Platform Housing Group Limited — case 202418480

Decision Case ID 202418480 Decision type Investigation Landlord Platform Housing Group Limited Landlord type Housing Association Occupancy Assured Tenancy Date 26 January 2026 Background The resident previously raised concerns about damp and mould in the property prior to July 2022. She complained in June 2024 as the damp and mould was ongoing. She has shared that she struggles with her mental health, has some mobility issues, and has asthma. What the complaint is about The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of: The resident’s reports of damp and mould.

The resident’s concerns about asbestos tiles. The resident’s complaint. Our decision (determination) We found: Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould. No maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about asbestos tiles. No maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. We have made orders for the landlord to put things right. Summary of reasons The landlord recognised failings in its handling of repairs and communication between 2022 and 2024 and awarded compensation.

However, it did not show that it acted in line with parts of its damp and mould policy. The landlord acted reasonably by inspecting the asbestos tiles it could and confirming that the resident should let it know if she wanted it to complete a full assessment. While there was some delay in responding to the complaint at stage 2, the landlord acted reasonably by letting the resident know it required additional time in line with the Code 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 specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic.

It has due regard to our apologies guidance. No later than 23 February 2026 2 Compensation The landlord must pay the resident £800 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of her reports of damp and mould. This includes its previous offer of £700. The landlord must provide documentary evidence that it has paid this directly to the resident by the due date. No later than 23 February 2026 3 Action Order The landlord must contact the resident to get an up to date understanding of her medical conditions, and update its records accordingly by the due date to inform future repairs.

No later than 23 February 2026 4 Inspection Order The landlord must contact the resident to complete a damp survey. The landlord must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. A suitably qualified person must complete the inspection. The inspection should: Investigate the cause of any ongoing damp and mould. Take reasonable steps, using appropriate tools, to rule out rising or penetrating damp. Consider whether it is appropriate to use data loggers to monitor humidity levels, and whether there are any other means to improve the ventilation.

Determine whether it has completed previously recommended work to install a heat recovery humidistat ventilator and relocate a radiator. Consider any specific concerns the resident has about using the bedroom, or ventilating and heating the property. No later than 23 February 2026 5 Action Order The landlord must contact the resident to determine whether there are factors preventing her from ventilating or heating the property and offer support where necessary. It should write to her detailing any support, the outcome of the survey, and any proposed actions, along with the timeframe in which it expects to complete works should she agree.

It should also provide a copy of the survey report by the due date. No later than 09 March 2026 Recommendations Our recommendations We recommend that the landlord contacts the resident to confirm the actions it would take to complete a full assessment of the asbestos tiles and flooring. It should take steps to arrange this with her as detailed in its stage 2 complaint response in July 2022. Our investigation The complaint procedure Date What happened May and June 2024 Following contact from the resident and her MP, the landlord arranged an inspection and survey on 30 and 31 May 2024.

The resident set out her reasons for dissatisfaction and asked to raise a complaint between 1 and 6 June 2024. In summary: It had not contacted her or completed work following a stage 2 complaint in July 2022 and the situation was impacting her health. It inspected and raised the same jobs it should have completed 2 years prior. She was also worried about asbestos tiles in the property. She needed to throw her personal belongings away due to mould, and wanted it to arrange a management move.

24 June 2024 The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response and said: It partly upheld the complaint as it should have completed work to the loft insulation following its previous complaint response in 2022. It was her responsibility to rearrange the missed appointment for the trickle vents, but it should have monitored contact to progress the agreed actions through to completion. It renewed trickle vents and handles, and topped up the loft insulation on 18 June 2024. It planned to install a humidistat fan, and replace the shower unit between 27 June and 9 July 2024, and had asked to bring her kitchen replacement forward to that financial year.

It investigated some floor tiles and found these were not damaged, and no further work was required. To make a full assessment, it needed to pull all carpets back, which she said was not feasible. It did not believe she met the criteria for a managed move as it was completing repairs, but would contact her about her housing options. It apologised that there was a slight delay in arranging a mould treatment and recognised that this was pending. It could not offer compensation for personal injury but said she could seek legal advice and pursue a liability claim via its insurers.

It offered £400 for the delay in completing repairs to the loft, its failure to monitor contact and arrange agreed work, and distress and inconvenience caused. 24 June 2024 The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint as she did not think the work would stop the mould returning, and it had not contacted her. She added that the asbestos floor tiles were cracked badly and the operative said the floors needed to be ripped up. On 1 July 2024, she said that contractors had visited to clean mould that day, but there was still mould on the kitchen and living room walls.

28 August 2024 The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response and said: It sent her a letter in July 2022 outlining the process to fully assess the flooring, but did not receive a response. She could let it know if she wanted it to complete a full assessment. It completed a mould survey which did not find any significant building issues, and said the damp was condensation related due to a lack of ventilation and heating. It provided a guidance leaflet and asked that she follow the guidance to prevent condensation.

It treated the mould but the team were unable to access all areas safely, meaning these were not treated. It planned to replace the bathroom extractor fan on 14 October 2024, and would replace the kitchen extractor during the kitchen refurbishment work planned for that year. It contacted her about a start date, but she declined work and said it was due to move her. It was not considering a managed move at the time. It had since discussed her application, considering her medical need, and said it would write to her with the outcome once it reviewed this.

It apologised for the time taken to resolve the issues, and offered £700 compensation for the delayed repairs to the loft and kitchen, distress and inconvenience, its failure to contact her following its response in 2022, and miscommunication. Referral to the Ombudsman The resident referred her complaint to us to investigate as she said the landlord had not fully completed the mould wash, the works had not resolved the damp in the property and she remained concerned about the asbestos.

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 the resident’s reports of damp and mould Finding Service failure What we have not considered In our communication with the resident, we have explained that this investigation is not able to fully consider her concerns that the situation has directly impacted her health.

We have also not assessed specific events more than 12 months prior to her complaint in June 2024, events following the complaint (including her concerns related to the landlord’s handling of her kitchen replacement) and her request that the landlord arranges a management move. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould The landlord’s repairs policy states that it would attend emergency repairs within 24 hours, routine repairs within 28 days, and major repairs within 90 days.

The landlord’s Damp and Condensation policy sets out the actions it will take in response to reports of damp and mould. It specifies that it would arrange to clean the mould and survey the property to identify the cause of damp, including any rising or penetrating damp. Where necessary, it would use sensors to record the climate in the property to help identify the timing and cause of condensation. It would seek to understand if there are any issues and provide help and support to a resident to better control condensation in a “collaborative” manner.

We found that the landlord fairly recognised communication failures and delays between 2022 and 2024. It responded in a reasonable timeframe following the resident’s reports in May 2024 by arranging inspections and carrying out some remedial work to the trickle vents and loft insulation. It also agreed to bring forward planned work to replace the kitchen which was reasonable in view of the resident’s comments about the condition of the kitchen. It also acted appropriately by explaining how the resident could raise an insurance claim for damaged belongings and the impact on her health.

It considered her management move request, event though this was not approved, and offered to provide information about her housing options. These steps were all suitable in the circumstances. The landlord’s offer of £700 compensation went some way to put things right, but we found several additional shortcomings as set out below: The landlord did not show evidence that it properly ruled out rising or penetrating damp, nor that it considered using environmental sensors. This would have been appropriate to confirm the diagnosis and help inform the specific actions it and the resident needed to take in line with its policy.

The resident stated she had not used the bedroom for over 5 years, was sleeping in the living room, and commented about not heating or ventilating the home. Despite this, the landlord has not shown that it sought to understand her personal circumstances, whether she understood the ventilation guidance, or if she had any difficulties with heating and ventilation due to health or financial issues. The resident made the landlord aware that it did not fully complete the mould wash on 1 July 2024.

Its records show it identified 2 small areas it had missed, and the resident raised concerns about areas where it could not see mould. We have not seen evidence to show that it looked to treat the remaining areas within a reasonable time, and it failed to explain its position within its complaint response, noting only that it could not access some areas safely. It did not offer to reattend until 29 September 2024, a month after its final complaint response. There were delays in installing the bathroom fan between the inspection on 31 May 2024 and 14 October 2024.

While there is a record of one re-arranged appointment, the landlord did not acknowledge or explain the reason for the delay. The inspection notes from 30 May 2024 show that it had not previously relocated a radiator as required and there is no evidence it tried to arrange this. We note that a previous survey in November 2021 recommended that the landlord install a heat recovery humidistat ventilator, which is different from an extractor fan, to help reduce the condensation.

Given the delays, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have reviewed historic recommendations to determine if these were complete, and to have explained its position. We have asked the landlord to consider this in our orders. Despite the resident raising concerns about the impact on her health, and referencing her disability, the landlord said it had no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident when it provided evidence in 2025. This indicates that it may not have fully considered the potential impact of damp and mould on the resident over the course of the complaint Our remedies guidance states that compensation figures over £600 can be proportionate to put right failings which had a significant impact on a resident.

The landlord’s offer of £700 is significant and goes some way to put right the impact of its failings. However, this does not fully reflect the impact of the failure to demonstrate that it had taken all reasonable steps to investigate the damp in line with its policy, arrange follow on damp works within a reasonable timeframe once it was aware areas had been missed, and to demonstrate that it had sought to understand the resident’s personal circumstances or offer support in line with its damp and mould policy.

Complaint The landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about asbestos tiles Finding No maladministration The landlord has a ‘duty to manage’ asbestos, as specified by regulation 4 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) says that “as long as asbestos is in good condition and is not damaged there is negligible risk, and that it should not be removed unnecessarily as this could be dangerous. There remains a dispute about the condition of the asbestos tiles in the resident’s property.

An asbestos survey report from May 2018 states that there were asbestos containing floor tiles in the bedroom, living room, hallway and airing cupboard. It found these were low risk, and that no action was needed at the time. The landlord explained the process that it would need to follow to assess the floor tiles, and dampness in the floor in its stage 2 complaint response in July 2022. At the time, it said it had not had a response and asked her to make contact. The resident provided a screenshot of this complaint response to the landlord as part of her complaint, indicating that she had received this at the time.

The landlord acted reasonably by inspecting the tiles it could see on 18 June 2024, once the resident had contacted it. Its records show that the resident did not want it to remove the floor coverings in full, and it was not able to complete a full assessment, but had not found that the visible tiles were damaged. It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on the opinions of its qualified staff and contractors when deciding that no further action was needed. It acted reasonably by explaining its position that in order to complete a full assessment, it would need to remove her floor coverings so it could see all of the tiles.

The resident has maintained that the tiles were damaged, operatives told her that all the tiles needed “ripping up” and staff had not asked her to pull the carpets back. However, we have not seen evidence that the landlord was recommended to remove tiles or that it was obliged to do so. It is not our role to determine whether the tiles were in a condition that warrants they be removed. We have not found a failing in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about the asbestos tiles.

We have recommended that it contacts the resident to explain the steps it would take to complete a full assessment and arrange this if agreed. Complaint The handling of the complaint Finding No maladministration The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The landlord has a published complaints policy which complies with the terms of the Code in respect of timescales. The landlord took 15 working days to acknowledge and respond to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 between 1 and 24 June 2024.

This was in line with its policy and the Code. The landlord took 47 working days to respond to the resident’s complaint at stage 2 (24 June to 28 August 2024). This was outside of the 25-working day timeframe to acknowledge and respond to a stage 2 complaint. The Code states that where a landlord requires additional time to respond, it should inform the resident, and the extension should not be more than 20 working days. The landlord acted reasonably by informing the resident of the need to extend the overall timeframe of the complaint by 20 working days and advising that it would provide its response by 28 August 2024 in advance.

The landlord responded within a reasonable overall timeframe, and the additional 2 working day delay was unlikely to have a significant impact on the overall outcome of the complaint. We have not found any service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint. Learning Knowledge information management (record keeping) The landlord has not provided records detailing the agreed actions from 2022, and some of its internal communication records are undated, meaning that they are not comprehensive.

The landlord should ensure that it is able to provide a clear audit trail of actions and communication so that it has an accurate timeline when handling complaints. Communication The landlord has acted reasonably by recognising that it should have communicated with the resident following its previous response in July 2022. We found that the landlord did not take reasonable steps to investigate if there were factors preventing the resident from ventilating or heating the property.

It should ensure that where damp in a property is primarily due to condensation, it takes all reasonable steps to understand a resident’s personal circumstances and offer tailored support.