Paragon Asra Housing Limited (202322626)

A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202322626

Paragon Asra Housing Limited

27 February 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:
1. The sales process.
2. The gas safety check and the resident’s report of a gas leak.
3. Repairs, damp and mould.
The Ombudsman will also investigate the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Background

The property is a 2-bedroom flat on the second floor. The resident is a shared owner of the flat with the landlord since November 2022. The landlord has no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident, however on 30 March 2023 she made it aware that her breathing had been affected by damp and mould. She also says she made the landlord aware during the sales process that she had been a victim of domestic abuse.
The resident started the legal sales process to purchase a share of the property in January 2022. She raised a query about the boundary on the title deed via her solicitor that month, and an updated title deed was provided by the landlord’s solicitor in June. The sale completed on 24 November 2022.
Before the sale completed the landlord carried an ‘end of defects’ inspection. The inspection report showed that there was a crack to the kitchen wall above the balcony door frame, which was subsequently repaired on 8 February 2023.
The resident contacted her solicitor after moving in on 24 November 2022 to report issues with parking, the boiler, and being unable to lock the front door. Her solicitor advised her to locate the gas certificate and contact the landlord. The resident found a gas certificate from 14 August 2021, which expired in August 2022, but could not locate an up to date certificate.
The resident contacted the landlord the same day to say that it must attend urgently to fix the front door as she could not afford to pay for a locksmith. The landlord emailed her solicitor to say that it could not smell gas at handover and the resident should contact her gas supplier. A gas safety check was subsequently carried out on 14 December 2022. A repair to the front door was carried out on 15 December.
On 21 December 2022 the landlord emailed the resident to request photos of the damp/mould. On 13 February 2023 it told her it could not find a log of any mould issues reported during the defects period. It asked her if she had any record of contact with it about this. She replied to say that she was not allowed to attend the defects inspection.
On 4 April 2023 the landlord said it would arrange a survey, but the earliest available date was in June, which the resident said was unacceptable. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 18 April 2023 via its webform. On 24 April she confirmed the following concerns:
1. Delays during the sales process.
2. The wrong parking space was assigned upon completion.
3. There was a gas leak when she moved in and no valid gas safety certificate.
4. The front door did not lock.
5. There were issues with bird droppings on the balcony.
6. There was mould and mildew in the bathroom.
The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 25 May 2023, in which it said:
1. The resident did not market her previous property for some time after viewing this property. Her initial buyer pulled out and the landlord waited for her to find a new buyer.
2. The problem with the front door was noted as part of the end of defects schedule, but was not unsecure so was not classed as an emergency.
3. It apologised for the delay in repairing the crack to the kitchen wall, which was not completed until after she moved in.
4. There was no mould or mildew noted at the end of defects inspection. As a shared owner it would be her responsibility to rectify this, but it has tried to arrange a survey. It said it had not received any photos of the issue from her.
5. The property is surrounded by trees, and it cannot control where birds settle. It said other residents had requested permission to install netting to deter birds, so she could consider this.
6. It offered £20 compensation for its delayed complaint response.
The resident completed the landlord’s webform on 15 July 2023 saying the issues were still outstanding. She said that she had responded to the stage 1 response on 26 May, however this Service has not seen a copy of this response. The landlord acknowledged the webform on 11 August. The resident chased a response on 18 September and 2 October. As she had received no response, on 2 October she also contacted this Service and asked for our help.
This Service contacted the landlord on 12 December 2023 and asked it to provide the resident with its final response. We contacted the landlord again on 23 January 2024 and it told us that it would issue its response by 26 January.
The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 29 January 2024, in which it said:
1. It apologised for having to involve this Service in order to progress the complaint. It offered compensation of £200 to recognise this delay.
2. There were no major delays during the sales process.
3. It had previously repaired a crack to the kitchen wall but a surveyor would attend on 29 January to assess this and arrange further work if necessary.
4. Visits were attempted to assess the mould in May and June 2023, however these did not go ahead. The surveyor would also assess this.
5. It maintained its position from its stage 1 response in relation to bird droppings.
6. It had no report of a gas leak. A gas safety check was completed before the sale, however this had expired by the time completion happened. It rearranged a service and found no leaks.
7. It had not identified any service failures but offered £200 compensation to reflect the time and trouble of raising the issues.
The surveyor made the following observations:
1. The crack in the kitchen wall above the balcony door did not go right through so could be repaired, which the landlord said it would arrange.
2. The balcony was covered in pigeon droppings, and the landlord said it would clean this.
3. The issue in the bathroom appeared to be the pattern of the tiles, rather than mould.
The resident contacted this Service on 12 February 2024 to say that the landlord misunderstood the issue in the bathroom. She said the problem was with where tiles meet the ceiling, where there was a shadow and dampness on the plasterboard. On 11 March she confirmed she wanted us to investigate the complaint as she said the landlord had not completed the outstanding work.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The resident has raised concerns about her health and the impact on this by the issues raised. Whilst this service is an alternative to the courts, it is unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can it calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspect of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim.
The resident has told this Service that delays by the landlord during the sales process led to the expiry of her mortgage offer, and her new offer had a much higher rate. The resident may wish to obtain legal advice if she wishes to pursue her concerns about her mortgage rate.
Whilst the Ombudsman cannot consider whether the actions of the landlord directly impacted the resident’s mortgage rate or health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced because of any service failure by the landlord.

Sales process

Neither the landlord or the resident have provided information about when the resident first viewed the property and registered an interest in it. The landlord said that delays in the sales process were a result of the resident not marketing her property straight away and her initial buyer pulling out. The resident told this Service during a phone call before our investigation that these issues occurred in 2021. She explained that her complaint about delays relates to the progress of the sale from January 2022 onwards.
The resident raised a query with her solicitor on 25 January 2022 about the boundary on the title deed as she said hers and another plot had been mixed up. Her solicitor emailed the landlord’s solicitor the same day to raise this query. Her solicitor chased this up in February and in April reconfirmed what information was outstanding. They continued to chase this during May and June, reminding the landlord’s solicitor that the resident’s mortgage offer was due to expire at the end of July.
The resident’s solicitor did not receive the amended title deed until 28 June 2022. This represented an unreasonable delay, which the landlord did not provide any explanation for.
The resident told the landlord that there was an outstanding issue with the allocation of parking spaces. This has been resolved but led to some difficulties between her and the neighbour after she moved in. The landlord failed to acknowledge this mistake in its complaint responses.
The Ombudsman considers there to have been maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the sales process. There may have been some delays in 2021 that were out of the landlord’s control. However, the evidence provided shows that the resident raised a valid query via her solicitor, which took the landlord 5 months to respond to, contributing to delays in the sales process. The issue with the title deed also led to an avoidable problem between the resident and a neighbour.
An order has been made for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £300 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its failures during the sales process.

Gas leak

The landlord’s shared ownership home user guide says that the landlord should provide a landlord gas safety record upon completion. This guide says that any gas leaks should be reported to the gas supply company.
The landlord carried out a gas safety check on 14 August 2021, and a copy of this certificate was provided to the resident during the sales process. This certificate expired on 14 August 2022. Due to delays in the sales process, as detailed above, this certificate was no longer valid upon completion, which was not appropriate.
Upon moving in on 24 November 2022 the resident said that she could smell gas. After contacting her solicitor she became aware that she did not have an up to date gas certificate from the landlord. On the same day the landlord said that it could not smell gas at the handover and advised the resident she should contact the gas supplier.
The resident has told this Service that she contacted the national gas emergency helpline the same day who sent an engineer. She has not provided any detail about what they found on this visit. She contacted them again the next day after smelling gas. She said that the engineer told her that gas pipes were not connected correctly, however this Service has seen no documentation in relation to this.
The landlord arranged for a gas safety check to be carried out on 14 December. The certificate shows that the check was passed with no defects identified and no remedial action needed. The resident received a copy of this certificate on 19 December 2022. In its stage 2 response the landlord acknowledged that she should have been given a copy of this in person when the check was completed.
The Ombudsman considers there to have been service failure by the landlord in its handling of the gas safety check and the resident’s report of a gas leak. The sale of the property was delayed in part due to failings by the landlord. It should have completed a new gas safety check when the original one expired, prior to the sale completing.
The landlord did arrange for a safety check to be carried out after completion and this check did not identify any issues. No evidence has been provided that there was anything wrong with the boiler or gas pipes upon completion. However, it is appreciated that the resident was caused some distress when she smelt gas and realised that the gas safety check was not up to date.
An order has been made for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £100 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to carry out an up to date gas safety check.

Repairs, damp and mould

End of defect issues

The landlord’s shared ownership home user guide states that there is a 12 month defect period after the build is complete, after which an end of defect inspection is carried out. Due to the length of the sales process in this case, the end of defect inspection was carried out on 3 November 2022, 3 weeks before the sale to the resident completed. The resident said that she asked to be at this inspection, but was not permitted as she was not yet the owner.
The end of defect inspection record shows that 2 issues were noted. There was an issue with the front door handles which needed tightening and a large crack to the kitchen wall above the balcony door frame. In its stage 1 response the landlord acknowledged that these repairs were not carried out until after she moved in. The front door was repaired on 15 December 2022 and the crack was repaired on 8 February 2023.
Whilst the landlord should have tried to complete these repairs before the resident moved in, there is no evidence that the crack in the wall caused the resident any detriment whilst she awaited this repair. However, the resident had told the landlord she was moving due to domestic abuse and safety was a concern for her. Therefore the problem with the front door was particularly worrying for her.
In its stage 1 response the landlord said that the damage to the door was due to it being forced and wedged open. It said that the door was not unsecure, therefore it was not classed as an emergency. This Service has seen no evidence that the door was unsecure and not able to be locked. However, the landlord was aware of the resident’s circumstances. It would have been reasonable for it to arrange this repair in the 3 weeks between the problem being identified and the sale being completed.
The landlord’s surveyor visited the property in January 2024 as the resident said the crack to the kitchen wall had reappeared. The surveyor noted that the crack did not go all the way through and could be repaired, which would be arranged. This Service has seen no evidence that this repair was completed and on 15 October the landlord told this Service it would need to send a surveyor to inspect this again. This represents an unreasonable delay in getting this issue fixed.

Balcony

The shared ownership lease shows that the balcony belongs to the landlord, and the resident has the ‘right to use’ this balcony.
The resident raised a concern with the landlord about bird droppings on the balcony on 24 April 2023. In the landlord’s stage 1 response of 25 May, it said that as a shared owner the balcony was her responsibility. It said that other residents had requested permission to install netting to deter birds, and she might want to consider this.
In its stage 2 response of 29 January 2024 the landlord maintained this position. However, it said that a surveyor would assess staining on the patio. Following this survey, the landlord confirmed on 8 February 2024 that it would clean the patio area of bird droppings. However, it did not say that it accepted responsibility for this area moving forward.
As ownership of the balcony is retained by the landlord, maintenance and prevention of problems with this area are its responsibility. It was not appropriate for the landlord to tell the resident that this was her responsibility and that she would need to take action herself, such as putting up a net, to protect the area. It was reasonable for it to agree to carry out work to clean the area, however it is not clear whether it has yet carried out this work. Costs incurred for cleaning at £32.03 are also to be reimbursed to by the landlord.

Damp and mould

The lease states that it is the resident’s responsibility to keep the property in good and substantial repair. The end of defects inspection report does not note any problems with damp and mould and this Service has seen no evidence that there was an issue with damp and mould present upon completion of the sale.
The landlord did agree to have a surveyor inspect the bathroom in January 2024, where the resident said the damp problem was, when inspecting the crack and the balcony. The surveyor said that marks on the bathroom tiles appeared to be the pattern, rather than mould. The resident told this Service on 12 February that the landlord had misunderstood the issue in the bathroom. She said the issue was where the ceiling tiles meet the wall where there was a shadow and dampness on the plasterboard.
As a shared owner, it is the resident’s responsibility to arrange for maintenance and upkeep of the inside of the property. As there is no evidence of a damp and mould issue when the sale completed, it is the resident’s responsibility to arrange for work to be carried out to resolve any damp problem. So, the landlord has acted in line with the lease in declining to take any further action in relation to this issue.

Summary of repairs issues

Overall, the Ombudsman considers there to have been maladministration by the landlord in its handling of repairs. There were unreasonable delays in the landlord carrying out work to rectify issues noted at the end of defects inspection. It incorrectly identified the balcony as the resident’s responsibility. This led to a delay in it agreeing to carry out work to clean this area.
The landlord agreed to carry out works in its stage 2 response of 29 January 2024. However, whilst it sent a surveyor out that day, no evidence has been provided that the recommended works have been carried out.
An order has been made for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £400. This is made up of £200 for the delay in the work being carried out, and a further £200 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to her. This amount has been awarded taking the landlord’s compensation policy into consideration.
Orders have been made for the landlord to carry out a repair to the crack in the kitchen wall and clean the balcony, if it has not already done so.
A recommendation has been made for the landlord to consider putting up a net to deter birds from the balcony area.

Complaint handling

Landlords must have an effective complaint process to provide a good service to their residents. An effective complaint process means landlords can fix problems quickly, learn from their mistakes and build good relationships with residents. The landlord’s complaints policy says that it will log and acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days and send its stage 1 response within 10 working days. It says it will acknowledge escalation within 5 working days and send its stage 2 response within 20 working days of the escalation request.
The resident raised the complaint on 28 April 2023. The landlord acknowledged this the next day, in line with its policy. It sent its stage 1 response on 25 May, 25 working days after it was raised. This was outside the policy timescale, however the landlord acknowledged this in its response and offered £20 compensation, which was reasonable.
The resident completed a webform on the landlord’s website on 15 July 2023 saying the issues were outstanding. She said she had already responded to the landlord’s stage 1 response on 26 May, however this Service has seen no evidence of this contact.
The landlord acknowledged her webform on 11 August 2023 and provided an informal response, however it did not provide her with its final response or escalation rights. She responded on 18 September chasing it for its final response.
As she had not received a response on 2 October 2023 the resident contacted this Service to ask for our help. We contacted the landlord on 12 December and asked it to send its final response. We contacted it again on 23 January 2024 and it said it would send this by 26 January. It did not send its stage 2 response until 29 January. This represented an unreasonable delay, taking more than 5 months to respond. It was also not appropriate that the landlord failed to respond until after this Service intervened.
The landlord did recognise the delays in its stage 2 response, and it offered £200 compensation, bringing its total compensation for complaint handling to £220.
The Ombudsman considers there to have been service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint. Whilst it has offered a reasonable level of compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused, it has not demonstrated that it has learnt from its failings. It has not provided an explanation for why its complaint response was so significantly delayed.
An order has been made for the landlord to pay the resident the £220 compensation it has offered, if it has not already done so. An order has also been made for the landlord to carry out a case review to ensure it learns from its failings in this case. The landlord should provide this Service with a copy of this review.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was:
1. Maladministration by the landlord in relation to its handling of the sales process.
2. Service failure by the landlord in relation to its handling of the gas safety check and the resident’s report of a gas leak.
3. Maladministration by the landlord in relation to its handling of repairs, damp and mould.
4. Service failure by the landlord in relation to its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

The landlord to pay the resident total compensation of £1,052.03, less any amount already paid during its internal complaints process, broken down as follows:
1. £300 in relation to the sales process delay.
2. £100 in relation to the gas safety check.
3. £400 in relation to repairs.
4. £220 in relation to complaint handling.
5. £32.03 reimbursement of cleaning costs.
The landlord to issue the resident with a written apology.
The landlord to provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to this Service within 28 days of this report.
The landlord to carry out a case review to ensure it learns from its failings in this case. The landlord should provide this Service with a copy of this review within 8 weeks of this report.
Within 8 weeks of the report, the landlord to provide evidence that it has:
1. Carried out a repair to the crack to the kitchen wall.
2. Cleaned the balcony.

Recommendations

The landlord should consider putting up a net to deter birds from the balcony area.
The landlord to pay the resident the £200 compensation to reflect time and trouble offered in its stage 2 response, if it has not already done so.