Read our new Spotlight report on repairs and maintenance – repairing trust.

Stockport Homes Limited (202400602)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202400602

Stockport Homes Limited

13 December 2024

 

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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
    1. Damp, mould, and associated repairs.
    2. A woodlice infestation.

Background

  1. The resident lives in a 2-bedroom semi-detached house with her partner and 2 children. They have lived in the property since April 2022, and she has a secure tenancy. The landlord does not have any vulnerabilities recorded for the family. As both the resident and her partner communicated with the landlord and the Ombudsman during her case on her behalf, they are both referred to as ‘the resident’ in this report.
  2. The resident first contacted the landlord on 22 November 2022 to ask it to inspect the window seals in the property’s bedrooms, as she noticed moisture on the windows. Following this, the resident raised further damp reports over the next 13 and a half months. After this, the resident raised a stage 1 complaint on 10 January 2024. She said she had raised damp issues numerous times and had endless inspectors out to assess this. The resident described feeling “fobbed off” by the landlord and had since noticed damp patches around the children’s bedroom window and vent. The resident also complained of woodlice in the bedroom.
  3. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 31 January 2024. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint. It confirmed it attended on 12 December 2022 after raising an operative’s visit when the resident first made the report on 22 November 2022. The landlord raised repairs after a surveyor’s inspection on 13 January 2023 recommended by its operative’s visit, most of which were completed by 20 June 2023. The landlord closed two jobs as the resident had refused a mould wash and the installation of a bathroom extractor fan. The Ombudsman understands from the resident these have been completed now. The landlord concluded that it believed its actions would prevent further water leaks in the kitchen and bedrooms and, with proper heating and ventilation, it would minimise the likelihood of woodlice.
  4. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 1 March 2024. She said she had had no contact whatsoever and confirmed the woodlice were still an issue and she attached a photo of the corner of the bedroom. The landlord responded on 6 March 2024 querying whether the resident had received the stage 1 response. It asked the resident for the reasons she remained unhappy and what outcome she hoped for. The resident contacted the landlord to chase her escalation request on 4 April 2024, she then realised she had missed its email. She said she was not happy that she was still having problems in the property. She had woodlice which she believed was related to the damp. The landlord escalated the complaint the next day. The landlord conducted a further surveyor’s inspection on 14 April 2024, where a mould wash and a specialist treatment to the utility was organised.
  5. The landlord sent its final resolution letter on 3 May 2024, and it partially upheld the complaint. In conversation with the resident, she said she was happy with the new surveyor. She said some repair jobs had not been completed and previous works had not prevented the issues. The resident identified some areas of investigation for the landlord. These and the landlord’s responses are listed below:
    1. Water tracking through gaps in the front door – the landlord inspected this and at the time there were no signs of water leaks.
    2. Water tracking through paving slabs – the landlord inspected this and was satisfied they were laid correctly.
    3. Outdated windows and doors – the landlord replaced the side door in mid-February 2024. It inspected the windows and agreed to reseal the windows. The landlord completed the ground floor windows on 12 February 2024, and it completed the first floor windows on the day of the final resolution letter.
    4. Mould issues in kitchen and living room – the landlord completed all the repairs it identified in its stage 1 response. It conducted a further inspection on 14 April 2024 and did not identify any issues in the living room. It requested a specialist drainage consultant carry out a survey. Once the landlord received survey the report it would advise the resident.
    5. A loose roof tile – the landlord assessed this on 20 June 2023 and deemed it was not causing problems. As there were no reported water leaks, the landlord was happy to address this during a future roof replacement programme unless the situation changed.
  6. The landlord also contacted the resident to ask her to reconsider it installing the bathroom extractor fan. The landlord acknowledged the delay in resealing the first floor window, and the lack of communication regarding the decision not to fix the loose roof tile. The landlord committed to raising these issues with the relevant parties to prevent this from happening again and stored this on its learning register. The landlord apologised and offered £500 compensation in recognition of the inconvenience and detriment to the resident and her family. The Ombudsman understands the landlord and resident agreed an additional £200 compensation for damage to the resident’s mattress after offering £500 in the final resolution letter. This brings the total to £700. The resident remains dissatisfied as she still has problems with damp and has not heard back concerning the woodlice issue.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident raised her concern about carpet beetles in her escalation request. The Ombudsman has ruled this outside the scope of this investigation, under 42.a. of the Scheme, which states we may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure. The landlord did not consider this aspect in its final resolution response, and the Ombudsman is aware the resident has brought this up in a subsequent complaint, which the landlord has currently responded to at stage 1, and that we have recorded in a separate case.

Damp, mould, and associated repairs

  1. The landlord had two versions of its dampness and condensation policy during the timespan of this complaint. The first says when a resident calls in with a damp and mould issue the landlord will triage it, sending out an operative if there are repairs outstanding. The operative will carry out the repair and take photographs, which will be reviewed by a technical surveyor who will decide if further assistance is necessary.
  2. The second policy from 23 August 2023 commits a rapid response team to attend in 10 working days to clean down the affected area and carry out any minor repairs. Any repairs which cannot be done immediately will be carried out in line with repairs policy timeframes. The landlord aims to complete follow up calls to residents in 6 months of their damp report to see if it is resolved. The landlord will provide the resident with a free hygrometer to help the resident understand, monitor, and control the moisture in the property.
  3. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states it will complete urgent repairs in 24 hours and non-urgent in agreement with the resident. The landlord may batch minor repairs and schedule them over a longer period.
  4. The Ombudsman published a Spotlight report on damp and mould in October 2021. This promotes proactive dealing with damp and mould and encourages landlords to adopt a zero-tolerance approach. Landlords are encouraged to move away from a culture of apportioning blame and to work with residents to resolve the issue. This could include providing advice, considering improvements to the property’s ventilation systems, and helping to manage mould growth with other interventions. It says occupancy factors do not mean that landlords have no responsibility. Landlords should take reasonable steps in partnership with residents in these circumstances.
  5. The Spotlight report says the landlord should clearly communicate its diagnosis with the resident. It should share any relevant information to ensure the resident has confidence in it and understands the next steps.
  6. The resident first contacted the landlord on 22 November 2022 to report the issues with moisture on the windows. The landlord’s initial response was appropriate and in keeping with its dampness and condensation policy at the time. It visited and assessed the window seals 14 working days later on 12 December 2022, finding them to be acceptable. The landlord provided the resident with advice about managing heating and ventilation. It advised her to open the windows in the morning, to make sure the heating was on, and ensure the radiators were not obstructed. The landlord also recommended a surveyor’s inspection, which it completed 21 working days after its initial visit on 13 January 2023.
  7. In conversation with the Ombudsman, the resident illustrated her commitment to resolving the issues. She stated the landlord told her to remove bushes around the exterior walls of the property, which she did. She also bought a dehumidifier on the landlord’s advice.
  8. Since the resident’s first report, and in response to further reports over the next 18 months, the landlord raised a number of repairs. These included to:
    1. Fill the porch frame gaps on 2 March 2023.
    2. Fit new draught excluders on 2 March 2023.
    3. Fill pointing in 2 areas on 16 February 2023.
    4. Fit a bathroom extractor fan the resident declined.
    5. Hack off and replaster bridging plaster by kitchen, rear door, and under stairs on 20 June 2023.
    6. Refit rubber seals around the rear door base and top of kitchen window on 2 March 2023.
    7. Mould wash in areas of the bedrooms and utility the resident declined before accepting on 22 May 2023.
    8. Re-screed the kitchen floor, replace walls tiles and beading on 6 September and 20 October 2023.
    9. Demolish the chimney and to make good the roof on 17 November 2023.
    10. Reseal the kitchen window on 28 September 2023.
    11. Replace the rear door on 13 February 2024.
    12. Fit a new double-glazed unit in the bathroom on 26 January 2024.
    13. Renew mastic seals around all the windows on 14 February 2024.
    14. Repair fractured and displaced foul water gully pipe on 31 May 2024, as recommended by its specialist drainage consultant on 8 May 2024.
  9. The landlord’s records state it did not complete the mould wash or the bathroom extractor fan installation. The resident cancelled and did not want to rebook the mould wash. The records state the resident refused the extractor fan. The resident explained to the landlord that she did not want the plastic trim on show. When she asked the operative if they could install it differently, they said they would ask, and the resident did not hear back. The resident informed the Ombudsman she now has a bathroom extractor fan, and the mould wash has subsequently been completed. These were reasonable steps for the landlord to take and were positive attempts to tackle any mould or excess moisture in the property, in line with its policy and our Spotlight report.
  10. Following the resident’s further concern about damp on 7 November 2023, the landlord carried out its rapid response visit on 21 November 2023. This queried whether a new damp proof course was needed as the kitchen walls were wet. In response to this, the landlord carried out a further visit on 19 December 2023. In communication with the Ombudsman, the landlord said it considered a new damp proof course, but it could not see evidence it had been compromised. During this visit, the landlord raised a job to renew the mastic seal around all windows.
  11. The landlord completed the ground floor windows on 14 February 2024 and the upstairs on 3 May 2024. The landlord acknowledged it took longer than it should have when resealing the upstairs windows in its final resolution letter. The landlord did not identify how it planned to resolve the wet kitchen walls, aside putting the mastic around the windows.
  12. The resident first reported issues in November 2022 and the resident reported to the Ombudsman she is experiencing continuing problems. The Ombudsman notes the resident says the renewed bridging plaster did not resolve the kitchen damp issue. She also advised the Ombudsman there are damp issues in the bedrooms, behind the living room sofa, the attic has a rotten rafter, and the front door frame is rotten. The Ombudsman notes the landlord has inspected these elements, but there was no work raised to look at the attic. The landlord refilled the front door frame, subsequently completed mould washes, and resealed windows.
  13. Landlords are entitled to rely on the opinion and recommendations of their qualified staff concerning what works are needed to resolve damp and mould. However, if these recommendations have been attempted and have not resolved the problem the landlord needs to address this. The Ombudsman recognises there will always be some damp and mould cases that are more difficult to diagnose and/or repair, therefore take longer to rectify. It is reasonable that it took a while to address this. However, it is disappointing and frustrating the resident reported to the Ombudsman she is experiencing continuing problems.
  14. In conversation with the Ombudsman, the resident said she has not kept the landlord informed of these continuing problems. She feels the landlord should call her. This is confirmed by the landlord which, in communication with the Ombudsman, states there are no outstanding repairs relating to damp and mould.
  15. The landlord’s current dampness and condensation policy makes provision for this when it says it aims to complete follow up calls within 6 months of a damp report to check whether the issue is resolved. The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence the landlord adhered to this part of its policy. In our Spotlight report, the Ombudsman also says it is good practice for the landlord to schedule follow up visits at set periods, for at least a year after works are completed, to satisfy itself the problem has not returned.
  16. Had the landlord contacted the resident or inspected the property again it would be aware of the continuing problems. This does not negate the resident’s responsibility to report repairs to the landlord. The Ombudsman acknowledges the resident is frustrated by the length of time she has been experiencing issues. However, the landlord needs to be informed of these, or it will not be able to put things right. It is clear from the list of repairs the landlord was responsive to the resident’s reports and the property has had extensive work.
  17. It is important that these types of cases are handled with particular care to ensure they are resolved effectively. This helps maintain the resident and the landlord relationship and reduces the risk of the resident feeling the need to resort to a complaint or disrepair claim.
  18. The landlord has provided the resident with appropriate information about managing dampness, mould, and condensation from its initial contact. It stated it provided the resident with a hygrometer during the visit on 21 November 2023. From evidence the Ombudsman has seen, the landlord did not apportion any blame to the resident, and it took the reports seriously. The landlord completed numerous repairs to the resident’s property, referring to specialist companies where necessary. Most repairs differed, however there were some common themes in the resident’s complaints being the windows and doors.
  19. The landlord has advised the Ombudsman it believes the issues are likely caused by the property and typical day to day living, and that the presence of mould will continue to be a challenge. The Ombudsman has not seen evidence it has communicated this to the resident, this is recommended in the Spotlight report.
  20. We have not seen the landlord recorded any impartial evidence of the damp issue, such as damp readings to be able to objectively say if the issue improved or not.
  21. Despite a lot of positive work by the landlord, there are areas of evidence missing. These are that the resident was informed it believed the issue was due to the property and day to day living, that it contacted the resident after 6 months to see whether the work it completed had resolved the issues, and the lack of impartial evidence of damp. Therefore, the Ombudsman finds there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and associated repairs.
  22. Ultimately, the £700 total compensation awarded by the landlord was in excess of the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance’s recommendation of up to £100 for cases where there has been a service failure. Therefore, the orders and recommendation in this report will be focused on attempts to achieve a remedy for the resident. This is via the landlord apologising to her and surveying the property to try to establish the cause of the damp issue, as well as reviewing its relevant training needs to learn from the outcome of her case.

Woodlice infestation

  1. The landlord’s pest policy does not identify woodlice as a pest. It defines pests as something which can be harmful, hamper human activities, and/or cause damage to property. In the policy, the landlord states the resident is responsible for the removal of all pests other than rats, mice, squirrels, or cockroaches from the property. The landlord will pay for the removal of infestations of rats, mice, squirrels, or cockroaches if they are deemed to be a health risk, have the potential to damage the property, and have not been caused by lifestyle.
  2. The resident reported the woodlice issue to the landlord on 23 March 2023. In accordance with its pest policy and responsive repairs policy the landlord advised the resident to contact pest control. The landlord carried out an inspection on 13 April 2023, where it noted no sign of moisture which might lead to the presence of woodlice. The landlord visited again on 19 September 2023. It agreed to install a mesh over the airbricks, which it completed on 21 November 2023.
  3. In the landlord’s stage 1 response, it detailed the actions it planned to take and had taken. It stated that, with proper heating and ventilation, it would minimise the likelihood of woodlice.
  4. The landlord reiterated to the resident on 5 April 2024 that any issues with woodlice would be for the resident to resolve. In its final resolution letter, the landlord said it will work toward ensuring all avenues relating to the appearance of mould and woodlice are explored.
  5. The resident advised the Ombudsman in July 2024 that the woodlice remain an issue. The resident described seeing woodlice crawling on her sleeping child. The Ombudsman recognises the distress the resident is likely to have felt at this. The landlord’s policy is clear that it is not responsible for the removal of woodlice. The landlord communicated this to the resident. The landlord did make efforts to try to reduce the entry of woodlice into the property.
  6. The landlord has taken steps to resolve the damp issues, which in turn should reduce the presence of woodlice. The landlord has taken reasonable steps to try to mitigate the woodlice in the property, despite it not being its responsibility. As such the Ombudsman finds there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a woodlice infestation.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was:
    1. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp, mould, and associated repairs.
    2. No maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a woodlice infestation.

Orders and recommendation

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Write to the resident to apologise for the failures identified by this report, take responsibility for these, and acknowledge their impact on her.
    2. Ensure the £700 compensation it previously offered is paid to the resident, if it has not already done so.
    3. Survey the resident’s property to try to establish the cause of the damp issue. This is to include but not limited to the damp proof course, attic, kitchen, bedrooms, front door, and windows both externally and internally. The findings are to shared with the resident and the Ombudsman, including a timeline to resolve any issues raised in the report.
  2. The landlord is to confirm compliance with these orders and the below recommendation to the Ombudsman within 6 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendation

  1. It is recommended that the landlord review its staff’s and contractors’ training needs in relation to the application of its dampness and condensation policy and the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould to prevent its failure in handling the resident’s reports of damp, mould, and associated repairs from occurring again.