Read our damp and mould report focusing on Awaab's Law

Sanctuary Housing Association (202325357)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325357

Sanctuary Housing Association

9 September 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

  1. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Damp and mould repairs in the bathroom.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The tenancy started on 3 May 2019. The property is a three-bedroom house.
  2. The resident first reported damp and mould in the bathroom to the landlord on 16 November 2022. A treatment appointment was booked for 28 November 2022, but this was then rearranged for 6 January 2023 and then 2 February 2023. A surveyor inspected the property on 7 February 2023 and found a series of repairs.
  3. The landlord treated the mould and replaced the extractor fan on 10 March 2023. The resident then complained to the landlord that the extractor fan had not been installed correctly. On 20 April 2023 the resident told the landlord they were unhappy with the delays to the bathroom repairs for damp and mould. This included that the extractor fan had not been fixed yet.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 5 June 2023. It confirmed the extractor fan had been fixed. It went on to say there was a delay from when the works were raised as to when they would be completed by. It apologised for this and offered a total of £100 compensation.
  5. Further works were carried out in the middle of August. However, on 15 August 2023 the resident told the landlord that there was still damp and mould in the bathroom around the window. The resident added that the situation was causing them stress and anxiety.
  6. The landlord issued a further stage 1 response on 30 August 2023. It said a further inspection had been set for 6 September 2023 to look at the damp and mould by the window. It offered a total of £75 for the length of time it had taken to complete the repairs and poor communication.
  7. The resident asked for their complaint to be escalated to stage 2 on 30 August 2023. They were unhappy with the time it was taking to resolve the repair, and the amount of compensation offered.
  8. The landlord sent the resident its stage 2 response on 27 September 2023. It said that following the further inspection by the surveyor on 6 September 2023 further works would be carried out on 20 October 2023 to treat the damp and mould. It also offered the resident a total of £400 made up of £100 for poor stage 1 complaint handling and £300 for the further delay to the repairs.
  9. The resident was still unhappy as either, the damp and mould was not treated or the quality of work was not good enough in their opinion. This resulted in the landlord offering the resident a further £150 compensation on 27 October 2023, £300 on 14 November 2023 and £130 on 19 December 2023.

Assessment and findings

Damp and mould repairs in the bathroom

  1. The landlord’s repair policy says it will carry out responsive repairs within 28 calendar days. Following self-assessment against our spotlight report on damp and mould, the landlord confirmed that it has a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould. It continues to devote more resources and improve systems to respond to damp and mould cases.
  2. Following the resident’s report of damp and mould in their bathroom, the landlord appropriately arranged to attend the property so the affected area could be treated. Although this was then rescheduled between the resident and landlord it was completed. From the evidence we have seen the rescheduling appears to have been at the resident’s request.
  3. However, it is unclear why the landlord only booked a surveyor to inspect the property after its attendance on 2 February 2023 to treat the mould. This was unreasonable as the resident had first reported the issue in November 2022. We would expect the landlord to have been more proactive in arranging for a surveyor to carry out an inspection when the damp and mould was first reported to it.
  4. Following the inspection, the surveyor recommended the following repairs:
    1. Treat the mould and paint the bathroom.
    2. Replace the extractor fan with a variable speed condensation extractor fan.
    3. Replace and plaster bathroom ceiling.
    4. Apply two coats of bio check paint to bathroom ceiling.
    5. Reinstate electrics when works are complete.
  5. The treatment of the mould and replacement of the extractor fan were booked for 10 March 2023. The painting of the bathroom ceiling was booked for 3 May 2023. The replacement of the ceiling, plastering and electrics were booked for 14 and 15 August 2023. Whilst the treatment of the mould and extractor fan replacement are within the timeframe of the landlord’s repair policy, the remaining repairs are outside of this. We have not seen any evidence to explain why the further repairs were scheduled outside of the landlord’s policy. This is therefore unreasonable.
  6. Following the repairs of 10 March 2023 the resident raised an issue with the extractor fan. This was dealt with and fixed on 28 April 2023, and the landlord offered the resident £125 compensation for this issue. This was reasonable as the landlord did put the matter right and compensated the resident for the inconvenience of an extra repair appointment. There was also a delay of about 3 weeks in the landlord fixing the fan. It took the landlord 7 weeks to complete the repair as opposed to the 28 days as set out in its policy. However, the sum of £125 was proportionate to the distress and inconvenience that was caused by this delay.
  7. While the resident was waiting for the fan to be fixed, they complained further to the landlord on 20 April 2023 about the delays to the treatment of the damp and mould in the bathroom. In its stage 1 response the landlord apologised for the delay and offered the resident £75 compensation for it. We think this was reasonable. The landlord apologised for the delay and offered a suitable amount of compensation for the delay in the repair works found in February 2023.
  8. After the bathroom ceiling was replaced on 15 August 2023, the resident escalated their complaint as they said the job had not been completed as there was still damp and mould around the bathroom window. The landlord sent a further stage 1 response on 30 August 2023. This was unreasonable as the complaint should have been escalated to stage 2. We will discuss this in further detail later in this report. This response said a further inspection had been arranged for 6 September 2023 and offered £75 compensation. Whilst the arrangement of a further inspection was reasonable, we would not view the compensation offer as reasonable due to the length of time it had taken for the repairs to be completed. The resident was also unhappy with the response and escalated their complaint to stage 2.
  9. The surveyor’s inspection of 6 September 2023 made further recommendations. These were to treat and paint the areas affected by mould around the bathroom window and walls/ceiling, replace the sealant on the window and bath, and replace the extractor fan with a condensation fan. The landlord booked these repairs for 20 October 2023. We have not seen any reason as to why these repairs were booked outside of the 28 calendar days that the landlord says it will complete repairs in. This was unreasonable. If the landlord was unable to meet its policy repair timescales it would have been reasonable for it to communicate this to the resident and to note the reason within its records accordingly
  10. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 27 September 2023. It apologised for the length of time the repairs were taking, confirmed the repairs were to be completed by 20 October 2023 and offered £300 for the further delay to the repairs. This was reasonable.
  11. Following the stage 2 response the resident remained unhappy. They reported their concerns on 20 October, 2 November and 13 December 2023. These included concerns that some repairs remained incomplete, and with the quality of the work. The landlord responded to the resident each time and offered further compensation. This further compensation totalled £580. Whilst the landlord responded appropriately to each further report from the resident, its handling of matters was the cause of further inconvenience to the resident. It is also noted that the landlord had provided an assurance in its stage 2 response that the repairs would be completed on 20 October 2023. It has not provided either the resident or this Service with a reasonable explanation as to why they were not.
  12. As such we have found service failure. The landlord did not resolve the repair issues within its complaints procedure and did not follow through on the actions it said it would in its stage 2 response. Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) says, “Outstanding actions must still be tracked and actioned promptly with appropriate updates provided to the resident”. The landlord did not do this and the resident had to raise reports concerns on 3 further occasions following the stage 2 response, to ensure that the repairs were completed satisfactorily. This could reasonably have been avoided.
  13. However, we are satisfied the landlord has reasonably compensated the resident in its stage 2 response and further offers following this for the delays they experienced. In total the landlord offered £1005 compensation for the issues and delays with the repairs. We consider that the landlord’s offers were proportionate in the circumstances and is in keeping with what we would award. We are also satisfied the repair works have now been completed. We therefore order the landlord to write to the resident to formally apologise for the further delays they experienced following the stage 2 response.
  14. The landlord also recognised in its stage 2 complaint response the lessons that could be learnt from the issues in this case. It said it would provide feedback to its maintenance teams to ensure staff undertaking works or specialist treatments did so in the correct manner. It also said it would remind operatives to report any issues they see which may require further works to be raised. Whilst this was appropriate, we recommend the landlord review the period after its stage 2 response and the repairs being completed to see if there is any further learning that can be taken from this case to show why further delays occurred.

The associated complaint

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy says it will give its stage 1 response within 10 working days and its stage 2 response within 20 working days. This is in line with our Complaint Handling Code.
  2. The resident raised their complaint on 20 April 2023. This was opened as a new complaint to deal with all the resident’s concerns about repairs and damp and mould in the bathroom together. It was reasonable for the landlord to streamline the resident’s concerns in such a manner. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 5 June 2023. This was 29 workings days after the complaint was raised. We have not seen any explanation for this delay.
  3. The landlord appropriately apologised for the delay when it issued its stage 1 response. It also offered £25 for the inconvenience that had been caused.  However, the landlord did not explain why its response was delayed. We are also not satisfied that the offer of compensation was proportionate in the circumstances.
  4. From the evidence we have seen, during this time period the resident contacted the landlord several times about the repair issues. It is clear they were unhappy with the service the landlord was providing. Due to the delay in the stage 1 response the resident was unclear when the repairs were going to be completed or if their complaint had been listened to. This, combined with the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay itself would justify an award for further compensation at this stage.
  5. The resident raised a further complaint on 15 August 2023, in response to which the landlord issued a further stage 1 letter. It is noted that on the web form the resident said that they had not reported the matter before. However, it is unclear why the landlord was unable to establish that the issues were linked to the stage 1 response that had been issued in June 2023. We would expect the landlord to have appropriate systems and processes in place to track its complaints and have an overview of the issues a resident was reporting. That the landlord did not escalate the complaint at this time was a failing.
  6. However, it is noted that the landlord did send the further stage 1 response within the correct timeframes. It also offered £25 for its complaint handling. The basis for this offer is unclear from the evidence. The landlord should reasonably have explained the rationale for its offer – and what it related to – within the response.
  7. The resident escalated their complaint to stage 2 on 30 August 2023. This was acknowledged on 31 August and 4 September 2023. The stage 2 response was sent on 27 September 2023. This was within the timeframe of the landlord’s policy. The landlord’s recognised in its stage 2 response that there had been a failing in its stage 1 response. It apologised for this and offered the resident £100. This was appropriate.
  8. The landlord then dealt with further complaints raised by the resident informally as they were made. This consisted of setting new appointment dates for the repair work and offering further compensation. This is not reasonable as no formal complaint process was being followed.
  9. Overall, we have found reasonable redress for the landlord’s handling of the complaint. The total compensation offered to the resident of £150 was appropriate. However, due to the landlord’s stage 1 handling and ad hoc approach after it had issued its stage 2 response, we recommend the landlord to review its complaints handling in this case to identify how it can link and deal with complaints about the same core issue together.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould repairs in the bathroom.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered reasonable redress in relation to its handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should write to the resident. The letter should contain an apology for the further delays the resident experienced following the stage 2 response. The apology should follow the best practice set out in the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance.

Recommendations

  1. We recommend the landlord review the period after its stage 2 response and the repairs being completed to establish if there is any further learning that can be taken from this case to show why further delays occurred.
  2. We recommend the landlord to review its complaints handling in this case to identify how it can link similar complaints about one core issue to deal with them together better.