Places for People Group Limited (202448943)

Decision
Case ID	202448943
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Places for People Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	12 January 2026

Background

1. The resident lives in a one-bedroom flat, owned by the landlord. She has mental health issues and breathing difficulties, which the landlord is aware of. It carried out multiple works in late 2023 and throughout 2024, as the resident had reported ongoing issues with damp and mould. She complained on 19 November 2024 as she said the landlord had not done enough to resolve the problem, and the mould had returned.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. Response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
   2. Complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Damp and mould

4. The landlord did not monitor repairs well enough, which potentially added to delays resolving the issue. However, it recognised its failings, offered reasonable compensation in the circumstances, and has now started the necessary works.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord acknowledged issues with its complaint handling at stage 2. However, it did not recognise the extent of its failures at stage 1 which had been detrimental to the resident.

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 Given the complaint handling failings found in this report, the landlord must pay the resident £150. This is in addition to the compensation it offered in its complaint responses. The landlord must ensure it has paid this directly to the resident and provide documentary evidence of this by the due date.	No later than 10 February 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
The landlord should also pay the resident the sum of £615 as previously offered, if it has not done so already. The finding of reasonable redress in its handling of the reports of damp and mould is based on it doing so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
November 2023	The landlord completed repairs to the external brickwork, windows, and extractor fan, as recommended by a damp and mould survey earlier that month. It also inspected the garden as the resident reported flooding to the patio.
January to March 2024	The landlord added new drainage to the garden and relayed the patio.   The resident made multiple reports that the windows were letting in water, and the landlord carried out another damp survey.
April to November 2024	The landlord completed further repairs to the brickwork and windows, and it treated the internal walls and ceilings for mould.
19 November 2024	The resident raised her complaint. She said: Black mould was covering her walls. The garden was still flooding. She was getting frequent chest infections and struggling with her mental health due to ongoing stress.
28 February 2025	The landlord issued its stage 1 response, in which it: Acknowledged there had been persistent problems which it had not yet resolved. Explained it was arranging a leak detection survey. Confirmed it would carry out a mould wash in the meantime. Apologised and offered £375 in compensation.
April 2025	The resident escalated her complaint as she said there were still problems with mould and the repairs had not worked. She also said a recent leak had damaged the bathroom flooring. She asked it to reimburse her for increased water and energy bills, which she said were due to running leaks and running a dehumidifier. The resident also asked it to compensate her for damage to her belongings.
4 August 2025	The landlord issued its stage 2 response, which listed a summary of its intended repairs. It apologised for its delays in both addressing the works and responding to the including its complaint responses, and it offered a total of £615 in compensation.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred her complaint to us as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and said it has not yet resolved the issue.

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	Damp and mould
Finding	Reasonable redress

 

What we have not investigated

6. The resident said the issues have affected her physical and mental health. It would be fairer, more reasonable, and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. It is best for the courts to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice. We have therefore not investigated this further.
7. The resident has reported damp and mould to the landlord for many years, which she highlighted in her referral to us. However, there is no evidence that she referred any previous complaints to us. We may not consider matters which took place over 12 months before a resident’s complaint, so we will not look at historical issues here. This investigation will consider events from 6 November 2023 when the landlord conducted a new damp and mould survey, to its final response of 4 August 2025.

What we have investigated

8. The landlord’s survey of 6 November 2023 recommended repairs to the brickwork, windows, and extractor fan. It did not find any evidence of mould itself. The evidence shows the landlord subsequently completed the repairs. Further issues arose, some of which were new such as the patio and garden drainage. The landlord undertook works to resolve those as well.
9. The resident complained on 19 November 2024, and she continued to report mouldy walls and window leaks over the following 2 months. In its stage 1 response of 28 February 2025, the landlord confirmed it was arranging a leak detection survey which it then completed in April 2025. This found no evidence of a leak but noted the presence of mould and increased moisture levels in various parts of the property. The survey recommended the landlord replace the window seals, and re-seal the bath.
10. The resident escalated her complaint in April 2025 as she said the landlord had not done enough to resolve the problems. She also said:
    1. The patio had flooded again.
    2. She had incurred extra energy costs due to running a dehumidifier.
    3. A leak had damaged the bathroom flooring.
    4. The mould had damaged her belongings.
    5. The back door would not close properly.
11. The landlord took interim measures between April and July 2025. These included mould treatments, clearing the guttering, and easing the door frame. It said the door was secure but it needed to fit new hinges which were on special order. In the landlord’s stage 2 response of 4 August 2025, it said it:
    1. Would install more garden drainage.
    2. Would repair and replaster the living room external wall.
    3. Had not found any repairs needed to the bedroom external wall, but it would also replaster this as a precaution.
    4. Would re-seal the bath.
    5. Had booked an appointment for the next day to repair the back door hinges.
    6. Had no record of reports about damage to the bathroom flooring, but it would replace this as a goodwill gesture.
    7. Would consider reimbursing the resident for increased energy costs upon receipt of evidence.
    8. Had referred her to its insurance team in respect of damage to her belongings.
    9. Offered a revised total of £615 in compensation.
12. The landlord responded in line with its policies to the matter of extra costs and damage. The resident told us she elected to replace the bathroom flooring herself, therefore this work is no longer outstanding. She also told us the landlord has now started works to the bedroom, bath, and garden, and it has completed interim mould treatments to the living room. The landlord’s complaint response does not mention the window repairs recommended by the leak survey, however it has included this in its summary of planned works alongside the other repairs it promised.
13. The landlord did not complete post-works inspections in line with its repairs policy. However, it recognised the resident’s distress and the impact of its delays on her wellbeing, as well as the overall inconvenience caused by the ongoing issues. Its response was empathetic and its apology was appropriate.
14. The landlord’s compensation of £615 included both its handling of the damp and mould reports, and its complaint handling issues. It did not break this down any further, and we will consider that £415 applies to its handling of the damp and mould. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance where a landlord’s failures have adversely affected a resident. The landlord’s offer of redress and commencement of the works it promised to undertake were reasonable remedies in the specific circumstances of this complaint.

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

 

15. The landlord’s complaints policy states it will try to resolve an issue quickly, if this is very straightforward or constitutes a service request such as reporting a repair. If the landlord cannot resolve the issue this way, it will begin its internal complaints procedure. This aligns with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which promotes early resolution and requires landlords to be alert to the difference between a service request and a complaint.
16. The landlord’s “early resolution” officer called the resident on 12 December 2024 to discuss her complaint. She repeated her complaint on 27 January 2025, and it replied on 4 February to state it had “decided to escalate [her] complaint to stage 1” due to the complex nature of the case.
17. It was not appropriate for the landlord to treat the resident’s original complaint as an ‘early resolution’ case. It knew the issues were complicated and the resident made it clear that she wanted to complain about its handling of the repairs over an extended period. The landlord’s failure to apply its complaints policy led to a significant delay in its stage 1 response, as it did not issue this until 70 working days after the resident’s complaint. This was far outside its policy timescale of 10 working days.
18. The landlord’s complaints policy states it will aim to respond at stage 2 within 20 working days, but it may extend this by a further 20 days in exceptional circumstances. It extended its stage 2 deadline to 28 May 2025 in line with its policy, however, it did not issue its response until 4 August 2025 after we intervened on the resident’s behalf. This was almost double the time required by its policy and the Code.
19. The landlord apologised for the delays at stage 2. This was meaningful, as it explained what had gone wrong, said it was reviewing its processes, and it acknowledged the resident’s time and trouble. However, the landlord did not recognise its failings at stage 1.
20. We have considered that £200 of the landlord’s compensation relates to its complaint handling, which is a fair reflection of its delays. However, the landlord did not recognise its failure to follow the correct process at stage 1. Given this, we have ordered the landlord to pay an additional £150 in compensation, which is in line with our remedies guidance in these circumstances.

Learning

21. The landlord would benefit from reviewing how it monitors damp and mould repairs, particularly post-works checks. This will ensure it adheres to its policy, as well as our spotlight report. The landlord can access more information about this on our website.
22. The landlord offered compensation for both the substantive issue and its complaint handling, but it did not break this down. When a landlord’s compensation takes different issues into account, it is good practice to show the amounts it has attributed to each matter and we encourage the landlord to take this approach in future.