Vivid Housing Limited (202400144)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202400144

Vivid Housing Limited

26 September 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:
   1. The resident’s reports of a fly infestation affecting her property.
   2. The associated complaints.

Background

2. The property is a 2-bedroom, second floor flat situated within a block. The resident has an assured tenancy which began in October 2009. The resident lives with her son. The landlord’s records state that the resident is vulnerable because she has a weakened immune system, mobility issues and a mental health condition. The resident’s son also has health conditions, including asthma.
3. The resident contacted the landlord on 16 August 2023 to report that there were fruit flies throughout the block. The landlord raised an order on the same day for a pest control contractor to inspect the block for fruit flies and fumigate as necessary. The contractor attended on 22 August 2023 and reported that it had not found any evidence of flies in the communal areas of the block. It therefore did not carry out any treatment.
4. The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 31 August 2023 to advise the landlord that there were several fruit flies in her property. She said the flies were landing on food and despite her using various cleaning and fly treatment products she had not been able to eradicate them. She said she had approached the local authority’s Environmental Health Department, but they had advised her that the landlord was responsible for dealing with the flies. The resident was therefore requesting the landlord to send someone to assess the problem.
5. The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 18 September 2023 in which it stated the following:
   1. It had spoken to the resident about her complaint on 4 September 2023 and she believed the flies were coming through the ventilation system that ran throughout the block.
   2. The landlord said it had spoken to the pest control contractor who had confirmed it had not found any evidence of flies during the inspection on 22 August 2023.
   3. The landlord said it had raised an order for the bins in the bin shed to be emptied and cleaned.
   4. The landlord said it had not found any service failures as it had followed its policy and residents were responsible for dealing with pest control issues within their own properties.
6. The resident wrote to the landlord on the same day (18 September 2023) and said she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s stage 1 response. She said the fruit flies were in her home and were coming from the air vents. She asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 25 October 2023 in which it stated the following:
   1. In line with her tenancy, the resident was responsible for pest control in her property. The landlord was responsible for dealing with pests in the communal areas or if pests were entering a property due to a building defect.
   2. The pest control contractor had checked the building and had not found any evidence of flies. The landlord had also checked the bin store for cleanliness.
   3. The landlord said it agreed with the findings at stage 1 that there had been no service failure.
   4. The landlord said the resident could arrange for her own pest control contractor to inspect her property and if the contractor found the flies were caused by a building defect, the landlord would carry out remediation works and cover the cost of the inspection.
7. The resident wrote to the landlord on the same day (25 October 2023) and said the flies had been present for 6 months. They were coming from outside the block and staying in the air vents. She said the flies had been landing on food and caused her and her son significant sickness and diarrhoea.
8. The resident contacted us on 14 May 2024 and said that although the landlord had sent complaint responses relating to various issues, she wanted us to investigate the landlord’s handling of the reported fly infestation. The resident also advised us on 8 September 2025 that she was still experiencing problems with flies in her home. She said the flies did not originate from within her home.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

9. The resident wrote to the landlord on 25 October 2023 and said fruit flies had been landing on food and had caused her and her son significant sickness and diarrhoea. We are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be better dealt with as a claim through the courts. The resident may wish to consider taking independent advice if she wishes to pursue this option.
10. The resident stated in an email dated 25 October 2023 that she had been reporting issues regarding flies for 6 months. The landlord’s records show that the resident reported flies in her property on 23 March 2023 and 20 April 2023 due to stagnant water caused by a defective kitchen worktop. These emails were in connection with a previous formal complaint made by the resident. This complaint was investigated by us under case reference 202228772. As we would not re-investigate matters that we have previously investigated, we consider it fair and reasonable to start this investigation from the resident’s report of fruit flies throughout the block on 16 August 2023.
11. We have received information showing events that took place in relation to the property after the landlord sent its final complaint response on 25 October 2023. A key part of our role is to assess the landlord’s response to a complaint and therefore it is important that the landlord has had an opportunity to consider all the information being investigated by us as part of its complaint response. We therefore consider it fair and reasonable to only investigate matters up to the date of the final response. Information following the landlord’s final complaint response has, however, been included in this report for context.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a fly infestation affecting her property

12. The landlord’s Housing Management Policy states: “We will…only take responsibility for pest eradication where the infestation is due to an issue with the fabric of the building, which is our responsibility to maintain”.
13. The landlord’s website states that residents are responsible for “ensuring any infestations are removed from the home”.
14. The resident contacted the landlord on 16 August 2023 to report that there were fruit flies throughout her block. The landlord raised an order on the same day for a pest control contractor to attend. As the resident had reported a fly infestation throughout the block, it was reasonable that the landlord had raised a timely order for a pest controller to investigate.
15. The pest controller attended on 22 August 2023 and reported that he had checked the communal areas and had not found any evidence of flies. He reported that housekeeping within the block was good and there were no food sources visible that would attract flies. He confirmed that he had not carried out any treatment as he had not found any evidence of flies. The job ticket gave the contractor a target timescale of 23 August 2023 to attend. Therefore, it had attended within an appropriate timescale.
16. The pest controller had reported there was no evidence of flies in the communal areas of the block and he had therefore not carried out any treatment. As the pest controller had carried out a timely inspection of the block and provided a report to the landlord, it was reasonable for the landlord to rely on his findings and advice.
17. The resident sent a stage 1 complaint to the landlord on 31 August 2023 and asked the landlord to send someone to her home as it was “swamped with flies”. She explained that she was vulnerable and the flies were landing on her food. She said she had been cleaning constantly but had not been able to eradicate the flies. She also contacted the landlord on 13 September 2023 and said the problem had worsened.
18. The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 18 September 2023 and said that it had not found any service failure because its pest controller had investigated whether there were any flies in the communal areas and its policy was that residents were responsible for pest control within their own properties. The landlord’s response was, in our opinion, reasonable as it was consistent with its Housing Management Policy which states that it will only deal with pest control where the infestation is due to building defects. It was also consistent with its website, which states that residents are responsible for removing pest infestations within their home.
19. The landlord said in its stage 1 reply that it had arranged for the bins to be emptied and the bin store to be cleaned. This was a reasonable precaution to prevent rubbish in the bin store attracting flies.
20. The resident wrote to the landlord on 18 September 2023 and said she was dissatisfied with its response because she said the fruit flies were coming into her home through the air vent system that ran throughout the block. She said the landlord should have sent a contractor to assess her home for flies. She wrote to the landlord again on 5 October 2023 and said the fly infestation had been in her flat, the lift and bin stores since May 2023.
21. The landlord responded to the resident on 25 October 2023 and said the pest controller had not visited the resident’s home because residents were responsible for pest control in their home. This advice was again consistent with the landlord’s website and was therefore reasonable.
22. The landlord said in its stage 2 response that the resident could arrange for her own pest controller to inspect her property. It added that if the pest controller found that the flies were caused by a building defect, the landlord would carry out any remedial works and reimburse the resident for the cost of the inspection. In our view, this was a fair and reasonable offer by the landlord, because based on its policy and website, the resident was responsible for dealing with pest control within her home and the landlord was responsible for pest control in communal areas or if caused by building defects.
23. The resident’s main complaint regarding the landlord’s approach was that the pest controller should have visited her property when he carried out the inspection on 22 August 2023.We can understand that a visit to the resident’s property would have provided her with reassurance regarding the flies. However, we have not seen any information to show that the landlord was obligated to arrange such a visit under the tenancy agreement or its policies.
24. The landlord’s records state that the resident had reported on 16 August 2023 there were fruit flies “throughout the block”. Therefore, it was reasonable for the landlord’s pest controller to focus its efforts on checking the communal areas as these were the areas that the landlord was primarily responsible for. The landlord’s records show that the pest controller examined the building to see whether there were any defects the landlord would be responsible for in relation to pest infestations. This was also reasonable as the landlord was responsible for dealing with any defects to the fabric of the building.
25. The landlord’s records show that it spoke to the pest controller in October 2023 as the resident had said the flies had made “nests” in the vent system. She had also advised the landlord that there was a nest of flies outside one of her windows. The pest controller advised the landlord that it had checked the communal areas and had not found any evidence of fly infestations. It also advised the landlord that flies lay eggs, rather than make nests. It was reasonable that the landlord had sought advice from the pest controller in relation to the resident’s reports about ‘nests’ of flies. Having received the advice from the pest controller, it was reasonable for the landlord to follow this advice.
26. In conclusion, we have found there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a fly infestation affecting her property because:
    1. After receiving the resident’s reports of flies in August 2023, it arranged a timely inspection of the communal areas by a pest control contractor.
    2. The contractor reported that there was no evidence of flies in the communal areas of the building and the landlord was entitled to rely on this advice.
    3. The contractor had only checked the communal areas (and not the resident’s property) because these were the areas it was responsible for in relation to pest control.
    4. The landlord had arranged for the bin stores to be cleaned to eliminate this as a potential source of flies.
    5. The landlord had sought expert advice from the pest control contractor when the resident had reported that the flies had made nests outside one of the windows and inside the vent system.
    6. The landlord offered to reimburse the resident if she brought in her own pest controller and it was found that the flies were caused by a building defect.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints

27. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints process. At stage 1 the landlord will aim to make personal contact with the resident by the close of business the following working day. It will then reply to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days. If the resident wishes the complaint to be escalated, the landlord will contact the resident to find out which parts of the complaint remain unresolved. The landlord will then let them know within 5 working days whether their complaint will be reviewed at stage 2. If the landlord agrees it should be reviewed at stage 2, it will aim to send its stage 2 response within 20 working days of the complaint being escalated.
28. The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 31 August 2023. The landlord contacted the resident on 4 September 2023 to acknowledge the complaint. The landlord had acknowledged the complaint within 2 working days, which was appropriate as the resident had submitted her complaint outside normal office hours on 31 August 2023.
29. The landlord sent its stage 1 reply on 18 September 2023, which was 10 working days after it had acknowledged the complaint. It had therefore responded within an appropriate timescale which was in line with its Complaints Policy.
30. The resident contacted the landlord on 18 September 2023 to say she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s stage 1 response. The landlord contacted the resident regarding her complaint on 21 September 2023, which was 3 working days after receiving it. The landlord had contacted the resident within a reasonable timescale and advised her it would notify her within 5 working days whether it was escalating the complaint. The landlord had therefore followed its policy in contacting the resident and advising her it would inform her of its decision on whether to escalate the complaint within 5 working days.
31. The landlord wrote to the resident on 28 September 2023 to confirm that her complaint had been escalated. The landlord had taken 5 working days to advise the resident of its decision from when it initially contacted her on 21 September 2023. This was appropriate and in line with its policy. It sent a formal acknowledgement of the stage 2 complaint on 29 September 2023.
32. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 25 October 2023, which was 19 working days after it had notified the resident of its decision to escalate the complaint on 28 September 2023. The landlord had therefore responded within an appropriate timescale which was in line with its policy.
33. Overall, we have found that the landlord responded to the resident’s complaints in line with its policy. We have therefore found there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.

Determination

34. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a fly infestation affecting her property.
35. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the associated complaints.