Sovereign Network Group (202448707)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202448707

Sovereign Network Group

3 October 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 complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
2. the resident’s requests for a replacement kitchen.
3. the resident’s reports of repairs needed to the brickwork and drainage.
4. the resident’s requests for additional plug sockets and a new toilet.
5. the associated complaint.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The property is a two-bedroom, ground floor flat. The resident’s adult daughter, who has asthma, also lives at the property. The resident says that the damp and mould has impacted this.
The resident has been reporting concerns about damp and mould since at least March 2023. In the process of investigating this, the landlord removed the cavity wall insulation from the property. The resident has contacted the landlord to request that it reinstates the insulation, repoints the external brickwork, reroutes a downpipe from the gutter and installs a new kitchen. The resident considers that these works would help to resolve the damp and mould issues.
The resident contacted their local MP about the issues in December 2023. The landlord responded to the MP but did not raise a formal complaint. She sent a complaint email to the landlord on 10 February 2025. She was unhappy with the time it was taking to complete the works required, damage caused to internal decorations by mould and the additional costs she was incurring. The resident also asked the landlord to install more plug sockets in the property and replace shelving in the storage cupboards.
The landlord sent a stage 1 response on 27 March 2025. It partially upheld the complaint. The landlord confirmed that it would look to reinstate the cavity wall insulation and replace the kitchen after April 2024. It said that it had provided the resident with a £100 voucher for the cost of redecorating the property. The landlord noted that there were two double plug sockets in the living room, and the toilet had become discoloured due to the hard water. The landlord also confirmed that it had logged repairs to inspect the downpipe and repointing of the property. It offered compensation of £73.54 towards the resident’s electricity usage.
The resident escalated the complaint during a call with the landlord on 28 March 2025. She was not satisfied with the explanations the landlord gave in its stage 1 response. The resident also felt that the compensation offered was too low. She requested confirmation that the landlord complete the works as soon as possible, the landlord to provide a decorator to redecorate the property and an increased compensation offer.
The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 6 May 2025. The landlord confirmed that it:
1. Booked a repair for the repointing for 27 May 2025.
2. Raised a job with a contractor to complete another damp and mould survey.
3. Was looking to replace the kitchen in June or July 2025, but this may extend to the end of March 2026.
4. Was looking to reinstate the cavity wall insulation after April 2025. But it first needed to find a contractor to complete this and then issue a section 20 notice to the leaseholders in the block.
5. Apologised for the delays in sending its complaint responses.
6. Offered compensation of £525.
The resident asked us to investigate her complaint on 15 May 2025. She was unhappy with lack of resolution for damage caused by damp and mould. The resident was not satisfied with the explanations given by the landlord about the causes of damp and mould. The resident requested that the landlord complete the works required. She also asked that the landlord replace shelving in the cupboards, repaint the bathroom, replace the toilet, pay for decorating, and install more plug sockets.
Since bringing the complaint to us, the resident has confirmed that the landlord has now replaced the kitchen, but she is unhappy with the standard of the work.

Assessment and findings

Reports of damp and mould

The landlord’s damp and mould policy says that it will respond quickly to reports of damp and mould, addressing any structural issues and provide support to residents. It goes on to say that it will ensure it treats all residents fairly, making sure not to apportion ‘lifestyle blame.’
The policy also says that, following a report of damp and mould, the landlord’s actions, “range from a wash down to the affected area and a follow-on inspection to ensure the issue is resolved, through to installation of specialist equipment such as vents, extractor fans and positive air flow (also known as Positive Input Ventilation or PIV) systems.”
The contact notes and repair history from the landlord show that the resident reported damp and mould in the property in March 2023 and October 2023. The landlord completed inspections and treated the mould found. This was positive, as the landlord acted quickly to remove the mould from the property. However, there is no evidence to show that it arranged follow up appointments, as per its damp and mould policy. This is a failing.
In September 2023, the landlord confirmed that it had raised a job with a contractor to inspect the cavity wall. The resident said that she needed the insulation to stop damp and mould. She also raised concerns about the impact on her health.
The resident reported damp and mould again in November 2023. She said that this was affecting her daughter’s asthma. There is no evidence to show that the landlord took any action. This is concerning, as the resident reported that this issue was impacting her daughter’s health. There was a delay in the landlord dealing with the issue and led to the resident having to escalate her concerns.
The resident contacted her local MP in December 2023. They passed her concerns on to the landlord. On 23 December 2023, the landlord removed the insulation from the cavity wall. It told the resident that the walls needed to dry out before it could reinstate the insulation. It provided the resident with a dehumidifier to help with this. It was reasonable for the landlord to provide a dehumidifier to help to remove any damp.
The landlord responded to the MP, confirming that it would arrange for damp and mould treatment, an inspection and would consider a new extractor fan. These actions are reasonable, as the landlord was taking steps to try to address the damp and mould issue.
The landlord raised a job for a contractor to inspect the property and install a new extractor fan in the kitchen. It booked an appointment for 25 January 2024. It placed this on hold, as the landlord said that there was potentially asbestos in the cavity walls. It was reasonable for the landlord to place this on hold, due to the potential impact if asbestos was present.
After the landlord placed the job on hold, it did not keep the resident updated. She had to repeatedly contact the landlord to ask about the progress of any work. The landlord told the resident that it had booked an appointment for 17 April 2024, but this did not go ahead. The resident requested that the landlord redecorate the property, due to the damage caused by damp and mould. The landlord said that it would respond within 10 working days, but there is no evidence to show that it did.
The landlords lack of action and contact with the resident is unreasonable. The landlord could have taken more action to identify the cause of the damp and mould. The lack of communication, even after the resident contacted her MP, meant that the resident had to continue to chase the landlord for updates.
The landlord completed a damp and mould survey on 15 May 2024. The surveyor took readings using a moisture measurement system. The surveyor found damp and mould by the front door and in a storage cupboard. They noted that there were no physical defects with the property, and humidity in the property was high. The report said that consistent heating and ventilation would reduce the risk of damp and mould. It also said that the property needed a new kitchen and that the store cupboard required a mould wash.
The landlord followed this up by arranging for the mould wash of the storage cupboard. It also arranged for a contractor to complete an asbestos survey for the cavity wall. These actions were reasonable, as the landlord took action to remove the mould and to investigate the concerns with the cavity wall.
The landlord completed an asbestos test on 19 June 2024. The resident says that the landlord told them it found no asbestos. However, the landlord then booked another asbestos survey on 27 June 2024. It is unclear why the landlord needed to book another survey. The resident disputed the need for another survey, but there is no evidence to show that the landlord explained the purpose of this. This is unreasonable.
The resident requested updates in July 2024, October 2024, November 2024, and December 2024. The landlord provided a dehumidifier and told the resident that it would get updates on the works. However, it did not follow this up or contact the resident. This is concerning as it left the resident with potentially harmful mould in the property.
On 7 January 2025, a contractor completed another damp and mould survey at the property. The surveyor found damp and mould in the front bedroom. Infra-red images showed cold surface areas on the walls, as the landlord removed the insulation. The surveyor recommended that the landlord reinstate the cavity wall insulation, install new extractor fans and install louvre grilles on the storage cupboard doors. It also recommended that the resident continue to use a dehumidifier.
As the damp and mould issues continued after the landlord’s inspection, it was reasonable for it to arrange another inspection with an independent contractor. However, the landlord did not act on the recommendations in the report. After the resident raised her complaint, an internal email from the landlord notes that it would not be taking the recommended actions. The landlord said the resident caused the damp and by turning off the extractor fans in the property.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy says that it will not apportion ‘lifestyle blame.’ An independent contractor recommended the landlord take action to reduce the risk of damp and mould. The landlord has not provided good reason for disregarding these findings. It is concerning that the landlord places blame on the resident for not using current extractor fans, especially considering that the report recommends that it installs new fans. The landlord’s disregard for the findings of the report is unreasonable.
In its stage 1 response, the landlord said that it planned to complete the kitchen and cavity wall works after April 2025. In its stage 2 response, the landlord referred to then damp and mould survey it completed in May 2024. It did not include details of the contractor’s survey from January 2025. Again, this is unreasonable as it does not give a full picture of the findings and recommendations from each visit.
In relation to the cavity wall insulation, the landlord explained in its stage 2 response that it currently does not have a contractor in place to complete this work. Once a contractor has been onboarded, the landlord will need to issue a section 20 notice to the leaseholders in the block before it can complete any work on the cavity wall.
While it is reasonable that the landlord obtains the services of a suitable contractor and issues a section 20 notice, it has not explained why it has not done this before. The landlord removed the cavity wall insulation in December 2023. It is reasonable to expect the landlord to have been aware of the need of a contractor and the section 20 notice at this point. There is no evidence to show that the landlord considered these issues. It also did not inform the resident that it needed to do this before it could reinstate the insulation. This is unreasonable, as it has led to lengthy delays.
In summary, the landlord:
1. Has left the property without cavity wall insulation since December 2023;
2. Has not been proactive in taking action to reinstate the cavity wall insulation, failing to appoint a contractor or issue section 20 notices;
3. Failed to follow up with the resident after completing mould washes;
4. Did not respond to some of the residents reports of mould and requests for updates;
5. Disregarded the recommendations from an independent damp and mould survey, and placed blame for the problem on the resident.
These issues have been going on for a significant period of time. The resident has had to continually contact the landlord to chase updates and responses. She has highlighted the impact of damp and mould on her and her daughter’s health.
We find that there has been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
We have ordered the landlord to arrange for an independent damp and mould survey at the property within the next 4 weeks. Following this, the landlord should provide a schedule of works to the resident for any actions recommended in the survey.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord offered compensation of £525. In our remedies guidance, we recommend compensation of between £600 and £1,000 when we find maladministration that has had a significant impact on a resident.
The resident has highlighted the additional energy costs incurred and the costs to redecorate the property. While she has not provided evidence of these costs to us, we can consider the impact that the complaint has had on the resident.
The resident has reported damp and mould repeatedly to the landlord over several years. The landlord has not taken sufficient action to investigate and resolve the cause of the issue. It has failed to reinstate cavity wall insulation, which the contractor’s damp and mould survey highlighted as a potential cause of damp and mould. The resident has explained the impact that this is having on her and her daughter’s physical and mental health. She raised these issues with her MP as she was concerned about the impact to their health. She has also experienced increased costs due to a lack of insulation and having to run a dehumidifier. The resident highlighted the stress and anxiety caused by having damp and mould in the property for several years, without a resolution.
We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident with compensation of £900 within 4 weeks for its failure to investigate the damp and mould issues. This includes the £525 offered in its stage 2 response. If the landlord has already paid this to the resident, it will deduct this from the £900.
We have also ordered the landlord to send a letter of apology which addresses the failures highlighted in this report and the learning taken to prevent recurrence.

Requests for a replacement kitchen

The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy outlines planned maintenance work. This includes replacing kitchens. The policy says it will review potential works based on a range of factors, including the life cycle and remaining life of the components, maintaining property standards and consulting with residents.
The landlord’s contact notes show that the resident has been raising issues with her kitchen since at least 2021. The landlord consistently advised that it was not due to renew the kitchen until 2025. This is reasonable, as the landlord was managing the resident’s expectations as to when they will be able to replace the kitchen.
In May 2024, the landlord completed a damp and mould survey. The surveyor noted that the kitchen was old, and the landlord needed to replace this. In July 2024, the resident contacted the landlord to request an update on the kitchen refurbishment. The landlord passed this query on to its planning team. However, there is no evidence to show that the landlord provided an update to the resident. This is a failure.
The resident chased an update in October 2024. The landlord replied on 15 November 2024, saying that the planned work team would contact her when a date became available. In December 2024, it reiterated that it could not give a timescale on the kitchen refurbishment. The landlord confirmed that it could raise repairs for any specific issues the resident was having with the kitchen.
The landlord’s response was reasonable. It told the resident that it would contact her when a date became available, and it would repair any issues with the kitchen in the meantime.
In its stage 1 response, the landlord said that it planned to replace the kitchen after April 2025. In its stage 2 response, it said that it hoped to do this in June 2025 or July 2025. These responses are reasonable, as the landlord was keeping the resident updated with its plans to replace the kitchen.
The resident has confirmed that the landlord has now replaced the kitchen. However, she is unhappy with the quality of the work. As the kitchen refurbishment happened after the landlord issued its stage 2 response, we would consider this to be a new complaint. The resident will need to raise any concerns as a new complaint with the landlord.
We find that there has been service failure in the landlord’s handling of the kitchen refurbishment. This is due to its failure to provide updates in July 2024 and October 2024.
We have ordered the landlord to provide an apology to the resident for its failure to respond, within 4 weeks.

Reports of repairs needed to the brickwork and drainage

The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy says that it will aim to visit a property and complete non-emergency repairs within 38 days the resident reporting it.
The resident has requested that the landlord repoints brickwork on the exterior walls and redirects a downpipe from a gutter. We will address these repairs separately below.

Repointing of brickwork

The landlord raised visited the property in January 2024 and raised a repair to repoint the brickwork around the front porch window. It booked this in for 19 March 2024. On 19 February 2024, the resident requested that the landlord repoint the corner of the property, as she was concerned that this was leading to damp and mould in her daughter’s bedroom. There is no evidence to show that the landlord responded to this request.
The initial steps the landlord took were reasonable. It visited the property and arranged to repoint the brickwork. However, it did not respond to the resident’s request to repoint the corner of the house. This is unreasonable, as it led to unnecessary delays in it raising a repair for this.
In April 2024, the landlord raised a repair to repoint the corner of the property. It got a quote for this from a contractor. However, it did not book an appointment until 2 July 2024, when it arranged to complete the work on 30 October 2024. The landlord has not provided a reason for this delay. The delay in the landlord attending the property is unreasonable, as it is outside of the 38-day timescale specified in its repairs policy.
The landlord repointed the lower corner of the property on 30 October 2024. It did not repoint the upper part of the building, as it had not arranged to install scaffolding. It would have been reasonable to expect the landlord to assess if it needed scaffolding and arrange for this before the appointment went ahead. This led to further delays in the landlord completing the repairs.
The resident believes that the pointing of the brickwork may be contributing to the damp and mould. The damp and mould survey from January 2025 found no issues with the fabric of the building, which could be causing damp and mould.

Drainage and downpipe

In its damp and mould survey of 15 May 2024, the landlord noted that there was a lack of drainage at the rear of the property. This was causing the path to flood when it rained. The report said that the landlord needed to install drainage channels. There is no evidence to show that the landlord took any action to install drainage channels. This is a failing.
In October 2024, the resident reported that their gutter was leaking. The landlord booked in a repair with a contractor. The resident chased this up with the landlord. The landlord told the resident that it was unable to speak to the contractor, but to allow it 10 working days to get back to her. The landlord did not respond with an update. This is a failing.
A contractor attended the property on 22 November 2024 and cleared the gutter. The resident contacted the landlord saying that the contractor should have redirected the downpipe. There is no mention of redirecting the downpipe in the landlord’s repair notes.
On 9 December 2024, the landlord booked in a repair to move the downpipe. It cancelled this on 17 December 2024. It has not provided an explanation for this. This is unreasonable, as it led to delays in the landlord investigating this. It would be reasonable to expect the landlord to keep sufficient records to explain why an appointment has been cancelled.
The resident requested an update on the downpipe in March 2025. The landlord told her that it did not have any follow up works booked in. It booked an appointment to inspect the guttering and drainage. The landlord confirmed this in its stage 2 response.

Summary

The landlord failed to properly deal with the repairs to the brickwork and drainage. There were delays in the landlord taking action and communicating with the resident. The landlord’s repairs notes are not sufficient to be able understand why appointments were cancelled.
We find that there has been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the pointing of the brickwork and drainage. There have been delays and a lack of communication with the resident.
We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £150 in compensation due to its failure to properly deal with these repair issues.
The resident says that a contractor has been to inspect the downpipe, but the landlord has not contacted them again about this. We have ordered the landlord to arrange for an inspection of the brickwork, guttering, downpipe, and drainage within 4 weeks. Following this, the landlord should provide a schedule of works to the resident for any repairs required.
Finally, we have ordered the landlord to send the resident a letter of apology.

Requests for additional plug sockets and a new toilet

In the landlord’s damp and mould survey report, it notes that the resident complained that the toilet was dirty and she cannot clean this. The landlord also noted the resident’s concerns that the living room only had one plug socket.
In its report, the landlord said that the toilet had heavy limescale build up, which the resident could clean using a quality descaler. It also said that the resident had 2 double plug sockets on either side of the chimney breast. The landlord reiterated this in its stage 2 response.
The landlord took action to investigate these concerns during the damp and mould survey. There is no evidence to show that the resident raised these concerns again until she submitted her formal complaint in February 2025. The landlord provided reasonable responses to these issues by confirming the findings from the survey.
We find that there has been no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests for additional plug sockets and a new toilet.
As the resident is unhappy with the plug sockets and toilet, we have recommended that the landlord investigate these issues further and provide the resident with a written response confirming any actions that it will take.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s complaints policy says that it will aim to agree a solution with the resident within 10 working days. It may need to extend this by a further 10 days but will let the resident know why. It aims to issue stage 2 responses within 20 working days. Again, it may extend this by 10 days and inform the resident of the reasons.
In December 2023, the resident contacted her local MP about the issues that they were facing. The resident says that they had made a formal complaint but had not received a response. The MP passed the concerns on to the landlord. The subject line of the email confirmed that it was a complaint.
The landlord’s contact notes show that the resident discussed her concerns with the complaints team on 20 December 2023. In an email to the landlord on 7 March 2024, the MP stated that the resident had not received a response to her complaint. There is no evidence to show that the landlord responded to the MP or raised a formal complaint.
The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) from April 2022, which was applicable at this time, defines a complaint as an “expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standard of service, actions or lack of action by the organisation.”
While the landlord looked to take action to address the resident’s concerns, it did not raise a formal complaint. This is a failure. In its stage 2 response, the landlord says that this is because it responded to the MP. However, the emails from the MP confirmed that the resident wished to raise a complaint and had not received a response to this. Its failure to raise a formal complaint could have potentially delayed the resident from accessing our service.
On 10 February 2025, the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2. As there was no complaint open, the landlord opened a new stage 1 complaint and informed the resident of this.
The landlord issued the stage 1 response on 27 March 2025, 33 working days after the resident raised their complaint. This is outside the 10-working day timescale stated in the landlord’s complaints policy. This delay is unreasonable.
The resident requested to escalate their complaint to stage 2 on 2 April 2025. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 6 May 2025. It took the landlord 22 working days to provide the stage 2 response, slightly outside of the timescale of 20 working days in its policy.
The landlord has not dealt with the resident’s complaint in line with its complaints policy or the Code. This meant that there were delays in the resident receiving the landlord’s final response, which would allow them to bring a complaint to our service.
We find that there has been maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.
We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £150 its failure to raise a complaint in December 2023 and the delays in its issuing its responses in 2025.
We have also ordered the landlord to provide an apology for these delays.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests for a replacement kitchen.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs needed to the brickwork and drainage.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests for additional plug sockets and a new toilet.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
1. Pay the resident compensation of £1,200 consisting of:
  1. £900 for the delays in it investigating and resolving the damp and mould issues.
  2. £150 for the delays in it repointing the brickwork and investigating the drainage issue.
  3. £150 for the delays in it raising a complaint and issuing complaint responses.
  4. the landlord should deduct the £525 offered in its stage 2 response if it can provide evidence to show that it has already paid this to the resident.
2. arrange for an independent damp and mould survey at the property. Following this, the landlord should provide a schedule of works to the resident for any actions recommended in the survey.
3. arrange for an inspection of the brickwork, guttering, downpipe, and drainage. Following this, the landlord should provide a schedule of works to the resident for any repairs required.
4. send a letter of apology from a senior member of staff which addresses the failures highlighted in this report and the learning taken to prevent recurrence.
5. Provide evidence that is has complied with these orders within 4 weeks.

Recommendations

We recommend that the landlord investigates the resident’s concerns with the plug sockets and toilet in the property. It should provide the resident with a written response confirming any actions that it will take.