Awaab's Law for Social Landlords — Single Module

The Call

Calder Reach Housing — D&M Response Desk

22,000 homes — Greater Manchester housing association

Statutory D&M function — newly-created role under Awaab's Law

Regulator-watched — Calder Reach has had no Cat 1 breaches in the past 12 months and intends to keep that record

You are the new Damp & Mould Response Officer at Calder Reach Housing — a 22,000-home housing association in Greater Manchester. The role exists because of the Social Housing Regulation Act 2023. Section 10A is the part everyone calls Awaab's Law. It runs on three statutory windows: 14 working days to assess a Category 1 hazard from the moment of written notification, 7 working days to communicate the assessment in writing to the tenant after the assessment is complete, and 42 working days to commence remediation works. Miss any window without a documented reason and you are in breach.

It is Friday 21:47. The phone is about to ring.

FRIDAY 21:47 — FOXGLOVE COURT, TAMESIDE

21:47:00 AMBER 14WD ASSESS 7WD COMMS 42WD REMEDY M1 — The Call SCORE0

Situation feed

Out-of-Hours Call — Friday 21:47

Megan Doyle, 14B Foxglove Court

The call lights up the OOH line. Megan Doyle, 14B Foxglove Court, Tameside — a 2-bed flat that Calder Reach has owned and let since 2019. The case management software pulls up her tenancy automatically as the call connects.

She is calm. She has a notebook open in front of her. She has done this call before.

Megan Doyle

I want to log a damp and mould complaint. Black mould, Caleb's bedroom. He's four. He's got asthma. Our GP has written you a letter. I have a copy on the table in front of me.

Megan Doyle

I've reported it before, in February and March. Cleaned it down with bleach twice. It came back. The GP says it needs to be properly fixed because of Caleb's chest. I'd like this logged formally tonight please.

You

Logging the case now, Megan. Can you read me what the GP letter says?

Megan Doyle

It says: Caleb Doyle has been seen in clinic on the 12th and 24th of this month with worsening reactive airway symptoms. Bedroom mould exposure is a likely contributing factor and constitutes a Category 1 hazard under HHSRS. I am writing to Calder Reach Housing to formally request remediation under Social Housing Regulation Act 2023 §10A.

Megan Doyle

She's named the law. So I assume you know what to do.

GP letter on file

From: Dr Elena Vukovic <e.vukovic@trinityparksurgery.nhs.uk>
To: complaints@calderreach.org.uk

Caleb Doyle (DOB 12-Apr-2022) — formal request for remediation under Social Housing Regulation Act 2023 §10A

I am the registered GP for Caleb Doyle, four years of age, of 14B Foxglove Court, Tameside.

Caleb has been seen in clinic on the 12th and 24th of this month with worsening reactive airway symptoms. His mother Megan reports persistent black mould in his bedroom which has been reported to Calder Reach Housing previously without remediation. Bedroom mould exposure is in my professional judgement a likely contributing factor to his presentation.

On the methodology in the HHSRS Operating Guidance (ODPM 2006) the conditions described constitute a Category 1 hazard. I am formally requesting remediation under Social Housing Regulation Act 2023 §10A. The statutory windows attaching to this notification are 14 working days for hazard assessment, 7 working days for communication of the assessment, and 42 working days for commencement of remediation.

Please copy your assessment outcome and remediation plan to this practice when complete.

Dr Elena Vukovic MBChB MRCGP — Trinity Park Surgery

21:54:00 AMBER 14WD ASSESS7WD COMMS42WD REMEDY M1 — Decision 1 SCORE0

Situation feed

Action required — case classification

How do you log this case?

Megan is still on the line. Two written notifications now exist — the GP letter and Megan's verbal-then-logged contact tonight. The case-management system will record what you classify it as. How do you log it?

21:55:00 RED 14WD ASSESS7WD COMMS42WD REMEDY M1 — Consequence SCORE0

Situation feed

Decision 1 outcome

Routine repair classification

The case sits in a 28-day inspection queue. Megan calls back on Day 8 asking for an update. There is none to give.

Dr Vukovic writes a second letter — this one to the Regulator of Social Housing — copying Calder Reach. The regulator opens a pre-investigation file.

By the time Ben Halliday gets on site, the 14wd assessment window has already closed without an assessment having been done. The breach has begun and is documented in two written notifications, both of which named the statute.

Why this is the wrong call

Section 10A of the Social Housing Regulation Act 2023 attaches to written notification of a damp and mould condition, not to a landlord's classification decision. Once Dr Vukovic's letter arrived, the 14 working day assessment clock had started — regardless of how Calder Reach chose to log it.

Logging as a routine repair does not pause the statute. It only delays the landlord's awareness of its own obligations. By the time the case is correctly reclassified, the window has run out.

21:55:00 AMBER 14WD ASSESS7WD COMMS42WD REMEDY M1 — Consequence SCORE0

Situation feed

Decision 1 outcome

Cat 1 logged — clock running

The case-management system flips the statutory-clock HUD on. 14 working days for assessment, 7 working days to communicate, 42 working days to commence remediation. The clock is visible to you, to Rebecca, to Jonathan, and — through the regulator's quarterly return — to the Regulator of Social Housing.

Ben Halliday is booked for a site visit on Tuesday morning. You email Megan a copy of the case file and the next steps before midnight.

Saul Goldberg replies to your case-creation email within five minutes despite it being a Friday night. He has only one line: Correctly classified. Well done.

What you got right

Section 10A is structured around three windows that begin running from written notification — not from the landlord's decision to act. Tagging the case as a Cat 1 D&M hazard does two things: it surfaces the obligation to everyone in the chain, and it creates the audit trail the Regulator of Social Housing will look for if a complaint is later escalated.

HHSRS categorisation is provisional at this stage — the surveyor's findings will confirm or downgrade it. But the clock starts on notification, not on confirmation. This is the load-bearing teaching point of the module.

21:55:00 AMBER 14WD ASSESS7WD COMMS42WD REMEDY M1 — Consequence SCORE0

Situation feed

Decision 1 outcome

Surveyor first, classification later

Ben Halliday gets on site on Day 4 and confirms Cat 1. By the time the case is reclassified under §10A, four working days of the 14wd window have already elapsed without the clock having been formally started in the system.

The reclassification is back-dated to the date of Dr Vukovic's letter — which is what the statute requires — but the audit trail now shows a four-day gap during which Calder Reach was on notice and had not formally engaged with the statute.

Saul flags it in his Monday compliance report. Not a breach. Not clean either.

Why this is the half-right call

Dispatching the surveyor was correct. Waiting for the surveyor's findings before tagging the case under §10A was not.

The HHSRS Operating Guidance is a methodology for confirming and grading hazards — it is not a gate on whether the statutory clock has started. The clock is started by written notification from a tenant, GP, or third party. Both notifications were already on file.

14:20:00 AMBER 14WD: 9 LEFT7WD COMMS42WD REMEDY M1 — Day 5 site report SCORE0

Situation feed

Activity 1 — HHSRS Hazard Classifier

Day 5 — Ben Halliday's site report

Ben Halliday's report has just landed. Six findings, each with a photograph, a measurement reading, and a one-line tenant quote from his site visit. You need to classify each as HHSRS Cat 1 Hazard, Cat 2 Hazard, or Defect Only. The classifications drive both the case priority and what gets listed on the assessment letter to Megan in 7 working days. Get them wrong in one direction and you allocate budget to non-hazards. Get them wrong in the other direction and you leave Megan and Caleb at risk.

Scoring

Correct = +2. Under-classifying a Cat 1 (logging it as Cat 2 or Defect) = -3 each — this is the regulator-relevant failure mode. Over-classifying a Cat 2 or Defect as Cat 1 = -1 each — misallocates remediation budget. See HHSRS Operating Guidance.

Classified: 0 / 6 Cat 1 found: – Cat 1 missed: –

17:40:00 GREEN 14WD CLOSED7WD: OPEN42WD REMEDY M1 — Day 5 17:40 SCORE0

Situation feed

Day 5 — Saul's office

Saul reviews your classifications

Saul reviews your classifications without comment for two minutes, then pushes the report back across the desk. He taps the case file with the back of his pen.

Saul Goldberg

Cat 1 confirmed in two locations. The 14 working day assessment window closed in compliance — your assessment is dated within the window and the methodology stands. That's the first hurdle.

Saul Goldberg

Now you have seven working days from the close of the assessment window to communicate the outcome to Megan in writing. The statute is specific — written. Phone call is not enough. Voicemail is not enough. A WhatsApp screenshot is not enough.

Saul Goldberg

I'll watch you draft this one. Don't make me write it for you.

09:12:00 AMBER 14WD CLOSED7WD: OPEN42WD REMEDY M1 — Decision 2 SCORE0

Situation feed

Action required — communication window open

Communication strategy

The 14wd assessment window closed yesterday in compliance. The 7wd written-communication window is now open. How do you communicate the assessment outcome to Megan?

09:13:00 GREEN 14WD7WD42WD REMEDY M1 — Consequence SCORE0

Situation feed

Decision 2 outcome

Letter sent — clock honoured

The letter goes out on Day 7 — well inside the 7wd communication window. Megan replies the same evening confirming receipt and asking two clarifying questions about the contractor's working hours. You respond.

Saul forwards the letter to Rebecca with a one-line note: This is the template now.

The 42wd remediation window opens cleanly on the same date as the communication.

Why this is the right call

Section 10A requires the assessment outcome to be communicated to the tenant in writing within 7 working days of the close of the assessment window. The statute is explicit about the form — written. A phone call is not sufficient under the Act, regardless of how thorough the conversation is.

Confirming receipt also matters. Megan's reply email becomes part of the audit trail Calder Reach will rely on if the case is later reviewed.

09:13:00 AMBER 14WD7WD: TIGHT42WD M1 — Consequence SCORE0

Situation feed

Decision 2 outcome

Phone call logged — but not in writing

You call Megan on Day 6. She is at the school gate. The call lasts four minutes. You explain Cat 1, the plan, the timeline. Megan thanks you and says she will pass it on to Dr Vukovic.

On Day 11 — inside the 7wd window if you had counted from the close of the assessment — Saul stops you in the corridor. The phone call doesn't count.

You scramble a written letter on Day 13. It lands inside the window by hours. The statutory clock is not breached, but the audit trail now contains a phone-call-then-letter sequence that Saul will have to defend at the next regulator return.

Why this nearly cost you the window

The statute's reference to communication in writing under §10A is a specific drafting choice. Phone calls produce no audit trail and no permanent record the tenant can refer back to. The Regulator of Social Housing has been explicit in its 2024 guidance that telephone communication does not satisfy the §10A communication requirement.

You salvaged this case by writing within the window. The next case may not give you that grace period.

09:13:00 RED 14WD7WD BREACH42WD M1 — Consequence SCORE0

Situation feed

Decision 2 outcome

Deferred to await contractor — clock did not pause

You wait for Trentham to confirm the remediation start. They take eight working days to come back with dates. By the time you write to Megan, the 7wd communication window has closed. You are in breach by one working day.

Dr Vukovic writes a second letter — this one to the Regulator of Social Housing. Saul logs the breach in the quarterly return and copies you on the email. He does not say anything otherwise. He does not need to.

Why deferring did not help

The 7wd communication window in §10A does not pause for contractor scheduling. The Act expects landlords to communicate the assessment outcome and an indicative plan — even if contractor dates are still being firmed up. A subsequent letter can confirm dates once they are known.

Waiting for certainty looks responsible from inside the operation. From the regulator's seat, it looks like a missed window.

11:00:00 AMBER 14WD7WD42WD: DAY 22 M1 — Day 22 timeline SCORE0

Situation feed

Activity 2 — Awaab's Law Timeline Composer

Day 22 — Mapping the case to the statutory windows

Saul has asked you to map the case to the statutory clock for the quarterly compliance return. Take the six events from Megan's case file and place each one under the correct statutory window. The over-declaring penalty applies — placing a window-1 event into window 2 or 3 (treating a follow-up email as a fresh notification, or pre-judging the breach) costs more than just leaving it untagged.

Window 1

Hazard-Assessment

14 working days from notification

Window 2

Communication

7 working days from end of W1

Window 3

Remediation

42 working days from end of W2

Window 4

Breach

When any window closes without action

07:14:00 AMBER 14WD7WD42WD: DAY 28 M1 — Day 28 SCORE0

Situation feed

Day 28 — Megan's second email

Caleb — getting worse

Megan's second email has landed in your inbox before you have taken your coat off.

From: Megan Doyle <megan.doyle.84@gmail.com>
To: you@calderreach.org.uk

Caleb — getting worse

I know you said the contractor would be in this week but Caleb's chest is worse. He was up coughing till 1 a.m. last night. He had to use the inhaler twice.

Dr Vukovic wants to refer him to the children's respiratory clinic. I'm not sure if she will write to you again or write to the regulator this time. I'd rather she didn't have to do either.

Could someone tell me what the actual remediation plan looks like? When does it start? When will it be done? I'll cooperate with anything you need but I need to know what is happening.

Megan

Rebecca Holt

I just saw Megan's email. We need to make a budget call this week. Jonathan's asking for a cost-benefit before he signs off.

14:30:00 AMBER 14WD7WD42WD: 35 LEFT M1 — Decision 3 SCORE0

Situation feed

Action required — remediation budget

Remediation budget under pressure

Three quotes are on the system. Jonathan is waiting for a cost-benefit recommendation. The 42wd remediation window is open and you have 35 working days remaining. What do you recommend?

15:00:00 GREEN 14WD7WD42WD: DAY 51 — CLOSED M1 — Consequence SCORE0

Situation feed

Decision 3 outcome

Full remediation — recommendation accepted

You write the cost-benefit memo. The headline is one line: £8,500 closes this case in compliance. £1,800 reopens it under regulator scrutiny.

Jonathan signs off the same afternoon. Trentham start on Day 32. The works run in three phases over three weeks. Megan sends a photo of Caleb's repainted room on Day 51. Caleb sleeps through the night without coughing for the first time in two months.

The 42wd remediation window closes with works completed and signed off. Saul's quarterly return goes to the regulator with the case marked CLOSED — IN COMPLIANCE.

Why the right answer was also the cheapest in the long run

§10A requires remediation to a Cat 1 standard — defined by reference to HHSRS Operating Guidance — within 42 working days of the communication window closing. A patch repair that does not address the underlying cold-bridge or moisture ingress is not remediation under the Act — it is a stop-gap that resets the clock as soon as the mould returns.

The £8,500 quote is the cheapest path that closes the case. The £1,800 quote looks cheaper today and costs significantly more once the regulator opens enforcement.

15:00:00 RED 14WD7WD42WD: BREACH M1 — Consequence SCORE0

Situation feed

Decision 3 outcome

Patch repair authorised — breach risk live

Trentham send a painter on Day 31. The bedroom looks better for two weeks. Megan emails on Day 47 — the mould has bloomed back through the new paint at exactly the cold-bridge corner.

Dr Vukovic writes a third letter, this time copied to the Regulator of Social Housing and to Megan's MP. The regulator opens a formal enforcement file. Saul arrives at your desk holding a printed copy of the email chain.

The 42wd remediation window closed at Day 49 with works that did not satisfy the Cat 1 standard. You are in material breach.

Why the cheap fix was the most expensive one

Remediation under §10A is defined by outcome, not by spend. A repaint that does not resolve the underlying hazard is not remediation — it is a cosmetic delay that leaves the Cat 1 risk in place.

The Regulator of Social Housing has been explicit that under-remediation of a confirmed Cat 1 hazard is the failure mode the statute was passed to prevent. This is the exact pattern that led to Awaab Ishak's death in Rochdale.

15:00:00 AMBER 14WD7WD42WD CLOSED M1 — Consequence SCORE0

Situation feed

Decision 3 outcome

Family decanted — over-budget but tenant-safe

You make the case to Jonathan that decanting is the safest route while works are ongoing. Jonathan reluctantly agrees. The family move into a serviced apartment in central Manchester for three weeks. Trentham complete the works on Day 49 with no occupant disruption.

The case closes in compliance. The regulator return is clean. The cost overrun is £5,500 against the £8,500 baseline. Rebecca thanks you for keeping the family safe and adds, quietly, that next time you should make the §10A case for full remediation in-place — that is the standard option, not the safety option.

Megan and Caleb return to a properly remediated home. Caleb's symptoms resolve.

Why this is the half-right call

Decanting a family during Cat 1 remediation is a tenant-safety choice that the Act permits but does not require. The standard expectation under §10A is that remediation works are run in-place where it is safe to do so.

Decanting is correct where the works themselves are unsafe to live alongside — or where the hazard is acute. For a three-phase D&M remediation, the in-place full-spec option is the standard answer. You spent £5,500 of Calder Reach's budget on something the statute did not require.

16:20:00 GREEN 14WD7WD42WD CLOSED M1 — Day 49 evidence bundle SCORE0

Situation feed

Activity 3 — Audio Evidence Composer

Day 49 — Assembling the evidence bundle

Saul is preparing the case file for the quarterly compliance return. He needs the voicemail evidence assembled in chronological order and tagged for criticality. Six voicemails are in the pool. Three are critical — they go directly to the §10A audit trail. Three are decoys — routine scheduling messages that belong in the case file but do not carry statutory weight. Place the critical clips in the timeline in chronological order. Decoys you may include or omit; chronology errors and missing critical clips both cost.

Placed: 0 / 6 Critical placed: 0 / 3

Voicemail clips pool

Evidence timeline (chronological order)

No clips placed yet. Add critical clips first, in date order.

17:00:00 GREEN 14WD7WD42WD M1 — The Quarterly Return SCORE0

Day 56 — Friday 17:00 — Quarterly return

Case status

Loading...

Stakeholder outcomes

Megan & Caleb

Calder Reach Housing

Your career

Replay module