Sanctuary Housing Association (202432009)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202432009 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
Sanctuary Housing Association |
|
Landlord type |
Housing Association |
|
Occupancy |
Assured Tenancy |
|
Date |
30 January 2026 |
Background
- The resident lives in a basement flat of a converted terraced building. She has PTSD and anxiety that requires the landlord to make appointments before any in-person visits. The resident experienced a recurring leak through her bedroom ceiling from late-December 2023. The landlord advised this was caused by several repair issues which it had resolved and the water damage inside the resident’s flat.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the:
- Damp repairs.
- Associated complaint.
Our decision (determination)
- We found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the damp repairs.
- We found it has redressed its complaint handling failures.
In view of the above, we have made orders for the landlord to put things right for the damp issue.
Summary of reasons
Damp repairs
- The landlord did not remedy the repairs that were causing damp within its policy timeframes or keep the resident updated. Although it acknowledged its failings and took some appropriate action to put right the impact on the resident, it did not show it had learned from its repeated mistakes.
Complaint
- The landlord recognised and paid appropriate compensation for the impact of its failure to follow its policy and procedures.
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 |
Case/learning review The landlord must review its handling of this case so we can be assured it has understood what went wrong and why. This should include its management of the leak repairs, its record keeping, and the communication both with the resident and internally (including its contractor). It must complete a lessons learnt review report and share this with its senior leadership team. It must also provide us with a copy by the due date. The landlord must share a summary of its learning with the resident. |
No later than 27 February 2026 |
|
|
Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident the compensation it awarded of £4737 for the impact of its damp repair failures, if it has not already. It must provide evidence that this has been paid by the due date. |
No later than 27 February 2026 |
Recommendations
Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.
|
Our recommendations |
|
The landlord should pay the £225 compensation it awarded for the impact of its complaint handling failures, as this is the reason we made a finding of reasonable redress. |
|
The landlord should contact the resident and/or her solicitors about the repairs because it has an obligation to complete these. The resident also must allow repairs to be completed as a condition of her tenancy agreement. |
|
We ask the landlord to consider adjusting its wording around awards for compensation to better reflect why it has been offered in its complaint responses. |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
Late 2023 |
The leak through the resident’s bedroom first occurred. She complained and received compensation for the impact on her use of her bedroom (up to March 2024) and to cover damaged items. |
|
14 March 2024 |
The resident complained about the landlord’s handling of a leak again affecting her bedroom, reported the week before. She asked it to reimburse costs of damaged belongings and arrange tenancy support for her mental health. |
|
17 April 2024 |
In the landlord’s stage 1 response, it apologised for delays in internal repairs (caused by the leak from a boiler in the flat above) and with the complaint. It confirmed it would complete them (including a mould wash) and awarded compensation of £1553, made up of:
|
|
7 June 2024 |
The resident escalated her complaint because she was unhappy with the time it was taking to complete repairs after a surveyor inspected her home in mid-March 2024. She later added that she had paid for mould treatments, there was still a leak, and more of her belongings had been damaged. |
|
6 July 2024 |
In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged a delay in completing repairs and in resolving the leak (from external pipework). It apologised for communication failings, assured that it would monitor repairs until completion, and awarded more compensation of £2502 (£4055 in total), made up of:
|
|
9 September 2024 |
The resident complained again that the internal repairs were outstanding and there was another leak, which was also affecting the flat above. |
|
25 September 2024 |
In the stage 1 response to the second complaint, the landlord confirmed that a leak from a neighbour had been resolved. However, it had not yet been able to repair another leak from an external soil stack. The landlord advised it had asked for its contractor’s quote for the repair to be approved outside of its usual processes to speed things up and awarded compensation of £75 for the further delay. |
|
1 October 2024 |
The resident escalated her second complaint because she was unhappy with the time it was taking to repair the soil stack and internal damage. |
|
29 November 2024 |
The landlord agreed there had been some further avoidable delays in its second stage 2 response. It confirmed the leak had been resolved and would complete internal repairs to the bedroom and lounge. The landlord awarded compensation of £907 (£4962 in total), comprised of:
|
|
December 2024 |
The contractor and resident confirmed the repairs were completed in mid-December 2024. Around this time, the landlord also contributed £444 towards the resident’s heating costs. |
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident asked us to investigate because she said the landlord mislead her about the repairs it completed. She added that, through a disrepair solicitor instructed in August 2025, other repairs were identified. She is seeking the landlord to complete repairs and to pay more compensation. |
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 repairs |
|
Finding |
Service failure |
- The resident advised us about new repair issues, including rising damp and the condition of external stairs. In the interest of fairness, we have limited our investigation to the issues complained about through the complaint process up to December 2024, when the internal repairs were completed. This is because the landlord needs a fair opportunity to investigate and respond prior to our involvement. The resident may wish to make a new complaint and/or to pursue her disrepair claim about any new issues or events.
- Available records show that the resident experienced water entering her home on at least 4 occasions between late 2023 and November 2024. These were sometimes from different sources including the boiler in the flat directly above, an external soil vent pipe in, and a boiler overflow pipe from a flat a few floors above. The resident’s bedroom was the main room affected, and this was the reason she initially complained. However, evidence such as the surveyor’s reports from March and November 2024 show the living room and a boiler cupboard were also affected, but to a lesser extent.
- We accept that some issues, such as damp, can be more challenging than others to diagnose and resolve, and can take multiple attempts. So, the fact the landlord completed several leak repairs is not itself an indication of a failing. This is particularly true as there was more than one cause identified. This also means the time it took to complete the bedroom repairs (up to 270 days from the surveyor’s inspection on 15 March to completing them on 13 December 2024) was not entirely unreasonable.
- The landlord’s repairs policy allocated 24 hours to repairs where a risk may be posed to the resident or property, such as an uncontainable leak. It therefore responded appropriately on 9 March 2024 by stopping the leak on the same day as the resident reported it. For less urgent repairs, where there is no immediate risk, it allocates a timescale of 28 days. Though the records provided did not always confirm the exact date on which repairs were completed, which we return to later, those available show that the landlord exceeded its routine repair timescales. And with no apparent reason given in the records or complaint responses. It took around:
- 52 days from the resident reporting a dripping leak on 10 May 2024 for the landlord to complete a repair to the soil vent on either 4 or 5 July 2024.
- 65 days from the resident’s report of a further leak on 9 September 2024 to confirm a repair had been completed at its inspection for internal repairs on 14 November 2024.
- Similarly, there were also some unreasonable delays with the internal repairs. Such as after the surveyor’s inspection on 15 March 2024, at which time the resident was not using her bedroom. Records show that the delay was partly due to the landlord and/or its contractor not always being able to contact the resident by telephone to make appointments. However, there is also no evidence of the number of attempts it made or that it considered other ways of contacting her, such as by email, at that time.
- The landlord’s communication with the resident and internally was sometimes poor and contributed to some of the repair delays. This was particularly the case in late March to early April 2024, where we have seen the resident was often chasing the landlord for progress updates without response. This caused her time and trouble, in addition to the distress and inconvenience from the leak. There was also a delay in arranging some support for the resident through her housing officer and its wellbeing team. It did not then initially follow its vulnerable persons policy in tailoring its approach and service to meet the resident’s needs, which was a failing that left her feeling unsupported.
- The landlord, for the most part, acknowledged its delays and communication failings. It also recognised the significant impact these had on her and took some appropriate actions to put things right. This includes:
- Awarding proportionate compensation of £1100 for the cumulative impacts of its failings. This was in line with the amount its compensation policy states it will pay for “high” impacts and our remedies guidance for cases that have had a significant impact.
- Compensating for loss of enjoyment based on 20% of the rent. This was in keeping with its redress guidance for where there has been total or partial loss of a bedroom.
- Reimbursing the costs the resident incurred for her damaged belongings without her needing to make an insurance claim. This was fair in the circumstances and would have helped speed up the process.
- Arranging for her housing officer to provide support (from July) and involving its wellbeing team (in September 2024).
- Monitoring the repairs to completion after the second complaint through regular contact with the contractor and the resident. Both confirmed that the repairs had been completed in mid-December 2024.
- The reason the resident referred her complaint to our service is because she experienced another leak which the landlord confirmed happened in May 2025. She also said the problem remains unresolved and she believes this shows the landlord failed to complete repairs. Though how it responded to this later report is outside the scope of this investigation, we have considered the recurrence in the context of the events she complained about.
- We expect landlords to be able to evidence with their records that they have attempted to complete a lasting and effective repair. This includes details of what work it or its contractors have identified and completed. The records the landlord provided were lacking in this detail, other than for the internal repairs. It is unknown if this was because the landlord failed to send the relevant records or it failed to document the nature of the repairs. Either way, this lack of detail means it was unable to evidence that it fulfilled its obligations to look for a lasting solution which is a failing.
- We would have ordered the landlord to complete an inspection in this case to identify any necessary repair because the resident advised the problem has continued. However, we have not done so in this case because it shared a recent inspection report from November 2024. This shows there was evidence of a historic leak affecting the bedroom ceiling, but that the surveyor identified no evidence of an active leak or damp and mould inside the resident’s property. It did though identify some repairs to the exterior of the building, including renewing a downpipe and rendering. We understand from the resident that she disputes the landlord’s findings and that she is in discussion with her solicitors about the matter.
- Given the above, we have found service failure because it has not been able to show us how it satisfied itself that a lasting and effective repair was completed during the time we investigated. The complaints process was a missed opportunity to consider this. We have ordered it to undertake a case review to look for learning because of its repeated failings. We have also recommended that it contacts the resident or her solicitors for an update and with a view to completing repairs it identified.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
Reasonable redress |
- The landlord’s complaints policy sets out its 2 stage complaints process that aligns with the requirements of our Complaint Handling Code. Its process is to acknowledge complaints and escalations within 5 working days. It must then respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and 20 working days at stage 2. If it needs more time, it will let the resident know and give a revised timescale of no longer than 20 working days. Once it has given a final decision it will ensure it puts right the impact of its failings on the person complaining promptly.
- We find the landlord recognised that it did not adhere to all its policy standards and timescales. It also took appropriate actions to put right the impact on the resident. This included:
- Apologising for taking:
- 22 working days from the resident first complaining on 14 March to issue its stage 1 response on 17 April 2024. It did follow its process and timescale in acknowledging the complaint in 5 working days on 19 March and informing the resident of the need for a 10 working day extension (on 26 March 2024).
- 42 working days after receiving the escalation request on 1 October to issue its stage 2 response on 29 November 2024. It again followed its process in acknowledging the complaint within 3 working days on 7 October and advising of the 20 working day extension (on 1 November 2024).
- Acknowledging its communications were not always clear or timely and that this led to the resident chasing things up and contributed to the repair delays. For example, in its first stage 1 response it agreed to monitor the repairs to completion but nothing in the records shows it was doing this. This was a missed opportunity to progress the works sooner and/or to keep the resident updated.
- Awarding compensation of £225, which was proportionate for the cumulative impacts on the resident. It was in keeping with the amount the landlord’s compensation policy states it may award for serious impacts.
- Adjusting its usual payment process so the resident was able to receive awards quicker. This tailored approach was reasonable and showed regard for the resident’s personal situation.
- Apologising for taking:
- While we are satisfied with the actions the landlord has taken has remedied its failings, we have noted that it repeatedly referred to its compensation awards as a gesture of goodwill. However, this was not always the correct terminology for the awards because its policy states a goodwill gesture is a discretionary payment made when there is no fault identified. We recommend therefore the landlord considers changing its template or wording around compensation to more accurately reflect when it is awarding it for its failure.
Learning
Knowledge information management (record keeping) and communication
- We have ordered the landlord to complete a review of this case and to give regard to its record keeping and communication procedures.