The Riverside Group Limited (202513919)

Decision
Case ID	202513919
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	The Riverside Group Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	20 March 2026

Background

The resident lives in a 2-bedroom house with her medically vulnerable daughter. She reported a reoccurring leak which caused damage and damp and mould in the property.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. A leak and the associated damp and mould.
2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found that there was:
1. Maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a leak and the associated damp and mould.
2. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

There were unreasonable delays in the landlord carrying out the repairs. There was also a lack of communication from the landlord to the resident about when it planned to complete the works. The compensation the landlord offered was not enough to put right these failings.
There were considerable delays at stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process. It apologised for these failings and offered compensation which recognised the impact on the resident and was sufficient 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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is provided by a senior manager. The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 17 April 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,000 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the damp and mould repairs. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 17 April 2026
3	External independent inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange a damp and mould inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by an external independent party suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: Inspects all areas of the property particularly both bedrooms, behind the wardrobe of the resident’s bedroom, the kitchen ceiling, the hallway ceiling and produces a written report with photographs. The survey report must set out: Whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards. The most likely cause of the damp and mould. Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue, together with reasons where it is not responsible. A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible). The likely timescales to commence and complete the work. Whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works.	No later than 15 May 2026
4	Completing the works The landlord must take all steps to complete the works promptly. This includes sealing the toilet and bath, replacing the skirting boards in the bathroom and hallway, repairing the holes in the kitchen ceiling, and addressing the damage to the hallway ceiling and the wall in the resident’s bedroom. These works must be completed promptly and in any event by the due date. If the landlord cannot complete the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date: Why it cannot complete the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will finish the works; or Explain the steps it has taken to ensure the works were completed and provide supporting evidence. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot. Whether suitable alternative accommodation is necessary and will be made available to the resident until the work is completed.	No later than 17 April 2026

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
Our reasonable redress finding is dependent on the landlord paying the resident £100 it offered for its complaint handling in its stage 2 response, if it has not already done so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
26 June 2025	The resident complained to the landlord. She said the property had been affected by a leak for more than 3 years, which had caused damage in several rooms and led to damp and mould. She also reported loose tiles in the bathroom after earlier works and said they were unsafe for her and her young daughter when bathing. The resident told the landlord that her GP and social workers had raised concerns. She said they believed the home posed a hazard to her daughter because of her health vulnerabilities.
8 July 2025	The landlord issued its stage 1 response and apologised for the problems the resident had reported. It said it had escalated the outstanding works and would arrange the repairs. It also recognised the resident’s concerns about her daughter’s health. The landlord then arranged temporary hotel accommodation for the resident and her daughter until 11 July 2025 while it repaired the bath, flooring, wall, and tiling.
20 July 2025	The resident escalated her complaint. She said she was unhappy with the works completed so far and felt several repairs were still outstanding. She also said the leak, damp, and mould were still present. The resident asked the landlord to consider her for a permanent home move.
3 October 2025	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It said it had completed the works to the property and carried out a damp and mould inspection on 8 July 2025. It said the inspection found no damp or mould in any rooms, but it installed ventilators as a precaution. The landlord said it had inspected the property again on 6 September 2025 and found that some of the works completed in July 2025 were unfinished or not done correctly. It had arranged another inspection for 25 September 2025 to plan the remaining works, but it did not attend the appointment. The landlord apologised and offered £400 compensation. It said it had scheduled the outstanding works for 10 October 2025 and offered further compensation for the resident’s overall experience.
Referral to the Ombudsman	On 15 October 2025, the resident asked us to investigate because she was unhappy with the landlord’s response. She said she would like it to fully address the leak, the repairs, and the damp and mould.

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.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of a leak and the associated damp and mould
Finding	Maladministration

What we did not investigate

Aspects of the resident’s complaint relate to the impact the situation had on her health and that of her family. Where we identify failure on a landlord’s part, we can consider the resulting distress and inconvenience. We are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on the resident’s health and wellbeing. Such matters are best suited to investigation through the courts or a personal injury insurance claim.
Although our usual approach is to consider events that occurred within the 12-month period leading up to a complaint, in this case we have followed the landlord’s approach of considering the 3-year period prior to making the complaint. This is because the landlord has used this period when it responded to the complaint, and using the same timeframe lets us assess its actions fairly.

What we did investigate

The landlord’s repair policy says that for a ‘P1’ emergency repair, it will attend and make the area safe within 12 hours. Any follow-up work will be completed in line with the priority. ‘P2’ repairs should be completed within 5 calendar days, and ‘P3’ repairs within 28 calendar days. The policy also says that leaks are classed as a P1.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy says it will undertake a property inspection when a repair is reported relating to suspected damp, mould and condensation.
The resident first reported a bathroom leak in July 2022. Although the landlord attended on time and identified damage, it did not complete the follow‑on works. Further leak reports in August 2022 were also attended promptly, but repairs to the bath and kitchen ceiling were not carried out, meaning the damage continued.
In September 2023, the resident reported damp and mould linked to the leak. The landlord inspected in October 2023, but there is no record of its findings or any explanation to the resident, which is a failure in record keeping and communication. It visited seven times over the next month; with inconsistent attendance and no evidence it kept the resident updated. A mould wash was completed in November, along with repairs to the bath and the leak, though more work was still needed.
Further repairs took place between February and April 2024. The landlord responded on time to a new leak report but again did not complete all follow‑on tasks promptly.
Between 4 September and 18 December 2024, the resident reported the leak again. The landlord attended the first report on time and carried out another damp and mould inspection, but its findings cannot be located. During this period, it visited the property 15 times but could not gain access on 10 occasions. It is unclear why these appointments did not go ahead or whether the resident had been informed. This is another record keeping failure.
Although we have not seen the damp and mould inspection from 4 September 2024, the evidence shows the landlord applied stain block to the kitchen and hallway ceilings on 9 September 2024. During a visit on 29 October 2024, it noted that another mould wash was needed. This was not completed until 18 December 2024, which was outside the timescales in its repairs policy.
Between 16 February and 11 March 2025, the resident reported that the leak and the damp and mould were still present. The landlord did not respond to the leak report within the required timescale. It carried out repairs in the bathroom and the resident’s bedroom on 7 March and 13 March 2025. During the final visit, the landlord noted that further work was needed to the bedroom wall, but there is no evidence it took any action. This was another missed opportunity.
The resident made a formal complaint on 26 June 2025 because she was still experiencing the leak. She said not all repairs had been completed and that damp and mould were still present in the property.
Between 26 June and 17 December 2025, the landlord tried to visit the property 20 times. One visit, on 25 September 2025, did not go ahead and no reason was given. The landlord appropriately apologised for this in its stage 2 response and offered compensation. On 14 January 2026, the resident declined another visit because she no longer felt confident the repairs would be completed.
During this period, the landlord completed further repairs to the bathroom, retiled it, and installed new bathroom flooring. However, the landlord’s contractors later identified that the earlier repairs had not fixed the root cause of the leak or the damage it had caused.
Despite a further damp and mould inspection, which said there was no damp or mould in the property, the landlord carried out 3 more mould washes on 7 August 2025, 15 August 2025, and 18 December 2025.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy says it will diagnose the cause of damp correctly and deliver effective solutions. It is based on fixing the cause of the damp, not just the symptoms, and aims to resolve issues first time wherever possible. It also says, “We will follow up each completed repair within six months of any damp and mould repair work being carried out”. There is no evidence the landlord followed up on each repair without needing further contact from the resident, as required by its policy.
The evidence suggests that, based on 7 reports from the resident and the 7 inspections carried out between 9 October 2023 and 19 January 2026, the landlord was treating the symptoms of damp and mould rather than the cause. The landlord should have recognised that a more detailed investigation was needed to diagnose the issue and identify the actions required to fix it.
The landlord told us that although it completed further repair works in February 2026, as stated in its stage 2 response, not all the works were finished. The resident also said there was damp and mould in the property as of 25 February 2026.
The evidence shows that the landlord completed several damp and mould treatments, such as mould washes and stain block, yet it also reported that there was no damp or mould in the property. This was confusing. Its repair logs suggest there may have been damp and mould; otherwise, it would not have carried out these works.
Overall, the landlord repeatedly failed to follow its own repairs and damp and mould policies. Although it attended some emergency reports on time, it did not complete essential follow‑on works, did not communicate effectively with the resident, and missed multiple opportunities to resolve the recurring leaks and resulting damage. Its offer of £300 compensation aligned with medium impact under its policy and did not reflect the full extent of the delays, distress and inconvenience the resident has experienced.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

The landlord’s complaints policy mirrors our Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’). It says it will acknowledge stage 1 complaints within 5 working days and respond within 10 working days. It will acknowledge stage 2 complaints within 5 working days and respond within 20 working days. If it cannot meet these timeframes, it may request an extension of up to 10 days at stage 1 and 20 days at stage 2.
The landlord both acknowledged and responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint on time, in line with its complaints policy and the Code.
The resident escalated her complaint on 20 July 2025, and the landlord acknowledged this 10 working days later. This exceeded the landlord’s policy timescale of 5 working days.
The landlord’s stage 2 response was provided on 3 October 2025, 44 working days after its acknowledgement and 24 days beyond its 20-working-day timescale. The landlord also failed to ask for an extension of time, as it could have done under its policy and the Code.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord acknowledged its delays. It offered the resident compensation of £100 to acknowledge its failures. This is in line with our remedies guidance for the impact to the resident of the failures we have identified.

Learning

Knowledge and information management (record keeping)

The landlord’s record keeping was lacking. Key details from several repair appointments were missing or incomplete, which contributed to delays and further inconvenience for the resident. In addition, the landlord failed to provide a full record of all complaint correspondence. It is reminded of the need to keep full, accurate, detailed, and accessible records.

Communication

Meaningful communication with the resident was limited, and there was little evidence to show the landlord kept her updated about its actions. It is important that a landlord keeps residents informed of any delays and how it intends to mitigate the impact of these.