Yorkshire Housing Limited (202337390)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202337390

Yorkshire Housing Limited

28 August 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s:
1. Handling of repairs to the roof and the subsequent damp and mould.
2. Complaint handling.

Background

The resident has a secure tenancy. They live in a 3-bedroom property owned by the landlord. They live with their partner and children. Their son is 17 years old and has cerebral palsy.
The landlord began works to replace the roof of the resident’s property on 1 March 2023. It removed the resident’s roof on this day. The resident says that their roof was left open to bad weather until 3 March 2023, when the landlord came back to partially re-tile the roof. However, it left gaps in the tiling to the front and back eaves of the roof.
The resident made their stage 1 complaint to the landlord on 14 March 2023. They said that they were not happy with the quality of the work done to their roof. They said that they were worried about the damp and mould that had developed because of the water leaking in through the gaps in the tiles that the landlord had left. For an outcome, the resident wanted repairs to be completed and compensation for the damage caused.
The landlord went back to the property on 14 March 2023 to fill in the gaps in the tiles.
On 20 March 2023, the resident completed a “Claim Notification Form” and requested £528.00 in compensation from the landlord for damage to their property because of the works to the roof. They said on their completed form that there was damage to the inside of the building, the walls and their belongings. The breakdown of their compensation request was as follows:
1. £219 for the damage to their son’s bedframe.
2. £129 for the damage to their son’s mattress.
3. £30 for the damage to the curtains.
4. £70 for the damage to the bedding and linen.
5. £20 for the cleaning equipment that they had used.
6. £60 for the anti-mould and emulsion paint that they used to redecorate their son’s room.
The resident asked the landlord to escalate their complaint to stage 2 on 25 March 2023. This was before the landlord had provided its stage 1 complaint response. The resident told the landlord that:
1. Water was running down their son’s bedroom wall.
2. They did not know if the works to the roof had been completed.
3. It had been 10 days since they had told it about the leak they were having.
4. Their son was having to sleep in his room that had had mould, damp, leaks and a draught in the meantime.
The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 27 March 2023. It told the resident that:
1. Their complaint had been upheld because some of the works had not been up to standard.
2. It accepted that the leak into the two bedrooms was because the roof had not been made weather-proof.
3. It was sorry for any stress and inconvenience that this had caused the resident and their family.
4. It would use the resident’s feedback to improve its processes.
5. A surveyor went to the property on 27 March 2023 to check that works had been completed properly.
6. It had arranged another mould wash to the walls and ceiling for 28 March 2023.
7. It accepted their claim for compensation made on 20 March 2023 and would pay the requested expenses.
8. It was sorry for how long it had taken to resolve the issue.
9. It would make sure that communication between its different teams would be improved.
The resident accepted the landlord’s offer of compensation on the same day.
The resident asked the landlord to escalate their complaint to stage 2 on 28 March 2023.
The landlord sent the resident its stage 2 complaint response on 24 April 2023. It said that it was going to uphold the decision it had made in its stage 1 complaint response. It told the resident that:
1. Its stage 1 response had resolved the issues that the resident had complained about.
2. It had already acknowledged its errors and paid compensation to the resident.
3. It was not acceptable that contractors had gone to the property without an appointment on 29 March 2023.
4. The roof works were completed on 30 March 2023, and the scaffolding was removed on 31 March 2023.
5. It would not be able to consider their reports of mould in this response because it did not think that the resident had complained about this at stage 1. Instead, it offered to raise a stage 1 complaint for the resident about the mould.
The resident contacted this service in February 2024. They said that they were having ongoing problems with mould in their son’s bedroom.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident said in their referral form to this service that this situation has been impacting on their son’s health. Whilst we do not doubt the resident’s comments, this Service cannot consider impacts on health and wellbeing. It would be more appropriate for the resident to deal with this issue through the courts as a personal injury claim. We have, however, still considered the general distress and inconvenience that the situation may have caused. We have also considered whether the landlord has considered the resident’s son’s health conditions in making its decision about whether their son needed to be moved to temporary accommodation whilst the roofing works were completed.
The resident has also told this service that their problems with damp and mould are still ongoing. The resident raised a new Stage 1 complaint with the landlord on 12 April 2024 about how the mould in their son’s bedroom had returned. The landlord provided the resident with their new Stage 1 complaint response on 2 May 2024. The resident did not escalate this complaint to Stage 2. This means that this Service can only consider the resident’s complaint made in March 2023. This is because the second Stage 1 complaint was made after the resident’s referral to this Service in February 2024 and because this second complaint has not completed the landlord’s internal complaint-handling procedure.
This investigation will therefore focus on the complaint that the resident made in March 2023.

Handling of repairs to the roof and the subsequent damp and mould

The tenancy agreement says that the landlord must carry out all repairs for which it is responsible and make good any damage to the inside of the property arising from works that the landlord has carried out. The tenancy agreement also says that the landlord will give the resident 24 hours notice in writing before carrying out works to the property. The only exception to this is in cases of emergency.
The landlord’s repair policy says the landlord will attend resident’s homes when it says it will. It also will keep the resident up to date with the progress of their repairs. The repair policy defines the following types of repairs:
1. An emergency repair, which will be made safe within 4 hours and the full repair completed within 24 hours.
2. A non-emergency repair, which will be a scheduled appointment to be completed within 28 days.
3. Planned maintenance, which are works to improve properties. These works include the installation of new roofs which is the case here.
The landlord says in its policy that the resident will be contacted to confirm their repair appointment after it has been made and kept up to date if there are changes to the appointment. It says that it will also keep the resident’s home safe, secure and weatherproof. It says it will also take all reports of damp, mould and condensation seriously and will be flexible it its’ response times to help prevent ongoing problems with damp, mould and condensation.
Appendix A of the landlord’s repairs policy says that emergency repairs include a “serious roof leak and/ or major structural failure”. Non-emergency roofing and guttering works fall into the category of a programmed repair. It says that damp and mould would be a responsive repair.
The landlord also has a ‘Decanting Policy’. This policy says that the landlord can arrange for a resident to be temporarily moved into alternative accommodation when major repairs or improvement works mean it is not reasonable for the resident to stay in the property in the meantime. The policy says that it will take into account the vulnerability of the resident when making this decision.
The landlord began roof works on 25 February 2023 and stripped the roof on 2 March 2023. It did not return to the property until 3 March 2023 to replace the roof. The resident said it was raining into the property, and it was very cold. The landlord’s repairs policy says that it will make sure that a property is weatherproof. This was therefore a failing by the landlord.
The evidence shows that the landlord did not communicate with the resident about when it would be returning to replace the roof. There is no record in the landlord’s evidence to show that it was keeping the resident up to date with the progress of their roof replacement. This is likely to have left the resident feeling frustrated.
The resident said that the landlord returned to the property without an appointment on 3 March 2023. The landlord did not communicate to the resident that it would be leaving some rows of tiling off the roof, or why it was doing so. This is likely to have left the resident feeling frustrated.
The resident was then left for 11 days with gaps in the tiling to the front and back of the property. In the meantime, there was severe weather and snow. The landlord’s evidence shows that the landlord knew about the severe weather ongoing at the time. As set out above, the landlord did not retile the rest of the roof until 14 March 2023. During this period, the resident reported that they were experiencing water ‘pouring’ into the bedrooms. This was unreasonable by the landlord as the evidence shows it did not take any steps to mitigate the risk of cold or water entering the property. This would have been a very distressing experience for the resident and their family.
The resident told the landlord in their Stage 1 complaint that the tiles had not been replaced on the back of the property. Internal emails from the landlord show that it knew that the resident’s roof had been left with gaps in the tiles. The resident was left without a weather-proofed property between 2 March 2023 and 31 March 2023. This would have been very distressing for the resident and their family, particularly because of the severe weather at the time. This period where the resident’s roof was left exposed also ultimately led to damp and mould in the property, which is discussed further below. This caused further distress and inconvenience for the resident and their family.
The resident also highlighted two further issues within their Stage 1 complaint on 14 March 2023 – the damp and mould that they had suffered as a result and the fact that their son was having to sleep on the sofa as a result.
Following the resident’s report about their son having to sleep on the sofa, they asked the landlord whether their son could be moved into temporary accommodation because he was having to sleep on the sofa. The landlord’s records show that it was aware that their son was under 18 and had a disability, specifically cerebral palsy. The landlord’s internal emails discuss whether a move to temporary accommodation would be possible for the resident’s son. The landlord’s internal emails show that it decided that a surveyor would need to inspect the property to decide if a move to temporary accommodation was needed. The Service has not been provided with evidence to show that the landlord did this assessment.
The Service also has not received evidence to show that the landlord communicated its’ decision with the resident about whether a temporary move would be suitable. This was unreasonable by the landlord because it did not keep the resident updated like it said it would in its’ repairs policy. If it felt that a move to temporary accommodation was not needed, it should have told the resident and kept them updated.
The landlord’s repairs policy also says that it must consider whether any children or vulnerable adults are at risk of harm when inspecting a property. It then must record this on the landlord’s Safeguarding System. This would then be allocated to a Designated Safeguarding Person and necessary actions can be taken by the landlord ‘to safeguard customers as far as reasonably practicable’. This policy applies here because there is damp and mould in the resident’s son’s bedroom. The landlord also was aware that the resident’s son has a disability. The Service has been provided with no evidence that it followed this section of its repairs policy. This was unreasonable by the landlord.
With respect to the damp and mould, the resident raised this in their complaint on 14 March 2023 and again on 20 March 2023 and 25 March 2023. The landlord did not follow its repair policy because it did not keep the resident updated with how it planned to respond to these reports until 26 March 2023. This would have left the resident feeling frustrated because they were not kept up to date with works. The landlord also did not manage the resident’s expectations by explaining their proposed timeframe for works.
In its Stage 1 complaint response on 27 March 2023, the landlord told the resident that it would be completing mould wash works the following day. These went ahead on 28 March 2023. The resident asked that their complaint was escalated to stage 2 on this same day because there was still water on the walls of their son’s bedroom. In response to this report, the landlord completed a damp and mould survey of the property on 18 April 2023. As damp and mould would be considered a ‘non-emergency repair’ under the landlord’s repair policy, this inspection was completed within the 28 days deadline. However, the landlord then took a further month after this to complete the mould wash works that were identified as being needed in the inspection. The resident’s report of damp was therefore not actioned by the landlord for 50 days. This is longer than the 28 days that the landlord had under its’ repairs policy. This was a failing by the landlord because there was mould in the resident’s son’s bedroom who, as discussed, had vulnerabilities that the landlord was aware of.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) recommends that landlords should make sure 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.
The landlord’s poor handling of the resident’s roof repairs meant that the property was left exposed to severe weather, firstly for the period of a day where the roof was left fully open and then for a further period of around two weeks when the tiles were not fully replaced. The landlord knew that there was severe weather ongoing at the time but took no steps to weather-proof the property in the meantime. In its internal emails the landlord recognised that the damp and mould was because of the poorly managed roofing works. This was a failure on the part of the landlord which adversely affected the resident.
The landlord also did not communicate well with the resident during the completion of the works. It did not follow its repairs policy or tenancy agreement in providing the resident with prior notice of appointments on several occasions. It also did not communicate with the resident about the progress of works, which it said it would do in its repairs policy. This also adversely affected the resident.
A finding of maladministration has therefore been made in relation to the landlord’s handling of repairs to the roof and the subsequent damp and mould.

Complaint handling

Where the landlord admits failings like it has in this case, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether it resolved the resident’s complaint properly in the circumstances and whether it offered the resident reasonable redress. In considering this, we look at whether the landlord’s actions were in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The landlord’s complaints policy says that, when considering whether to award compensation, the landlord will consider any distress and inconvenience caused to the resident. In its Stage 1 complaint response, the landlord acknowledged that some of the works to the resident’s roof were not up to standard and that it had not made sure that the property was weather-proof which led to leaks into two of the bedrooms. The landlord offered to pay the resident’s exact expenses that they had claimed on 20 March 2023 for the furnishings that had been damaged by the damp and mould. Whilst this was a positive attempt by the landlord to make things right for the resident, it did not consider whether it would offer the resident any compensation for the distress and inconvenience that they had suffered.
This offer by the landlord to pay the resident’s expenses in the sum of £528 therefore did not fully reflect the failings that had taken place or the impact that the situation had had on the resident. An order for further compensation to be paid to the resident is made below.
In its Stage 1 complaint response, the landlord also said that it would ensure that “lessons learnt are put into place and that communication between internal parts of the business is improved”. Whilst it is appreciated that this was an attempt made by the landlord to put things right, this statement is vague and it is not clear what lessons the landlord had learned. A recommendation about how the landlord might make sure that a future similar situation does not happen to other residents is made below.
The landlord’s complaint responses did not acknowledge the part of the resident’s complaint about how their son was having to sleep on the sofa whilst there was damp and mould in his room. It also did not explain to the resident in its response whether it would be considering moving the resident’s son to temporary accommodation whilst the damp and mould works were ongoing, in accordance with its Decanting policy.
A finding of service failure has therefore been made in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect to its handling of repairs to the roof and the subsequent damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was a service failure by the landlord in respect to its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident for the unnecessary distress and inconvenience caused by the service failures identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident the sum of £700 in compensation, made up of:
  1. £600 for the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident in its failure in handling the repairs to the roof and its handling of the subsequent damp and mould issues.
  2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused to them by its service failures in the handling of the resident’s complaint.

This sum is in addition to the £528 already paid to the resident by the landlord.

The landlord should contact this Service within 4 weeks of the date of this determination to evidence its compliance with the above orders.