Southern Housing Group Limited (202224516)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202224516

Southern Housing Group Limited

19 September 2023

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 landlord’s handling of damp, mould and condensation.
The landlord’s complaint handling has also been investigated.

Background

The resident holds a 6-year fixed term assured tenancy for a top-floor flat with the landlord which is a housing association. The tenancy began on 12 November 2018.
The resident has been experiencing issues with damp and mould since 2020, which she has been reporting to the landlord. In December 2021, an MP contacted the landlord on the resident’s behalf, to assist her with seeking a resolution of the issues.
In response to the MP enquiries, an inspection was carried out on 11 January 2021, which recommended that a heat loss survey be arranged, with the potential of providing an additional double radiator to the external wall behind the customer’s sofa. This took place on 8 March 2022.
On 1 April 2022 the resident contacted the landlord to raise a formal complaint regarding the lack of contact following the heating survey. The resident said that she would like the ongoing issues with the ventilation and humidity to be resolved.
The landlord provided a stage 1 response on 7 April 2022, and said that a heat loss survey had been booked for 11 April 2022, but acknowledged that the resident had already had one. It also offered £50 compensation as a gesture of goodwill.
On 11 April 2022 the resident escalated her complaint as she remained dissatisfied that the heat loss survey was being done again. As a resolution she wanted the radiator to be fitted within her property and for the ventilation within her property to be reviewed as per the survey recommendation.
The resident chased the landlord on 27 April and 4 May 2022 for a response to her escalation request. The resident also informed the landlord that she was pregnant and wanted the issues to be resolved as soon as possible.
On 5 May 2022, the landlord informed the resident that there was a dispute between departments regarding the installation of the radiator, but that it had been resolved and would be installed. Three further heat loss surveys would also be carried out in the winter months and as the repair is being progressed, it would not escalate the complaint. The radiator was installed on 13 June 2022.
On 31 May 2022, the landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage two escalation request and said it would respond by 30 June 2022. On 9 June 2022, the resident informed the landlord that the condensation within her property had started to cause mould. She was concerned as she was pregnant and was told that ventilation was the issue.
On 22 August 2022, the landlord provided the resident with a stage 2 response where it said:
1. It was sorry for the poor communication.
2. The radiator had been installed, but as the weather was warmer it was not possible to know if this would resolve the issue with mould and condensation.
3. As agreed with the resident, the surveyor would visit on 1 November 2022 to resume investigations into the cause of the damp and mould.
4. It planned to treat the affected area with a mould wash, whilst it determined the next steps it would take to reduce the condensation. It may also install data loggers to help with the investigations. For information, a data logger records moisture levels within the property for monitoring purposes.
5. An additional £100 compensation was offered in an acknowledgement of the poor complaint handling.
In November 2022, the resident contacted the landlord on multiple occasions regarding the issues she was experiencing within the property. On 25 November 2022, a further inspection was carried out, and the landlord reported that it would need to return with data loggers. Furthermore, the landlord completed a mould wash within the property in December 2022.
On 3 January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord again as she was concerned about the effect the mould was having on her daughter who had asthma. She also informed the landlord that the data loggers had not been installed and she wanted ventilation to be fitted.
On 13 January 2023 the resident contacted the Ombudsman for assistance with resolving her complaint. The resident explained that she had an ongoing issue with damp and mould since 2020 and she would like for this to be resolved. The resident said that she wanted ventilation in the property or to be moved as a last resort to a home that was safe.
In August 2023, the resident informed this Service that she was still experiencing issues with communication and the issue had not been resolved.

Assessment

Scope

This Service is aware that the resident made an additional complaint in January 2023, to which she has yet to receive a response. This has not exhausted the landlord’s complaint procedure and so cannot be investigated by this Service. As such, this investigation focuses on the resident’s dissatisfaction in April 2022, the landlord’s response in August 2022 and whether the landlord has delivered what it said it would, as a way of resolving the resident’s complaint.

The Ombudsman’s approach

The Ombudsman’s role is to determine complaints by reference to what is fair in all the circumstances and decide if the landlord is responsible for maladministration or service failure.
When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its dispute resolution principles. These are high-level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are only three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.
2. put things right, and.
3. learn from outcomes.

Policies and procedures

The Housing Act 2004 ensures landlords are responsible for assessing hazards and risks within their rented homes. When assessing any such hazards and risks, the assessment should be considered in line with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Damp and mould growth are potential hazards that may require remedy. Section 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 also requires the property to be free from a hazard to be fit for human habitation.
The landlord has a dedicated page on its website ‘controlling damp, condensation and moisture’. The website urges residents to report concerns to the landlord immediately and that it will carry out an inspection within ten days of the first report and aim to find a resolution within six weeks.
The website also says that the landlord should:
1. Take proactive steps to install data loggers in homes to see how the property is performing.
2. Track the damp and mould cases closely, which are prioritised by risk, and keep residents up to date with proposed resolutions and progress.
The landlord’s repair policy, dated March 2021, says that the landlord recognises that some repair issues have a potentially adverse impact on residents with a medical vulnerability or condition. In these situations, the landlord will investigate the matter promptly and work in partnership with its contractors and in liaison with the resident to resolve the matter. In all instances, the resident’s welfare, health and safety will be the landlord’s primary concern.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) provides recommendations for landlords, including that they should:
1. Adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions. Landlords should review their current strategy and consider whether their approach will achieve this.
2. Ensure they can identify complex cases at an early stage and have a strategy for keeping residents informed and effective resolution.
3. Ensure that they clearly and regularly communicate with their residents regarding actions taken or otherwise to resolve reports of damp and mould.
4. Identify where an independent, mutually agreed and suitably qualified surveyor should be used, and share the outcomes of all surveys and inspections with residents to help them understand the findings and be clear on the next steps. Landlords should then act on accepted survey recommendations promptly.
The landlord’s complaint policy, dated August 2022, shows that the landlord operates a two-stage complaint policy. Stage 1 complaints will be acknowledged within 5 days and responded to within 10 working days. Stage 2 complaints will be acknowledged within 5 days and responded to within 20 working days.
The landlord’s compensation policy statement, dated September 2017, says that it will make a payment when there is evidence that there has been a service failure that it is responsible for, that has caused loss, damage, or inconvenience, and has been recorded onto our case management system as either a service dissatisfaction or as a complaint. Service failures include not delivering services in line with published standards, and not following policies and procedures. It will also pay a maximum of £25 for service failure.
The landlord has also provided a compensation framework which says that discretionary payments can be made and which takes into account the severity of the issue and any vulnerabilities of the people affected.
Paragraph 5.6 of the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) states that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law and good practice where appropriate

The landlord’s handling of damp, mould and condensation.

After reviewing the information sent to this Service, it is clear that the resident has been experiencing issues with damp and mould for a number of months and logged multiple complaints. Previous inspections had been carried out at the property and information shows that the landlord had reported that a contributing factor was the resident’s use of the kitchen and recommended that she use lids on top of her pans when cooking.
As part of ongoing investigations into the cause of damp and mould within the resident’s home, the landlord inspected in January 2022 and concluded that a heat loss survey should be completed, and a radiator should be installed on an external wall. The heat loss survey was carried out two months after the initial inspection and a report was provided to the landlord on an unknown date. This is not appropriate. As damp and mould are most prevalent in the winter months, this Service would have expected to see that the survey was requested and completed soon after the inspection in January 2022. However, based on the information provided, this Service is unable to determine whether the delay was a direct result of the landlord’s actions.
It is unclear when the heat loss survey report was provided to the landlord, but as the resident made a formal complaint on 1 April 2022, it is clear that the landlord did not follow up with the contractor as a priority, following its visit on 8 March 2022, nor did it communicate its next steps to the resident. Furthermore, the landlord’s stage 1 response said that it would arrange for a further heat loss survey to be completed on 11 April 2022, which further shows that it did not make enquiries with the contractor for a copy of the report. This would have left the resident feeling frustrated, given that the issue had been ongoing for some time, and that the landlord was suggesting a second unnecessary heat loss survey was conducted.
Following the resident’s request to escalate her complaint, there were extensive internal emails between the landlord and contractor about the next steps it should take. The contractor informed the landlord that the problem with the property was due to no ventilation, which it was not responsible for, but the surveyor did not agree with these findings and informed the contractor that it should install the radiator as recommended. Although the landlord was working to resolve the issue internally, it failed to communicate with the resident, which prompted her to chase the landlord on 27 April and 4 May 2022 for an update. This again would have added to the frustrations that the resident was already feeling.
The resident continued to contact the landlord and report issues within her property, which she believed were because of the damp. She, again, requested ventilation to be installed, such as additional vents. The information provided to the Ombudsman shows that there were extensive internal communications between staff who were actively discussing what next steps it was going to take as it was aware that the resident was pregnant. It was agreed that a further inspection was required and, in the meantime, the resident was asked to send pictures of the damp and mould.
The landlord’s final response said it would return on 1 November 2022 as the resident requested it return in the winter months. The Ombudsman acknowledges that this was a reasonable request and that in the interim period, no further action was taken, however, the landlord failed to follow up and ensure that it did what it told the resident it would do. It was not until the resident contacted the landlord multiple times in November 2022, that a further inspection was carried out on 29 November 2022 where investigation continued and December 2022 for the mould wash to be completed.
The Ombudsman further acknowledges that the landlord did continueto take steps following the resident’s contact, but notes that repair records from December 2022, show that further concerns were raised about the property’s lack of ventilation. And it was not until the resident instructed an external solicitorto bring a disrepair case against the landlord, that in April 2023 the landlord took additional steps to try and address this issue. This included retrofitting an additional heating unit to the living area and recommended that an extraction fan should be fitted within the kitchen and retrofit a passive ventilation unit. The resident says to date that these works have not been completed.
In line with the HHSRS guidance, damp and mould are potential hazards, and as such, this Service would have expected to see records that demonstrated the landlord was exploring every possible solution to try to resolve the issue with the condensation, damp and mould issue. The records shows that the landlord was aware of the resident’s health concerns and the lack of ventilation within the property, but failed to explore this as a possible solution within a reasonable timescale and therefore, the landlord failed to follow the HHSRS guidance and its own guidance on its website. This potentially meant it left the resident is a property that was not fit for human habitation. This was a failure by the landlord.
The Ombudsman’s damp and mould spotlight report provides further insight into how this Service expects from landlords to act in these circumstances:
1. Landlords should ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue.
2. Landlords should review the number of missed appointments about damp and mould cases and, depending on the outcome of any review, consider what steps may be required to reduce them.
3. Landlords must ensure there is effective internal communication between their teams and departments, and ensure that one individual or team has overall responsibility for ensuring complaints or reports are resolved, including follow-up or aftercare.
Whilst this Service acknowledges that damp and mould may take a number of attempts to resolve, the landlord failed to follow up on what it said it would do within its final response and furthermore, information shows that investigations are still ongoing. This is an unreasonable amount of time to elapse between the issue being identified and a suitable resolution. This amounted to maladministration which was further exacerbated as the landlord was aware of the ongoing reports of damp and mould and the resident’s concerns about being pregnant and her daughter’s asthma.
Within the landlord’s final response, the landlord acknowledged that there was a service failure relating to communication and apologised. However, the landlord did not acknowledge its failure to follow its own policy and procedures. As such, it has not taken sufficient action to ‘put things right’ for the resident. Neither had it detailed how it has ‘learned from outcomes’ and what steps it has taken to prevent a recurrence of the failings.
The Ombudsman draws the landlord’s attention to section six of the Code, which sets out what the Ombudsman considers are the best practice principles of “putting things right” where there have been failings. This includes the principle that any remedy offered by a landlord “must reflect the extent of any service failures and the level of detriment caused to the resident”. Therefore, the decision to not award compensation in recognition of its full failings was not reasonable.
In assessing an appropriate level of compensation, the Ombudsman takes into account a range of factors including any distress and inconvenience caused by the issues, the amount of time and effort expended on pursuing the matter with the landlord, and the level of detriment caused by the landlord’s acts and/or omissions. It considers whether any redress is proportionate to the severity of the failure by the landlord and the impact on the resident. The Ombudsman also considers the evidence that has been provided.
Ultimately the Ombudsman considers what would be fair and proportionate. The aim of compensation is not to be punitive, but to provide redress for the impact of any failings by the landlord on the resident. In the case of compensation for distress and inconvenience, we are not able to quantify a definitive loss and the intention of such an award is to recognise the overall distress and inconvenience suffered by the resident.
The Ombudsman has first considered the distress and inconvenience suffered by the resident as a result of the landlord’s failure to take reasonable steps to resolve the issue with damp and mould and effectively communicate this to the resident, this includes the failure to do what it said it would do in November 2022. In line with the Ombudsman’s remedy guidance where there has been a failure which had a significant impact on the resident, a payment of between £600 and £1000 is recommended. The landlord knew that the resident was experiencing ongoing issues with damp and mould, and that it needed to return on 1 November 2022 to continue its investigations so it could resolve the issue within a reasonable timeframe, and therefore should have taken steps to ensure all possible solutions were explored and implemented. In recognition of this, the Ombudsman has made an order for the landlord to pay the resident £1000 compensation.
In summary, a finding of maladministration has been made as the landlord failed to address the resident’s report of damp and mould in a reasonable timeframe, and to date is still outstanding. The landlord was aware of the resident’s concerns and the length of time it has remained unsolved.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

When the resident raised her complaint on 1 April 2022, the landlord appropriately acknowledged the complaint within its published timescales.
On review of the stage one response from the landlord, it is the Ombudsman’s view that the landlord did not carry out a reasonable investigation of the full history of the complaint and use its formal responses as an opportunity to explain its actions in this case. The landlord missed an opportunity to conduct a thorough investigation which would have identified its failure to adequately communicate with the resident and the delays she had been experiencing.
The response provided to the resident was vague and did not provide the resident with any reassurance of what steps the landlord was taking to resolve her complaint. This resulted in the resident escalating her complaint on 11 April 2022. The landlord should have acknowledged the complaint within 5 working days and responded within 20 working days. However, the landlord failed to do so and the resident had no choice but to chase the landlord a further two times.
This Service has also seen communication from the landlord that it needed to do all it could to ‘stop the complaint from going to stage two’ and on 5 May 2022, the landlord contacted the resident and said that as the radiator was due to be fitted, it would not be escalating the complaint.
The Ombudsman’s code, point 4.14, states that a landlord must not unreasonably refuse to escalate a complaint through all stages of the complaints procedure and must have clear and valid reasons for taking that course of action. Reasons for declining to escalate a complaint must be clearly set out in a landlord’s complaints policy and must be the same as the reasons for not accepting a complaint.
Whilst the landlord had arranged for the radiator to be fitted, it was not reasonable for it to refuse to escalate the resident’s complaint. The landlord failed to address all the resident’s issues that she raised and therefore, should have escalated the complaint in line with their policy and the Code. Furthermore, it is unclear why the landlord did not want the resident’s complaint to be escalated to stage two, as this denied the resident the opportunity to have things put right and therefore, was not in line with the Ombudsman’s dispute resolution principles.
It is not clear from the information provided why the landlord then acknowledged the resident’s stage two request on 31 May 2022, after refusing to escalate the complaint, but said it would respond by 30 June 2022. The landlord failed to respond within this timeframe, and it was not until 22 August 2022 that it provided a response, which was considerably outside of the 20 working day timescale within its policy. This amounts to maladministration and as such would attract a level of compensation.
The Ombudsman has considered the impact on the resident regarding the delay that she experienced in the complaint handling, and also the missed opportunity by the landlord to put things right. In line with this Service’s remedy guidance, where there has been a failure which has adversely affected the resident and the landlord has made no attempt to put things right, payments of between £100 and £600 are recommended.
In recognition of the time and trouble and distress and inconvenience the resident has experienced, as well as the poor complaint handling by the landlord, the Ombudsman has made an order for the landlord to pay the resident an amount of £400.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration with the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration with the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

The landlord is ordered to pay the resident a total of £1400 within four weeks of the date of this report for the reasons identified above comprised of:
1. £1000 in recognition of distress and inconvenience caused as result of the delay in resolving the issue with damp and mould.
2. £400 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused as a result of the complaint handling.
The landlord should provide a written apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report within four weeks of the date of this report.
The landlord should instruct an external damp and mould specialist to carry out a full survey of the resident’s property, to assess how the issues can be fully resolved. The landlord must contact the resident within 28 days to arrange a suitable appointment for the inspection. The landlord must ensure a copy of the inspection is provided to the resident and this service within 28 days of receiving it and must set out if it intends to complete the works, and if so, by when. The surveyor must be asked to comment on whether the property benefits from sufficient ventilation and heating – including insulation.

Recommendations

The landlord should consider sharing the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code with its staff members who deal with complaints in order to ensure that complaints are responded to in line with best practice.