PSOW Individual Decisions

Mr A complained that Hafod Housing Association had not finished repairs to his property he had been waiting over a year for, despite a previous early resolution reached by the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman decided that the works had not been fully completed, and that dates Mr A had been given for the works to take place had been postponed. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Housing Association’s agreement that within 2 weeks it would send a written apology to Mr A, inform him of the scheduled dates on which the works would take place and arrange a redress payment in the sum of £100 in recognition of the time and trouble taken in having to return to the Ombudsman.

Mrs C complained that Hafod Housing Association failed to complete outstanding repairs and adaptations to her property, and that she had to repeatedly report the problems with her patio, doors, kitchen and toilets. Mrs C said that the situation severely affected her mental health. The Ombudsman decided that although delayed, the Housing Association had completed some of the works. One outstanding issue was a repair to the property’s outside tap. Mrs C said that she needed to be able to use the tap to keep the garden safe for her to use. The Housing Association said it was not responsible for the repair, but it was unable to provide documents to evidence this. In recognition of this failure, the Housing Association completed the tap repair. It also confirmed that it was in the process of identifying a contractor to replace the greywater system, and because Mrs C remained concerned about the condition of the property’s patio, doors, and kitchen, it had arranged to complete a full property stock condition survey. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Housing Association’s agreement to apologise to Mrs C that she has had to contact the Ombudsman, complete the stock condition survey and confirm in writing the outcome and timeframes of any works or repairs identified, and to provide an update on the greywater system, within 3 weeks.

Miss X complained that Hafod Housing Association failed to carry out repair works it had agreed to undertake. The Ombudsman found that the Association had failed to gain access to Miss X’s property to undertake repairs. It had also failed to provide scheduled appointment letters to Miss X. She said this caused uncertainty and frustration for Miss X. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Association’s agreement to, within 3 weeks, offer an apology for failing to provide confirmation of scheduled appointments and for the ongoing delay in completing the outstanding repair works, offer £100 redress for the failing and delay, and provide Miss X with a clear timeline detailing when the remaining works will be completed.

Miss X complained that Hafod Housing Association had said someone would be in contact with her regarding her ceiling repair; however, she had not heard anything. The Ombudsman found that the Association had identified that the contractor held incorrect contact information for Miss X. She said this caused uncertainty for Miss X. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation The Ombudsman sought and gained the Associations agreement to, within 1 week, apologise to Miss X for the avoidable delay to the ceiling repair.

Mr A complained that Hafod Housing Association failed to consider reasonable adjustments relating to his health conditions by not appropriately considering his request for a transfer to larger Welsh Housing Partnership tenancy property, if one became available. The Ombudsman decided that whilst the Housing Association appeared to be working with Mr A to resolve the situation and develop an internal policy, due to conflicting information that was initially provided to Mr A this appeared to have taken longer than necessary. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Housing Association’s agreement that within 2 weeks it would send a further complaint response to Mr A, which should apologise, outline the steps it was taking in respect of developing its internal policy and confirm any actions Mr A was required to take.

Miss A complained about repair issues at her home, which had been ongoing since early 2023. She complained that the property was full of black mould, windows were not properly secured, water was leaking through the roof and there was no insulation. Asbestos also needed to be replaced. Miss A was left without hot water and heating over the Christmas period and there was a large hole in the ceiling. Where work, such as the flooring, had been undertaken it was of a poor standard and needed replacing. The Ombudsman found that although the Housing Association had undertaken some repairs, there were delays and works had not been completed. Where works had been carried out, further damage was caused to Miss A’s property, furniture and possessions. There were issues around communication between Miss A and the Housing Association. This had caused Miss A distress and frustration and had a significant impact on her family. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Housing Association agreed to, within 4 weeks, meet with Miss A to inspect the property and identify a list of outstanding issues. It also agreed to provide her with a schedule and timeline of the planned works, and a written apology for the delays in carrying out repairs.

Miss X complained that Hafod Housing Association failed to address the damp and mould in her property for four months. As a result of this, Miss X’s belongings and decor were ruined. The Ombudsman found the Association had received a complaint from Miss X in January, however, it had dealt with her complaint informally and had failed to provide Miss X with a complaint response. She said this caused uncertainty and frustration for Miss X. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Association’s agreement to, within 3 weeks, offer an apology and an explanation for the length of time it has taken to resolve the repair, issue a stage 2 complaint response, arrange a date with Miss X to carry out a mould washdown, and offer to redecorate her home following the roof repair. Contact with Miss X will be made prior to attendance, with a confirmation letter provided.

Ms C complained that over a four-year period, Hafod Housing Association had not taken sufficient action to stop dampness and prevent mould in her home and provided evidence that a drainage channel had not been installed properly. The Ombudsman decided that the Housing Association had taken reasonable action by arranging an independent inspection and acting on the findings of the report. However, the inspection had been carried out during a period of warm, dry weather when evidence of dampness may have been less apparent, and there was an issue with the drainage channel that had been installed. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Housing Association’s agreement to inspect the drainage channel within two weeks and take any necessary remedial action, and within three months, carry out a further damp assessment following a period of heavy rain.

Ms A complained that Hafod Housing Association failed to act on advice from its contractors, that her front door needed to be replaced. The Housing Association acknowledged that the information provided by its contractors about replacing the door, was unclear. In recognition of this, it offered Ms A £150 redress. The Housing Association also confirmed that it was going to replace the door, but it did not provide a timeframe. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Housing Association’s agreement to apologise to Ms A that she had to contact the Ombudsman, and to replace her front door within 1 month.

Ms K complained about how Hafod Housing Association dealt with a leak in her bathroom. Specifically, Ms K said she received an email from the Housing Association stating that the leak was caused because the bathroom floor had not been sealed. She was later told that the actual cause was failed seals on the shower enclosure door and a dip in the bathroom floor level. Whilst the Ombudsman was satisfied that the Housing Association had taken appropriate action to investigate and repair the issues caused by the faulty shower doors and floor, she was concerned about how the Housing Association communicated its findings and the remedial work required to Ms K. This caused Ms K distress and frustration. In the interest of settling the complaint, the Housing Association agreed to carry out a number of actions within 20 calendar days, including issuing an explanation and apology to Ms K about the incorrect information provided and the delay in recognising an issue with the bathroom floor, and offer her a payment of £200 in recognition of the stress and inconvenience caused.

Ms A complained that Hafod Housing Association had failed to resolve an issue with a cracked wall in her garden. She said the wall had been inspected by a surveyor in August but she had not received any further contact from the Association. The Ombudsman decided that there had been a delay by the Association to rectify the problem and complete the work needed to the wall. She said this had caused inconvenience and frustration for Ms A.  The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Association’s agreement to apologise to Ms A and provide her with £50 redress in recognition of the delays. The Association also agreed, that within 3 weeks, it would provide Ms A with a written response which sets out the action it will be taking to resolve the issue with the wall.

Miss A complained that between February 2021 and January 2023, Hafod Housing Association (the HA) had not acted in accordance with its policy and procedure regarding her anti-social behaviour (“ASB”) complaints about parking and noise nuisance. In addition, concerning the ASB the HA had failed to take her disability into account and consider whether it was appropriate to make reasonable adjustments (“RAs”) under the Equality Act 2010. Finally, Ms A said that the HA did not handle her complaint in line with its complaint process and did not sufficiently address the ASB matters that she raised in its complaint response to her. The Ombudsman found that the HA had not always acted in accordance with its ASB policy and procedure, or indeed best practice as set out by the Welsh Government. She also identified that communication with Miss A could have been more effective than it was. In terms of record-keeping, the Ombudsman found that it was not always clear when contact was made or what the ASB management plan was in Miss A’s case. Inaccuracies in some of the responses provided by the HA were also not helpful. The Ombudsman noted that Miss A did not always return noise logs and there were periods where she did not report ASB complaints. There were also instances when the HA did take action. Despite this, shortcomings in the way the HA carried out its ASB policy and procedure, added to Miss A’s distress and caused an injustice. The Ombudsman concluded that the HA’s failings amounted to maladministration. In light of these shortcomings, to that extent only, this part of Miss A’s complaint was upheld. The Ombudsman identified that there was a lack of meaningful engagement shown by the HA in Miss A’s health issues. This led to missed opportunities for it to consider reasonable adjustments at an early stage. The Ombudsman also noted the HA’s failure to identify and acknowledge this as an issue in its responses to the complaint, including to the Ombudsman’s office. The Ombudsm

Ms A complained about ongoing damp and mould issues with her property. The investigation found that Ms A had previously complained to the Association about the same issue and a Maintenance Surveyor had inspected the property, along with an Environmental Health Officer, and confirmed there were issues that needed to be addressed. The Association had arranged for the developer to make improvements and the works were completed. Following Ms A’s further complaint, the Association said it had instructed an independent damp/mould surveyor to undertake an inspection and provide a report. Following receipt of the report, the Association said it will respond to Ms A’s further complaint within 4 weeks of the date of this decision and act on any results that are necessary. The Ombudsman considered that the action the Association had agreed to take was reasonable and the matter was settled. Ms A would be able to return to the Ombudsman if she was not satisfied with the outcome.

Mr A complained about the Housing Association (the HA) not listening to his complaints, and the delay in the HA replacing the defective cavity wall insulation in his block of flats and dealing with the issue of mould. Mr A, who has mental health issues, said that his physical and mental health had “greatly deteriorated” due to the stress. Mr A also referred to belongings (clothes and furniture) being damaged as a result of the mould. Mr A referred to the fact that the HA had not compensated him for the damaged items. The Ombudsman found that there had been excessive delays by the HA in carrying out work to the defective cavity wall insulation which was causing penetrating damp (where moisture moves from the exterior wall of a building to the interior) and other problems. The Ombudsman noted that the Contractor used by the HA had first identified the problems in 2022 and had been asked to do a repeat inspection in March 2023 which confirmed the same issues. The work on the defective cavity wall insulation was started in July 2024. The HA said that it had made changes to its repairs process to stop similar delays. The Ombudsman also identified that communication with Mr A about the delay could have been better. Mr A’s complaint to the HA had provided it with an opportunity to have identified some of the issues that led to the delays and to have acknowledged and apologised to Mr A for the delays. The Ombudsman noted the effects of the delayed work on Mr A’s health. The Ombudsman noted that the HA in response to Mr A’s complaint had carried out an inspection visit and found that the cavity wall defects would not have caused the amount of moisture it would have taken to damage Mr A’s items. As the Ombudsman’s office was not a compensatory body it could not take this part of Mr A’s complaint forward. Mr A later made it clear that he was not after compensation but just wanted the work carried out. The HA agreed as part of the settlement to apologise to Mr A both for the de

Miss A complained about the length of time Hafod Housing Association took to repair a leak to her pipe, which subsequently burst. She complained that this also lead to an increase in her water bill. The Ombudsman decided that it was not made clear to Miss A the length of time that it would take to repair the initial leak, however, the Housing Association had repaired the burst pipe within 24 hours. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Housing Association’s agreement that within 20 working days, it would write to Miss A to apologise for the confusion over the length of time it would take to repair the initial leak and that it would give consideration to paying redress to cover the increase in the water bill for the period of the leak, if Miss A provided evidence of this.

Ms A complained that the Housing Association failed to carry out the necessary repair work to her property, despite the Ombudsman having previously referred the matter to it to be dealt with. As the Housing Association agreed that it would undertake the work, apologise to Ms A for the delay and to make a redress payment of £150, the Ombudsman considered the matter settled.

Ms A was unhappy with the lack of action from Hafod Housing Association towards maintaining a tree in her garden. The Ombudsman found that although the Association was taking action in respect of the tree, there had been considerable delays. Further, it was found that the Association was awaiting permission and an estimated timescale for work from another public body. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Association’s agreement to provide Ms A with an apology for the delay, confirm that works will be undertaken on the tree and update Ms A on its communication with the other public body, within 20 working days.

Mrs A complained about how Hafod Housing Association dealt with her complaint about damage to her furniture, which she said had been ruined by damp in her house. The Ombudsman decided, that the Housing Association had repaired the leak, which was causing the damp. But that it had failed to offer appropriate redress for the damage the damp had caused to Mrs A’s furniture. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. She sought and gained the Housing Associations agreement, that within 20 working days, it would write to Ms A to apologise for the time and troubling in bring her complaint to the Ombudsman, and make a redress payment in the sum of £500 for damage to her furniture due to mould.

Ms Q complained that Hafod Housing Association had failed to deal with a repair to resolve an issue of water ingress leaking through ceiling air vents. The Ombudsman found that whilst the Association had attended Ms Q’s property to carry out works, there had been miscommunication between Ms Q and the contractor concerning the works that were required. Additionally, no appointment was made with Ms Q prior to the attendance of the contractors. This caused additional frustration and confusion for Ms Q. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Association’s agreement to carry out an inspection within 2 weeks, with the works to be completed within the following 4 weeks. Additionally, appointments are to be made prior to attendance with confirmation letters and those attending to carry identification.

Mr B complained that Hafod Housing Association failed to carry out repairs that were needed to his property and failed to formally respond to the complaint he made to it.The Ombudsman found that the Association had completed the repairs, but decided that there had been a significant delay to do so and a further delay to respond to Mr B’s complaint. She said this caused inconvenience and frustration for Mr B. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation.The Ombudsman sought and gained the Association’s agreement to provide Mr B with a response to his complaint which includes an apology and an explanation for the delays. The Association also agreed to pay Mr B £100 redress for the time and trouble taken by him to complain to the Ombudsman.

Mr T complained that Hafod Housing Association had failed to carry out repairs that were needed to his garden fence and failed to formally respond to the complaint he made to it. The Ombudsman decided that there had been a significant delay by the Association to carry out the repairs and to respond to Mr T’s complaint. She said this caused inconvenience and frustration to Mr T. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Association’s agreement to apologise to Mr T, provide him with £50 redress for the delays and trouble taken to complain to the Ombudsman and provide him with a complaint response. The Association also agreed to complete the work to the fence within the next 4 weeks.

Miss X complained that Hafod Housing Association failed to respond to her complaint regarding an outstanding repair to a door at her home. The Ombudsman decided that there had been delays and oversights with the response which caused frustration and uncertainty to Miss X. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Association’s agreement to issue its complaint response (within 3 weeks), which should include an apology and explanation for the delay and issue a redress payment of £150 in recognition of the delay and need to approach the Ombudsman.

Ms D complained that Hafod Housing Association failed to address various issues in her home, which included water leaks and a damaged fence. She also complained that the Association failed to respond to the complaints raised about the issues. The Ombudsman found that the Association had been poor in its communication with Ms D. She felt this caused additional frustration and uncertainty. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Associations agreement to write to Ms D, within 2 weeks, to apologise for the lack of communication and its delays. It should also include an explanation for the delays, the actions it is taking to resolve the outstanding issues and financial redress of £150.

Ms S complained that she has not received a response to concerns she formally raised with Hafod Housing Association in December 2023. Her concerns included unresolved damp and asbestos in her home. The Ombudsman found that there had been an unnecessary delay in responding to Ms S’s concerns which caused additional frustration and uncertainty to Ms S. She decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman agreed with the Association that it would pay Ms S £150 for the time and trouble in raising her concerns. The Association has contacted Ms S to commence the works required to resolve her concerns.

Ms V complained that Hafod Housing Association had failed to resolve the various maintenance issues in her property and had not responded to the complaint she made to it in October 2023. The Ombudsman found that there had been a delay by the Association to rectify the problems in the property and respond to Ms V’s complaint. She said this caused inconvenience and frustration for Ms V. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without an investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Association’s agreement to apologise to Ms V and provide her with a redress payment of £150 for her time and trouble in raising her complaint with the Ombudsman. The Association also agreed to provide Ms V with a complaint response which includes a schedule of works to be undertaken, within 3 weeks.