Read our damp and mould report focusing on Awaab's Law

Torus62 Limited (202440567)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202440567

Torus62 Limited

31 July 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 the repairs to the windows.

Background

  1. The resident has been an assured tenant of the landlord since October 1999. The landlord is a housing association. It said that the resident disclosed she had a mental health condition. The resident said that her 9 year old grandson lives with her and has asthma.
  2. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 27 October 2023. Her complaint was about its handling of the repairs to her windows. She explained that the double glazed units it replaced in September 2023 had failed and this caused damp and mould to her blinds and curtains.
  3. The landlord inspected the issue on 2 November 2023 and said it would renew the sealant and install a trickle vent on the front bay window. It noted that paper covering the external vent by the front bay window, prevented airflow. It provided the resident with a hygrometer to help her monitor the humidity in her property. The landlord said that the resident cancelled the repairs because she did not agree that they would resolve the problem.
  4. The landlord issued its stage 1response to the resident’s complaint on 10 November 2023, and said:
    1. It inspected the issues on 2 November 2023. It identified remedial works and booked a repair appointment for 30 November 2023. It said that it would install trickle vents and reseal the front bay window. It would then return in the new year to check if the repairs resolved the problem.
    2. It provided the resident with a hygrometer to help her monitor the humidity in her property.
    3. It upheld her complaint because it said it should have installed the trickle vents sooner and the window should not have required resealing so soon after their installation. It apologised for the inconvenience caused to the resident.
  5. In February 2024 the resident continued to report issues with her windows. On 22 February 2024 the landlord inspected and confirmed that the windows were properly sealed. It also said that the resident agreed to remove the cover in front of the external vent to allow air flow.
  6. On 27 February 2024 the landlord carried out a post inspection visit. It raised a job to install a proprietary condensation vent to the front bay window and renew the front bedroom window sealant. The landlord said that the resident cancelled the repairs. In March 2024 it agreed to ask for a second opinion about replacing the windows. It also booked a visit to overhaul the ventilation system, but the resident cancelled this because she wanted more information about the repair. She was especially concerned about the running cost of the appliance.
  7. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 16 February 2024. On 14 March 2024 the landlord agreed a 10 working days extension to respond to the resident’s complaint. It issued its stage 2 response on 2 April 2024, and said:
    1. Following its inspection in November 2023, it contacted the resident to book the appointment to reseal and install a trickle vent to the bay window. The resident said she was unhappy with this, and at her request it cancelled the repairs.
    2. On 2 February 2024 the resident phoned, and the landlord raised a new job for the repairs. On 22 February 2024 its operative attended and said that all the windows were sealed. It also advised the resident to remove the cover from the front of the vents to allow air flow.
    3. It acknowledged that there was a delay in booking the post inspection, which took place on 27 February 2024.
    4. On 14 March 2024 it cancelled the job to overhaul the ventilation system, located in the attic. This was because the resident wanted more information about the job before proceeding, and it agreed for its surveyor to speak to the resident about it.
    5. It raised a job to fit a trickle vent to the bay window and renew the sealant to the front bedroom window. It said it would aim to complete the repairs by 9 April 2024.
    6. Its surveyor attempted to book an inspection to provide a second opinion about replacing the window frames, but the resident was unable to commit to a day because of a bereavement in the family. The resident said she would contact the landlord to book the inspection.
    7. It apologised to the resident if its surveyor made her feel that her lifestyle was to blame for the issues. It reassured her that as her landlord it did not place blame on its residents.
    8. It acknowledged the resident’s concerns about the damp and mould on her grandson’s health and advised that she could consider making an injury claim.
    9. It also apologised for the delay and poor communication in booking the post inspection in the new year. It offered to pay £50 compensation to the resident to reflect the inconvenience caused to her.
  8. On 19 June 2024 the landlord inspected the windows and concluded they did not need replacing. It booked a repair appointment to apply mould wash on 27 June 2024, but the resident said the landlord failed to notify her, and it did not go ahead. The resident also informed the landlord that she would apply the mould wash herself.
  9. The landlord issued its second stage 2 response to the resident’s complaint on 4 July 2024, and said:
    1. As agreed, in April 2024, its surveyor contacted the resident to inspect the property. The resident could not book the inspection at the time and said that she would contact it to make an appointment, which she did on 19 June 2024.
    2. Its operative attended the property on 27 June 2024, but the appointment did not go ahead because it had not notified the resident of it. The resident then said that she would apply the mould wash herself.
    3. It inspected the property and concluded that it was not necessary to replace the window frames. It booked a repair appointment with the resident for 18 July 2024, to apply silicon to the window frames.
    4. On 4 July 2024 the resident said that she would contact it to book the overhaul of the positive air unit.
    5. It did not uphold the resident complaint. It reiterated the offer of compensation it made in April 2024.
  10. After attempting to book a repair appointment, it wrote to the resident on 4 July 2024 and shared the outcome of its inspection and the details of the repairs it raised. On 10 July 2024 it attended to overhaul the ventilation system, but the resident was not home. On 18 July 2024 it attended to apply silicone sealant to the window frames but there was no access, it contacted the resident and left a calling card. The resident said that she did not know about the repair appointment.
  11. In November 2024 the resident asked the landlord to install the proprietary condensation vent by the front bay window, it said that it completed this on 10 December 2024. However, the resident disputed this and said that the operative did not do any repair on that day. Following further reports from the resident, the landlord inspected the property in April 2025 and raised remedial repairs.
  12. The resident informed this service in July 2025, that the issues were on going. She is seeking for the landlord to replace her window frames, install the trickle vents on her windows, make good of the decoration when the repairs are done. The resident is also seeking for the landlord to compensate her for the inconvenience caused to her.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident reported that the landlord’s handling of the matters significantly impacted on her mental health. She also raised concerns about the potential impact of mould on her grandson’s health. We can consider the impact that the issues raised have had on the family, and whether the landlord acted reasonably. However, we cannot conclusively assess the extent to which a landlord’s actions may have contributed to or exacerbated any physical and/or mental health issues. These are legal aspects better suited to a personal injury claim or court.
  2. We are an impartial service which can only base its decisions on the evidence provided. When there are conflicting accounts between parties and independent evidence cannot verify what occurred during the period in question, we will not investigate the issue because the evidence neither proves nor disproves either side. In such cases, we cannot conclude that there was failure by the landlord or require it to take action to put right this failure.

The repairs to the windows

  1. The landlord has repair obligations under section 11 of The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 which places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. This includes the window frames, windowsills and draught proofing the windows.
  2. The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy says that it will complete routine repairs within 20 days and more complex repairs within 60 days. When needed, it will inspect the repair before scheduling the works. Its policy says that it will promptly inspect any issues of damp and mould and complete the required repairs, if any. It also says that it will arrange a 3-month follow up call after doing damp and mould works. It explains this is to assess whether the remedial repairs resolved the problem.
  3. The landlord responsive repairs policy adds that whenever possible, it will book repair appointments at a time suitable to the resident and confirm it by text or email. It elaborates that if the resident is not home for a repair appointment, it will notify them and will only cancel repairs at the resident’s request. It also commits to adjust it repairs service delivery to vulnerable residents, when suitable to do so.
  4. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) recommends that landlords should ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue. Landlords should consider appropriate timescales for their responses to reflect the urgency of the case and set these out clearly for residents so their expectations can be managed. They should also ensure that they clearly and regularly communicate with the residents on actions taken to resolve damp and mould.
  5. In April 2023 and September 2023, the landlord replaced the double glazed units in the property. On 27 October 2023 the resident raised a complaint. She explained that the new glazed units had failed, and this caused damp and mould to her blinds and curtains. The landlord inspected the problem 6 days later, which was reasonable and in keeping with its responsive repairs policy. This was also in keeping with our Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould to promptly act on such reports.
  6. We understand that the landlord’s surveyor also advised the resident on managing the humidity and air flow in her property. For example, it advised that she removed the paper blocking an external vent and moved furniture around. It also provided her with a hygrometer to monitor the temperature and humidity in the property. While those were reasonable actions by the landlord, the resident felt that it blamed her for the situation. In its complaint response, the landlord explained why it could not investigate the matter thoroughly. It also clarified that it did not blame her for the damp and mould and apologised for giving her that impression. Those were reasonable actions by the landlord.
  7. Following its inspection, the landlord said it would install a trickle vent and reseal the front bay window. It then booked the works for 30 November 2023 but then rescheduled this because the resident had a family bereavement. The landlord said that on 13 December 2023, the resident explained she was unhappy with the proposed works and cancelled the job. The landlord’s actions were in keeping with its responsive repairs to cancel jobs when requested by the resident.
  8. The evidence shows that the resident raised the issue again in February 2024. The landlord attended 20 days later and concluded that the windows were correctly sealed. It advised the resident on managing the air flow in the property by, for example, unblocking the vent cover by the front bay window. Those were reasonable actions by the landlord, it acted in keeping with its responsive repairs policy.
  9. On 27 February 2024 it inspected the property and agreed to install a proprietary condensation vent to the front bay window and renew the sealant to the front bedroom window. It said that the resident then cancelled the repairs and rebooked them in November 2024. The landlord said it completed the repairs in December 2024, but the resident disputed this. Therefore, we order for the landlord to confirm the status of this repairs.
  10. On 14 March 2024 the landlord booked a repair to overhaul the ventilation system. The resident cancelled the job because she was concerned with the running cost of the appliance. The landlord said that its surveyor would discuss this with her. We understand the landlord met the resident in June 2024. It then booked to overhaul the ventilation unit in July 2024, but the appointment did not go ahead because of no access. In August 2024, the resident reiterated her concerns about proceeding with this repair. It is unclear whether this has been resolved. Therefore, we order for the landlord to discuss with the resident the purpose of the ventilation unit, its running cost, the works required and agree whether this repair should go ahead or not.
  11. In March 2024 and April 2024, the resident repeated to the landlord that it needed to replace her window frames to resolve the issues. The landlord agreed to seek a second opinion about replacing the window frames. There was a delay in booking the inspection, but this was out of the landlord’s control. On 19 June 2024 the surveyor concluded that the window frames did not need replacing. We recognise the resident disagree with this. However, our role is not to determine whether the window frames need replacing, instead, our role is to assess the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports. In this case, the landlord took reasonable steps to assess the problem, and it also sought a second opinion. Those were reasonable actions by the landlord, it was also reasonable for the landlord to follow its experts recommendations.
  12. In June 2024 the landlord attended the property to apply a mould wash. The appointment did not go ahead because it failed to notify the resident about it. While it was reasonable for the landlord to offer a mould wash once it identified mould around the window, it should have notified the resident about the appointment. Its failings to confirm the repair appointment with the resident was unreasonable and not in keeping with its responsive repairs policy.
  13. We understand the landlord did not rebook the mould wash appointment. It said that the resident refused to rebook the mould treatment because she was doing this herself. The resident later clarified that she had said the landlord applied mould wash the previous year and she did not see the point of doing it again. We cannot determine the reasons for not rebooking the mould wash because of the different recollections of what happened and no evidence to support either accounts. Therefore, we cannot determine there was a service failure by the landlord in not rebooking the mould wash. It is also acceptable for residents to apply mould wash themselves if they prefer.
  14. On 18 July 2024 the landlord attended to apply silicon to the window frames, but the resident was not home. We understand the resident said she did not know about the repair appointment. However, the evidence shows that the landlord had informed her about the appointment in its final complaint response letter in July 2024. Those were reasonable actions by the landlord, it took appropriate steps to inform the resident of the repair appointment.
  15. The Housing Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on damp and mould (published October 2021) says that landlords should recognise that damp and mould can have an ongoing detrimental impact on the health and well-being of residents.
  16. In this case, the resident informed the landlord of her concerns about her grandson’s health and the potential impact of the damp and mould on his asthma. We understand that it correctly advised the resident about making a personal injury claim. However, we saw no evidence it assessed the potential risks of exposure to mould to the household. The landlord should have considered adjusting its service delivery and documented its decision in keeping with its responsive repairs policy. We recognise that we saw no evidence that its failings to do this impacted on the resident’s overall outcome.
  17. Furthermore, the evidence shows that after the resident informed it in February 2024, about her grandson’s health condition, the landlord did not update the household vulnerabilities on it systems. The Housing Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Knowledge and Information Management says that recording vulnerabilities is the first step in providing a sensitive and responsive service to residents. Landlords must then keep this information up to date. In this case, the landlord did not do this, which was unreasonable.
  18. We understand that following further reports from the resident, the landlord inspected the property in April 2025 and raised remedial repairs. The resident informed this service in July 2025, that the landlord had not completed those repairs. We are unable to assess the landlord’s handling of the matters beyond its final complaint response as it has not had the opportunity to do so itself, through its internal complaints procedure. This would normally require the resident to log a new complaint for the landlord to consider. However, we feel that this would unreasonably add to the time and trouble the resident has taken in pursuing the matter. Therefore, we order the landlord to provide a work schedule for the remedial repairs to the resident, this must include the details of the repairs and their expected completion dates.
  19. It is evident that the parties disagree on what would resolve the matters and the sequence of what happened. We recognise that the landlord said the resident cancelled some of the repairs or was not home for some of the scheduled appointments. We also understand that the resident disputed this. She explained that she provided valid reasons for not proceeding with some of the repairs and that the landlord had failed to confirm some repairs appointments with her. We saw no evidence that the landlord incorrectly cancelled repairs or systematically failed to confirm repair appointments with the resident. As previously explained, when there are conflicting accounts between landlords and residents, we cannot conclude that there was failure by the landlord without evidence to support this.
  20. After considering the evidence of the case, we determine there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the repairs to the windows. Overall, the landlord acted on the resident’s reports in keeping with its responsive repairs policy. It promptly acknowledged her reports, inspected the problems and raised the required remedial repairs. We understand there were delays in resolving the issues, which were out of the landlord’s control. Nevertheless, and from the landlord’s own admission, there were delays in booking the post inspection in February 2024, and it failed to notify the resident of a repair appointment in June 2024. It also failed to show that it considered the household vulnerabilities when handling the repairs.
  21. During the complaint process, the landlord acknowledged and apologised for its failings. It also offered £50 compensation to the resident to reflect the inconvenience caused to her. In our opinion its offer does not fully reflect the failings identified in this report. In keeping with our remedies guidance, which is published on our website, we order the landlord to pay £125 to the resident to reflect the inconvenience caused to her.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the repairs to the windows.

Orders and recommendations

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report, we order the landlord to:
    1. Pay £125 compensation to the resident to reflect the inconvenience caused to her. This is inclusive of the £50 compensation it offered in its complaint responses and if it has already pay this, it should deduct it from this amount.
    2. Discuss with the resident the purpose of the ventilation unit, its running cost, the works required and agree whether this repair should go ahead or not. The landlord is to provide us with evidence that it has done this and share with us the agreement they made about the repair.
    3. Confirm to the resident and us whether in December 2024, it installed the proprietary condensation vent to the front bay window, as planned. If the repair is outstanding, the landlord is to book a suitable time with the resident to proceed with the installation.
    4. To provide a work schedule to the resident in respect of the repairs it identified in April 2025. This must include the details of the repairs, which it has not yet completed and their dates for completion.
    5. To assess the potential risks to the household from exposure to damp and mould and the actions to mitigate the risks, if any. The landlord is to share the outcome of its assessment with the resident and us.
    6. Update the household vulnerabilities on its housing management system.