Richmond Housing Partnership Limited (202341724)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202341724

Richmond Housing Partnership Limited

31 March 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of her reports of:
1. Repairs to the property.
2. Damp and mould.
3. Repairs to the boiler.
We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident is a tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The tenancy was acquired via a mutual exchange. The deed of assignment commenced on 12 December 2022. The property is a 2 bedroom flat.
On 14 December 2022 the resident experienced boiler issues. An operative attended and the boiler had to be disconnected. The repair was ongoing and eventually fixed on 9 January 2023. During this time the resident was provided with heaters.
On 23 January 2023 the resident reported the following issues about her bathroom to the landlord:
1. Bath panel was broken.
2. Plumbing system was backwashing into the bath from the toilet.
3. There was no shaver point.
4. Mirror required removing.
5. The tiling was ‘scruffy’.
6. There was barely any room because of the design.
7. The bath enamel had gone and was like “sandpaper”.
8. The floor boards squeaked.
9. The radiator was rusting from urine.
The resident requested this be inspected and asked when her bathroom would be due an upgrade. She also raised concerns about her kitchen shaking when the washing machine was on and stated the floor was uneven.
On 24 January 2023 the resident emailed the landlord to raise concerns about:
1. The property being cold which resulted in her using a lot of gas. She stated a draught was coming up through the floor.
2. Damp and mould found in one of the bedrooms. She confirmed she had removed this by spraying and painting over.
She asked the landlord to inspect these issues.
The following day the landlord contacted the resident confirming that it had booked an inspection and the earliest availability was 21 March 2023. The landlord also confirmed the bathroom was due for a renewal in 2035 and explained any issues would need to be addressed by repairs.
The resident raised a complaint on 28 March 2023 about the condition of the property. A stage one response was issued by the landlord on 19 April 2023. The main points addressed were:
1. It spoke with the surveyor who did a survey on 1 November 2022 (prior to the mutual exchange), and found the only highlighted issue was unrelated to this complaint. That issue was resolved by the outgoing resident.
2. The surveyor had stated that the incoming resident was required to accept the property in the condition it was in and, if accepted, was responsible for repairs. Thereafter the landlord would only carry out essential repairs.
3. The landlord agreed to see to a leak through the kitchen window and explained a further appointment had been raised on 24 May to conduct a repair.
4. It apologised and explained it would not be able to attend to the other issues the resident had reported, including a rusting radiator, damaged enamel on the bath and flaky walls. It explained the surveyor had not noted these (at the inspection before the mutual exchange) and they would not be classed as essential repairs.
5. In recognition of the resident not having a working boiler over the Christmas period it offered:
  1. £250 for the time spent without heating and hot water.
  2. £100 for extra money spent on heating the property with heaters.
The landlord has told us that between May to June 2023 it changed its repairs service to use a new contractor. This resulted in a large number of jobs being passed onto its new contractors, resulting in services taking longer than expected.
On 14 June 2023 the landlord confirmed the kitchen was due for a renewal in the financial year 2024/2025.
On 28 June 2023 the landlord re-arranged for a surveyor to attend on 2 August 2023 to assess the issues with the bathroom and kitchen.
The resident contacted the landlord on 8 September 2023 to complain about the bathroom pipes making noises and keeping her up at night. The landlord stated it would chase the surveyor who attended on 2 August 2023 to determine what works needed to be done.
On 29 September 2023 the resident called the landlord to complain about quality of service and lack of attention. She wanted the bathroom to be replaced and explained she was unhappy about:
1. Still experiencing issues with the bathroom pipes, despite complaining about this in February. She stated she was not getting any sleep and lost 2 jobs in a year.
2. The previous surveyor had informed her the entire bathroom would need to be re-done because:
  1. The tiles were“disgusting”.
  2. The taps on the sink did not work.
  3. The toilet did not work.
  4. The bath needed replacing.
  5. The pipes were very loud and located behind tiles on the wall.
  6. The wall had caved in and there was a massive hole was in the wall.
The resident contacted the landlord on 3 October 2023 complaining that she had not yet had an update on the survey which was completed in August 2023. She stated that none of the repairs or her complaint had been rectified.
On 20 October 2023 the resident emailed the landlord providing images of the bathroom. She also stated there was a bad smell. The resident explained that despite making complaints and being assured the work would be completed, it had not been done. She asked the landlord to address the issues or she would seek the support of a solicitor.
The landlord issued a stage one response on 23 October 2023. This said:
1. It recognised the surveyor attended in August 2023, but it had not reviewed the findings due to sickness. It explained this would be reviewed on 24 October 2023 and the resident would be updated with a plan of action for the repairs.
2. It explained repairs to the resident’s living room light and a leak through the window had been raised.
3. The landlord apologised for its lack of communication in regards to repairs. In recognition that its service could have been better, it offered:
  1. £15 for lack of communication about the repairs after the surveyor’s visit.
  2. £15 for time and trouble caused.
The resident did not accept the landlord’s offer and stated she wanted to know the outcome of the surveyor report which was completed in August 2023. She also requested the repairs be completed.
On 20 October 2023 the resident contacted the landlord about mould in the bathroom, stating it was concerning as her and her son have asthma.
On 8 November 2023, an appointment was booked to have the resident’s light fixed between 12 and 5 pm. However as the electrician arrived at 5 pm and the resident needed to go to work, the repair was not completed. This was rescheduled.
The resident contacted our service in February 2024 to complain that it had been a year since she reported repairs and the landlord had also not provided a stage two response. We wrote to the landlord and asked it to address the resident’s concerns.
A stage two response was issued on 8 March 2024. The landlord apologised for the delay in providing a response. In its response the landlord explained:
1. A mutual exchange is a private agreement between two residents. Therefore there was little oversight from the landlord. Properties swapped via this method are not subject to its void procedures.
2. In response to the resident’s surprise to see floorboards after removing the carpet due to fleas, the landlord explained it was common to find wooden floorboards underneath carpet as opposed to tile flooring. It also explained it is usually the resident’s responsibility to do the flooring. The landlord stated it would arrange for an inspection in response to the resident’s reports of draughts between the floor boards.
3. It apologised for the issues experienced with the boiler when the resident moved in. It explained the gas safety check record was up to date at the time.
4. In response to the multiple repairs requests for the bathroom, the landlord had instructed its contractors to attend on 11 March 2024.
5. Regarding the damp and mould, it explained its contractors would contact her directly.
6. Its contractors had been instructed to inspect the uneven floor in the kitchen and it would advise a plan to address the problem.
7. In response to the resident’s reports of issues with the communal lights, the landlord explained its contractors attended within 24 hours.
8. It also addressed her concerns about the communal fire alarm and explained the system was working. It had also asked its fire safety team to monitor.
9. The landlord increased its offer of compensation from £30 in its stage one response to £100.
On 19 March 2024 the resident informed the landlord that its contractors missed the appointment on 11 March 2024. The landlord apologised and explained it asked its contractors to get in touch with her to arrange a scope of the repairs however they were unable to reach her.
During April 2024 the contractor contacted the landlord explaining that it had attempted to reach the resident several times but had not heard back from her.
A survey of the drains was completed and the stack was cleared on 4 April 2024. Follow-up work for a plumber to attend to remedy leaks from the waste pipe to the stack was recommended.
In May 2024 a contractor attended the resident’s property, however was refused entry as she was unsure why they were there. They attended at a later date and started on repairs to the bathroom. However this work was stopped by the resident and she expressed concern about the quality of works. These were:
1. She felt the bathroom was “thrown together” with no precision, white plastic and too much silicone used to cover mistakes.
2. Toilet was away from wall and wobbly.
3. Workers were making decisions without informing her. She also explained they did not speak English.
4. They made the bathroom smaller.
5. They used giant skirting boards.
6. The door was put on badly and had no lock. There was an inch gap from the floor.
The resident contacted the landlord in June 2024 stating the toilet was still wobbling and not secure. She also explained the bathroom had been “abandoned” during the refit 3 to 4 weeks ago and she had not had an update.
During July 2024 contractors attended to conduct a survey to assess the works completed and the outstanding works, however were unable to gain access.
On 18 August 2024 the resident confirmed the surveyor had attended and:
1. Asked when the bathroom would be fixed.
2. Asked when the floor would be levelled.
3. Said that the kitchen cupboards were misaligned.
4. She explained she had not heard from the compensation team. She also felt the landlord had not addressed the missed appointments or lack of repairs.
During October 2024 the contractors stated they had attempted to book in a mould treatment and survey with the resident and had also left a voice message. However she had informed them that no mould was present as she had treated it herself. The landlord contacted the resident to confirm this.
On 6 November 2024 the resident contacted the landlord, stating the bathroom had been in disrepair since May. She stated the following was outstanding:
1. Toilet was still not secured to the wall or floor.
2. The floor was a mess.
3. No tiles.
4. Holes everywhere.
5. Sealant holes.
6. Lumps under flooring.
The landlord emailed the resident explaining that it needed access to the property to get the repairs completed as, for its most recent appointments, it was unable to gain access. It asked the resident to confirm her availability. The resident stated this was untrue as she had not heard from the landlord.
On 19 November 2024 the resident confirmed there were no ongoing issues with mould. She had informed the landlord that she treated the mould herself. Therefore the landlord stated it would be closing her open case regarding the mould. Her main concern was the outstanding repairs to the kitchen and bathroom. She also was unhappy with the running cost of keeping the extractor fan on constantly and explained she had disconnected it.
On 9 December 2024 the landlord stated it had started work in the bathroom but the resident did not let its contractors finish the work. It had since been trying to gain access to complete the work however the resident had both refused to make appointments and had not been in the property for appointments.
On 6 March 2025 the landlord informed us that the resident declined its offer of repair to the toilet and basin when its contractors arrived. She wanted it to be replaced instead. The landlord discussed this with the resident further and agreed to have these replaced. Its contractors had been asked to arrange an appointment with the resident.

Assessment and findings

We have addressed two separate complaints within this investigation report due to the interconnected nature of the issues. Some of the repairs were ongoing and linked across both complaints. Combining both complaints into a single report allows a more comprehensive investigation of the situation, ensuring that any overlapping or related factors are properly identified and addressed.

Repairs to the property.

The landlord’s repairs policy sets out its timescales. This states:
1. Emergency repairs will be attended within 24 hours.
2. Routine repairs are within 10 working days.
3. Repair exclusions will be completed within 20 working days.
4. Larger jobs that may require materials and works to be planned may take longer.

Bathroom.

Upon moving into the property we note the resident was unhappy with the condition of her bathroom. The resident was seeking to have the bathroom replaced and the landlord informed her this was not due to take place until 2035. Whilst we understand the resident’s occupation of the property commenced via a deed of assignment and mutual exchange, and therefore the landlord was not required to carry out the usual void checks and any resulting works in the way that it would when a new tenancy began, it was appropriate for the landlord to inform the resident that any essential repair issues would be considered in line with its repairs policy.
The evidence shows that on 19 April 2023, after a survey had taken place, the landlord informed the resident it would not conduct any repair which the surveyor noted as not essential. We have reviewed the landlord’s repairs policy which does not state exactly what is considered an essential repair. However, whilst it is clear that the resident was concerned about the overall condition of the bathroom, there is no evidence that the works she requested were essential, taking into account the surveyor’s findings. The landlord acted in accordance with its policy, appropriately arranged an inspection and informed the resident of its position. Furthermore we can see that the resident was made aware prior to acceptance of the mutual exchange that she would be accepting the property in its current condition and the landlord would only be responsible for essential repairs.
Following further reports by the resident, the landlord arranged its contractor to visit to identify a scope of works in August 2023. The evidence shows the resident was chasing the landlord for an update on the surveyor’s findings and in October 2023 it explained the surveyor had been sick and had not been able to share the survey results. Whilst we understand sickness cannot be controlled, the length of time it took for the outcome of the assessment to be provided was unreasonable. This essentially resulted in further delays in getting any necessary works started.
We see repairs to the bathroom remained outstanding and this was addressed in the landlord’s stage two response in March 2024. The evidence shows there were appointments missed by the resident and the landlord’s contractor.
The bathroom works were started in May 2024. However the resident reported issues with the quality of works. Works were stopped leaving them incomplete, as the resident declined to let the works continue before speaking with the landlord. Thereafter the resident continued to chase the landlord to have the bathroom completed.
Overall there was unclear communication between the landlord, contractors and resident, which resulted in a delay in appointments. During October 2024 contractors attempted twice to access the property to complete bathroom works but were not provided access. On 12 November 2024 the landlord further chased the resident about getting the repairs completed, however this was not successful. Correspondence in December 2024 shows the landlord was still unable to complete works in the bathroom.
After the landlord’s internal complaints procedure had been completed, we understand its contractors had arranged a repair to the toilet and basin in the bathroom, however this was declined by the resident as she was seeking to have these replaced. Subsequently the landlord has agreed to this and this work is currently being arranged.
We understand initially the landlord stated works were not required, but later agreed to these being completed. It is evident the repairs were ongoing and there were delays and poor communication on the landlord’s part. We see it acknowledged this and has since repeatedly made efforts to have repairs completed. However it is clear that after the internal complaints procedure issues remained outstanding with the bathroom which resulted in the resident having to chase further. Therefore, and taking all the circumstances into account we have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to her bathroom.

Kitchen.

Repairs in the kitchen were reported to the landlord on 24 January 2023. The resident’s main concerns were regarding the floor being unlevelled which caused her kitchen to shake and cupboards to misalign. The resident was seeking a kitchen replacement. However the evidence shows that a planned kitchen upgrade is due in 2025 and the resident was informed of this.
We have not seen evidence to suggest the landlord made attempts in 2023 to level the kitchen floor or investigate the matter. However its contractors were instructed to attend on 14 March 2024 to do an inspection to decide what steps were needed to address the problem. This was explained in the landlord’s stage 2 response dated 8 March 2024. The evidence shows that when its contractors attended, the resident explained that she did not know why they were there and declined the inspection.
After the internal complaint procedure, works to the floor remained as an outstanding issue and the landlord arranged for a survey to be completed in August 2024. We have not seen the outcome of this report or if anything has been done to address the uneven floors which were reported by the resident.
Whilst we understand the kitchen is due a renewal and this work is likely to be considered as part of the renewal, there is no evidence that the landlord informed the resident of this or appropriately addressed her concerns to explain its position at the time.
In the landlord’s recent update to us in 2025, it did not confirm if works had been completed in the kitchen to address the uneven floors. We understand the landlord had previously inspected the resident’s kitchen floor with a view to resolve the issues. This was also stated in its stage two response dated 8 March 2024. It explained on inspection it appeared the kitchen floor tiles may have been removed by the previous resident. It further confirmed it would advise the resident of its plan to address the problem. If the works have not been completed, the landlord should provide the resident with a reasonable timeframe as to when the works will be completed this year.

Flooring throughout property.

The resident expressed concern about draughts coming up through the floorboards on 24 January 2023. In accordance with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the landlord’s repair responsibility, as the floor is deemed to be part of the structure of the property, it is obliged to address reports raised concerning this.
We see the landlord booked an appointment for 21 March 2023, stating this was the earliest it could arrange. However we have not seen any records to confirm if the visit occurred and what the outcome was.
On 28 June 2023 a task was raised to arrange a surveyor visit to check the floorboards as the resident had again said that gaps were letting cold air in. The evidence shows that a survey was completed on 2 August 2023. However we have not seen what the outcome of this visit was, or that any follow up work was done according to the repair logs.
Correspondence between the landlord and resident shows that a survey took place during October 2023. However we have not seen a record to reflect what this entailed or the outcome.
In its stage two response dated 8 March 2024, the landlord acknowledged the resident had removed the carpet and was surprised to see wooden floorboards, but explained it was common to have wooden floorboards as opposed to tiles underneath carpet. It also informed the resident that putting underlay and carpet down would usually be the resident’s responsibility, but agreed to have a contractor conduct an inspection regarding the excessive draught between the planks.
Whilst we agree the landlord would not be responsible for underlay and carpets as per its policy, it was appropriate for it to address the resident’s concerns of draught and in the event it found that there was an issue to seek a remedy.
Further correspondence shows the resident contacted the landlord on 23 November 2024 and mentioned cold air was coming through the floor.
Whilst we can see several requests were made to resolve the issues concerning gaps in the floorboards, we have not seen evidence to show the landlord sought a solution to this. The resident further emailed the landlord on 23 November 2024, which suggests that the issue remain unresolved.
Overall we find the length of time that this issue has been ongoing to be unreasonable. Whilst we recognise attempts were made by the landlord to conduct an inspection, the resident continued to chase for a solution and no further follow-up investigation or communication about the landlord’s position was provided to the resident. Therefore we have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports to the flooring throughout the property.
We have considered the landlord overall handling of all repair reports. We understand in it stage two response the landlord acknowledged the inconvenience the poor communication caused and offered to increase the residents compensation to £100. In this instance, at the time of offer we considered the level of compensation was proportionate. However the evidence shows that issues remained unresolved post its internal complaints procedure. We have not seen that it has reviewed its compensation offer. Therefore in recognition of the ongoing delays remaining for a considerable extended period following the landlord’s final response, we have made a finding of service failure. We also have made an order for further compensation to reflect the impact caused to the resident.

Damp and mould.

When the resident raised a report to the landlord about damp and mould, it raised a repair requeston 25 January 2023.
We see the resident informed the landlord she had removed the mould by spraying and painting over it. She stated it was also on the windows of the coldest bedroom and the walls were freezing damp. She further explained there were gaps in the floorboards causing a draught and believed this to be the cause of the damp and mould.
Whilst we understand the resident stated she had resolved the issue, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to arrange an inspection to determine the cause of damp and mould at the time. We have not seen any records to reflect a visit was made by its contractor prior to August 2023. When the contractor visited in August 2023, there is no evidence of the outcome of this assessment.
The evidence shows the landlord instructed its contractor to contact the resident to address the damp and mould in March 2024. We have not seen any record to confirm if this was done.
When the resident further made a report of damp and mould on 20 October 2024 the landlord referred the job to its contractors. The evidence shows its contractors attempted to contact the resident on 25 October 2024 to arrange an appointment for treatment, however they were unsuccessful. We can see the resident informed the contractors that the mould was no longer present as she treated it herself.
Damp and mould would generally be considered a routine repair, and as such the landlord should attend to the matter within 10 working days. In this instance we see it appropriately instructed its contractors to attend within the expected timeframes as set out in its policy.
Whilst no further action was taken by its contractors, we can see attempts were made to contact the resident. We are satisfied the landlord acted appropriately as the resident had informed that the mould was gone and did not agree to the appointment. We also see it followed this up with the resident in November 2024. At the time she had informed it the issues were no longer present and therefore it closed its damp and mould case.
The landlord had informed the resident that if the mould returned it could refer this to its specialist. We have not seen any evidence to suggest the damp and mould remain. However, if it returns, the landlord should arrange for a damp survey to determine the cause.

Repairs to the boiler.

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the resident’s occupancy agreement state the landlord is responsible for the repair and proper working order of the installations in the property for space heating and heating water. Therefore when the resident informed the landlord of the issues concerning the boiler it was obliged to assess and to repair if necessary.
The resident was upset that she was without a boiler for a month. She said that her home should have never passed inspection as the boiler was leaking carbon monoxide and had to be disconnected two days after she moved in.
The gas safety records were up to date at the time the resident moved into the property. We have not seen evidence to suggest issues with the boiler prior to the resident moving in. At the time the landlord arranged for its contractor to attend and for the duration it was unable to fix the fault the resident was provided with a heater.
We understand the resident’s frustration and it was appropriate for the landlord to consider its compensation policy for the delay in resolving the matter.
The landlord’s guidelines for compensation payments state that if a resident experiences actual loss or expense as a result of its services, it will compensate them for the loss. This includes if utility costs were incurred because of a lack of heating.
In this instance, in its stage one response on 19 April 2023, the landlord offered the resident a total of £350 compensation. At the time the resident was using alternative heating. The landlord’s compensation policy states that where it provides the resident with temporary heaters it will compensate £45 per week to reflect this. As the amount of compensation offered exceeds this and gives consideration to the inconvenience caused, we find this amount to be reasonable redress in the circumstances

The landlord’s complaint handling.

The resident expressed upset that the landlord had closed the complaint without a resolution. When the landlord provided the resident with a stage one response on 23 October 2023, she said she was unhappy with its findingson the same day and informed it she did not want her complaint closed. We see the resident proceeded to chase the landlord for a stage two response and this was issued on 8 March 2024.
The landlord’s complaints policy states it will acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days and aim to provide a stage two response within 20 working days of the complaint being acknowledged. The landlord exceeded its expected timeframes when issuing a formal response to the resident.
In its stage two response the landlord apologised for the delay in issuing its response. However there was no offer of compensation in recognition of this. Considering the length of time and the impact it had on the resident, the landlord should have considered its compensation policy. Therefore we have found service failure in its overall handling of the complaint.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to reports of repairs to the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s response to damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of reasonable redress in respect of the complaint about its handling of repairs to the boiler.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders.

The landlord to contact the resident about the planned works to the bathroom and to arrange a date convenient for both parties to have the repairs completed.
The landlord to contact the resident about the planned kitchen replacement to discuss the timeframe in which works will be completed.
The landlord should arrange a survey of the resident’s floorboards to assess the draughts reports. It should then explain its position to the resident and discuss what further actions, if any, will be taken to address the matter.
The landlord to pay the resident £50 compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by its lack of communication regarding the uneven kitchen floor.
The landlord to pay the resident £50 compensation in recognition of the uncertainty caused by its failure to confirm its position regarding the draught to the floorboards.
The landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the distress caused by its overall complaint handling.
All orders should be completed within 4 weeks of the date of this letter. The landlord should also provide evidence of compliance to this service.

Recommendations.

If not done so already, the landlord should pay its previous offers of compensation to the resident. This entailed:
1. £350 compensation for the boiler issues.
2. £100 compensation for lack of communication and delay in having repairs completed.