The Guinness Partnership Limited (202308333)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202308333

The Guinness Partnership Limited

12 November 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

The complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould.
2. The landlord’s handling of door and window replacements.
3. The associated complaint handling.

Background

The resident holds an assured tenancy. The property is a 2-bedroom bungalow. The resident’s wife has medical conditions including asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, and fibromyalgia.
The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 13 February 2023. He said that it had measured his front door for a replacement in December 2022. However, he had not received any further updates. He also said that he experienced damp and mould for around 3 years. He said the landlord had offered multiple mould washes but not identified the cause of the issues. He noted that the ongoing damp and mould impacted his wife’s health. He was also unhappy with the lack of communication provided by the landlord.
Following a lack of response from the landlord, the resident contacted this Service for support. The Ombudsman wrote to the landlord on 25 September 2023. We asked it to provide its stage 1 complaint response within 5 working days.
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 2 October 2023. It upheld the complaint. It said:
1. It was sorry to hear of the outstanding repairs. It appreciated that this would have caused him stress and inconvenience.
2. He reported damp and mould in 2021. He reported this again on 30 January 2023. It had raised multiple repairs regarding the damp and mould including mould washes. It noted he had refused some of the repairs because he wanted it to identify the cause of the issues first.
3. A manager would inspect the property on 4 October 2023. It would assess whether it needed to complete further repairs.
4. It would install a new drainage system on 5 October 2023. This would prevent water ingress into the property.
5. It had received a quote for the replacement windows and door on 2 May 2023. It needed to inspect the current windows and door before proceeding with the replacement. It would complete the inspection during the appointment on 4 October 2023.
6. He needed to provide evidence of any personal items damaged by the outstanding repairs. It would then consider compensation or reimbursement of the items.
7. It acknowledged its poor communication. It identified 5 occurrences of this between 30 January 2023 and 18 April 2023. It said it had failed to return his calls within its published timescales of 2 working days. It recognised this was poor service which would have caused stress and inconvenience. It said it needed to do better.
8. It offered him £250 compensation. £75 was for poor communication. £175 was for his time, trouble and inconvenience caused by the delayed repairs.
The resident escalated his complaint to the landlord on 18 October 2023. He said:
1. He refused a mould wash on 2 October 2023 as he wanted evidence of the damp and mould.
2. It had not found the cause of the damp and mould.
3. The living room had rising damp, and most rooms had condensation. These issues impacted his wife’s health. He felt the landlord continued to fail in its duty of care to its residents.
4. It had completed the works to install the drainage. He considered the drainage matter resolved.
5. The damp and mould had damaged his personal belongings.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 16 November 2023. It upheld the complaint. It said:
1. It completed multiple repairs in response to the reported damp and mould. It listed the various steps taken throughout January 2023 and September 2023.
2. It acknowledged delays in completing repairs and noted some repairs remained outstanding. It would inspect the property on 21 November 2023 and give an update on the following day. It would monitor any repairs required through to completion.
3. It received a quote to replace the external doors and 3 windows on 2 May 2023. It acknowledged it had failed to act after receiving this quote. It inspected the property on 4 October 2023 and found that these components did not require a replacement. It would review this decision during the inspection on 21 November 2023.
4. It acknowledged 2 further instances of poor communication to the resident.
5. It needed evidence of the damaged personal belongings to consider any compensation for this aspect.
6. It would share its findings with its repairs teams to ensure overall improvement to its service.
7. It offered further compensation of £125. £100 was for the resident’s time, trouble, and inconvenience. £25 was for its poor communication.
The resident escalated his complaint to this Service. He remained unhappy with the outstanding repairs to find and resolve the cause of the damp and mould in the property. The complaint became one that the Ombudsman could investigate on 9 April 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident said that the landlord’s handling of his reports of damp and mould affected his wife’s health. While this Service does not doubt the resident’s comments, it is outside our remit to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. The resident may wish to seek independent legal advice regarding this aspect of his complaint. The resident may also be able to make a claim via the landlord’s liability insurance. If this is something he wishes to do, he should make enquiries with the landlord accordingly.
The resident is currently experiencing issues which occurred after the complaints process ended. This includes issues with more recent repairs and asbestos within the property. In the interest of fairness, we cannot investigate matters that the landlord has not yet had the opportunity to respond to. The resident may wish to log a new complaint for the landlord to investigate his concerns and put things right. He may then bring that complaint to the Ombudsman as a new case to investigate if needed.

The landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould

Landlords must ensure that the accommodation they provide is free from serious hazards, including damp and mould, and that homes are fit for habitation. They must treat cases of damp and mould with the utmost seriousness. Furthermore, the landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by the Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth pose a health risk to residents. Therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any mould problems in its properties amount to a health hazard that may require prompt remedy.
The resident first reported damp and mould to the landlord in 2021. In the interest of fairness, the Ombudsman can consider events from up to a year before the resident made his complaint. This would have been February 2022. The first record of repairs related to damp and mould, after this date, was on 7 November 2022. However, the landlord’s complaint responses focussed on events from 30 January 2023 onwards.
Within the landlord’s complaint responses, it acknowledged failings in its response to reports of damp and mould. It found some repairs remained outstanding as well as delays in completing repairs. Our spotlight report on damp and mould encourages landlords to adopt a zero-tolerance attitude towards such matters. It also encourages landlords to take prompt action when dealing with such reports. The report gave recommendations to landlords to try to prevent any issues with handling reports of damp and mould.
The landlord has provided its repair records to the Ombudsman. Its records show that it incorrectly marked repair jobs as ‘completed,’ when in fact no repairs had been carried out. This happened on 4 occasions between January 2023 and August 2023. The landlord was aware of this issue, as on 29 September 2023, it shared such concerns within internal emails. It said, “it might be worth keeping an eye (out) to make sure the jobs don’t get closed down again.” This reflects issues with its record keeping and/or systems, and may have contributed to the overall repair delays experienced by the resident.
On 30 January 2023, the resident reported damp and mould in the lounge. The landlord attended the same day to carry out a mould wash. However, it did not complete the wash as the resident asked for it to first inspect why it had occurred. This was a reasonable request by the resident, especially given he had experienced the damp and mould for some time. The landlord responded appropriately to this request as a manager then attended the property.
The resident continued to repeatedly ask the landlord to find the cause of the issues. He asked it not to complete mould washes until it knew what caused the issues, so it could complete a lasting repair. The landlord continued to offer mould washes which the resident refused on 2 occasions in April and May 2023. After a third offer to complete a mould wash, the resident agreed. It completed a mould wash on 30 May 2023.
While the reasons why the resident had declined the mould washes are acknowledged, it was not unreasonable for the landlord to continue to offer these to ensure that the conditions within the property remained safe. However, the Ombudsman expects landlords to inspect the cause alongside this. Simply removing surface mould will not prevent the damp and mould from reappearing.
It would be reasonable to expect that any thorough inspection of damp and mould should include an assessment of all potential causes. This includes leaks, rising damp, penetrating damp, and condensation. This would involve checking the fabric of the building for faults. This should include the roof, damp proof course, brickwork, plumbing, external drains and gulleys, rainwater goods as well as the airflow and extraction within the building.
It is evident that following the resident’s report of damp and mould on 30 January 2023, the landlord raised multiple repairs to try and find the cause. It outlined the various repairs completed within its complaint responses. It checked the cavity insulation and roof and raised repairs to air vents. However, there is no evidence that the landlord completed a comprehensive inspection of the damp and mould at the time. It is therefore unclear how it decided the required works without a comprehensive inspection first.
The landlord’s first record of an inspection occurred on 15 August 2023. It arranged this following the resident’s request for an inspection on 2 August 2023. It is a failing that the landlord did not proactively manage the damp and mould issues. It instead responded reactively to the resident’s request. It was not fair that the landlord’s inaction placed the onus on the resident to ask it to progress the next steps with resolving the issues present at the property.
During this time, on 17 May 2023, the resident told the landlord that he believed the damp and mould may be associated with the drains. At the inspection on 15 August 2023, it identified works required to install drainage systems to prevent water ingress. It identified that water pooling at the bottom of a ramp outside the property created damp patches. It raised the drainage works on 21 August 2023. While we cannot say with certainty, if the landlord had proactively managed the repairs, and completed an inspection sooner, it may have identified the need for such works earlier. It is unclear why the landlord did not explore the resident’s concerns sooner.
The landlord acknowledged that it failed to provide the resident with the appointment date for the drainage works. This caused a further delay in completing the works as it could not gain access to the property on 18 September 2023. It later completed the works to install the drainage system on 5 October 2023. The time taken to complete the works was not in line with the landlord’s repairs policy. Its policy states that it would respond to routine repairs within 28 calendar days. However, it instead took 51 calendar days to complete the repair. This was not appropriate.
The inspection on 15 August 2023 also identified multiple other repairs required to the property. This included new air vent covers, removing and addressing plasterwork, and cleaning required. In the landlord’s initial complaint response, it incorrectly said that the resident had refused some of these works. It is unclear how the landlord had reached this conclusion but it is indicative of poor and/or inaccurate record keeping.
Following the resident’s escalation highlighting the inaccuracy, it was appropriate for the landlord to have corrected this. In its final complaint response, it clarified he had not declined the works. The initial inaccuracy would have understandably caused frustration for the resident. However, its efforts to rectify this would have gone some way to reassure him that it understood his concerns and put things right for him.
As part of the landlord’s initial complaint response, it said it would inspect the property again on 4 October 2023. It completed this inspection on 3 October 2023. Due to a lack of detailed records, this Service cannot assess what the landlord found during this inspection. We therefore cannot assess whether it acted appropriately afterwards. However, the resident noted concerns with continued damp and mould as part of his complaint escalation on 18 October 2023. As it is unclear what action the landlord took, if any, following the resident’s reports of continued damp and mould, this is a failing.
There is no evidence to suggest that the landlord provided any updates to the resident about steps it would take regarding the ongoing damp and mould until 15 November 2023. During this time, the resident would have understandably been left with the impression that it was not taking his concerns seriously. On this date, it agreed to inspect the property again on 21 November 2023. It also confirmed this plan within its final complaint response.
At the inspection on 21 November 2023, the landlord identified multiple works required to address the damp and mould. It also identified some of the works during the earlier inspection on 15 August 2023 such as installing soffit vents. It found a 100% moisture reading on the ceiling from the roof. This inspection was seemingly more comprehensive than the previous inspections. It is a concern that the landlord did not do this sooner. Especially given that the resident had experienced damp and mould intermittently since 2021 and had reported issues since January 2023 more recently.
The resident told the landlord that the damp and mould caused damage to his personal belongings. The landlord asked him to provide evidence of the damaged items for it to consider reimbursement or compensation. This was a reasonable response by the landlord. Its intention to investigate this issue is in line with its damp and mould policy. This states it would pay compensation because of failure to deliver service which resulted in damaged belongings. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns in relation to this was therefore appropriate.
The landlord’s policy also outlines steps that it would take in response to reports of damp and mould. It states that where issues reoccur, it would complete a risk assessment. The landlord has not provided evidence that it has done so, which is a failing. Its policy also states it would take responsibility for diagnosing and resolving damp and mould in a timely effective way. It is evident that it did not do so, as the first inspection in August 2023 was 7 months after the report in January 2023.
The policy outlined the landlord would regularly communicate with its residents regarding actions it would take. However, the landlord acknowledged poor communication with the resident and upheld his complaint regarding this aspect. While it was right for the landlord to acknowledge its poor communication, it would have still understandably caused significant distress and inconvenience to the resident.
It is a significant concern that the landlord failed to follow its own policy. By not doing so, the resident remained in a property with damp and mould. It is also concerning that the landlord failed to consider the reported vulnerabilities. The resident repeatedly disclosed the impact that the issues had on his wife’s health. There is no evidence to show that the landlord investigated these concerns or considered the impact of the issues on their health. The delays in completing repairs and finding the cause of the issues further exacerbated the distress, inconvenience, and frustration caused.
The landlord offered a total of £375 compensation to the resident. This included £275 for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused to him. It also included £100 for its poor communication. It is clear the landlord tried to offer redress for its failings in its response to reports of damp and mould. However, this amount was not proportionate to the failings identified by this investigation. Additionally, the offer included amounts towards its handling of roof and window replacements. The amount offered therefore did not offer redress for its failings. The landlord should therefore pay a further £450 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its failures.
It is evident that further issues have occurred after the landlord’s final complaint response. The Ombudsman cannot investigate these issues within this report, in the interest of fairness. However, the resident has told this Service that the landlord has scheduled further works to the property on 11 November 2024. It is recommended that the landlord completes a post-inspection of the works completed at the property. Additionally, the resident has advised that the landlord agreed to purchase new blinds for his lounge and bedroom but this has not progressed any further. The landlord should therefore confirm its position to the resident regarding purchasing new blinds for these rooms.

The landlord’s handling of door and window replacements

As part of the resident’s complaint, he said that the landlord had not yet replaced his windows and door. On 8 November 2022, the landlord raised a repair job to replace the front door. The resident said that it inspected and measured the door in December 2022. However, the landlord’s records do not show this.
Between January 2023 and August 2023, the resident asked for updates on the door and windows replacement on 12 occasions. During this time, on 13 March 2023, he contacted the landlord’s CEO regarding his concerns with the replacement. The lack of proactive updates from the landlord caused considerable time, trouble, and effort to the resident.
The landlord’s records throughout this period are minimal. On 23 February 2023, it noted it had approved the door replacement, and its contractors awaited further instruction to start works. On 2 March 2023, it chased quotes for the windows replacement. On 11 April 2023, it raised works to service the windows and doors. Its records state it completed this on 20 May 2023, but it is unclear what this entailed and what the outcome was. On 19 April 2023, it chased its contractors for an update with the door replacement.
The landlord’s initial complaint response, on 2 October 2023, outlined its position regarding the replacements. It said it had received quotes to replace both external doors and 3 windows on 2 May 2023. It said that a manager needed to complete an audit before approving the works. It apologised for the delay in arranging this. It said it would complete the audit during the inspection which later took place on 3 October 2023. It was appropriate for it to apologise for the delay which would have caused considerable distress and inconvenience to the resident.
On 18 October 2023, the landlord held an internal discussion regarding the replacements. It said it did not find any issues with the conditions of the windows or doors. There is no evidence to suggest that it updated the resident with its findings at this point. Instead, he remained under the impression that the replacements would go ahead. It therefore failed to manage his expectations regarding the likely outcome which had taken over 11 months to reach.
Over a month after the inspection, the landlord confirmed its position regarding the replacement within its final complaint response. It said it had not found a need for replacing the windows or doors. However, it would review this decision during its inspection on 21 November 2023.
The landlord’s handling of door and window replacements raises significant concerns. It had repeated opportunities to investigate the replacements sooner. For 1 year the resident believed it would complete the replacement, but it then said it would not do so. While the landlord has the discretion to determine whether to replace or repair components, it is clear it failed to appropriately manage the resident’s expectations.
There are also concerns over previous issues found with the windows and doors. The inspection on 15 August 2023 found draughty windows and “issues” with both doors. The inspection on 3 October 2023 found window condensation issues and issues with the lock on one of the doors. The landlord failed to address this in its final complaint response, which is a concern.
The resident has since told the Ombudsman that the landlord replaced the windows and doors on 23 July 2024. It is unclear what subsequently prompted the landlord to replace these. However, it is positive to note that the repair issues are now resolved.
Given the failings identified within this investigation, the landlord’s combined compensation offer was not proportionate. It should therefore pay a further £400 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of door and window replacements.

The associated complaint handling

The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 13 February 2023. The landlord’s records note this was an online complaint. However, it classified the type as an “existing repair” case. It did not respond to this as a formal complaint.
The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out expectations for landlords. It states that a resident does not have to use the word ‘complaint’ for it to treat it as such. Additionally, it must raise a complaint following an expression of dissatisfaction with its response to a service request. This is even if the handling of the service request remains ongoing, as in this case. It is a failing that the landlord did not do so.
The resident should not have had to chase the landlord or this Service to receive a response to his complaint. However, given the landlord’s lack of response, he asked the Ombudsman for assistance in making his complaint. We contacted the landlord on 25 September 2023 and asked it to respond within 5 working days. It then responded to the complaint appropriately, in line with the period set by the Ombudsman.
During the preceding period, the resident spent time and trouble in chasing the response. He understandably thought the landlord was not taking his complaint and concerns seriously. The landlord did not acknowledge any failures in its complaint handling. It therefore did not offer redress for the inconvenience and distress caused by its delayed response. It also failed to consider compensation to reflect the time and trouble that the resident experienced.
Given these failings, the landlord should pay £200 compensation to the resident. This is an appropriate award to offer redress for its failure to respond to the complaint. This is for the distress and inconvenience which it would have understandably caused to him.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of door and window replacements.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the associated complaint handling.

Orders

Within 28 calendar days of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Pay the £375 compensation offered in its complaint responses if it has not already done so.
2. Pay a further £1,050 compensation to the resident. It should pay this directly to the resident and not to his rent account. This includes:
  1. £450 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its response to reports of damp and mould.
  2. £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of door and window replacements.
  3. £200 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its associated complaint handling.
3. Complete a post-inspection of the works completed at the property. A surveyor or senior member of staff should complete this post-inspection. It should allow him the opportunity to raise concerns with any outstanding issues should he have any. It should then write to the resident with its findings and an action plan for further repairs required (if any). The action plan should include dates for any appointments.
4. Confirm its position to the resident regarding purchasing new blinds for the lounge and bedroom. This should be provided in writing.
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescale above.