Southern Housing (202337894)

Background

1. The resident lived in a 1-bedroom ground floor flat, and had an assured tenancy. The landlord took over the tenancy from 21 March 2022. The resident complained to the landlord on 8 February 2023 about the way it handled repairs from November 2022. She also reported faults then with a bedroom window, and a back door which she felt had caused mould. The resident told the landlord she is disabled.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. Handling of mould and related repairs.
   2. Complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found that the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in our opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint about its:
   1. Handling of mould and related repairs.
   2. Complaint handling.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of mould and related repairs

4. We found there were failures in the landlord completing repairs in line with its responsive repairs policy and completing mould washes in line with its processes. However, as part of the complaint process it offered the resident an inspection, agreed improvement works, provided temporary accommodation, and offered compensation as part of its final response which amounted to reasonable redress.

The landlord’s complaint handling

5. Although there were delays at both stages of the landlord’s complaint process which were not in line with its policy or our Complaint Handling Code (“the Code”) the landlord explained what action it would take and paid reasonable compensation.

 Our investigation

The complaint procedure

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.

6. The resident told us that the damp and mould affected her health, including breathing. It would be fairer, more reasonable, and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
7. When a resident reports damp or mould, the landlord should act quickly to inspect the property and check for hazards. The landlord has a responsibility under the Decent Home Standard and Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, s.9A and 10, to ensure that its properties are fit for human habitation and free from ‘relevant hazards’ and risks. Damp and mould growth can be caused by poor ventilation, a lack of insulation and inadequate heating. Mould growth is a potential hazard. Therefore, the landlord needs to consider whether any mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard that may require remedy. Therefore, in this report we have considered the landlord’s handling of repairs relating to ventilation, insulation or heating.
8. The landlord’s Damp and Mould Repairs and Serious Health Conditions Standard Operating Procedure (“SOP”) states it will inspect properties within 5 working days of a report of damp or mould where there may be a serious risk to health. It extends this time limit to 10 working days in all other cases. The landlord must complete initial remedial action at the inspection, and form an action plan with a view to resolving the issue within 6 weeks. If it cannot achieve this it must escalate the case.
9. The responsive repairs policy the landlord provided us with states it must offer an appointment at a time that suits the resident. The policy on its website is more specific and states it aims to complete most routine repairs within 20 working days. The landlord is responsible for the exterior and structure of the property which includes walls, brickwork, and it is also responsible for heating installations. This is under the resident’s tenancy agreement and its responsive repairs policy.
10. We expect landlords to maintain a detailed record of contacts and repairs. This is because clear, accurate, and easily accessible records provide an audit trail. They also improve the landlord’s ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise.  The landlord failed to maintain adequate records. This has affected our ability to carry out a thorough investigation, as highlighted at various points throughout this report. This was a significant failure by the landlord and contributed to other failures identified in this report.
11. It is unclear when the resident first reported damp and mould to the landlord. The landlord accepted there was a gap in its internal repair records from November 2022. The landlord was aware that the resident’s back door was not locking on 28 November 2022. On 8 February 2023 the resident told it that the door was letting in cold air and causing mould. The landlord did not repair this until 20 December 2023. It took the landlord 219 working days to complete this from the date it was aware of the fault. This was unacceptable as it was not in line with the landlord’s responsive repairs policy.
12. On 8 February 2023 the resident also reported a fault with her bedroom window which meant the resident was unable to open it. This would likely affect the ventilation in the property and poor ventilation is a contributor to damp and mould. As the resident told the landlord on 30 March 2023 that it had fixed the window “about a month or so ago now” it is evident the landlord likely repaired this in line with its responsive repairs policy.
13. While the resident expressed concern on 30 March 2023 about “bad black mould” in her bedroom the landlord’s records show the resident refused its contractor entry on this day. It also said it replaced a bathroom vent on 17 April 2023 and checked the cavity wall and found the insulation good. We have also seen it inspected the property on 23 August 2023 and agreed to mould wash the bathroom walls, bedroom walls, and around the lounge window, repair a ball valve, and install a kitchen extractor to the internal wall.
14. The landlord repaired the faulty ball valve within 16 working days (on 15 September 2023). This was reasonable as it was in line with its responsive repairs policy and the fault may have caused water ingress or damp to enter the property. However, while the landlord completed an upgrade of the kitchen extractor fan on 29 July 2024 it is unclear when it completed the work to the kitchen extractor fan that the landlord’s report of 23 August 2023 recommended. Therefore, we cannot be satisfied it acted reasonably in connection with this.
15. The landlord said it scheduled the mould washes for 16 November 2023 and 23 November 2023, but the resident was not at home. The resident disputed this. As the landlord has not provided evidence of the efforts it made to gain access, we cannot verify its account. However, we have seen the landlord completed a mould wash on 27 November 2023. The landlord said it also completed mould washes on 23 December 2023 and 30 December 2023. This was 203, 221, and 224 working days respectively from when the resident reported mould (8 February 2023). The landlord also did not show it formed an action plan to resolve the damp and mould within 6 weeks. Therefore, this was not in line with its SOP.
16. The landlord inspected the resident’s property on 5 January 2024 after she complained 3 days earlier. This was an appropriate response to her complaint that the mould washes had failed, and she was living in unhabitable conditions. We have not seen evidence from the landlord or resident that the property was unhabitable then. The report from environmental health from 10 January 2024 found there were cold spots and draughts in the bedroom, and dampness in the bedroom corner. It also identified holes on the exterior of the property which were liable to damp penetration.
17. The landlord said it agreed to complete jobs to overhaul the bathroom window on 11 January 2024, but it is unclear if it completed these. It also agreed to book a job to upgrade or relocate the bedroom radiator on 9 January 2024, this was 33 working days after it authorised this (20 November 2023). The evidence shows that it wanted to install a radiator on 1 February 2024 but did not complete this then as the resident asked for all work to stop on 23 and 24 January 2024.The landlord’s records from 19 February 2024 show that this was because she felt the landlord failed to check her availability before booking jobs and failed to tell her what work it planned.
18. We have not seen the landlord confirmed to the resident the full extent of the works it proposed until 20 February 2024, and after the council’s environmental health department got involved. Nor have we seen it checked with her availability in advance before booking jobs in January 2024. Therefore, we cannot be satisfied that it acted reasonably between January to February 2024 to arrange appointments. The resident agreed to the jobs identified by the landlord on 20 February 2024 with the addition of a job to renew the lounge door and replace her letterbox on 10 April 2024.
19. On 27 February 2024 the landlord agreed to offer temporary accommodation for the resident to allow the work to proceed. While this was reasonable, the temporary accommodation was not available until 22 April 2024 as the resident did not want to move until the landlord made changes to the temporary accommodation. It is also evident there were delays while the landlord arranged to keep her belongings safe. Therefore, we cannot fault the landlord for not starting the work until after 22 April 2024. The landlord also acted reasonably to offer alternative temporary accommodation on 13 May 2024 when the resident raised concerns about damp and mould in the temporary accommodation she was staying at.
20. While the landlord said it completed most work by 3 May 2024, we note it told the resident on 17 May 2024 it had identified additional necessary work relating to the bin shed, bathroom, and the bedroom. It also recommended on 3 June 2025 further work to upgrade the kitchen and bathroom extraction, block a kitchen airbrick together with improving the lounge insulation, and repointing external brickwork. It informed the resident of this on 18 June 2024.
21. While the resident requested compensation for damage to her bed, carpet, and clothes it was appropriate of the landlord to explain she could either make a claim through her household insurance or contact its insurer. This was reasonable as it was in line with the landlord’s compensation policy.
22. Overall, the landlord did not complete work in line with its responsive repairs policy and SOP. In fact, the landlord did not complete all the jobs it identified in January 2024 until the end of July 2024. It took the landlord over 6 months to complete the repairs or jobs. As discussed, this was partly because the landlord sought to satisfy the resident’s pre-conditions of moving to a temporary accommodation. Therefore, the landlord was not responsible for all the delays during this period. There were further delays between May and June 2024 because the landlord identified additional work, but it kept the resident informed which was reasonable.
23. Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, we will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord puts things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. When considering this we have regard to whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our dispute resolution principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
24. The landlord apologised it had not offered a long-term solution to the damp and mould and for its contractor’s refusal of a mould wash. It agreed to another inspection and to raise any necessary jobs following this, which it completed. It also said it would offer temporary accommodation which it did. It increased its compensation offer to £395 in its final response for failures relating to the damp and mould.
25. It also paid an additional £50 (£445 in total) in January 2025 to acknowledge the additional delays caused by additional work it identified. These combined actions showed a sincere willingness to put things right. It also said it had set up a specialist damp and mould team to improve its monitoring and completion of work. This demonstrated it had learnt from the complaint and sought to improve. The landlord went on to rehouse the resident. The level of compensation was in line with the amount we would have ordered for the failures and combined with the actions showed it put things right, acted fairly, and learnt from the complaint. Therefore, overall we have found reasonable redress on the understanding the compensation was paid.

26. The landlord has a 2 staged complaint process in line with our Complaint Handling Code (“the Code”). It had to respond to complaints at stage 1 within 10 working days, and to complaints at stage 2 within 20 working days. It took the landlord 210 working days to respond at stage 1. It took the landlord 63 working days to acknowledge the resident’s escalation request (2 January 2024 to 2 April 2024), against a target of 5 working days. The landlord took 73 working days to respond at stage 2 and only responded after we had contacted it. These actions were not in line with its policy or the Code.
27. The landlord said it would feedback to the relevant team and ensure it acknowledges complaints within 5 working days of an escalation request. It also offered the resident £175 compensation for complaint handling failures which was in line with the compensation we would order for the failure considering our remedies guidance. We also note that it tracked,  actioned and updated the resident on the jobs it agreed to do after its final response to ensure it completed them. This was in line with the Code. We have therefore found reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling on the understanding the compensation was paid.

Learning

28. The landlord acknowledged the delays in its complaint process and agreed to feedback to ensure it acknowledges escalation requests within 5 working days in future. In doing so it demonstrated learning.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

29. The landlord accepted it did not have records of its contractor’s visit and findings from November 2022. It was also unclear when it completed the initial recommended improvements to the kitchen extractor fan or the efforts it made to arrange damp and mould washes. The absence of records is a barrier to running an effective repairs service and means landlords are unable to show that their actions were reasonable.

Communication

30. The landlord communication with the resident improved after February 2024 when it provided her with a plan, timescales for work, and updates. Prior to this the landlord was unable to show it had effectively communicated with the resident to inform her of the jobs it planned or to discuss her availability for appointments. This caused the resident to feel overwhelmed. Landlords should communicate clearly with residents over planned work and the timescales involved to manage expectations. It is also vital that landlords communicate with residents to arrange appointments in advance to avoid wasted time and distress.