Southern Housing (202406344)

Background

1. The property is a 3 bedroom flat. The resident lives with her 2 children, and the issue affected her son’s bedroom, who has underlying health concerns.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about:
   1. The landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould.
   2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould.
   2. Reasonable redress in its complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

Handling of the damp and mould.

4. The landlord did not take a proactive approach to resolve the damp and mould issues for the resident. It did not realise that its contractor had recommended works and then delayed in raising the works.

Complaint handling.

5. The landlord’s handling of the complaint could have been improved, but it has recognised the impact on the resident and has taken proportionate steps to put things right.

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.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

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.

What we have not looked at.

6. Through the complaint, the resident raised the impact the damp and mould had on her and her families mental and physical health. It would fairer, more reasonable, and effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim. The Courts are best placed to deal with such issues, and we have not investigated this further. We have considered the overall distress and inconvenience caused.

7. When the resident first reported the damp and mould in the property on 22 November 2023, the landlord raised an appointment to attend, in line with its damp and mould procedure, within 10 working days on 28 November 2023.
8. The landlord attended on 7 December 2023 at the resident’s request. The landlord has not provided details of this inspection, which suggests a record keeping issue.
9. The evidence shows the landlord did not then raise the recommended survey until 11 January 2024 after the resident had chased the landlord for updates. This is outside of its damp and mould procedure which says it would complete any remedial works within 6 weeks of the inspection. The landlord needs to ensure it has effective systems in place to track and monitor repairs to ensure it can take a proactive approach to resolve damp and mould.
10. After receiving the contractor’s inspection report on 17 January 2024, which clearly showed the need for a replacement window and vent repairs, the landlord took no further action. It later claimed in its stage 1 response that the report had recommended no work. This failure to act and review the report caused unnecessary delays in resolving the issue for the resident. It also shows a lack of thorough investigation.
11. The evidence also shows that the resident chased the landlord on 1 February and 5 March 2024 and while the landlord said the relevant team would respond with updates, it did not do so. Had the landlord responded as it said it would, it may have realised that it did in fact need to raise repairs.
12. The landlord, in its stage 1 response, said that it would raise a request for its damp and mould team to undertake a further inspection of the property, yet it failed do so. Therefore, it did not assess the risk of the damp and mould and understand if it needed to provide any temporary measures while awaiting the required works.
13. The resident chased the landlord again on 16 May 2024, yet there is no evidence that the landlord took any further action to inspect the damp and mould in the resident’s property. This was a further missed opportunity for the landlord to inspect and resolve the issue.
14. The landlord’s inaction forced the resident to raise the vent repair herself on 15 May 2024. Following which the landlord raised a repair for 19 June 2024. Despite the contractor previously identifying the issue, the landlord did not act proactively or follow its damp and mould procedure, resulting in a five-month delay before it addressed the repair. It is not appropriate that the resident had to report the issue directly for the landlord to resolve it.
15. When the landlord issued it stage 2 response on 14 June 2024, it accepted that due to human error, it had not completed the promised referral to the damp and mould team. While it was appropriate of the landlord to acknowledge and apologise for this, the same issue occurred following the stage 2 response and the landlord failed again to make contact within the promised timescale to inspect the damp and mould. This highlights that it did not undertake any learning from the errors at stage 1.
16. The evidence shows the resident continued to chase the landlord for updates with regards to the window replacement and ongoing damp and mould. It did not complete the inspection until 2 October 2024 and completed the works in January 2025; 14 months after the first inspection.
17. As part of its stage 2 response, the landlord accepted that its communication had been poor throughout with regards to the repairs and issues that occurred, in particular with a member of staff named by the resident. While the landlord needs to ensure it always responds within its published 5 working day target, it was appropriate of it to accept the service failure in this instance. Furthermore, it confirmed it had appropriately reminded its staff of the importance of responding in line with its SLA.
18. In its stage 2 response, the landlord offered £170 in compensation for its failings related to the damp and mould. This offer is not commensurate with the failings found in this report. As such, the compensation offered is insufficient to avoid an adverse finding.

19. Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. Our findings are:
    1. The landlord’s published complaints policy complies with the terms of the Code in respect of timescales.
    2. The landlord acknowledged the complaint within 5 working days and while it provided its response 1 day outside of its published timescales, it wrote to the resident the day the response was due to explain the delay and managed her expectations.
    3. The resident requested to escalate her complaint on 23 April 2024, but the landlord did not acknowledge this request until 16 May 2024. However, it apologised for this in its stage 2 response.
    4. It responded at stage 2 in line with its published timescales.
    5. It appropriately apologised and offered compensation of £100 to reflect the failings found in its complaint handling.

Learning

20. The landlord did not demonstrate effective collaboration between its teams, resulting in missed referrals related to damp and mould. It must ensure that robust systems are in place to support clear communication across departments, so that repair requests—particularly those concerning damp and mould—are promptly addressed. This is essential for taking a proactive approach and adhering to its own standard operating procedures.

Communication

21. The landlord’s communication in this case was poor. It needs to ensure that it has processes and procedures in place that enable effective and regular communication with its residents. In this case the resident spent a significant amount of time chasing the landlord for updates. Good communication plays a key role in an effective repairs system, and the landlord should consider how it can improve its communication with residents.