Sovereign Network Group (202336810)

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202336810

Sovereign Network Group

30 May 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of reports of:
1. A repair to the wet room pump.
2. Damp and mould.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The tenancy commenced on 20 February 2017.The property is a one bedroom bungalow.
During January 2023 the resident reported issues with her shower pump not working properly. She also reported damp and mould. In response the landlord arranged for an operative to attend on 10 February 2023. The operative noted that a mould wash was needed to the ceilings and walls in the kitchen, bathroom, bedroom and lounge. It was stated that stain block would be needed after it had dried. The operative requested follow-on works to check both extractor fans, loft insulation and gable end pointing.
During March 2023 the landlord arranged for an operative to attend to complete repairs to the shower pump.
The inspection to check the fans, insulation and gable end was completed on 4 April 2023. We have not seen the findings of this inspection. The landlord also fixed the fans and confirmed they were both in working order.
A further report concerning the shower pump was raised on 25 July 2023. The landlord raised an emergency repair that day.
During July 2023 an operative attended to seal the gable. They also checked the wall cavities and stated they did not believe there was any insulation. The operative also raised follow on works regarding the soak-away being blocked.
On 8 August 2023 a routine repair was raised concerning the shower pump. A damp and mould treatment was also completed during August.
The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 12 September 2023 about ongoing issues with damp and mould in the property. The resident stated the affected areas were the hallway and walk-in wardrobe. She also informed the landlord the shower pump in the wet room was not working. She said that this resulted in her having to wash in a bucket which was affecting her back.
During October 2023 an operative attended and fixed the shower pump and the soak-away. The landlord had also arranged an inspection of the damp and mould and for it to be cleaned. During the inspection it was noted there was a split in the flooring behind the toilet causing water ingress and damp issues. It was recommended to remove the existing flooring. It was also recommended to have the bathroom, hall and bedroom re-plastered.
The landlord issued a stage one response on 10 October 2023. This said:
1. Damp and mould – The landlord partially upheld the resident’s complaint regarding the damp and mould. It stated it had raised an inspection to determine the cause and any works needed.
2. Faulty shower pump – The landlord partially upheld the resident’s complaint regarding the shower pump. It stated due to staff resourcing and annual leave there were delays in resolving this. In recognition of this failure, it offered £20.
On 1 January 2024 the resident’s representative wrote to the landlord and our service to express concern over his mother’s living conditions. He explained that despite issues being raised on multiple occasions, the landlord had not resolved the matter. He expressed his concerns about electrical safety, structural issues and the risk of health issues caused by the damp and mould. Following this, the resident’s complaint was escalated to stage two of the landlord’s complaints procedure.
During January the resident had contacted the landlord asking how it planned to find the root cause of the damp and fix the ongoing issues. The resident’s representative had stated the first priority should be to identify if there is a leak.
On 18 January 2024 the landlord explained it planned to book in a plasterer but stated it needed to allow time to carry out an inspection for a leak and resolution prior to works.
The landlord issued its stage two response on 5 February 2024. It acknowledged the damp and mould had been ongoing since February 2023. Since the report it had carried out inspections, and various works to attempt to resolve the issue. This included:
1. Insulation in the loft and cavity walls.
2. Overhauled extractor fans.
3. Sealed the gable end with a waterproof treatment.
4. Made sure the soakaway was clear and free flowing.
The landlord acknowledged the delays in arranging and attending to these jobs. It apologised and offered the resident £100 compensation.
A technical survey was completed on 7 February 2024. The operative stated the neighbouring property which was in disrepair may be causing the issues experienced. This property did not belong to the landlord.
The landlord arranged a further inspection on 21 February 2024, however the operative was unable to find a leak. The operative thought the damp and mould may be a result of ventilation issues and recommended the landlord consider installing a positive ventilation system.
In May 2024 the representative expressed upset with the delays in resolving the damp issues. He stated the plasterer had visited on 30 April 2024, but would not carry out work until the root cause of the damp was fixed.
During July 2024 an operative attended to repair the flashing to the roof.
On 2 September 2024 the representative sent an email to request assistance in resolving the damp and mould. He stated his mother’s health was deteriorating and there was a safety concern as the damp had now spread to behind a light switch.
A further inspection took place on 18 September 2024, the operative found severe damp and mould in the hallway, bathroom and bedroom and recommended a full roof check. Repairs were raised to the flashing, soil pipe, verge, and front elevation. The landlord explained the external roofing works were due for completion in November. Once this had been completed it would return to plaster.
On 1 October 2024 an operative attended to check the hallway switch, and found the wall was cold but not wet. The light switch was also working. It was noted the wall was crumbling.
On 3 March 2025 the representative provided an update to us. He stated since re-plastering the walls, it had taken a couple of weeks for the damp to return in both the bedroom and bathroom. He was unhappy the landlord had not established the root cause of the damp. He stated the remediation work had minimal effect and believed there may be a problem in the brickwork which needed to be investigated. He stated the damp and mould had been reported to the landlord recently, but it had not replied.
On 1 April 2025 the landlord reviewed the resident’s complaint and identified service failures which it addressed:
1. It acknowledged the resident was left without washing facilities which resulted in her using a bucket to wash with for over 2 and half months. The landlord apologised for this and offered £300.
2. It recognised the damp and mould was ongoing for a long time which resulted in the resident having to chase for updates. It apologised and offered £300 for stress and inconvenience. It also offered £200 for loss of enjoyment within her home.
3. The landlord confirmed a dehumidifier would be delivered to the property to assist in the process of drying it out. It offered £60 to contribute towards the running cost. This was to cover £10 for 6 weeks.
On 5 May 2025 we were provided with an update on the current situation at the property by the resident’s representative. The representative explained the condition of the property had continued to worsen. He stated the root cause of the damp has still not been identified or addressed. He stated:
1. The landlord had confirmed it would replace and refit the bathroom, however there has been no confirmation of a date.
2. The resident received the compensation payment offered by the landlord.
3. A dehumidifier was provided on 14 April 2025 but this has had no positive impact on clearing or reducing the damp and mould.
4. When seeking updates from the landlord, communication has been poor.

Assessment and findings

Although the landlord’s internal complaint process was formally completed in February 2024, it was appropriate to consider events after that point. This is because the landlord reconsidered its position on the resident’s complaint in April 2025, which indicated the matter was not fully resolved and there was a need for it reassess aspects of the complaint. We also see that the issues have been ongoing after the landlord’s internal complaint process. In order to conduct a fair investigation it is therefore appropriate for us to look at events since the landlord’s final response.

Repair to the wet room pump.

The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states it will aim to visit a property and complete non-emergency repairs within 38 days of a repair first being reported. For emergency repairs it will aim to repair on the same day or within 24 hours of a report being made.
The resident had stated she had an ongoing problem with the pump in her wet room. This type of repair would fall under the landlord’s responsibility and would be considered a non-emergency repair.
We have reviewed the landlord’s repairs history and see the resident reported the pump issue on 29 January 2023. At the time she had reported issues concerning the temperature and the flow of water. The repair records show on 20 March 2023 an operative attended to remove the faulty shower pump and replace it with a new one. It was reported that it was working.
The repair records show that on 25 July 2023 the landlord had arranged for an operative to attend for an emergency repair. It was stated that a new appointment needed to be raised with a plumber and electrician. Following this a routine repair was raised on 8 August 2023 to carry out the required work to fix the pump, however this was not completed until 5 October 2023.
This was not in accordance with the landlord’s repair timescale, as it took 3 months to repair the fault. During this time the resident states she was impacted and had to use alternative methods to wash. The landlord acknowledged this service failure and considered its compensation policy.
The landlord’s compensation policy states it will make discretionary payments where its actions have resulted in delays in undertaking a repair. It does not specify the amount of compensation it would pay in such circumstances. In this instance the landlord offered the resident £20 in recognition of its service failure. Whilst we recognise it appropriately considered its compensation policy, the amount offered was less than we would have expected.
Following contact from this Service, the landlord revised its offer of compensation and increased this by £280, to £300. We accept this compensation offer represented an attempt to put things right. However it was offered a considerable time after the complaint process was exhausted. Additionally, it appears to have been prompted by this Service’s intention to investigate the complaint. This should have been an outcome and offer of redress identified at the time of the complaint process.
In summary, whilst we understand the landlord carried out a repair, we have found the delay in carrying out the repair was unreasonable. Whilst we appreciate it reconsidered its position on compensation as this was not done in a timely manner, we have found maladministration. An order of £100 compensation has been made to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

Damp and mould.

The landlord’s damp and mould policy states how it should respond to reports of damp and mould. This entails:
1. Assessing the damp and mould.
2. Completing any repairs identified quickly.
3. It may carry out treatment of the affected areas, installation of specialist equipment such as vents, extractors fans and positive air flow systems.
4. In cases where extensive work is required it may temporarily rehouse residents.
5. In some circumstances, it may need a surveyor to inspect the home to assess the underlying cause and arrange for repairs to be completed.
The resident expressed upset over the landlord’s failure to establish the root cause of the damp issues since they were first reported. We understand when dealing with damp and mould it is not always easy to determine the cause and remedy. It may require several inspections and repairs. We would however expect the landlord to be taking active steps to resolve the matter in a reasonable timeframe.
In this instance the resident raised a report in January 2023. The landlord conducted an inspection and carried out several repairs to the property. This included:
1. Repairs to the gutter.
2. Mould washes.
3. Insulation in the loft.
4. Cavity insulation.
5. Sealing the end of gable.
6. Checking and replacing fans.
However these works did not resolve the issue. In its stage one response the landlord agreed to a further inspection to try and determine the cause of the damp and mould. The evidence shows that an inspection took place on 16 October 2023. This was to assess where water ingress was coming from and the cause of the damp and mould. There was no documented evidence of the outcome of this inspection. However in its stage two response the landlord stated, following the inspection, it had arranged for the bathroom flooring to be replaced and plastering in the affected rooms.
In its stage two response the landlord stated it would arrange for a technical survey to be done to the resident’s property on 7 February 2024. We see this visit took place. The operative recommended a mould wash to remove spores and for a dehumidifier. The note suggested the issues within the property were compounded by the disrepair of the neighbouring adjoining property. This property did not belong to the landlord and was rented out by a separate party. We have not seen evidence to confirm the landlord took steps to address any concerns with the neighbouring property. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to try to actively engage with the neighbouring owner, and explore its options based on the surveyor’s feedback at the time.
The landlord had instructed a further inspection on 21 February 2024. Operatives conducted a meter leak detection test but found no leak. The landlord concluded the mould was likely to be linked to the ventilation of the property, further stating it would benefit from having a positive input ventilation system installed. We have reviewed the information and cannot see this was done at the time.
During 2024 several attempts to resolve the issues were made by the landlord. These included:
1. Inspecting the roof.
2. Repairing flashing to roof.
3. Clearing the gutter and downpipe.
4. Mould washes.
5. Repointing defective areas under bathroom window.
6. Repairing any cracks.
The repair records show that the landlord was actively seeking a remedy. However the issues concerning damp and mould were ongoing after its internal complaint procedure. During 2 September 2024 the landlord chased its contractors about scaffolding and roof repairs. The works were then outsourced on 22 November 2024.
The repair records show during December 2024 a further visit was made to attend and treat any mould within the property, also to identify the cause. Again in March 2025 operatives were told to conduct another assessment and treatment. On reviewing the information we have not seen that the cause was determined during these visits.
The evidence shows the landlord conducted a further inspection on 5 March 2025. It confirmed that a mould wash to the bedroom, cupboard, bathroom walls and hallway was completed but noticed the plastering it had previously completed was soaking wet. Therefore it stated it would book for a surveyor to look at the property again. This visit took place on 7 March 2025. The technical surveyor stated it would need to complete a refurbishment of the bathroom, so it could expose the pipework and locate any leaks.
Most recently the resident has informed us that she had not been provided with an update as to when these works will be carried out. We have reviewed the records and also cannot see communication in regard to this. It is essential the landlord is maintaining clear and consistent communication with its resident regarding the scheduling, scope and expected timeframes.
Overall we understand the resident’s frustration with the length of time the damp and mould has been ongoing. We also understand that it has been difficult for the landlord to resolve the issue. In any case we would expect the landlord to be proactive and taking steps to determine the cause and rectify the matter. In this instance we see there were delays both before and after its internal complaints procedure. We also see the resident’s representative had to chase for repairs.
In the landlord’s stage two response dated 5 February 2024 it offered £100 compensation for inconvenience, delays in responding to the resident’s stage two complaint and its failing to resolve the issue. It did not specify how this amount was apportioned. Whilst we understand the landlord acknowledged its failings and had made attempts to put things right for the resident, its response did not adequately address the detriment caused to the resident and the offer was not proportionate to fully recognise the impact on her. Therefore we have found maladministration.
The landlord failed to ensure that matters were put right following its final response. It has reviewed its compensation offer 14 months after its internal complaints procedure. In recognition of the ongoing issue remaining for a considerable extended period following the landlord’s final response, it offered £500 for stress, inconvenience and loss of enjoyment. Whilst we recognise the landlord’s attempts to put things right by means of financial compensation for the resident. This was considered 14 months after the complaint was closed, following and prompted by out intention to investigate the complaint. Furthermore the issue still have not been resolved.
On 1 January 2024, the resident’s representative had expressed concerns about the electricals being unsafe. He was concerned the mould was near the affected area. He also raised concerns about cracks forming on the wall and was concerned there was a structural issue. Although this point did not form part of the original complaint raised, he raised this concern before the stage two reply was issued. The landlord did not comment on the matter, despite it issuing a stage two response 4 weeks later. During September 2024 the resident’s representative stated the damp had spread to behind the light switches and he was concerned about safety.
Whilst we can see an inspection took place after the resident’s report of January 2024, we have not seen a record to reflect the landlord looked specifically at the resident’s electrical safety concerns at the time. The evidence shows the landlord arranged for this to be checked during October 2024.
In accordance with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the landlord’s policies it would be responsible for the electric supply and installations. Therefore when the resident raised this concern it should have been looked at within 38 days of the report as per its policy. As we have not seen evidence to satisfy this was done, we have found there was a failure by the landlord.
We also find it would have been appropriate for the landlord to address the electrical safety concerns and explain its position regarding the electrics in the stage two response.
With regard to the cracks, we have not seen the landlord’s position on the underlying cause. We have seen an inspection took place and it was agreed to have the wall plastered. This suggests acknowledgement of the issue and a willingness to address it. We are satisfied with the landlord’s actions in respect to these concerns.
In summary, while it was appropriate that it carry out inspections and surveys to investigate the resident’s concerns, there was an unreasonable delay in carrying out repairs. Whilst we acknowledge the landlord reconsidered its position and offered compensation14 months after the complaint was closed. This was a missed opportunity to identify its errors, to provide an explanation, to identify learning, and to offer redress. Therefore, we have found there was maladministration in the circumstances. An order for £500 has been made to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the complaint about the resident’s request for a repair to the wet room.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Orders and recommendations

Orders.

The landlord should pay the resident £100 compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by the delays repairing the wet room.
The landlord should pay the resident £500 compensation in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident for the ongoing damp and mould.
If not done so already, the landlord should pay the resident its offer of £860 compensation. This is in addition to our orders above.
All orders above should be completed within four weeks of the date of this determination.
The landlord should provide the resident with a plan of action for the bathroom. This includes scheduling, scope of works and the timeframe. The works should be completed within 3 months of the date of this determination.