Sanctuary Housing Association (202304261)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202304261

Sanctuary Housing Association

17 April 2024

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 the resident’s:
1. Reports of damp and mould.
2. Associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident has an assured tenancy for a 3-bedroom house, which began on 28 April 2017. The landlord is a housing association.
The resident lives in the property with his 5 children. The landlord did not have any vulnerabilities recorded for the resident during the scope of this investigation.
The resident first reported damp and mould on the upstairs ceilings in 2019. He has continued to report damp and mould issues to the landlord up until the date of this report. The landlord inspected the property in October 2020. The surveyor’s report said:
1. There was a high-level damp reading in all upstairs ceilings.
2. The damp was a result of property fault and lifestyle.
3. The tenant was advised about concerns of washing being dried on radiators and drying frames, and that furniture and other items were blocking radiators which was causing poor heat circulation.
4. The main concern was the loft insulation. It was absorbing condensation, which was causing the plasterboard ceilings to be damp, and was likely causing damage to the soffit boards.
5. The landlord intended to invest in it’s properties in the area, but the significant mould and damp required a quicker response.
It is noted the landlord’s records do not provide any information about the damp and mould issues from the date of the surveyor’s survey in October 2020 to 18 March 2022.

Scope of the investigation

The Ombudsman expects complaints to be raised within a reasonable period, which is usually 12 months from the issue occurring. This Service acknowledges that the resident reported damp and mould in 2019, however, the Ombudsman has considered the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould from 18 March 2022 until the final complaint response on 1 May 2023.This is because as the substantive issues become historical it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as the Ombudsman, to conduct an effective review of the actions taken to address those issues.
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 the resident’s health or wellbeing. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the resident’s claims that the landlord’s handling of his reports of damp and mould had a negative impact on his and his household’s health and wellbeing. These matters are better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

Summary of events

On 18 March 2022 the resident reported damp and mould to the landlord. On the same day the landlord raised a job to clean down the mould. The appointment was cancelled and rescheduled several times between March and December 2022 due to operative sickness, staff changes and the resident not being home.
On 29 July 2022 the resident asked the landlord to contact him about the repairs, because the other joint tenant was no longer living at the property. On 3 August 2022 the resident contacted the landlord to say it’s repairs team were continuing to contact the other joint tenant, who was not passing information about appointments to him. The landlord’s records state it updated the contact details that day.
On 4 November 2022 the landlord attended the property to wash down the mould, however, the contractor cancelled the appointment as the resident had not been told they were attending.
On 13 December 2022 the landlord visited the resident and sent internal emails asking for an update as the damp and mould was ‘quite bad’ and the resident had told her his son had been unwell.
The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 15 December 2022. He said the mould was getting worse and he was not happy with the delays and the way the landlord was handling the situation. He said himself, his daughter and his son all had viral infections.
On 16 December 2022 the landlord washed and treated the mould from the ceilings and the top of the walls in all the upstairs rooms.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 19 December 2022 and said it would respond by 5 January 2023.
On 20 December 2022 the landlord asked it’s contractor to carry out a damp inspection. The inspection was completed on 31 January 2023. The report said:
1. There was a variation in insulation levels between the centre of the ceiling and eves. This was causing condensation to form in the property but was not the cause of the damp.
2. The root cause of the damp was the humidity within the property. The lack of consistent heating and inadequate ventilation were causing condensation.
3. It was likely there would be no further mould growth if the property was heated and ventilated within the suggested parameters.
4. The landlord could consider the variation in insulation levels in the meantime.
5. Any wet insulation in the loft must be replaced.
On 1 February 2023 the landlord reviewed the damp inspection report. It’s internal records state it would advise the resident to maintain a heating regime and clear furniture from radiators. It would not raise any works to treat the mould as the issue was not due to property failure. It would send the tenant a damp and mould leaflet.
On 3 February 2023 the landlord visited the resident and told him about the outcome of the damp inspection and gave him a damp and mould leaflet.
On 15 February 2023 the resident reported the damp and mould had returned despite moving furniture away from the walls and radiators. He also reported that the windows had blown and needed new seals. The landlord’s records state ‘the tenant was aware that it was potentially lifestyle that was causing the damp’.
On 17 February 2023 the landlord’s records show internal emails were sent asking if the wet insulation in the roof would be removed as per the damp inspection report dated 31 January 2023. An internal email said the surveyor’s report did not mention wet insulation, so no further inspections or action was necessary.
On 9 and 13 March 2023 the resident contacted the landlord for an update on his complaint and the damp and mould issues. He asked for the wet insulation to be replaced. The landlord’s records show internal emails were sent stating the insulation was sufficient and the surveyor’s report does not state the insulation had to be replaced. It said the property had been added to it’s planned program of works to look at the loft space. A new contractor was starting in April 2023, and they would contact the resident directly once the works could be scheduled.
The landlord issued it’s stage 1 complaint response on 13 March 2023. It said:
1. A damp and mould inspection was carried out and it was recommended that the resident cleared space around the radiators to create better ventilation.
2. The resident had reported that despite doing this the mould had returned.
3. The repairs team would visit the property on 23 March 2023.
4. It apologised and offered £50 compensation for the delay in its complaint response and £150 compensation for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused.
On 15 and 17 March 2023 the resident asked to escalate his complaint. He said the loft insulation was damp and believed it was causing the damp and mould in the ceiling. He said the situation was getting worse as the seals on his windows were deteriorating. He also said he was not happy with the compensation offer due to the length of time these issues had been outstanding.
The landlord acknowledged the escalation on 22 March 2023 and said it would respond within 20 working days.
On 23 March 2023 the landlord washed and treated the mould. The landlord’s records state this was applied ‘in the same areas as last time’.
On 4 April 2023 the resident reported leaks in the roof which was causing water to come into one of the bedrooms and the loft space.
On 18 April 2023 the landlord told the resident it needed to extend its response timescale to 3 May 2023 as it was awaiting further information.
The landlord issued it’s stage 2 complaint response on 1 May 2023. It said:
1. The resident first reported damp and mould on 18 March 2022. An appointment was made for 26 April 2022; however, this was changed to 10 June 2022 due to operative availability.
2. The operative recommended the walls were washed down in 3 rooms. An appointment was made for 11 August 2022. This was rearranged for 4 November 2022 due to operative availability. As the resident was not home, it was rearranged again for 15 December 2022. The work could not be carried out on that date as furniture needed to be moved. The walls were washed down on 16 December 2022.
3. Following the resident’s complaint a damp and mould inspection was carried out on 31 January 2023. The report stated the cause of the damp and mould was due to high levels of humidity caused by lack of heating and ventilation. It was recommended that the property was heated to minimum of 19 degrees, ventilated and furniture removed from radiators.
4. The resident reported the damp and mould had returned on 9 March 2023. A wash down and treatment of the mould was carried out on 23 March 2023.
5. The resident’s property has been placed on the planned programme of works to replace the loft insulation.
6. It acknowledged and apologised that it had poorly communicated with the resident and that there had been delays in investigating and completing repair works, and delays in issuing it’s complaint responses.
7. It would raise its findings with senior managers to improve its level of service in the future.
8. It would increase its offer of compensation to £370. This was broken down as:
  1. £200 for time, trouble, and inconvenience.
  2. £150 for complaint handling.
  3. £20 for failed appointments.

Events after the landlord’s internal complaints procedure

On 9 November 2023 the landlord repaired the lead flashing on the roof.
The resident contacted this Service in January 2024 and said his daughter had been diagnosed with asthma due to the conditions in the property. The resident said he had told the landlord.
In January and February 2024, the landlord’s contractor attended the property to clean and treat the mould on all upstairs ceilings, walls, and window frames.
In April 2024 the resident told this Service that the damp and mould had returned. He said although the landlord had carried out repairs to the roof and replaced the wet loft insulation, he was concerned the property was still damp from the leaks which was causing the mould to regrow.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles are:
1. be fair
2. put things right
3. learn from outcomes.
This Service will apply these principles when considering whether any redress is appropriate and proportionate for any maladministration or service failure identified.

The landlord’s obligations

The landlord is responsible for the repair and maintenance of the property and for ensuring a property is fit for human habitation, in accordance with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the Decent Homes Standard, the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, and the tenancy conditions.
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) is a risk-based evaluation tool to identify potential risks and hazards to health and safety in dwellings. The Decent Homes Standard is a standard for social housing introduced by the UK government, which advises that properties should be free from category one hazards under the HHSRS. Properties must be in reasonable state of repair, have reasonably modern facilities, and provide reasonable thermal comfort. Damp and mould growth is a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying. The HHSRS specifically recognises that damp and mould growth can pose a threat to physical and mental health.
The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure states it will respond to emergency repairs within 24 hours, and non-emergency repairs within 28 days.
The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. It states it will acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days, and it aims to respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
The landlord’s compensation policy states for time, trouble, and inconvenience of a service failure it will pay up to £400 compensation. For poor complaint handling it will pay up to £150 compensation. The policy states it will pay 20% of the rent for the loss of the use of a bedroom. If more than one room is affected, it will increase the offer of compensation to a maximum of 50% of the rent.

The landlord’s handing of the resident’s reports of damp and mould

The resident reported there was damp and mould in his property on 18 March 2022. No evidence was provided to this Service that the landlord arranged an inspection of the property. Although this Service has not considered events that occurred prior to March 2022, the landlord was aware the damp and mould was an on-going issue. It was reasonable to expect the landlord to draw from its previous records to ensure it had a holistic view of previous investigations and works. Instead, it opted to default to works that it had carried out before. This is not resolution focused and the landlord failed to ensure it understood the root cause of the damp and mould.
There was a pattern of poor communication from the landlord about the steps it was taking to resolve the damp and mould. The landlord failed to keep the resident updated when it’s contractor rearranged appointments which led to the resident chasing updates. In July 2022 the resident told the landlord that the other joint tenant had left the property, however, the landlord continued to contact the other joint tenant about the repairs and appointments. This resulted in missed appointments, delays in repairs being carried out and caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
The landlord washed and treated the mould in December 2022, this was 9 months after the resident reported the damp and mould to the landlord. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance procedure states it will carry out non-emergency repairs within 28 days. This was an unreasonable delay. During this period multiple opportunities were missed to reduce the continued impact on the resident and his household by resolving the repair issues as quickly as possible.
The resident told the landlord the damp and mould was causing him and his children health issues. There was no evidence the landlord communicated with the resident about any risks or carried out a risk assessment. In December 2022 the resident told the landlord his family were getting infections. In January 2023 he told the landlord his daughter had been diagnosed with asthma and was worried this was due to the conditions of the property. No evidence was provided to this Service that showed the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns, showing a lack of empathy towards the resident. This Service would have expected to see the landlord assess the level of risk at these clear escalations and evidence it had considered all options available to it to support the resident and his children. The landlord did not record this vulnerability in the household, it was not proactive in its response, and did not make any attempt to mitigate the worry the resident had in this regard. The landlord failed to meet its agreed service level agreement and communicate effectively with the resident. This left the resident feeing unsupported by the landlord.
If a landlord knows there is going to be a delay with a repair it must make an assessment of risk, looking at what impact the delay will have on the household, and consider loss of amenity and what interim measures could be considered and put in place. This could include dehumidifiers, support from local services, or a decant. Interim measures may not always be possible, but a landlord must show they have explored all options and explain to the resident why such measures are not being put in place. There is no evidence the landlord investigated or communicated with the resident about whether interim measures could have prevented the damp and mould from getting worse. It was unreasonable the landlord left the resident and his household living with the damp and mould for a significant period with no consideration of any interim measures or support.
The landlord’s contractors carried out a damp inspection in January 2023. The landlord did not request this until the resident raised a formal complaint. The report said the condensation was being caused by a lack of consistent heating and the lack of ventilation. Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 the landlord has a legal obligation to repair the structure or exterior of the property. It was reasonable to expect the landlord to go back to the contractor and ask them to assess whether there was adequate ventilation in the property and whether it had a repair obligation. The landlord acted unreasonably by stating it would not raise any further works as the ‘issue was not due to property failure’ when it had not effectively investigated the cause of the damp and mould.
The landlord repeatedly put the onus on the resident being responsible for the damp and mould due to his lifestyle choices. Even if a landlord believes occupancy factors are contributing to damp and mould, this does not mean the landlord has no responsibility. Landlords should recognise some homes were not designed with modern living in mind. Landlords must take reasonable steps in partnership with residents in these circumstances, including considering improving ventilation or other appropriate measures. The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould states it is important for landlords to communicate in a manner that reflects a shared responsibility to tackle issues around condensation, which avoids residents feeling they have been unfairly blamed.
In February 2023 the resident reported that the damp and mould had returned, and in March 2023 he raised concerns about the roof insulation being wet which he felt could be causing the damp and mould. The damp inspection report dated 31 January 2023 said, ‘any wet insulation in the loft must be replaced’. However, the landlord stated that the insulation was sufficient and did not need replacing. The landlord disregarded the contractor’s report which was unreasonable and inappropriate as it needed to be fully satisfied that all water ingress had been resolved to meet its repair obligations and resolve the complaint. Ultimately the landlord proceeded with internal works without first identifying the cause of the damp and mould which was inappropriate.
In April 2023 the resident reported water was coming into his bedroom and the loft space from the roof. No evidence was provided to this Service that the landlord inspected the property within its repair target timescales, that it considered whether the leak could be related to the on-going damp and mould, that it communicated timescales for the repairs with the resident or that it considered any interim measures or support. The landlord repaired the lead flashing on the roof which was causing the leak in November 2023. This was 7 months later. The landlord acted unreasonably by failing to consider and investigate the impact this leak could have had with the on-going damp and mould issues in the property.
Once a landlord has completed repairs it must take action to monitor the effectiveness of those repairs. It was unreasonable for the landlord to assume the damp and mould issues had been resolved and put the onus on the resident to report further issues. A landlord must take a proactive approach to repairs. Having an aftercare programme in place can help landlords to quickly identify when matters have not been resolved without residents having to report the problem again.
The Ombudsman expects landlords to maintain a robust record of contacts and repairs. This is because clear, accurate, and easily accessible records provide an audit trail and enhance landlords’ ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise. The landlord failed to maintain adequate records. The evidence provided to this Service highlighted it did not accurately record it’s communication with the resident or it’s contractors, visits to the property, or what action it had taken. The landlord’s record keeping impacted on its ability to effectively review the case when responding to the resident’s reports of damp and mould and repairs. This restricted the landlord’s ability to put things right and to learn from points in this case.
In summary, there were delays in investigating and carrying out repairs to resolve the damp and mould. The landlord did not complete sufficient investigations to establish the cause of the damp and mould and failed to act on the advice of its own contractors. It failed to consider if any interim measures were required to manage any risks to the resident and his household. It showed no empathy towards the resident’s situation and offered no support. There was evidence of poor communication and record handling. The landlord acknowledged some of these failings in it’s complaint responses. However, it failed to put things right as the damp and mould issues are still on-going and it has not shown any learning from this case. The landlord offered the resident £220 compensation for it’s handling of the reports of damp and mould, however, this does not reflect the time and trouble, and distress and inconvenience caused.
The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident compensation due to the loss of enjoyment of the home. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it may offer compensation equal to 50% of the rent if more than one room is affected. As all the upstairs rooms were impacted by the damp and mould, and the resident experienced a great deal of distress as a result, the landlord is ordered to pay:
1. 50% of the current weekly rental amount of £136.94.
2. For a 58-week period from 18 March 2022 to 1 May 2023.
3. This totals £3971.
The landlord completed a self-assessment against the Ombudsman’s damp and mould spotlight report published in October 2021. It stated it would look to implement a damp and mould policy in the summer of 2023. This has not yet been implemented. A policy taking into consideration the Ombudsman’s recommendations would be a positive step to the landlord improving its response to damp and mould.
The Ombudsman finds maladministration for the failures identified in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint

The resident submitted a complaint on 15 December 2022, the landlord acknowledged the complaint within its 5 working day timescale and told the resident it would respond by 5 January 2023. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 13 March 2023, this was 58 working days later which was outside its 10-working day response time. This was an unreasonable delay. The landlord failed to contact the resident to extend its response timescale or explain the reason for the delay. This led the resident to chase an update on his complaint. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to effectively communicate with the resident and keep him updated.
The landlord failed to show it fully investigated the resident’s complaint. It’s stage 1 complaint response did not address the fact that the damp and mould had been on-going issue since 2019, what action it had taken previously, and what action it was going to take to resolve the complaint. As highlighted previously the landlord’s poor record keeping had an impact on its ability to effectively review the case and restricted it’s ability to put things right and to learn from its mistakes. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to effectively investigate the complaint issues and resolve the complaint at the earliest opportunity.
When the resident made his complaint, he told the landlord the damp and mould was affecting his and his children’s health. The landlord failed to acknowledge or consider the resident’s concerns about the household’s health in it’s complaint responses. The landlord showed a lack of empathy in the language used, and failed to consider the impact the damp and mould was having on the resident and his household. This was a significant failing.
The resident escalated his complaint on the 15 and 17 March 2023. The landlord acknowledged this within its 5 working day timescale. The landlord acted appropriately by contacting the resident to extend the timescale for it’s stage 2 response. In line with the Complaint Handling Code (the Code) it explained why it needed the extension and the new timescale given was within 20 working days.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 1 May 2023, which was within the extended target response time given to the resident. The landlord acknowledged and apologised for its complaint handling failures. It acknowledged and apologised for its lack of communication, and the delays in investigating the damp and mould and carrying out repairs. However, it failed to acknowledge that the resident had raised the issues with the windows in his escalation request and that the damp and mould was still an on-going issue. The landlord acted inappropriately by failing to investigate all the complaint issues raised, and for leaving the resident with no resolution to his complaint.
In summary, 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. In this case the landlord failed to fully investigate the complaint, there were delays in its stage 1 complaint response, and evidence of poor record keeping and poor communication. It did not acknowledge its failings in how it handled the resident’s reports of damp and mould and its complaint responses lacked empathy and did not consider the household’s health. Although the landlord offered the resident £150 compensation, this was not suitable redress for the time, trouble, distress, and inconvenience caused. The landlord also failed to show that it had learnt from this complaint and did not say what steps it was taking to ensure it did not make the same mistakes again.
Based on the above the Ombudsman finds maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Reasons

The landlord failed to complete sufficient investigations into the cause of the damp and mould, failed to act on the advice of its own contractors, and there were significant delays in repairs being completed. It put the onus on the resident being responsible for the damp and mould and failed to consider if any interim measures were required to manage any risks to the resident and his household. There was a lack of empathy towards the resident’s situation, it failed to consider the impact the damp and mould was having on the resident and his household’s health and it did not offer appropriate support. There was evidence of poor communication and record handling. The landlord failed to put things right, did not show any learning from this case and it did not offer suitable redress.
The landlord failed to fully investigate all the complaint issues, there was a significant delay in the stage 1 complaint response, and there was evidence of poor record keeping and poor communication. It failed to acknowledge its failings in how it handled the resident’s reports of damp and mould and its complaint responses lacked empathy and did not consider the household’s health. The landlord did acknowledge its failings and attempted to put things right by offering redress, however, this Service feels the redress offered did not reflect the time, trouble, distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
1. A senior member of the landlord’s staff should apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
2. If the landlord has not already done so it should pay the resident the £370 compensation it offered in its stage 2 complaint response.
3. In addition to this the landlord must pay the resident a total of £4121 compensation, which is made up of:
  1. £3971 for the loss of enjoyment of the home due to the damp and mould, as discussed in paragraph 51.
  2. £150 for the distress and inconvenience, and time and trouble caused to the resident by the failures found in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  3. Compensation should be paid directly to the resident, and not offset against any arrears.
Within 8 weeks of the date of this report the Ombudsman orders the landlord to:
1. Inspect and obtain a survey on whether there is adequate ventilation in the property. The landlord must also investigate the resident’s concerns that the attic remains damp and is causing mould to regrow on the ceilings. If further repairs are identified the landlord must agree the works with the resident and agree dates for the completion of the works.
2. Inspect all the windows in the property. If further repairs are identified the landlord must agree the works with the resident and agree dates for the completion of the works.
3. To consider any interim measures such as dehumidifiers, support, sign posting, or referrals it can make to support the resident and his family whilst they await a resolution to the damp and mould issues.
4. To inspect any damage to the decoration of the property caused by the roof leaks. If works are required to put the decoration back to what it was before the leaks, the landlord must agree the works with the resident and agree dates for the completion of the works.
5. Complete a case review on the issues identified in this report and its overall failures and provide a copy of the case review to this Service.

Recommendations

If it has not already done so the landlord should complete a self-assessment against the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management.
To review it’s self assessment against the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould and consider implementing a damp and mould policy.
It is recommended the landlord considers reviewing its staff’s training needs to ensure all relevant officers:
1. Respond to requests for repairs appropriately and progresses works orders in accordance with its relevant policies and procedures.
2. Are keeping relevant records up to date and making sure information is accessible to all relevant departments.
3. Respond to formal complaints appropriately. Responses must address all issues raised by the resident. It should ensure all relevant officers do so in an efficient and timely manner, and in accordance with its relevant policies and procedures and the Code.