London Borough of Ealing (202203160)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202203160

Ealing Council

14 March 2023

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

The complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. At times throughout this case, a representative of the resident communicated on the resident’s behalf. For clarity, they will both be referred to as “the resident”.
The resident says that she initially reported that there was damp and mould in the property during February 2021. The landlord says that it does not have any record of this report.
On 21 May 2021, works were raised to address damp and mould in the resident’s property; these works were carried out on 4 June 2021. Following this, on 2 July 2021, a local councillor requested that the landlord carry out further works to resolve the issue. The landlord arranged for a damp specialist to carry out a survey on 5 August 2021, which identified that the mould was caused by condensation. The survey recommended that mould treatment works be carried out and vents installed in the property.
The recommended works were completed on 10 September 2021 but the resident was dissatisfied with the works. The resident also raised a complaint on this date due to the length of time it had taken for the damp and mould issues to be resolved. In addition, she stated that there had been damage to decorations, furniture and clothes and stated that her health had been impacted.
A surveyor inspected the property during the week commencing 27 September 2021 and, following this, an order was raised to treat the mould and paint the affected areas. The mould was treated, and an extractor fan installed on 14 December 2021. However, the resident continued to chase the redecoration needed in the property and a response to her complaint which she had escalated in October 2021. In addition, she stated that the vents needed to be redone due to being poorly fitted.
The landlord provided its stage two response on 8 July 2022. It apologised for the delays in carrying out the repairs. It was unable to confirm the status of the vent works and stated they would be raised as follow-on works and monitored weekly. It informed the resident that damages should be claimed through her contents insurance but acknowledged that delays had exacerbated the damage and offered to carry out the decoration works as compensation. In addition, it offered £300 compensation (£50 for delays and £250 for the overall poor service).
The resident subsequently referred her complaint to the Ombudsman. She was dissatisfied with the overall timescale of the repairs and the landlord’s complaint handling, and that her belongings had been damaged. She asked for further compensation and for the repairs to be completed.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

The resident has informed the Ombudsman of how the damp and mould issues in her property impacted her health. The Ombudsman cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

Policies and Procedures

The landlord’s responsive repairs policy states that emergency repairs are attended within the same working day; routine and urgent repairs are attended on the next available date but no later than 15 working days; and planned repairs are attended to within 60 working days.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property

The resident has stated that she initially reported the damp and mould issue in February 2021. The landlord says it does not have any evidence of this and has provided its call logs which show that no phone calls were received in February 2021, as well as repair logs which show the issue first being raised in May 2021. The Ombudsman relies on evidence in order to determine any actions or lack thereof. As there is no evidence of the resident reporting the damp and mould in February 2021, this investigation will focus on the landlord’s handling of the issues from May 2021 onwards.
In this case, the work to treat the damp and mould was initially raised on 21 May 2021 and was not resolved until 14 December 2021, when the mould was treated with an anti-fungal solution and an extractor fan was installed in the bathroom. Following this date, follow-on works were raised, such as recall works for the vents which had been installed, and decoration works within the property.
The landlord did attend on several occasions between May and December 2021 to treat the damp and mould in the resident’s property. The initial works were raised on 21 May 2021, and were carried out on 4 June 2021. This was a total of 10 working days which was in line with the landlord’s repairs policy.
The landlord acknowledged that between July and September 2021 there were delays in its service due to Covid-19. This was somewhat outside of the landlord’s control, but nevertheless it recognised that this had impacted the resident and it apologised for any inconvenience and distress caused. Furthermore, the landlord took appropriate action to address the damp and mould reports during this period as it instructed a damp specialist to survey the property and complete the recommended works.
The damp specialist identified the cause of the mould to be condensation, and the works they completed included the installation of vents in the property and treatment of the mould. The Housing Ombudsman’s Spotlight on Damp & Mould (2021) highlights the importance of landlords taking reasonable steps in partnership with residents in circumstances where condensation is the main cause of the damp and mould, such as considering additional ventilation. Therefore, the landlord’s actions were in line with the approach recommended by the Ombudsman in such cases.
Following completion of the works by the damp specialist, the resident expressed dissatisfaction with the standard of the works. The landlord acted appropriately by arranging for a surveyor to inspect the property, who recommended that further works should be completed. The landlord raised these works on 14 October 2021, and they were completed on 14 December 2021. This was a total of 44 working days which exceeded the target timescale of 15 working days. In addition, there is no evidence to show that the landlord attempted to effectively manage the resident’s expectations during this time.
During January 2022, the resident informed the landlord that the vents needed further work as they had been poorly fitted and that the decoration works agreed by the landlord remained outstanding. The resident had to chase up the works following this. In the landlord’s stage two response on 8 July 2022, it apologised that the outstanding works had not been completed and that it had been unable to confirm the status of the vent works due to staff absence. It said it would book in the outstanding works with the resident the following week.
The landlord upheld the complaint and offered the resident £300 compensation in view of the delays in completing the repairs and for the overall poor service experience. The landlord’s offer was reasonable given the extent of the delays that had occurred up to this point, that the mould had been treated and remedial works had been carried out to try and resolve the mould problem going forward. The offer was also in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which confirms that awards of between £100-£600 are appropriate where there has been maladministration by a landlord that has adversely affected the resident but not had a permanent impact.
However, during this investigation the Ombudsman asked the landlord several times to confirm if the outstanding works had been completed and to provide the relevant supporting evidence. While the landlord said that the works had been completed, it failed to provide any evidence to confirm that this is the case. Accordingly, the landlord has not been able to demonstrate that the outstanding works have been completed despite making commitments to do so in its final complaint response. The resident has also told the Ombudsman that the works remain outstanding.
Therefore, a finding of maladministration has been made as no evidence has been provided to show that the landlord has completed the outstanding works. This will have impacted on the living conditions in the property as several rooms remain undecorated, including the living room and two bedrooms, after the wallpaper was removed to treat the mould. To put things right the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £200 compensation, in addition to the compensation offered in its complaint responses. The landlord has also been ordered to carry out an inspection of the property and to complete the outstanding works.
Within her complaint, the resident reported that there had been damage to her clothing and furniture. In the stage one response, the landlord said that residents are advised to take out their own contents insurance to cover any damage to their personal possessions. The Ombudsman is unable to determine if the landlord should compensate the resident for the damage caused to her belongings because liability for the damage is not clear, and this would be more appropriately decided by an insurer or the courts.
However, in this case it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have provided the details of its own liability insurance, especially when it later acknowledged that the delays had impacted the extent of the damage in the property. The landlord has therefore been ordered to provide the resident with details of its liability insurance, so that the resident can submit a claim for the damage to her clothing and furniture should she wish to.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

The landlord’s complaints policy states that a stage one response should be sent within 10 working days, and a stage two response should be issued within 20 working days.
The resident raised a stage one complaint on 10 September 2021 and the landlord issued its stage one response on 22 October 2021. This was a total of 31 working days which is 21 working days outside of the appropriate timeframe described in the landlord’s complaints policy. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for how a resident’s complaint should be handled. This acknowledges that there may be times when a landlord is unable to respond within the appropriate timeframe in its policy, but states that a holding response should be provided which explains the reason for the delay and a date by which the response can be expected. This did not happen in this case.
The resident then requested her complaint to be escalated on 22 October 2021. The landlord provided two holding responses in December 2021 and June 2022. The Code states that if an extension is needed at stage two, it should not exceed a further 10 working days. While the landlord acted appropriately by providing the resident with a holding response, it delayed excessively in issuing its stage two response. This was issued on 8 July 2022 and was a total of 178 working days after the escalation request was received.
Furthermore, the resident had to request assistance from the Ombudsman in order for her complaint to be progressed with the landlord. The significant delays in the landlord’s handling of the complaint impacted the resident, as she spent time and trouble chasing a response. Furthermore, this exacerbated the distress and inconvenience the resident faced due to the ongoing issues with the repairs needed in her property and ultimately, it delayed her ability to escalate her complaint to the Ombudsman for independent adjudication.
In its stage two response, the landlord acknowledged there had been delays in issuing its response and apologised for this. It also considered the resident’s request for compensation for the delays in its complaints procedure and appears to have included an amount for this in its overall compensation offer of £300. While this was appropriate, it is not clear how much of its compensation offer was for complaint handling. There is also no evidence that the landlord meaningfully reviewed its complaint handling in this case and took any remedial action to implement service improvements going forward.
Therefore, the landlord has failed to put this aspect of the complaint fully right and a finding of maladministration has been made. To put things right the landlord has been ordered to pay additional compensation of £100 to the resident. It has also been ordered to review its complaint handling in this case and implement any necessary remedial action to ensure it complies with the Code going forward.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in the way it handled the resident’s reports about damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in the way it handled the associated complaint.

Orders

The landlord is ordered to do the following within four weeks of the date of this report:
1. Pay the resident a total of £600 compensation. This is made up of:
  1. £300 previously offered to the resident, if this has not already been paid.
  2. £200 for its handling of the outstanding repairs to the vent and redecoration works.
  3. £100 for its poor complaint handling.
2. Inspect the property to check the works that remain outstanding and agree an appointment with the resident to complete these works.
3. Provide the resident with details of its liability insurance, so that the resident can submit a claim for the damage to her clothing and furniture, should she wish to.
4. Review its complaint handling practice in this case and implement any necessary remedial action to ensure it complies with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code going forward.