02/09/2025
I stopped treating mould as a maintenance issue and started treating it as a compliance issue.
This shift changed everything about how I approach remediation in social housing. When you realize that post-cleanup testing creates the paper trail that protects both tenants and organizations, you never skip it again.
Here's what happens without proper testing.
Mould comes back in six months. Tenant gets respiratory problems. Legal team gets involved. And you're sitting there trying to explain to a judge why you have no documentation proving your remediation actually worked.
Good luck with that.
Post-cleanup testing gives you proof the remediation worked, baseline readings for future reference, and documentation that meets regulatory standards. Most importantly? Evidence you followed proper protocols when someone questions your methods.
The testing costs maybe Ā£200-400 depending on the property size.
One legal claim costs tens of thousands. Plus the damage to your reputation as a housing provider who takes tenant health seriously.
But somehow providers still treat mould like fixing a leaky tap... clean it and move on. That approach works fine for plumbing. Doesn't work for something that can seriously impact people's health and create massive liability exposure for your organization.
Smart social housing operations build testing into every single mould remediation project. Not as an optional extra you consider if budget allows.
As standard procedure.
Because when you're responsible for people's homes and their health, "we cleaned it" isn't documentation. "We cleaned it and confirmed it worked" is real documentation.
Have you seen the difference proper testing makes in mould cases? Like this if you think post-cleanup testing should be standard, and comment with your experience below.
