London & Quadrant Housing Trust (202106643)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202106643

London & Quadrant Housing Trust

24 May 2022

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

This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of mould growth in her bathroom.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident is an assured tenant whose tenancy began on 5 October 2009. The tenancy agreement describes the property as a three-bedroom house.
The landlord has a repairs booklet that shows that:
1. it is responsible for remedying penetrative and rising damp and for repairs to items such as radiators and guttering;
2. the resident is responsible for keeping the property ‘clean and in good condition’, re–decorating, treating and cleaning mould and repairs to dividing fences.
The repairs booklet adds that the landlord will attend to emergency repairs – where there is an immediate danger to the occupant or members of the public – within 24 hours and that all other repairs will be dealt with at a mutually convenient time.
From April 2020, the landlord introduced a ‘healthy homes’ programme so it could ‘focus on tackling the root cause of mould and damp in homes and carry out any repairs needed to prevent damp and mould from reoccurring’. The landlord’s website shows that this involves a specialist attending properties to assess the cause of mould, completing a ‘clean and shield’ service and installing a sensor that highlights when a property is in a condition that could allow mould growth.
The landlord’s complaints policy sets out a two-stage process where it is required to respond within 10 working days (at stage one) and 20 working days (at stage two) respectively.

Summary of Events

The landlord’s records show that it raised a repair order on 18 February 2020 due to a report that there was there was damp to the walls of the bathroom and that a mould wash had not resolved the problem.
The landlord’s tenancy records show that it noted on 11 March 2020 that works had been scheduled for 26 March 2020 but could roll over into the following day.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 11 May 2020 – she said that she was aware that all but emergency works had been suspended due to the pandemic but queried when her repairs would be done. The landlord replied the following day, confirming it would deal with the repairs once its usual service resumed.
The resident chased the landlord for progress on 31 July 2020, advising that there was ‘stuff growing on the walls’ of the bathroom.
The landlord responded to the resident on 6 August 2020, explaining that it was still only conducting emergency works.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 3 September 2020, advising that a delay in getting repairs done was affecting her wellbeing. She said that:
1. her primary concern in the bathroom was mould growth;
2. a fence issue was causing a problem between her and her neighbour and recent bad weather had brought the fence down and meant the neighbour’s dog was entering her garden;
3. she reported a guttering issue just after lockdown and the resulting smell was affecting her asthma.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 4 September 2020 – it advised that the bathroom mould issue had been passed to its ‘healthy homes team’, a repair order had been raised for the guttering and its planning team would contact her directly to arrange fencing works.
The resident advised the landlord on 7 September 2020 that someone told her earlier in the year that her bathroom window was not energy efficient and the bathroom radiator was too small. On the same date, the landlord noted it had arranged the fencing works to be done on 24-25 September 2020.
The landlord noted a repair order on 9 September 2020, showing it intended to fit eaves trays and gutters and clean guttering and a rain water pipe.
The resident chased the landlord on 20 September 2020 – she said that it had cleaned away mould, painted and fitted a new extractor fan the previous week but mould spotting had returned. She advised that she thought the landlord needed to address decorations and tiling and she asked for a copy of a February 2020 inspection report. The resident has provided photographs from this date showing a small radiator and mould growth to sealant by a tap.
The landlord advised the resident on 25 September 2020 that it was chasing up the guttering repair and that its damp and mould process changed in April 2020 so its new contractor would assess the bathroom.
The resident chased a response to her concerns on 28-29 September 2020 and 8 October 2020. She confirmed the fencing had been done and said that scaffolding had been put up (for the guttering).
The resident confirmed on 23 October 2020 that the guttering had been addressed but she was still worried about the state of the bathroom. She added on 26 October 2020 that the mould in the bathroom had been cleaned but the bathroom still looked horrible.
The landlord asked the resident on 28 October 2020 for photographs of the tiles. It advised on 30 October 2020 that mould to grout and sealant was common and needed to be cleaned with a mould wash product and that the radiator would not be replaced unless there was a leak on it. The resident claimed on the same date that the mould cleaning had already been done and the February 2020 inspection had identified a need to improve heating.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 2 November 2020. She said she still wanted to see a copy of the surveyor’s bathroom inspection report from earlier in the year and reported that her property had not been renovated since 2002.
The landlord issued a complaint response to the resident on 12 November 2020 – it said the area supervisor had considered the case and it was deemed that the works were not critical or necessary although it offered a £50 decorations voucher.
The resident responded to the landlord on 16 November 2020, advising the £50 was insufficient and claiming that the landlord had gone back on its surveyor’s advice.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 30 November 2020 and offered to escalate the complaint if she could explain what outcomes she was seeking.
The resident asked the landlord on 3 December 2020 for a complaint escalation as she had still not been given a copy of the surveyor’s report, she disagreed with it about the radiator, the mould product would not work and the £50 would not cover all the required repairs.
The landlord’s internal records show that it asked its contractor on 5 January 2021 to attend the property to assess the bathroom, including the radiator. However, it noted on 7 January 2021 that this would not be a ‘critical repair’ which it was focused on at the time.
The landlord issued its final complaint response to the resident on 11 January 2021. It concluded that:
1. it had inspected the bathroom following contact in February 2020 but could not share the report with her as it was for internal use only
2. the report ‘recommended and quoted for a 3-point mould wash and installation of a humidity sensing extractor fan’ and did not show that a window and radiator needed replacing as the resident had said
3. the resident had reported outstanding fencing, guttering and bathroom repairs on 3 September 2020 which led it to organise dates for the fencing and guttering
4. it had been completing critical repairs only due to Covid-19 but scheduled bathroom works in for 18 September 2020
5. the resident reported on 20 September 2020 that the bathroom needed decorating, the bathroom tiles were not in good condition and the guttering still needed to be done
6. it had advised that it was not responsible for decorations and the fencing was confirmed as done in late September-early October 2020 whilst the guttering work was also completed in October 2020
7. following a review of photographs she provided, it told the resident on 30 October 2020 that mould growth on grouting was not uncommon and recommended she use a mould remover product
8. it apologised for repairs and communications delays and advised it had briefed staff about the case to ensure lessons were learned
9. the resident should contact it once a full repairs service was reinstated so an engineer could attend to assess the resident’s radiator replacement request and it would then inspect the bathroom again
10. it awarded £320 compensation for repairs and communications failings and the time and trouble caused to the resident.
The resident wrote to the landlord on 13 January 2021. She said the work agreed in February 2020 was a two-day job and she had explained that the recommended mould products were not working. She said she would await the agreed inspection.
The landlord replied to the resident on 13 January 2021 – it said it had been unable to locate an inspection report recommending window and radiator works but a surveyor would attend once the usual repairs service resumed.
The landlord’s tenancy records show that the resident contacted it on 5 March 2021 to enquire about the radiator and that it chased its contractor who advised a part was available and works would therefore be done on 9 March 2021. Its repairs records show a bathroom radiator repair job was completed on 16 March 2021 and an old radiator was subsequently removed.
The resident approached this Service in June 2021 on the grounds that the landlord had not considered her property condition as promised in January 2021, the bathroom mould had returned and the kitchen needed modernisation.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles are:

Be fair
Put things right
Learn from outcomes

This Service will apply these principles when considering whether any redress is appropriate and proportionate for any maladministration or service failure identified.

The resident initially reported a problem with bathroom mould growth in February 2020 and the landlord noted on 11 March 2020 that it had arranged for works to be completed later that month. Given the landlord’s repairs booklet indicates that the resident was responsible for treating and cleaning mould, it was reasonable for the landlord to nevertheless arrange works.
On the same date that the bathroom mould works were due to be conducted, the country entered its first Covid-19 lockdown. The government subsequently issued guidance for landlords, tenants and local authorities on 28 March 2020 which stated that it was recommended that access to a property was only proposed for ‘serious and urgent issues’. There was therefore no service failure on the part of the landlord in failing to progress works during this period.
However, in May 2020, the government advised that routine repairs could be resumed and in June 2020, further guidance was issued, allowing landlords to undertake wider repairs and safety inspections, if these were undertaken in line with public health advice. Nevertheless, the landlord continued to advise the resident as recently as August 2020 that it was conducting emergency works only. Although some delay was inevitable after Covid-19 restrictions eased, due to the backlog of repairs that will have built up, it was inappropriate that it took until mid-September 2020 for the landlord to carry out the bathroom mould wash and extractor fan renewal.
There was subsequently a dispute between the resident and landlord as to the extent of works needed to the bathroom. The resident alleged that more works (including to the bathroom radiator) had been agreed in February 2020. It is of concern that the landlord has not been able to provide a copy of its February 2020 report to the resident or this Service – this was a record-keeping failure as the landlord should have been able to clearly demonstrate how it diagnosed the cause of the bathroom mould issue.
Further, during October 2020, the landlord relied upon photographs from the resident to reach its decision that the works needed were only decorative and not therefore its responsibility. This was inappropriate as its ‘healthy homes’ programme sets out that it should have organised a specialist to attend and for a sensor to be installed to monitor the property condition. Although the landlord’s offer of a £50 decorations allowance was resolution-focused, it was unreasonable that it did not investigate the resident’s concerns about heating levels to the bathroom and whether this was contributing to mould growth.
When the landlord reviewed the resident’s complaint in January 2021, it decided that it would inspect the property again, including the radiator condition. It said that it would do so once its full repairs service was reinstated. Given there was a third national lockdown from 6 January 2021, it was reasonable that the landlord said it would not be able to inspect the property at this time.
The landlord’s records indicate that a bathroom radiator renewal was completed in March 2021 but it is of concern that there is no evidence of a full damp assessment of the bathroom and that the resident advised this Service in June 2021 that she was still waiting for this. It is not within the jurisdiction of this Service to assess events that have not been considered through the landlord’s complaints process but a recommendation is made below in this regard.
In its final complaint response, the landlord apologised for repairs and communications delays, promised to conduct a full inspection, awarded £320 compensation and advised that senior managers had been made aware of the case and involved staff trained to improve future performance.
Although the £320 compensation also partially related to guttering and fencing repair delays, in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance, this level of compensation was appropriate for circumstances where a landlord has failed over a considerable period to act in accordance with policy. There is no evidence that the resident’s bathroom was unusable due to the mould growth but it will have become an inevitable source of frustration for her and her household and she went to time and trouble chasing the landlord for progress. The compensation therefore appropriately recognised the inconvenience and time and trouble caused to the resident by the landlord’s delays during mid-late 2020.
In summary, although Covid-19 was a mitigating factor, the landlord was responsible for delays between June-September 2020 in progressing bathroom mould works, failed to keep a record of its initial diagnosis of the problem and delayed between October-December 2020 in deciding to conduct a further assessment. However, in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles, the landlord was fair in its assessment of this service failure, took steps to put things right and demonstrated it had addressed potential learning points.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 55b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered reasonable redress to the service failures identified in its handling of the resident’s reports of mould growth in her bathroom.

Reasons

The landlord did not keep a record of its February 2020 bathroom damp inspection and delayed unreasonably in progressing bathroom mould works during June-September 2020 and conducting a new inspection during October-December 2020. However, the landlord has accepted and apologised for these service failures, offered assurances that it will improve its service in future and its compensation offer of £320 was fair given the circumstances of the case.

Recommendations

If it has not already done so, the landlord to complete a ‘healthy homes’ specialist inspection of the resident’s bathroom to diagnose the cause of mould and assess whether any repairs are required to resolve the resident’s concerns; it should write to her within four weeks of the inspection to confirm the outcome and provide an action plan.
If it has not already done so, the landlord to pay the resident the £320 compensation that it awarded in its final complaint response.
The landlord to write to the resident to advise when her property is likely to be on its annual planned maintenance programme and if this will involve replacement of the kitchen and bathroom.

The landlord should confirm its intentions in regard to these recommendations to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.