak, making the resident’s electrics safe, and its “unacceptable” call handling on 10 March 2024. It apologised for this and for the distress and inconvenience caused. It also set out a schedule of planned refurbishment works such as internal works, which showed its commitment to completing outstanding works and keeping the resident updated.
The landlord has told us that its contractor addressed the repair on 24 April 2024. While there is no evidence of inspections visits or works done concerning the roof leak or electrics the resident has confirmed to the Service the issues were remedied while she was in temporary accommodation (12 March to mid-June 2024).
Its stage 2 complaint responses of 19 March and 5 June 2025 confirmed the resident returned home in June 2024 after the major repairs such as the roof were completed. Its final complaint response said its service had not met its expected standards. It apologised for failing to respond to her concerns in a timely manner and offered £1050 compensation for its service failures and the impact of the time taken to address the repairs. The landlord’s acknowledgement of its failings, apology and compensation offer was appropriate as it had accepted its failures around its repairs policy timeframes and the subsequent impact on the resident.
The Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily. In considering this the Ombudsman takes into account whether its offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
In this case the landlord has appropriately apologised for its handling of the roof leak and the impact on the resident and offered £1050 compensation. Its apology and compensation offer were in line with the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance. It was proportionate to the distress and time and trouble experienced by the resident.

Complaint	The resident’s reimbursement request
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord’s compensation policy says it will compensate for “actual, proven financial loss sustained as a direct result of a service failure”.
The resident complained the landlord had not reimbursed her for all her payments to a property company (the company) including the sum of £2600 (paid 3 April 2024). After the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response of 9 April 2024 did not specifically set out the breakdown of payments and costs, she escalated her complaint on 24 July. She said she had sent it evidence of payments which had not been refunded. In both its stage 2 complaint responses of 19 March and 5 June 2025, it referred to a payment of £2100 to the resident on 8 April 2024 (for 30 March to 12 April 2024), and it offered a payment of £2700 (for 12 to 30 March 2024).
The landlord received an invoice on 31 March 2024 from the company. It responded on 3 April 2024 to say the resident would pay the invoice and it would then reimburse her. After the company then asked the resident to pay the invoice, she told the landlord on 4 April 2024 that she had paid £2600. There is no evidence the landlord reimbursed the £2600 payment.
The resident emailed the landlord on 21 June 2024 with evidence of payments with copy invoices and bank statements. Neither stage 2 complaint responses addressed the resident’s specific concern about reimbursing the £2600 payment. Its failure to investigate the matter meant it did not fully address the complaint in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). Had it done so it would have shown it was willing to take her concerns seriously given the large sum involved and comply with its own policy to compensate for “actual, proven financial loss”.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The landlord’s complaints policy sets out a 2 stage complaints process. It will acknowledge complaints and escalations within 3 working days and respond to stage 1 and 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days, respectively. The policy is in line with the Code.
While the resident’s escalation was acknowledged within its policy timeframes, there is no evidence her original complaint was acknowledged. Also the landlord’s initial complaint response of 9 April 2024, and its first stage 2 complaint response of 19 March 2025 exceeded its policy timescales by 9 working days and approximately 8 months, respectively. While the landlord appropriately apologised and offered £150 compensation for its delayed first stage 2 complaint response, its stage 1 response did not do so for its initial complaint response delay.
Neither stage 2 complaint response set out details of how the resident could escalate the matter to the Service which meant the responses were not in line with the Code, which requires that this information be included.

Learning

Communication and record-keeping

The landlord’s failings in this case were largely due to a lack of evidence and records. The landlord should consider the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management for accurate record keeping.