Paragon Asra Housing Limited (202444308)

Decision
Case ID	202444308
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Paragon Asra Housing Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Shorthold Tenancy
Date	28 November 2025

Background

The resident lives in a ground floor flat with her 2 children. At the time of the complaint, she was pregnant and concerned about living with a newborn child in the property. The resident complained because she said the landlord had not responded fully to her reports of damp and mould. The resident has told us she has dyslexia and learning disabilities.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the:
1. resident’s reports of damp and mould.
2. associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found maladministration in the landlord’s response to the:
1. resident’s reports of damp and mould.
2. associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The response to the damp and mould

The landlord acknowledged its communication with the resident was “inadequate”. There were multiple record keeping failures which impacted its service and this investigation. It did not follow up on its proposed solution to install a ventilation system. It did not clearly explain to the resident its assessment of her reports of damp and mould.

The complaint handling

The landlord failed to record when the resident first complained and delayed responding to the complaint until intervention from us. While it offered appropriate apology and compensation for this in its stage 1 response, it did not respond fully to the points raised by the resident in her stage 2 complaint.

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 £1,230, as offered in its earlier complaint responses for any distress and inconvenience likely caused by the failures outlined in this report. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence to this Service by the due date.	No later than 07 January 2026
3	Record keeping The landlord must contact the resident to ensure it has accurately recorded any household vulnerabilities and any reasonable adjustments she may require. The landlord must provide documentary evidence to this Service by the due date.	No later than 07 January 2026
4	Specific action The landlord must write to the resident to confirm whether damp and mould has been found in the property. The letter must: Summarise the damp and mould survey findings using non-technical language. Explain clearly what actions the landlord will take, and what it will not do so. The landlord must send evidence of this communication to the Ombudsman by the due date.	No later than 07 January 2026
5	Starting the works: Centralised Mechanical Extract Ventilation System The landlord must take all steps to ensure the works to install the ventilation system offered at stage 1 are started no later than the due date. If the landlord cannot start the works in this time, it must explain to us and the resident, by the due date: Why it cannot start the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will start and finish the works; or The steps it has taken to start the works and provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to ensure the works were started by the due date. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot. Whether suitable alternative accommodation is necessary and will be made available to the resident.	No later than 23 January 2026
6	Complaint order The landlord must respond in writing to all points raised by the resident in her stage 2 complaint. The landlord must provide documentary evidence to this Service by the due date.	No later than 07 January 2026
7	Review order The landlord should carry out a review of the complaint handling from this case and what improvements it needs to put in place as a result. This review should include consideration of training needs and compliance with policies and procedures. A copy of the review should be provided to this Service.	No later than 07 January 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
October 2024	The resident reported damp and mould in the bathroom and near the front door.
Before 17 January 2025	The resident complained there was damp, mould and yellow staining in her home. She felt this had affected her health and damaged her clothes. She complained about communication from the damp and mould team. She wanted a response within a “decent” timeframe.
January to March 2025	The landlord completed 2 mould washes.
17 June 2025	The landlord gave its stage 1 response. It said it had surveyed the property and found some mould and humidity. It said it would install a ventilation system. It apologised for not resolving the issue and poor communication. It offered £230 for complaint handling failures and £500 for stress, inconvenience and poor service.
24 June 2025	The resident escalated her complaint. She said she had been reporting damp and mould for over a year. She wanted copies of the surveys carried out. She wanted a clear timeline for repair works to address the root causes and additional compensation.
17 July 2025	The landlord gave its stage 2 response. It upheld its stage 1 decision and offered an additional £500 compensation.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident contacted this Service. She wanted the issues resolved and ongoing monitoring of the property to ensure it did not reoccur. She wanted compensation to reflect the impact on her health.

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 response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord’s record keeping failures mean it is not possible to assess whether its actions between October 2024 and June 2025 were reasonable or not. It conducted 2 mould washes in this time and inspected the property for damp and mould post ICP on 22 July 2025. The landlord’s position was there were no signs of current damp in the home. It said there was a small amount of mould behind the kitchen door which could be safely cleaned by the resident.
The resident said she felt dismissed about her reports of damp and mould, and that the landlord gave her contradictory information. She said, “on one hand they say there are water stains and signs of humidity and on the other they say there is no damp and mould”. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report: Attitudes, Respect and Rights emphasises treating residents as “equals” and ensuring they feel heard. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response explained its damp and mould assessment using technical language without explanation which may have contributed to the resident’s confusion.
In its stage 1 response the landlord said it had found low levels of mould and some humidity. It said it wanted to install a Centralised Mechanical Extract Ventilation (CMEV) system to manage humidity in the home. The landlord did not record how it categorised this installation and did not provide the resident with a timeline of when it expected to install the ventilation system. The resident reports the system has not been installed. We are therefore unable to conclude whether the system was installed within a reasonable time.
In her escalation request, the resident raised multiple damp and mould concerns. She asked for copies of the surveys carried out, a clear timeline for the repair works and further compensation. The landlord upheld its stage 1 response but offered an additional £500 compensation. It is unclear why the landlord offered additional compensation. It did not respond to the issues raised by the resident, which the resident stated was one of the reasons she bought her complaint to us.
The resident told the landlord she was very distressed by the situation, and she did not feel it had been resolved. The landlord offered £1,230 compensation for the likely distress and inconvenience caused by the failures outlined above. This was in line with our Remedies Guidance for failures which have had significant impact on the resident. However, it did not complete its proposed solutions and did not respond fully to the resident’s stage 2 escalation. We have therefore made orders to complete the works, explain its current damp and mould assessment to the resident and ensure household vulnerabilities are recorded.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Maladministration

The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case is the 2024 edition. Our findings are the landlord:
1. has a published complaints policy which complies with the Code in respect of timescales.
2. did not record when the resident submitted her stage 1 complaint. It apologised for not acknowledging it within 5 working days on 17 January 2025. It is not possible to assess the extent of the delay due to record keeping failures.
3. responded to the stage 1 complaint 104 working days after its acknowledgement and after intervention from us. This was outside of its policy timescales.
4. acknowledged and responded to the stage 2 complaint within the timescales set out in its policy.
5. did not respond to all points raised in its stage 2 response. This caused the resident an inconvenience as she was left not knowing its position about the issues she had complained about. The Code states that the landlord must respond to all aspects of the resident’s complaint.
The landlord’s stage 2 response did not summarise or address all the points raised by the resident’s escalation. It did not explain why it offered an additional £500 and did not clearly link this to its compensation policy or learnings it had made. Had it done so, it may have resolved the resident’s complaint earlier.
The landlord apologised and offered £230 for its complaint handling failures at stage 1. This was in line with our Remedies Guidance for a failure which adversely affected the resident. However, as the landlord did not respond to all matters complained about, we have found maladministration and made orders to put things right in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles.

Learning

Record keeping

As a member of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has an obligation to provide us with sufficient information to enable a thorough investigation. The landlord’s records provided prior to the resident’s stage 1 complaint were incomplete and did not record the date of completed repairs nor what occurred at the appointment. This was a record keeping failure and impacted the landlord’s ability to assess and monitor repairs.
The landlord’s maintenance policy said it would work flexibly with vulnerable residents. This includes children under 3. The resident told the landlord she was heavily pregnant and was worried about damp and mould affecting her health. The landlord did not record any vulnerabilities in the household. This was a record keeping failure which may have prevented the landlord from understanding the needs of the household and offering any reasonable adjustments needed.

Communication

Due to record keeping failures, it is not possible to assess the extent of the landlord’s communication failures. The resident said it failed to call her back on the 3 occasions she reported damp and mould. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaint until intervention from us when it apologised for inadequate communication from the damp and mould team.