Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

Shropshire Council (202409618)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202409618

Shropshire Council

30 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. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. The resident’s requests for window repairs and replacement.
    2. Damp and mould repairs and associated requests for health considerations.
    3. The resident’s reports of drainage issues.
    4. Associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the property, a 1-bed flat owned by the landlord. She lives with her wife who has formally diagnosed allergies to common ingredients used in repair work.
  2. The resident reported drainage issues in March and April 2023. The landlord raised works to inspect and fix these. It inspected the property in April 2023 and raised works to install a bathroom extractor fan to reduce damp and mould. The resident reported missing window restrictors on 19 September 2023 and gaps in the frames on 25 January 2024. In March 2024, she told the landlord about her wife’s allergies.
  3. On 2 February 2024, the resident complained to the landlord about outstanding repairs to the windows, bathroom floor and shower tray, damp and mould and smells from the wet room toilet. She made another complaint on 28 February 2025 about the same issues.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 1 response to the resident in March 2024. it apologised for not installing a bathroom fan, completing works in the wet room, and not installing all window restrictors. It agreed there was damp in the wet room. It gave dates of 27 and 28 March 2024 for works. It offered £200 compensation for distress and inconvenience for not completing works more quickly.
  5. On 4 March 2025, the landlord shared its original stage 1 response from March 2024 after the resident chased it for a stage 2 response. She said it had not responded to her complaint since its complaint handler left in June 2024.
  6. The resident formally escalated her complaint on 5 March 2025. She said the landlord had not followed its procedures or exercised a duty of care to her wife in relation to her allergies. She said the windows were in poor condition and general repairs had been ongoing for 18 months.
  7. The landlord sent its stage 2 response to the resident on 4 April 2025. It apologised for not escalating her complaint in July 2024. It provided a plan for outstanding works and inspections. It offered £450 compensation for complaint handling., not accounting for her wife’s allergies during works and for raising a possible breach of tenancy for refusing works when she was concerned about her wife’s health.
  8. The resident asked us to investigate as she is awaiting a permanent move to a new property after she could not reach a satisfactory agreement for works with the landlord. She is seeking an increased compensation payment and an action plan for works and the permanent move.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident said this situation had a detrimental impact on her and her wife’s health and wellbeing. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. We cannot decide causation or liability for personal injury like a court can. However, we can consider the overall impact of the situation on the resident. We have considered the landlord’s compensation offers within our general assessment of her complaints. If the resident wants to pursue a personal injury claim, she may wish to seek independent legal advice.

Windows

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy says it will complete routine repairs, those that do not require an emergency or urgent response, within 28 calendar days.
  2. On 26 September 2023, the landlord inspected the resident’s windows for fitting restrictors. It raised works and partially completed the installation on 29 November 2023 due to a parts supply issue. It needed 3 more restrictors to complete the works. However, there is no evidence it acted on this before the resident complained in February 2024. At this time, it had already exceeded its policy timescale for routine repairs. This was not reasonable and led to further delays.
  3. The resident reported gaps around the sides of the windows on 25 January 2024. It overhauled the windows on 2 February 2024, within policy timescales. In her complaint of 6 February 2024, she said the operative chipped chunks out of the window frame to make it fit and left the frame with bits missing.
  4. In its stage 1 complaint response of March 2024, the landlord said it would contact the resident with an appointment for installing a new vent and replacing sealant around the kitchen window by the 28 March 2024. It apologised for not fitting all window restrictors first time and said it would contact her to book an appointment. It offered £200 compensation for overall delays on 4 separate repairs. As such, we attributed £50 of this amount to window repair delays.
  5. This was a fair response from the landlord. It acknowledged its failure to complete repairs and apologised for this. However, its compensation offer was low considering it raised works 5 months earlier and far exceeded policy timescales. In line with our remedies guidance, £100 compensation would have been more proportionate for the delays.
  6. On 4 March 2024, 27 calendar days after the resident complained about the issues, the landlord raised works to reseal the windows and install the 3 remaining restrictors. It did not complete these works until 3 May 2024, a further 2 months later. It again exceeded its repairs policy timescale.
  7. The landlord raised further works to overhaul 2 windows and renew sealants on 3 April 2024 and completed these on 11 April 2024. On this occasion it worked within policy timescales and completed works promptly.
  8. The resident did not report any further issues with the windows until 28 January 2025. The landlord raised works to overhaul the windows and completed these on 5 February 2025, within policy timescales.
  9. In her stage 2 escalation request of 7 March 2025, the resident said her windows had cracked and warping frames, but the landlord would not act. She reported one window not locking and another having a gap in the frame.
  10. In the landlord’s stage 2 response, it said it found no problems with the living room window during its inspection. However, it acknowledged this took place on a warm day. It said the windows were due for renewal in 2033 as it was updating its life cycle to the sector norm of 30 years. It offered to reinspect the windows by October 2025 during colder weather. It said it was reviewing its window and door programme following funding for improvements. It agreed to update the resident about this by 30 June 2025.
  11. In its response, the landlord’s offer to reinspect the windows during colder weather was positive and showed its willingness to reassess the problem. It did not acknowledge the added delays repairing the windows or increase its stage 1 compensation offer for this. This was not reasonable. However, it kept to its agreement and told the resident it was unable to provide a date for her window replacement on 30 June 2025, but it scheduled this for 2043. This was contradictory to its stage 2 response. It said it was hoping to update her during its inspection in October 2025.
  12. Overall, there were avoidable delays in the landlord’s repairs of the resident’s windows. Its compensation offer was disproportionate to the repair delays. We find service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests for window repairs and replacement. We will order an added £50 compensation and ask it to provide a date for the window reinspection in October 2025. We recommend it confirms the window renewal year as soon as it knows this.

Damp and mould repairs and associated requests for health considerations

  1. The resident reported issues with damp and mould in her bathroom flooring and a broken extractor fan. She later reported damp and mould in a storage cupboard. We will assess the landlord’s handling of each element separately below, including her requests for health considerations during repairs. We will summarise its overall response to the repairs at the end of this section.

a. Extractor fan

  1. The landlord completed a damp and mould checklist for the property in November 2022. It found no extractor fans installed. It did not list these as needed and therefore did not raise works. However, it inspected the property on 6 April 2023 and raised works to install a bathroom window extractor fan. It is unclear why it did not find these works were necessary 5 months earlier.
  2. The landlord did not send the works to its contractor until 11 August 2023, 4 months after raising them. The evidence shows it raised or sent the same works to its contractors a further 2 times before the resident’s complaint in early February 2024. In her complaint she said she felt the lack of extractor fan was worsening the damp and mould. This was 10 months after it raised works. Its repairs policy lists other window works under its planned works. These works have a 6-month response time, which it exceeded in this case.
  3. On 13 February 2024, the landlord attended the property for the extractor fan works. It could not access the property. It sent the resident a reminder text for this appointment on 12 February 2024. It raised works again following another inspection on 27 March 2024 and attended on 11 April 2024 to measure the window. However, it did not order the window unit until 3 May 2024, 3 weeks later. It completed works on 23 July 2024.
  4. In the landlord’s original stage 1 response of March 2024, it said it would make an appointment for works by 28 March 2024. It did this as part of the inspection ahead of raising works. We attributed £50 of its £200 compensation offer to the delays installing the bathroom fan.
  5. The resident reported the bathroom fan was not fully working during the landlord’s visit on 28 March 2025. It offered to inspect the fan in the next 28 days as part of its stage 2 complaint response of 4 April 2025. There is no evidence it did this. It did not reassess its earlier compensation offer for the added delays after its stage 1 complaint response.
  6. The landlord’s response was not appropriate. In line with our remedies guidance, it should have considered apologising for the time taken to install the bathroom fan and an appropriately revised compensation offer of £100.

b. Bathroom flooring

  1. On 3 March 2023, the landlord raised works for loose tiles around the bathroom waste drain and the floor not draining. It marked these as abandoned although it is unclear why. It raised the same issue again on 30 March 2023. It attended on 9 May 2023 but could not access the property. However, it had already exceeded its 28-day routine repair policy response time.
  2. The landlord sent the works to its contractor on 24 July 2023 but took no further action until it inspected the floor on 16 October 2023. It ordered a new shower tray on 24 October 2023 but repeated this action on 23 November 2023. In January 2024, the landlord was having internal discussions about the works but had not taken any action. It remained outside of its policy response time to complete these works.
  3. In her complaint of 2 February 2024, the resident said she expected completion of the bathroom floor repairs that day. However, the landlord only measured the floor and reinspected. It raised works again with a target date of 1 March 2024.
  4. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord said the works would take 2 days to complete and gave an appointment date of 27 March 2024. It offered compensation, £50 of which we attributed to floor repair delays. This offer was disproportionate to the delays of over a year since first recognising the repair. It did not explain the reason or apologise for the delays. This was not in line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) which says landlords must acknowledge when something has gone wrong and set out actions it has taken, or intends to take, to put things right.
  5. On 15 March 2024, the resident told the landlord her wife received a diagnosis of allergies to common repair ingredients. She asked it to postpone works on 21 March 2024 while it investigated the planned ingredients. It said it would send the health and safety sheets for the materials to her. It marked the works as complete on 22 May 2024, but it had not completed them. She chased it for an update on outstanding works on 13 June 2024 but there were no further conversations about the flooring repairs.
  6. The resident began proceedings under the Pre-Action Protocol for Housing Conditions Claims in April 2024. As part of this process, there were 2 independent surveys of the property. The survey organised by the landlord suggested it undertake works to the bathroom flooring and shower tray. The process ended without settlement, and the landlord raised the works again on 11 November 2024. It told her she must allow access under her tenancy agreement and booked an appointment for 27 and 28 November 2024.
  7. The landlord completed works on 28 November and 11 December 2024. It confirmed this in a post-works inspection on 30 January 2025. It took over 18 months to complete works which is significantly outside of its policy response times. However, delays between 15 March and 28 November 2024 were outside of the landlord’s control due to the resident’s health concerns and the ongoing Pre-Action Protocol.
  8. In her complaint escalation, the resident said she felt the landlord had not acted sensitively to her wife’s allergies. She felt she had to let repairs go ahead due to its comments about breaching the tenancy agreement.
  9. In the landlord’s stage 2 response, it apologised for not considering the resident was protecting her wife’s best interests when it reminded her of her tenancy obligations. During its inspection on 28 March 2025, it noticed it needed to correct the new flooring. It said it would look at finding products which were suitable for her wife’s allergies. It offered £250 compensation for not accounting for the allergies during works and for raising a possible breach of tenancy with the resident.
  10. The landlord’s response was fair. It acknowledged where it could have been more sensitive to the resident’s concerns and offered appropriate compensation for this. Its compensation offer took its total offer to £300 across both responses which was fair in the circumstances. It explained the further works it needed to do but did not give a timeframe for these due to needing to explore materials. It continued to find alternative materials and shared the details of these with the resident in June 2025.

c. Storage cupboard

  1. The resident reported problems with damp and mould in the understairs cupboard during the landlord’s inspection on 28 February 2025. It raised works on 5 March 2025. However, she refused access for works due to the ongoing concerns about her wife’s allergies.
  2. The resident reported this problem after the landlord’s stage 1 response. However, the landlord included it in its stage 2 response. It explained the cooler walls as the reason for condensation and therefore, damp. It outlined the works it would complete and said it would arrange to schedule an appointment within the next 28 days. It found safe materials for the resident’s wife’s allergies and completed works on 10 July 2025.
  3. The landlord took just over 4 months to complete works to the storage cupboard. This is outside its policy response time. However, the delays were outside its control due to the ongoing health concerns.

Damp and mould summary

  1. There were significant delays in the landlord’s handling of repairs up to its stage 1 response of March 2024. However, some delays after this up to its stage 2 response of April 2025 were outside its control. It did offer compensation during its complaint process, but this was not proportionate to the level of distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused to the resident. Overall, we find service failure in its handling of repairs and will make an order for improved compensation for this.

Drainage issues

  1. The resident reported a blocked external drain to the landlord on 30 March 2023. It completed works on 19 April 2023, within its 28-calendar day policy timescale for routine repairs.
  2. There resident did not report any further drainage issues until 6 February 2025. She said there was a bad smell. The landlord could not attend on 6 February 2025 and raised works to clear the drain channels with a target date of 8 August 2025. It is not clear which policy response time these works would come under. However, this was an excessive target date for works to clear drains and far exceeded its usual 28-calendar day routine response.
  3. It is unclear why the landlord decided to include drainage issues in its stage 2 complaint response. However, it said in its inspection of 28 March 2025, it found an issue with the kitchen sink waste pipe which was likely to cause bad smells. It would contact her in the next 7 days to arrange works to fix this.
  4. The landlord completed works to clear the drain channels on 17 April 2025. This was ahead of its 8 August 2025 target date but outside of its policy timescale. However, evidence shows it still needed to fix the sink waste pipe in a report dated 2 July 2025.
  5. We find service failure in the landlord’s handling of drainage issues based on its delayed work to clear drain channels and its failure to complete the actions outlined in its stage 2 response. We will order the landlord to provide a date for works to the kitchen sink waste pipe if it has not done so already. We will also order £100 compensation.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints policy. It will acknowledge complaints at both stages within 5 working days. From the date of acknowledgement, it will respond to complaints at stage 1 within 10 working days and stage 2 within 20 working days.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord on 2 February 2024. It acknowledged this in a call and email to her on 6 February 2024. This was within policy timescales. From this date its stage 1 response was due on 20 February 2024. The exact date of its response is unclear. However, it later said it sent it in March 2024. As such, it exceeded its complaints policy timescales at stage 1. It did not apologise or offer any remedy for this.
  3. We have not seen evidence of an escalation request by the resident prior her chasing a stage 2 response in February 2025. In this request, she said she had been waiting for the landlord to respond since June 2024. It shared its original stage 1 response again on 4 March 2025 and she formally requested it escalate her complaint on the same day. It acknowledged this within policy timescales.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 2 response to the resident on 4 April 2025. This was 23 working days after receiving her escalation request and a small delay outside policy timescales. In its response, it apologised for not actioning her escalation request in July 2024. It said the complaint handler at the time left the company and it missed the request. It explained it implemented changes since this, including hiring a dedicated complaints manager and a group email inbox to ensure oversight of complaints by several team members. It offered £200 compensation for not escalating her complaint.
  5. Overall, the landlord’s explanation and remedies at stage 2 were fair and appropriate. However, it did not acknowledge stage 1 delays at either stage and it did not offer any redress for this. As such, we find service failure and will order £50 compensation for the delays at stage 1.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we find service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of:
    1. The resident’s requests for window repairs and replacement.
    2. Damp and mould repairs and associated requests for health considerations.
    3. Reports of drainage issues.
    4. Associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 28 days of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Pay the resident compensation totalling £900, comprising:
      1. £200 offered for the distress and inconvenience of repair delays at stage 1 if it has not already paid this.
      2. £50 additional compensation for the delay repairing the windows.
      3. £50 additional compensation for the delay installing the bathroom fan.
      4. £50 additional compensation for the delay providing its stage 1 complaint response.
      5. £200 offered at stage 2 for delay escalating her complaint.
      6. £250 offered at stage 2 for failures in handling health concerns.
      7. £100 additional compensation for delay fixing the sink waste pipe.
    2. Write an apology from senior management to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
    3. Provide the resident with a date for reinspection of the windows if it has not already done this.
    4. Provide the resident with a date for fixing the sink waste pipe if it has not already done this.
    5. Provide us with proof of compliance with these orders.

Recommendations

  1. We recommend the landlord continue to advise and support the resident in relation to her request for rehousing.