Westward Housing Group Limited (202348084)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202348084

Westward Housing Group Limited

31 January 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 response to the resident’s concerns about damp, mould, and cavity wall insulation.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of a 2-bedroom bungalow, owned by the landlord. The resident has vulnerabilities in relation to his health (severe asthma and breathing problems).
3. The resident reported mould growth in the property on 28 June 2023. The landlord attended on 5 July 2023 and 7 September 2023. It informed him its contractors would survey the property and provide recommendations on the works required.
4. The resident made a formal complaint on 26 March 2024. He was unhappy about the landlord’s handling of his reports of damp and mould and his concerns about the lack of insulation within the walls of the property. He stated that the damp and mould were affecting his family’s health, and his bills had increased due to the property being cold.
5. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 8 April 2024. It upheld the resident’s complaint, stating it had raised jobs to rectify the damp, mould, and cavity wall issues. It apologised and offered £100 compensation comprising £50 for the delay in reinstating the cavity wall insulation and £50 for the delay in installing a positive input ventilation (PIV) unit.
6. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response and asked it to escalate his complaint to stage 2 of its complaints process on 17 April 2024. He stated his electricity bills had increased due to using humidifiers to soak up the water coming in through the walls.
7. In its stage 2 response on 7 June 2024, the landlord said it completed mould-related works and would continue to monitor the situation regarding mould growth in the resident’s home. It said it completed the cavity wall works on 18 April 2024. It apologised for the delays in completing the damp, mould and cavity wall works. It offered £826 compensation, comprising:
   1. £50 for the delay in installing the PIV units.
   2. £100, increased from £50 at stage 1, for the delay in reinstating cavity wall insulation.
   3. £362 for heating costs.
   4. £100 towards damaged goods.
   5. £250 towards distress and inconvenience.
8. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and brought his complaint to this Service. He stated there were still ongoing issues with damp and mould and the landlord did not complete the cavity wall works properly.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

9. The resident told the landlord and the Ombudsman that the damp and mould have had a negative effect on his family’s health. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. This is largely because independent medical experts are appointed to give evidence. They have a duty to the court to provide unbiased insights on the diagnosis, prognosis, and cause of any illness or injury. When disputes arise over the cause of an injury, oral testimony can be examined in court. Therefore, this element of the resident’s complaint is better dealt with via the court.

Concerns about damp, mould, and lack of cavity wall insulation.

10. The landlord’s repairs policy states it is responsible for repairing the structure, exterior, and the installations and fixtures of its properties including walls and ceilings. Its policy further states that it would complete routine repairs within 28 days and planned repairs within 90 days. Reports of damp and mould would normally fall under the landlord’s routine repairs policy while repairs to the structure including cavity walls fall under planned repairs. It does not have a separate damp and mould policy.
11. The resident informed the landlord on 28 June 2023, that the painters identified black mould in the bedroom behind the wallpaper, he said the mould covered the wall and was on the skirting. It completed a damp and mould referral and said a property surveyor would schedule an inspection. The landlord’s records show it attended the property on 5 July 2023, it stated it would ask its damp and mould contractors to attend and provide recommendations.
12. When a resident makes a repair request, this Service would expect the landlord to attend within the time limit specified in its policy and keep clear records of repair appointments and outcomes from such visits. It would also expect the landlord to inform the resident of scheduled visits and communicate the outcome of these visits and any subsequent plans to remedy the repair.
13. The landlord’s records show the resident contacted it on at least 4 occasions between 15 August 2023 and 6 September 2023, requesting updates on when its contractors would attend. It had not provided him any updates by 6 September 2023, which was 70 days from when he initially reported damp and mould and 42 days outside its routine repairs time limit. On 7 September 2023, he reported that his clothes and carpets were mouldy, and the walls were black and had cracks and fungus growing on them. He stated that the damp was all over his home and it was negatively impacting his health.
14. The landlord’s surveyor attended the property again on 7 September 2023, after the resident’s reports of damp and mould on the walls. They stated that the internal dampness of the wall suggested there were issues within the wall cavities. The landlord created a job to remove the blocks to enable its specialist contractors to inspect the cavity wall insulation.
15. The landlord’s specialist contractors attended on 13 September 2023 and 1 November 2023. They identified damp and mould growth in the corners of the room and on the walls. They raised various jobs which included installing PIV units, and fans, and completing mould treatments. They also recommended that the landlord should remove the insulation in the walls due to void areas and slumped insulation.
16. The landlord’s records show the resident contacted it on multiple occasions between 17 November 2023 and 12 January 2024, requesting updates on when it would complete the works. He stated the property was cold and damp and reiterated the negative effect on his health. He requested compensation for his clothes and possessions he had to throw away due to the ongoing issues with damp and mould.
17. The landlord’s records state it posted its compensation leaflet to the resident. Its compensation policy states that it would not compensate residents for a lack of contents insurance. It advises residents to claim for damages to their items via their home content insurance. It further states that it would offer discretionary compensation to residents where it has caused damage to property by its direct action or inaction. In such cases, it would usually need to inspect any damaged items claimed. It states residents must keep items for a reasonable time and if items are not available, it may refuse compensation.
18. The resident chased the landlord again for the works on 26 January 2024 and 1 February 2024. It informed him that the contractors had cancelled the works due to exceptional demand. He insisted that the mould was bad, especially in the bathroom. The landlord raised a job to wash down and treat the mould on the bathroom ceiling. On 8 February 2024, it completed mould washes in the bathroom, and kitchen areas, it also reconnected an extractor fan pipe.
19. The landlord’s communication with the resident was poor, and he constantly had to chase it for updates on his repairs. This would have caused further distress and inconvenience. Furthermore, considering he had explained how the situation was affecting his health, it should have made more enquiries about this and considered prioritising the works. It completed mould washes more than 7 months from when he first reported damp and mould in his property. In addition, it did not provide any information on when it would complete the works recommended by its specialist contractors. This was a failure and not in line with its policy or this Service expectation for landlords to keep residents updated on the status of their repairs.
20. The landlord’s records show it removed the damaged insulation on 1 February 2024. This was 57 days outside its 90-day time limit for planned repairs. Its records show that the delay was due to the workload of its contractors. It would have been reasonable to explain the situation to the resident and keep him updated on a date for the repairs. Lack of communication on all aspects of the repairs is evident in this case.
21. The resident contacted the landlord on 7 February 2024, stating that an appointment to refill the cavity insulation had not been attended. It informed him that due to budget cuts it was completing only essential and emergency repairs and had cancelled the works. It was unreasonable of the landlord to have waited until he contacted it before informing him of this.
22. In its repairs policy, the landlord states that in accordance with the Social Housing Regulator’s ‘Home Standard,’ (now the Safety and Quality Standard) as set out in The Regulatory Framework for Social Housing in England, it will ensure its homes are in a reasonable state of repair and must provide a realistic standard of thermal comfort and be weatherproof. It states it would seek to replace and/or improve components and implement services to ensure its priorities continue to meet these standards when it completes responsive repairs.
23. As highlighted above, the landlord has a responsibility to ensure its homes are in a reasonable state of repair. In this case, it was aware the resident’s home was not in a reasonable condition due to the issues with the wall cavities and the damp and mould. Furthermore, he had been waiting for all works to be completed for a long time. He had also reminded it often about the negative effect the cold had on his health and his concerns about his increased heating bills. It would have been reasonable of it to have acted in a timely manner in consideration of its commitment under the ‘Home Standard’ referred to above.
24. In its communications with the resident on 3 April 2024, the landlord asked him to quantify the claim he was making concerning his damaged personal items. There is no evidence that the resident provided any information regarding how much his damaged personal items were worth, nor that it showed it the items. It also asked him to provide his heating bills statement so it could review it in line with its compensation policy.
25. In the landlord’s internal correspondence of 3 April 2024, it reiterated that due to budget constraints, it had suspended all non-emergency/non-urgent works. The suspended works included the cavity reinstallation work and the works to install the PIV units and fans. However, it confirmed that conditions would not improve in the resident’s property until it completed the recommended works, so it re-raised the job orders to complete these works.
26. In its stage 1 response, the landlord stated that the resident wanted compensation for the damage sustained to personal items, which included, flooring, wardrobes, clothes, and shoes, and for the detrimental effect this matter had on himself and his wife’s health. It again advised him to claim via his personal home content insurance. However, as the damage was likely caused due to its delays in resolving the repairs, it should have provided its insurer details and advised him to claim against this. It failed to do this
27. The landlord’s response also stated that it had raised jobs for its contractors to attach ducting to the bathroom vent to ensure the fan vents worked appropriately and to install a PIV unit. It confirmed its contractors would attend on 19 April 2024 to reinstate the cavity wall insulation. It offered the resident £100 compensation for the delays in installing the PIV units and re-installing the cavity wall insulation.
28. In his escalation request on 17 April 2024, the resident stated that his heating costs had increased. Furthermore, his insurance company had advised that he should claim compensation from the landlord because it cancelled the works without completing them.
29. The landlord’s records show it completed the cavity wall refill works on 18 April 2024.
30. In its stage 2 response of 7 June 2024, the landlord stated it completed mould wash in the property on 8 February and installed a PIV unit and kitchen fan on 7 May 2024, it also provided the resident information on how to manage condensation and report damp and mould. It said it would continue to monitor the situation with damp and mould growth. It acknowledged it completed the repair outside its time limit and apologised for the delay.
31. The landlord’s stage 2 response also stated it reviewed the electricity bills the resident presented and calculated how much additional energy he would have consumed. It offered him £2 per day per its compensation policy to help with additional heating costs from his use of humidifiers between the date it raised the order to remove the insulation and the date it was re-installed, which was 163 days, amounting to £326.
32. Regarding the resident’s claim for damaged items which consisted of carpets, wardrobes, clothes, and shoes, the landlord stated that as he no longer had the items to provide evidence of the damage it could only offer a goodwill payment of £100 towards them. In total, the landlord offered £826 compensation for 5 reasons as summarised above.
33. Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, this Service will consider whether the redress offered by it (including an apology and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, this Service considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
34. In its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses, it was reasonable that the landlord acknowledged and apologised for the distress and inconvenience to the resident and offered £250 compensation towards this. The £326 compensation it offered for electric costs was appropriate and in line with its compensation policy. Its offer of £100 towards his damaged items was fair in the circumstances because the resident provided no proof of the alleged damage. It was therefore unable to assess this.
35. The landlord’s actions above would have constituted reasonable redress, however, the compensation it offered for the delay in completing the mould, damp, and cavity walls works was disproportionately low when we consider the length of these repair delays. The landlord’s record shows it completed the damp and mould works on 7 May 2024, this was more than 10 months from when the resident raised his initial report. It completed the cavity insulation works on 18 April 2024, more than 7 months after it identified the issue with the walls. This was a lengthy delay and would have understandably had a negative impact on him.
36. In summary, although the landlord’s actions were mostly reasonable, it did not offer sufficient compensation for its delays in completing repairs. This amounts to service failure. The Ombudsman has made an order for additional compensation to reflect the further delays.

Determination

37. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about damp, mould, and cavity wall insulation.

Orders

38. The landlord must:
    1. Complete a damp and mould inspection, including inspecting the cavity walls in the property. It must provide the resident and this Service a copy of the inspection report. If repairs are required, the report should set out what the repairs are and the time limit for completion.
    2. Pay the resident total compensation of £1,130 (rounded up) broken down as follows:
       1. £826 it offered in its stage 2 response (if not already paid).
       2. An additional £300 for the delay in completing the damp, mould and cavity wall works.
    3. Provide the Ombudsman with documentary evidence of compliance with these orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.