Social Tenant Access to Information Requirements (STAIRs) consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

The Guinness Partnership Limited (202500927)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202500927

The Guinness Partnership Limited

1 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of damp and mould repairs at the property.
  2. We have also looked at the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlords since 2017. She lives at the property, a 4-bed house, with her children.
  2. On 24 April 2024, the resident told the landlord there was damp and mould at her property.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 3 May 2024. She said she was not happy with the way it managed the damp and mould repairs at her property.
  4. On 7 June 2024, the landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaints process. It upheld her complaint and offered her £325 compensation.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint on 10 December 2024. On 16 January 2025, the landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaints process. It upheld her complaint and increased the offer of compensation to £820.
  6. The resident remained unhappy and brought her complaint to us. She said she would like the landlord to resolve the damp and mould at her property and an increase in compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. There is evidence the resident reported damp and mould repairs in 2023. These issues were not raised as a complaint until 2024. Paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme says we may not consider a complaint about issues, not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period. This is normally within 12 months of the issues arising. As such, this report will centre on the landlord’s handling of damp and mould repairs from April 2024, which was 12 months after the last damp and mould repair.
  2. The resident said this situation had a detrimental impact on her son’s health and wellbeing. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. This is because independent medical experts can give evidence. While we can consider the overall impact of the situation on the resident, we cannot decide causation or liability for personal injury like a court can. If the resident wishes to pursue a personal injury claim she may wish to seek independent legal advice.

The landlord’s handling of damp and mould repairs at the property

  1. On 24 April 2024, the resident said there was damp and mould in the walls, ceilings, kitchen cupboards, and multiple rooms at the property. She also said the downstairs flooring was damp and lifting. The landlord attended the same day for an emergency repair and assessed the damp and mould.
  2. The landlord told the resident the extractor fans were faulty on 29 April 2024, and this was causing the damp and mould to reappear. It said it would replace the extractor fans.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 3 May 2024. She said she was unhappy with how the landlord handled the damp and mould repairs at her property.
  4. On 13 May 2024, the landlord repaired the seals around the resident’s front and back door at the property to stop water coming in. On 15 May 2024, the resident said the landlord did a mould wash in her kitchen cupboards. The landlord raised a new repair for damp and mould treatment at the property on 20 May 2024. The resident chased the outstanding repairs with the landlord on 5 June 2024 and said the landlord had not been in contact with her.
  5. On 7 June 2024, the landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaints process. It upheld the resident’s complaint and said the delay to replace her extractor fans was not acceptable. The landlord said the extractor fan repair was booked in for 17 June 2024. It offered £275 compensation broken down as:
    1. £250 for time and inconvenience.
    2. £25 for poor communication.
  6. The landlord’s repairs policy says for emergency repairs it will attend within 24 hours and for routine repairs it will attend within 28 days. Actions may include providing dehumidifiers, installing mechanical or passive ventilation systems, or applying mould resistant coverings. It says the landlord will assess on a case-by-case basis.
  7. The landlord’s compensation policy says it can pay between £101 to £600 for a failure which adversely affected a resident. It also says it can pay between £601 to £1,000 for an issue which takes a long time to resolve and results in significant inconvenience.
  8. The landlord’s response at stage 1 shows it acted following the resident’s report of damp and mould at the property. The landlord completed the repair to the front and back door seal within the policy time. It identified the delay in repairing the extractor fans and tried to put things right with an offer of compensation, in line with its policy. This was reasonable of the landlord.
  9. On 1 July 2024, the landlord replaced the flooring in the kitchen and hallway at the property which was a delay of around 2 months. The extractor fans were replaced on 23 July 2024, and this was around a month’s delay, compared to the landlord’s repairs policy.
  10. The landlord raised a repair on 24 July 2024 to complete a damp and mould wash at the property. It was completed on 18 September 2024, around a month longer than the time in its repairs policy.
  11. On 30 September 2024, the resident reported to the landlord that damp and mould was still occurring at the property. The landlord attended on 10 October 2024 to complete an inspection.
  12. The resident contacted the landlord on 20 November 2024 to chase the damp and mould repair. She escalated her complaint on 10 December 2024. The resident said she was unhappy the landlord had not resolved the damp and mould at her property. The resident said the damp and mould affected her son’s health.
  13. The landlord arranged an inspection for 20 December 2024 however the resident was not aware of the appointment, so it did not go ahead. The landlord raised a new repair appointment for 40 days later.
  14. On 16 January 2025, the landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaints process. It upheld the resident’s complaint. The landlord said it had mismanaged the repairs which caused a “significant delay” to resolve the damp and mould issue. It gave the resident information on how to make a claim for personal injury regarding the impact on her son’s health. The landlord said it was sorry its communication with the resident had been poor. It increased the offer of compensation to £770 broken down as:
    1. £600 for time, trouble and inconvenience caused by the delay to resolve the damp and mould issue.
    2. £100 for poor communication.
    3. £70 for failed repair appointments.
  15. The landlord’s response at stage 2 shows it recognised repair delays for the flooring and extractor fans. It said it managed the damp and mould repairs poorly and increased the offer of compensation. It also acknowledged its poor communication and gave her information the resident regarding the effect on her son’s health.
  16. On 7 February 2025, the landlord completed a damp and mould inspection at the property. It fitted damp sensors, a new heat sensor and provided a dehumidifier to the resident on 17 February 2025.
  17. The landlord identified the failings in this case through its complaint responses and offered compensation. Our role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. We consider whether its offer of redress was in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right, and Learn from Outcomes. As well as our own guidance on remedies.
  18. In summary, over 10 months the landlord attended the property multiple times and acted in line with its damp and mould policy. It carried out repairs to try and resolve the issue. The landlord recognised its failings of delayed repairs and poor communication at stage 1 and 2. It tried to put this right with an offer of compensation, in line with its policy.
  19. The landlord offered £770 compensation for repair delays, poor communication, distress, and inconvenience. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance of failures that had a significant impact on a resident and the redress needed to put things right was substantial.
  20. In our opinion, the landlord evidenced through the repairs, apology and offer of compensation that it made reasonable and proactive efforts to resolve the complaint. The landlord’s actions and offer of compensation put things right for the resident. This amounts to a determination of reasonable redress.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. On 2 May 2024, the resident complained to the landlord. It responded on 7 June 2024. This was a delay of around 14 working days for its response at stage 1 as per its complaints policy of 10 working days. The landlord recognised the delay and offered the resident £50 compensation. This was reasonable of the landlord.
  2. The resident escalated her complaint on 10 December 2024. The landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaints process on 16 January 2025. This was within the 20-working daytime frame of its complaints policy.
  3. In summary, the landlord recognised its delay responding at stage 1 and offered compensation to put things right. This leads to a determination of reasonable redress. This means the landlord’s actions for the failing put things right for the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we consider the landlord has made reasonable redress to the resident for its handling of the damp and mould repairs at her property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we consider the landlord has made reasonable redress to the resident for its complaint handling.

Recommendations

  1. To pay the resident the £820 it offered in its complaint process if it has not done so already.
  2. The finding of reasonable redress is based on the landlord making the above payment to the resident.