Southern Housing (202232562)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202232562

Southern Housing

27 June 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 complaint is about the landlords handling of:
1. Works agreed in September 2021.
2. The resident’s report of a leak.
3. The associated complaint.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a housing association. She lives with her children in a 3-bedroom house. She has health issues, which she has made her landlord aware of.
The resident previously made a damp and mould disrepair claim to her landlord and in September 2021a settlement was agreed. Her landlord awarded her £1375compensationfor damage and inconvenience related to mould and it agreed to complete necessary repairs within 60 days. It did not complete these works until June 2023.
The resident said to the landlord in August and September 2023 that during these works she experienced “stress” and damage to belongings, and she asked the landlord for compensation. She said during the works some personal belongings had been damaged by mould, flooring had had paint damage and artificial grass in her back garden had also been damaged. She also said the prolonged duration of the works had caused her stress living in damp and mould conditions.
In a letter on 20 September 2023, the landlord responded to her compensation request and asked the resident whether she wanted this considered as part of its complaints process or as part of the legal process. It said the contractor did not recall any damage to the garden. It said if the mould damage occurred before the recent works, it was already covered in the September 2021 settlement and could not be considered again.
It offered to investigate the paint damage to the flooring. It said it could not offer compensation for stress as it had either already compensated her for stress in the September 2021 settlement or if her request related to the recent works it would not offer compensation for stress as the works were necessary. It offered the resident £500 compensation for the delay in completing the works. The resident did not accept the compensation and contacted us for assistance.
On 31 October 2023, the resident reported to the landlord a leak into her daughter’s bedroom. We contacted the landlord on 13 November 2025 to ask it to provide a complaint response by 20 November. We told the landlord that the residents complaint related to damp and mould, and she was seeking:
1. Damp and mould to be addressed and copies of any damp and mould reports provided to her.
2. Internal redecoration, flooring replacement and wardrobe repair due to damages from contractors during works.
3. Reimbursement for costs of additional electricity used to dry plaster and damage to artificial grass.
4. A response to her compensation claims for damages during the works agreed in September 2021.
On 11 December 2023, the landlord acknowledged the complaint. In addition, the resident asked for the roof leak reported in October to be addressed as part of the complaint. On 12 December 2023 the resident further explained her dissatisfaction with the landlord’s works agreed in September 2021. She said her personal items and her garden were damaged and her family had suffered “stress”. She told the landlord she had cancer and had felt ignored. The landlord replied it would provide a complaint response by 26 December 2023.
In December 2023 and January 2024, the landlord requested from the resident an extension on 2 occasions. It issued its stage 1 complaint response on 26 January 2024. It apologised that the works linked to the resident’s settlement agreement had been delayed. It said it was unable to award compensation for mould damage to furniture, furnishings, and clothing as this had been already covered in the September 2021 settlement agreement.
The landlord said in its response that it had appointed a surveyor to investigate the new damp and mould concerns, leak, extractor fans, internal decoration, repairs to built-in wardrobes, replacement of floor coverings and repairs to the garden area. It provided a timeline for inspection and said the works will be completed by 27 February 2024. It offered the resident £400.00 compensation made up of £50 for complaint delay and£350.00 for inconvenience, time and trouble.
In response on that same date (26 January 2024) the resident explained she was unhappy with the landlord’s stage 1 investigation. She said she found the compensation offer insulting and that the artificial grass in her garden had cost £1400. She asked that her complaint be escalated. The landlord acknowledged her request on 30 January 2024 and said a panel would review her complaint on 16 February 2024 and a stage 2 complaint response would be issued by 1 March 2024.
The landlord issued the stage 2 complaint response on 1 March 2024. It said that the roof works would start on 26 February 2024 and would be completed by 11 March 2024, it apologised for the delay. It said all the works would be completed by 02 April 2024. The landlord apologised for inconvenience and delay and increased the stage 1 compensation offer by £50 to a total of £450.
During April 2024, the landlord completed the roof repair, a mould wash, internal decoration and replaced the flooring. The resident asked us to investigate her complaint as she said the landlord had not considered her compensation request. We accepted her case for investigation on 1 August 2024. In June 2025, the resident told us about new repair issues related to a leak and concerns with electrics.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident reported to us in June 2025 a new recent leak that was affecting electrics within the property. Under paragraph 42.a. of the Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which are made prior to having exhausted the landlord’s complaints procedure. Therefore, to provide the landlord a fair opportunity to try and resolve these repair reports under its complaint’s procedure, this investigation will not look at those concerns. The focus of the investigation will be on the landlord’s handling of the roof repair, mould and compensation request that have been raised through and exhausted its complaints process on 1 March 2024.
In this case the Ombudsman recognises that a settlement agreement was reached between the resident and the landlord in September 2021. This agreement included financial compensation for the landlord’s failure to adequately address damp and mould, as well as a commitment to complete remedial works within 60 days of its date. The resident informed this Service that the landlord had not completed the works within the agreed timescale and the landlord did not dispute this. While we acknowledge that a breach of this settlement may be also pursued through the courts, we have not seen evidence of any legal proceedings being initiated.
Additionally, we have not seen evidence the resident wished to pursue this through the legal process. In its letter on 20 September 2023, the landlord further provided the resident with the option of the issues to be reviewed under its complaints process, and she raised a formal complaint (with our assistance) in November 2023. As such, it is within our remit to look at the appropriateness of the landlord’s response to the compensation request and the action taken in relation to the agreed programme of works in September 2021 (part of the settlement).
The resident also said that the delayed repairs had affected her health and caused her stress. We recognise the distress the resident experienced, however we are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, effects on health and wellbeing or to award damages for these. This is because we do not have the authority or expertise to do so in the way a court or insurer might. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation, and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed through the courts or a personal injury liability insurance claim. Therefore, these are not assessed in this report.

Legal and Policy Framework

The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) classes damp and mould as a category 1 hazard.
The landlord has a damp and mould policy which states it will contact the resident the day after a mould report and will arrange a visual inspection of the property (or communal areas) within 10 working days of initial report.
The landlord has a legal obligation under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to complete repairs within a ‘reasonable’ timescale. It is acknowledged that various factors can affect what constitutes a reasonable timescale, such as volume and complexity of required work or the need for additional materials to be ordered and delivered. The landlord should however be able to show that any delays were unavoidable, and that it did everything it could to resolve issues appropriately.
The landlord has a repairs policy which states, in line with its compensation policy, residents can request compensation if it accidentally damages their home while conducting a repair. It also states it is responsible for the upkeep of the structure and outside of home including drains, gutters, outside pipes and the roof.
The landlord’s compensation policy provides compensation for a range of circumstances including ‘quantifiable loss’ where the service failure resulted in a measurable loss such as increased electricity costs and discretionary compensation for time and trouble.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s compensation claim and works agreed in September 2021.

For clarity and the purpose of this report we have separately looked at the works and the different aspects of the resident’s compensation claim.

Handling of works related to damp and mould

The landlord agreed to complete works in a settlement agreement on 22 September 2021 and settled the matter on a sum of £1350 in damages. This settlement was on the basis that works related to damp and mould would be completed within 60 days. However, the landlord did not dispute that it had not adhered to those timeframes. In its letter of 20 September 2023, it acknowledged delays in works and offered £500 compensation. It stated the works had been completed on or around 2 June 2023 (which the resident did not dispute). As such, the landlord took 18 months to complete works which were planned and agreed to be completed with 2 months. This was unreasonable.
The resident raised in her complaint the delays related to the works in the settlement and a compensation request related to damage during those works. She also raised concerns about the impact of the work delays on her and her household.
In its stage 1 response, the landlord acknowledged the delays in completing the works but neither confirmed the compensation offered in its letter from September 2023, nor did it provide a review or reasoning for those delays. Under Section 11 of The Landlord and Tenant Act landlords are required to complete repairs within a reasonable time. In this case however there is no evidence that the landlord had a valid reason for the delay and given how long the works took to complete it is understandable that the resident experienced distress which the landlord failed to acknowledge in its response.
Furthermore, the resident told the landlord on November 9 and 30 November 2022 and again on 12 December 2023 that during the works she and her family had been living amongst dust and rubble and unable to use their garden. She had also explained she had cancer, and her daughter had been hospitalised, and the disruption and “stress” had affected her health. The landlord was therefore aware of the resident’s circumstances, yet it did not explain why it did not address this at the time of the reports or in any of its complaint responses.
Furthermore, given the duration of the works despite being aware of the resident’s vulnerability, there is no evidence the landlord offered any support or took any interim measures to mitigate the risk (such as decant or dehumidifiers and heaters). It has not provided evidence for this investigation to explain why temporary alternative accommodation was not considered by the landlord which would have been appropriate. In addition, in its submission to this Service the landlord said the resident did not have any vulnerabilities which also raised concerns about the landlord’s record keeping and appropriateness of the resident’s circumstances’ consideration.

Compensation request

A main aspect of the resident’s concerns in relation to the landlord’s handling of the works agreed in the settlement was her compensation request and the damage she reported during those works. In her complaint she provided details of damage to several personal items, garden’s artificial grass, flooring and decoration.
We have seen an internal email dated 23 December 2023 in which the landlord confirmed that the compensation request for clothing and furnishings damaged by mould, damage to artificial grass, flooring and stress could be considered under the landlord’s complaints procedure as they were not linked to the previous disrepair claim.

The residents report of mould damage to personal items

In its stage 1 response of 26 January 2024, the landlord stated that mould damage to the resident’s personal items was part of the settlement in 2021 and did not consider it any further. The landlord as such did not investigate this further despite being advised in previous internal correspondence from its legal team in December 2023 that it could assess those issues through its complaints process. As such the landlord missed an opportunity to acknowledge that the resident and her household experienced a reoccurrence of mould during the works related to the settlement.
The landlord’s records show that on 29 December 2022 (and while the works agreed in September 2021 were carried out) the resident reported issues with damp and mould in the property. She explained that workers had removed her built in wardrobes leaving her nowhere to store her clothes. This was over a year after the settlement in September 2021, and it was therefore unreasonable of the landlord to say this was part of the previous settlement and to not consider it. The resident had also submitted photographic evidence, yet the stage 1 response failed to reassess the issue.
This raises questions about the robustness and fairness of the landlord’s investigation. It is also concerning that the resident and her family experienced a reoccurrence of mould during these works. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have advised the resident of her options as per its policy to either have approached her content insurance, or to have signposted her to its liability insurers. Additionally, it could have been reasonable to have applied its discretion and considered the compensation request under its complaints process. However, it did not take any of those reasonable steps and as such the landlord missed an opportunity to put things right though its complaints process or provide appropriate advice on her report of damage.

The resident’s report of damage to artificial grass

The resident also requested compensation for damage to artificial grass. She said the grass had been damaged by contractors during the course of the repair works. In the stage 1 complaint response and its letter from September 2023, the landlord stated it would investigate repairs needed to the garden. However, we have not seen evidence that it followed up on this or that it undertook any repairs to the back garden. Additionally, there is no evidence of whether it considered reimbursing the resident for the cost of the artificial grass.
The landlord’s compensation policy states that compensation can be awarded where “a contractor working on our [the landlord’s] behalf, directly caused damage to your [the resident’s] belongings, and it is not reasonable to expect the damage to be covered by your [the resident’s] home contents insurance. We [the landlord] will ensure you [the resident] do not incur further inconvenience and cost making a claim for compensation in these circumstances, particularly where we [the landlord], or our contractor, are clearly at fault.”
In the letter dated 20 September 2023 the landlord stated the contractor said it did not know how the artificial grass was damaged. However, while it was reasonable for the landlord to ask its contractor, the landlord’s file does not evidence a thorough investigation into how and whether the artificial grass had been damaged. This was inappropriate and as such the landlord could not demonstrate that it had ensured a fair investigation and a customer focused approach.

The residents request for compensation for additional electricity costs and damage to flooring

When we referred the resident’s complaint to the landlord in November 2023, we also included as part of the resident’s complaint that she had referred to us her concerns about additional electricity costs related to increased use of heaters to dry out plaster work following repairs. However, the landlord did not consider the resident’s compensation request for increased utility costs despite its compensation policy allowing for ‘quantifiable loss’ that can be evidenced. The landlord did not ask the resident for further information for these costs to ensure fair assessment. This was a further omission by the landlord in its complaint investigation.
In its stage 1 complaint response the landlord did however consider the residents request for compensation for damage to flooring that occurred during the works related to the settlement agreement. The landlords file shows that flooring was replaced throughout the property in April 2024. While this was a reasonable step, the landlord failed to respond to the other reports of damages.
In the resident’s escalation request, the resident further raised concerns of the landlord’s lack of response to her compensation request. However, the landlord did not address any part of the resident’s compensation request in its stage 2 complaint response, nor did it provide any explanation why it decided to do so. A stage 2 complaint investigation requires the landlord to review all relevant complaint documentation and to consider the resident’s complaint afresh. Had it done so all elements of the resident’s complaint would have been reconsidered providing the landlord an opportunity to ‘put things right’ in a timely manner. By failing to do so the resident was denied a thorough and fair investigation. Instead, the resident had to escalate her complaint to this Service which further added to the resident’s frustration.

Summary

The resident had provided photographic evidence, and she said she provided a breakdown of her losses. Despite this several elements of her compensation request were not assessed. The landlord failed to conduct a fair and transparent assessment of the resident’s complaint related to the works agreed in September 2021 and missed an opportunity to offer appropriate resolution in its stage 2 complaints process. In failing to do so the landlord also missed an opportunity to rebuild its relationship and trust with the resident.
While the landlord previously offered £500 compensation towards the delayed works in its letter of September 2023, this was not offered during its complaints process. Regardless, this level of compensation was not sufficient to recognise the multiple failings identified including its failure to apply its own procedures, the considerable delays of 18 months to complete the repair or provide reasons for those. The resident experienced further frustration and inconvenience because of mould returning and the landlord not addressing the compensation request under its complaint’s process. Considering the multiple failings identified the landlord is responsible for maladministration and is ordered to pay the resident additional compensation of £400 which is in line with our remedy’s guidance for a higher end of maladministration where “there was a failure which had a significant impact on the resident.”
In addition, we have made an order for the landlord to fairly consider the outstanding elements of the resident’s compensation request that have yet to be addressed by the landlord, namely the items damaged by mould, the artificial grass and increased electricity costs. It should also provide the resident with details of its relevant insurance policy to enable her to explore a claim which she had raised for stress and damage to health.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s report about a leak

The resident initially reported the roof leak to the landlord on 31 October 2023, and in November 2023 we reported to the landlord damp and mould. The works to the roof and damp and mould wash or any follow up works were not completed until 2 April 2024. This was 5 months from the landlord being made aware of the issues.
Under the landlords’ damp and mould policy an inspection should have been completed within 10 days of the resident’s mould report and there is no evidence that this was done by the landlord. The landlord failed to apply its mould policy and address the mould in a timely manner. This is particularly concerning given the previous mould issues in the property, this recurrence and the reported resident’s health should have prompted a timely response.
In the landlord’s stage 2 response from 1 March 2024, the landlord acknowledged it had delayed the works to address the roof leak. The landlord apologised for the delay and offered compensation for this. In also followed up on its response and completed the works as planned in April 2024.However, it did not provide any reasons for the delays, and this would have been reasonable given its overall handling of the damp and mould at the property.
The landlord offered £400 compensation for ‘time and trouble’ to recognise the inconvenience the resident experienced due to its failure to address the roof leak and associated mould in a timely manner. As a resolution, the landlord followed up on the works and completed them after its stage 2 response which the resident confirmed to us in May 2024 (despite some new concerns raised). Furthermore, the mould reoccurrence was intermittent, and the landlord’s failures affected 1 bedroom in the property. As such the compensation of £400 was proportionate and in line with our remedy’s guidance for maladministration and proportionate for failures which ‘the landlord has acknowledged and made attempt to put things right.’ In completing the repairs, providing an apology and a proportionate level of compensation the landlord offered an appropriate remedy during its complaints process about the handling of the leak.

The landlords handling of the associated complaint.

There was some initial confusion as to whether the resident had made a complaint to the landlord prior to her contact with us in November 2023.This was prompted by the previous legal settlement, part of the pre-action protocol and the agreement from September 2021. As such, it was appropriate for the landlord on 20 September 2023 to ask her whether she wanted her concerns and the compensation request to be considered under its complaints process.
Following intervention from this Service on 13 November 2023 the landlord accepted the resident’s complaint. While this was reasonable, it did not acknowledge the complaint with the resident until 11 December 2023. This was 15 days outside the 5-day timescale as stated in the landlords’ complaints policy. The landlord initially stated it would provide a stage 1 complaint response by 26 December 2023.
The landlord requested several extensions in December 2023 and January 2024. It provided reasons for those stating it needed more time due to staff shortages and the need for further investigation. It was appropriate that the landlord provided reasons for the extension requests in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Code (The Code) which states “any extension must be no more than 10 working days without good reason, and the reason(s) must be clearly explained to the resident.”
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 26 January 2024. The landlord appropriately recognised its complaint handling delay in its stage 1 response; it offered apology and £50 compensation which was fair and proportionate for the landlords complaint acknowledgement delays and 2 extension requests.
The resident escalated her complaint on 26 January 2024. The landlord responded at stage 2 on 1 March 2024. As such, its stage 2 complaint response was issued 2 days outside its 20-day policy timescale. However, the landlord advised the resident on 30 January 2024 that her complaint would be assessed by a panel on 16 February 2024 and its response would be issued on 1 March 2024. It appropriately followed up on this commitment. Although slightly delayed the landlord’s stage 2 response was in line with the timescale communicated to the resident. As such its handling at stage 2 does not amount to service failure.
The landlord appropriately apologised for the procedural delays and communicated with the resident any extensions. As the complaint handling delays were not significant and were fully acknowledged by the landlord. The £50 compensation offered to the resident was fair and proportionate to the failings identified. As such the landlord provided reasonable redress for its complaint handling failure.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the works agreed in September 2021.
In accordance with paragraph 53.b. the landlord offered reasonable redress in relation to its handling of the leak.
In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme the landlord provided reasonable redress in relation to its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
1. Provide a written apology to the resident that acknowledges the failings identified in this report.
2. Conduct a full assessment of the resident’s compensation request for the artificial grass, mould damage to personal items and increased electricity costs. Provide this Service with a copy of its decision.
3. Pay the resident a total of £900 compensation made up of:
  1. £500 previously offered by the landlord for the delayed completion of the works agreed in September 2021 (if not paid already).
  2. Additional £400 compensation for the work delays and its handling of the resident’s compensation request.
The Ombudsman orders the landlord to provide evidence of compliance with the above orders within their respective timeframes.

Recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends the landlord to pay the resident £450 compensation made up of:
1. £400 compensation previously offered by the landlord for the delayed roof repair (if not paid already).
2. £50 compensation previously offered by the landlord for its complaint handling delay (if not paid already).
The landlord should provide the resident with details of its liability insurance policy to enable the resident to make a claim for any effect on her health the issues in her case caused, should she wish to do so. The liability insurance company is a separate organisation from the landlord and the landlord is not responsible for the insurer’s decision or the claims process, aside from passing on the details of how to claim to the resident. We cannot comment on the likely outcome of any liability or insurance claim the resident may submit.