Sovereign Network Group (202413879)

Background

1. The resident lives in a mid-terrace house with her family. Her adult son has asthma, a health condition the landlord is aware of. The resident first reported damp and mould to the landlord in January 2023. The landlord completed some inspections for the period January 2023 to February 2024. Following this it completed the majority of the repairs apart from some brick works. However, the resident continued experiencing damp and mould.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
3. We have also looked at the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found the landlord is responsible for:
   1. Maladministration in its response to reports of damp and mould.
   2. Maladministration in its response to the associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

Damp and mould

5. The landlord failed to provide sufficient evidence it carried out detailed damp and mould inspections following the resident’s initial report of the issue in January 2023. The repairs it did raise at the time were delayed and did not resolve the damp and mould.
6. Following the resident’s formal complaint, it did complete a more in-depth inspection in February 2024 and raised repairs to address the underlying cause of damp and mould. However, it was also delayed in completing these repairs.
7. Its position regarding the need for roof repairs was unclear and contradictory. It appears it should have raised these repairs sooner.
8. The landlord did acknowledge some failings, and it made attempts to put things right by offering the resident compensation. However, our investigation has found further failings that the landlord did not address. Therefore, its offer was not proportionate to the overall impact to the resident.

Complaint handling

9. The landlord did acknowledge its failure to respond to the resident’s stage 2 complaint. Its compensation offer was appropriate and proportionate to the overall impact caused to the resident by this failure.
10. However, it was significantly delayed in responding to the resident’s stage 1 complaint. It did not acknowledge this and made no attempts 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.

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.

11. Prior to February 2024, the landlord failed to take effective action regarding the resident’s reports of damp and mould which she first reported to it in January 2023. Its damp and mould inspections were lacking detail and did not demonstrate it made reasonable efforts to inspect the property thoroughly for any underlying causes of the issue. The repairs it did raise were delayed and did not resolve the damp and mould. In its stage 1 response to the resident, it confirmed she had reported damp and mould to it several times, but the required works had not been completed. This was a failure by the landlord which contributed to a significant delay in its overall handling of the damp and mould issues as the resident continued to live with damp and mould in her property during this time.
12. It was positive that the landlord completed a more in-depth damp and mould inspection on 15 February 2024. However, this was more than a year after her initial report. The inspector recorded the moisture readings in each room affected by the mould and damp. This included high moisture readings in the kitchen, under the stairs and on the inside of the front door. They also identified pointing work, and guttering repairs that were needed to the property to address what they believed to be the underlying cause of the issues at the time. They also noted the door was causing severe mould and damp to the carpet and door reveal.

The front door 

13. The landlord attended to inspect the front door on 5 April 2024. This was a significant delay by the landlord as it was first made aware of the issue on 8 November 2023. This was not in keeping with its published timescales and was a failure by the landlord which caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
14. Its operative concluded there was a fault when the door was first installed. As the landlord could not repair the door, it was appropriate that it raised a job to replace it on their planned replacement programme.
15. It appears the landlord replaced the door in January 2025, 8 months after it committed to doing so. Although it did tell the resident there would be some delay, this was not in keeping with its repairs policy which states follow on repairs may be placed on a programme for completion within 6 months of the date of the original repair.
16. Overall, the landlord failed to address repair issues with the door in a timely manner. It also failed to replace it within the timescales published in its repairs policy. This was a failure by the landlord which caused the resident distress and inconvenience as the door suffered with damp during this time, impacting on the area around it.

Guttering repairs

17. The landlord raised repairs to the gutter and a check for blockages on 2 January 2024. It originally scheduled this for 24 April 2024 but postponed the repair to August 2024 when it was completed. This was not in keeping with its published timescales. This was a failure by the landlord which caused the resident distress as it had told her this repair would help prevent the walls becoming damp. This therefore contributed to its overall delay in resolving mould and damp issues in the resident’s home.

Pointing works 

18. The landlord was delayed in raising the pointing works followings its inspection in February 2024. However, it attended to the next appointment on 9 April 2024. This was in keeping with its published timescales for appointed repairs.
19. The landlord completed this inspection and raised further works which were allocated to its contractor. These works were classified as ‘major and external responsive works.’ It was reasonable for the landlord to classify these works as such as they fell outside of the scope of everyday responsive repairs.
20. The landlord’s repairs policy states it will agree specific completion targets for ad-hoc major works which it will communicate and agree with the resident. The landlord has not provided sufficient evidence it or its contractor communicated the likely timeframe for these works to be completed. This was not in keeping with the landlord’s policy.
21. The contractor completed pointing works 7 months later, in November 2024. The landlord had told the resident that the damp and mould issues would be resolved once the pointing works were completed as this was the biggest contributing factor. Therefore, the landlord should have demonstrated attempts to prioritise these repairs and schedule them in sooner. This was a failure by the landlord which caused the resident distress and inconvenience as she continued to experience mould and damp in her home during this time.
22. Following the contractors visit in November 2024, the resident raised concern to the landlord that they had not completed the full scope of works originally identified in April 2024. The landlord did not respond to the resident. Instead, it said it would arrange a further inspection of the property by its surveyor. This was inappropriate as it should have queried the work carried out by its contractor and compared this against with the work identified on its visit on 9 April 2024. It should have then provided the resident with an explanation if it found the initial scope of works were no longer necessary. It did not do this, and this was therefore a failure by the landlord which caused the resident distress.
23. The landlord failed to address this concern despite a further 2 damp and mould inspections on 21 January 2025 and 28 May 2025. On 28 May 2025, it raised further brickwork repairs, but it did not explain whether these were due to its contractor having missed the work on their visit in November 2024. This was a further failure by the landlord which caused the resident distress. If these works are still necessary, the landlord must write to the resident with an expected timeframe for completion. If they are not, it must write to her and explain why.

Roofing works

24. On 30 April 2024, the landlord visited the property to complete a mould wash. Its operative’s notes state “roofing specs” to be emailed over to a member of the landlord’s staff. In its stage 1 response to the resident, it said it suspected “the water is coming from the attic and down in between the cavity walls”. However, in its stage 2 response to the resident in May 2024, it said roofing works were not required. Despite this, it later raised a roofing inspection for water ingress, unprompted by the resident, in December 2024. This found works were required to the roof which it completed in March 2025 to help resolve damp and mould issues.
25.  The landlord’s position that the roof did not require repair in May 2024 was unclear and contradictory. It did not provide any explanation or sufficient evidence as to why roofing works were not required at the time and was not in keeping with its stage 1 response. It is concerning that it later found repairs were required as it appears it missed an opportunity to resolve these repairs earlier.

Communication

26. The landlord’s communication with the resident was very poor. She had to contact it on a regular basis for updates, and it often failed to respond to her emails. This exacerbated the situation and had a significant impact on the resident.

Conclusion

27. It is important to note that when trying to resolve issues with damp and mould, it can sometimes take time to find the right solution and different repairs may need to be attempted before the problem is fully resolved. However, the landlord failed to carry out a thorough inspection of the property for a significant time. When it did, the repairs it raised to resolve the underlying causes of damp and mould were delayed. This contributed to an overall delay in its handling of the damp and mould which has caused the resident significant distress and inconvenience. Its poor communication with her only exacerbated this.
28. When the landlord has made an offer, it is the our role to assess whether the offer is fair and reasonable. Whilst it is positive that the landlord attempted to put things right by offering the resident £450, considering the further failings identified above, we do not consider this amount adequately reflects the distress and inconvenience the resident would have experienced as a result of the landlord’s actions. In line with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance, which sets out our approach to compensation, we have found maladministration by the landlord and made an order for it to pay the resident £600 compensation. This should replace its original offer of £450 for its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
29. After the complaints process ended, the resident continued to experience issues with damp and mould. The landlord raised new inspection appointments and is in the process of resolving an issue with a vent tile that it believes is causing damp in the kitchen. In the interest of fairness, this investigation has looked at issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint only. This is because the landlord needs a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any new issues before our involvement. The resident can address any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint, such as those described above, directly with her landlord. She can progress this as a new formal complaint if required.

30. The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process. It says the resident should receive a formal response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.
31. The landlord was delayed in responding to the resident’s complaint at both stages of its process. It was only responsible for a minor delay at stage 2. However, it was significantly delayed in responding to the resident’s stage 1 complaint and did so in 80 working days. This was a failure by the landlord which caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
32. It was appropriate that it offered the resident £50 compensation for the delay in responding to the stage 2 complaint. However, it did not take any steps to acknowledge its failures in responding to the resident’s stage 1 complaint. As such, we have found there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the complaint. In line with our Remedies Guidance, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £150. This should replace its original offer of £50 for its handling of the complaint.

Learning

Record keeping

33. The landlord should consider reviewing its record keeping in respect to damp and mould inspections. It should be able to demonstrate these are completed thoroughly and that it has checked the property for all potential causes of the issue.

Communication

34. The landlord has told us that following its final response to the resident’s complaint, it put in place a single point of contact for her for new repairs it raised. This is positive given its poor communication with her up to this point. It should consider doing the same for other residents in similar situations.
35. Its communication with the resident throughout this time was very poor. This exacerbated the distress and inconvenience already caused to her by its handling of damp and mould.