Lambeth Council (202014676)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202014676

Lambeth Council

20 July 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 the landlord’s handling of:
1. Back door repairs;
2. Damp and mould.
The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s:
1. Complaint handling;
2. Record keeping.

Background

The resident has been a secure tenant of the landlord since 2011. The property is a three bedroom house. The resident lives at the property with his wife and children. The landlord is a local authority.

Legal and policy framework

The resident’s tenancy agreement says that the landlord will maintain the structure and outside of the property.
The landlord’s repairs policy says that it is responsible for repairs to walls, skirting boards, ceilings, window frames, external doors, frames and locks. It sets out the following repair response times:
1. Priority 1 – within 24 hours or by emergency callout.
2. Priority 2 – within two working days.
3. Priority 3 – within five working days.
4. Priority 4 – within 30 working days.
5. Priority 5 – within 90 days.
Under Section 9a of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord has an obligation to ensure that the property is fit for human habitation during the term of the tenancy in relation to freedom from damp.
The landlord’s housing management complaints policy sets out a three stage process:
1. Early resolution where the landlord will make contact with the resident to agree actions with timescales to resolve the issue. For these, no written response will be provided.
2. Local resolution where a response will be provided in 20 working days.
3. The review where there is no set timeframe for a response.

Summary of events

In May, July, and December 2019, the resident reported repairs to his back door, cracks throughout the property, and excessive damp and mould. The landlord subsequently raised works orders for these issues. In December 2019, two further works orders were raised in relation to the back door. The works orders were closed but the records provided by the landlord do not show the date they were closed or the outcome.
Between 10 January 2020, and 19 October 2020, the resident contacted the landlord eight times regarding repairs to his back door and windows. The records provided do not show any works orders raised for these issues during this period.
On 2 October 2020, the landlord’s records show that a complaint was received from the resident but it is not clear what this was about.
On 25 October 2020, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord about the incomplete repairs at his property and received an automated response.
On 2 January 2021, the resident reported that the back door lock had come out of the door and it was not secure. The landlord raised a works order with a completion target date of 3 January 2021. The job was closed but the evidence provided does not confirm the closure date or the outcome. The resident confirmed that the landlord attended in early January 2021, and carried out a temporary repair to make the back door safe.
On 23 February 2021, the resident contacted this Service to report prolonged disrepair to his kitchen, including:
1. Water pouring into the kitchen via cracks and holes in the ceiling, wall and window frame.
2. A hole in the rotten back door that let water in when it rained and constant draughts.
3. The back door lock had fallen out due to the structure of the wall. This had been temporarily repaired but nobody had returned to assess this and the back of the house was not secure.
4. The wooden back door would swell up when wet, putting more strain on the damaged structure when opening, closing and locking the door.
5. The kitchen wall was damp due to water damage and the plaster was wet and falling away from the wall.
6. Rotten skirting boards due to damp and wet conditions.
The resident said that this was causing him distress, making him anxious and he was concerned for the health and safety of his family.
The next day this Service contacted the landlord asking it to respond to the resident under its complaints procedure.
The resident contacted this Service in March and April 2021, advising he had not received a response from the landlord.
On 27 April 2021, the resident reported damp and mould in the kitchen, bathroom, and two bedrooms. A works order was raised with a target date of 8 June 2021, but the job was cancelled due to its repairs contract ending. A further works order was raised for this job on 10 July 2021, but this was also cancelled. A third works order was raised on 21 July 2021, with a target date for completion of 25 November 2021, and on an unknown date in October 2021, the landlord carried out a mould treatment at the property.
On 11 May 2021, this Service contacted the landlord asking it to provide a response under its complaints procedure to the resident. The resident advised this Service that he did not receive a response.
On 16 June 2021, this Service contacted the landlord with a final request for a response to be provided under its complaints procedure to the resident; warning that a Complaint Handling Failure Order (CHFO) would be issued if it did not comply with the request.
On 30 June 2021, this Service issued the landlord with a CHFO and advised that a final complaint response should be issued to the resident no later than 8 July 2021.
On 6 July 2021, the landlord provided a stage one complaint response, which said:
1. It apologised for the delay in responding.
2. The complaint was about damp and mould in the kitchen and other rooms.
3. It had arranged a property inspection for 14 July 2021.
4. It was in the process of changing to a new repairs contractor and so any repair works needed after the inspection would be delayed until the new contractor was fully in place. It apologised for this.
5. The complaint was partially upheld in recognition that the inspection and repairs were still outstanding.
The landlord carried out an inspection on 14 July 2021. It noted there was damp on the kitchen walls, the back door lock was in poor condition, bathroom tiles needed to be renewed, there were cracks throughout the property and a bedroom window needed reglazing. A works order was raised that day to:
1. Replaster the kitchen;
2. Overhaul the back door;
3. Fill cracks throughout the property;
4. Renew the bathroom tiles;
5. Reglaze the bedroom window.
The target date for these repairs to be completed was 18 November 2021. The job was closed but the records provided do not show the date it was closed or the outcome. The landlord told this Service that a job was booked for 1 February 2022, for the plastering and tiling works to be completed but from the evidence provided it is not clear if they were.
On 22 July 2021, the resident reported that his back door was not locking properly. A works order was raised with a target date for completion of 23 July 2021. This order was completed but the records provided do not show the completion date or outcome.
The resident asked the landlord on 29 July 2021, when the repairs identified during the inspection earlier that month would be carried out.
On 13 October 2021, this Service wrote to the landlord advising that it considered the landlord’s internal complaints procedure was complete because of its failure to provide a final complaint response, as requested by the Ombudsman.
On 29 October 2021, the resident requested compensation from the landlord as it had missed two appointments to carry out the repairs identified during the inspection on 14 July 2021.
On 26 November 2021, the landlord records show that a complaint was received from the resident but it is not clear what this was about.
On 21 April 2022, a works order was raised to renew wall tiles in the bathroom, replaster kitchen walls, repair kitchen door frame and redecorate the kitchen. This job had a target date for completion of 31 May 2022. The job was closed but the records provided do not show the closure date or outcome.
On 6 May 2022, an inspection was booked in response to an MP enquiry on behalf of the resident. The landlord system noted that the resident had reported damp and mould in the property. On 10 May 2022, the landlord inspected the resident’s property and identified the following works required:
1. Replace damaged tiles to bathroom;
2. Reseal bath;
3. Renew skirting in hallway;
4. Mould wash needed in all three bedrooms.
A works order was raised for these jobs on 20 May 2022, with a target date for completion of 29 June 2022. This job was completed but the records do not show the completion date or outcome.
In October 2021, May 2022, and February 2023, the resident contacted this Service advising that he was still waiting for the landlord to complete the repairs at his property and that all the issues previously reported remained unfixed. He said that his kitchen flooded every time it rained and he wanted the repairs completed and compensation for the landlord’s failures.
On 14 October 2022, a works order was raised to renew the back door and kitchen window with a target date for completion of 17 February 2023. The records show this job was issued.
On 20 March 2023, the resident reported damp and mould throughout the property and requested the landlord carry out an inspection. The landlord raised a works order on the same day with a target date for completion of 30 April 2023. The job was completed but the records do not show the completion date or outcome.
During contact with this Service in July 2023 the resident advised that the back door issue had been resolved but that there were ongoing issues with damp and mould in the property.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The evidence indicates that some of the repair concerns have been ongoing since 2019. While an overview has been given in relation to these the Ombudsman will not investigate historical events in detail. The investigation will focus on the period beginning with the resident’s complaint of 25 October 2020. The Ombudsman considers that this will cover a reasonable period of time and that it would be disproportionate to investigate the issues prior to this. Moreover, Paragraph 42(c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states that “the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which, in its opinion, were not brought to the attention of the member as a formal complaint within a reasonable period, which would normally be within 6 months of the matters arising.”
On 1 February 2022 the Ombudsman issued a special report on the landlord following an investigation under paragraph 49 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme into the landlord’s complaint handling. The report can be viewed here: Housing Ombudsman special report on London Borough of Lambeth (housing-ombudsman.org.uk). Some of the findings of the Ombudsman’s special report are relevant to this case and are referred to accordingly in this report. However, we have not made any orders or recommendations which would duplicate those already made to landlord in the Ombudsman’s special report.

Handling of back door repairs

The landlord raised an emergency works order on 2 January 2021, to make safe and secure the back door lock following a report from the resident, which was appropriate. The records provided do not state when the landlord attended but the resident confirmed that it did and that the door was made safe. However, there is no record that any further inspection or follow on works were raised, in order to assess and resolve the wider issue, which the landlord should have done. This resulted in another report from the resident about the back door being insecure in July 2021 and a further emergency works order being raised to attend to this.
The records show that the resident first reported issues with his back door in May 2019, and since then, there are records of five works orders being raised in relation to this issue, in addition to the emergency orders. The records provided are not clear what works have been completed to the back door or when, and the most recent order raised in October 2022, for a replacement door, is still showing as outstanding. In recent contact with this Service, the resident advised that the back door had been replaced; however, as this took around three and a half years, the Ombudsman considers this an unreasonable delay.
Following the landlord’s inspection in July 2021, a priority five works order was raised for multiple repairs to be carried out, including to the back door. From the records provided it is not clear why the landlord raised this as priority five; however, it did say in the complaint response issued the same month, that any repairs identified during the inspection would be delayed due to a change in its repair contractor.
Where a landlord is changing its repairs contractor, it should put in place the necessary arrangements to be able to continue with repairs as normal during the changeover period. Considering this and that the required repairs did not appear to be complex or specialist in nature, it is the opinion of this Service that raising this as a priority five works order was unreasonable. The records provided are not clear when, or if, these repairs were completed; however, it is clear that even if they have now been completed, there was a significant delay, as the resident reported in October 2021 that there had been two missed appointments in relation to these repairs and then a further works order was raised in April 2022 for a number of the same repairs, indicating they were still outstanding. This is a delay of at least nine months and possibly more as the records provided are not clear when, or if, these repairs have been completed.
In May 2022, the landlord reinspected the property and identified further works required. While the job was recorded as completed, there is no record of when or what the outcome was, so it is not clear whether the works were fully completed or not and so an order has been made below for the landlord to reinspect the entire property to identify any outstanding repairs and provide a written update to the resident, including a timeframe for any repairs to be completed.
Overall, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of back door repairs. There was a delay of around three and a half years in the landlord resolving this, which meant that the resident was left living in a property with water leaking in when it rained, causing the kitchen to flood for a significant period of time. This, in addition to living with an insecure back door for an extended period will have, understandably, been worrying and upsetting for him and his family. The landlord’s communication with the resident was poor, resulting in him escalating to this Service to get a response and action taken. Orders have been made below for the landlord to apologise to the resident for the handling of this matter and pay him £600 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the handling of this issue.

Handling of damp and mould

In April 2021, the resident reported damp and mould throughout the property. The landlord raised a priority four works order, with a target date for completion of 30 working days. The timeframe for treatment of damp and mould is dependent on the severity of the issue and so it would have been appropriate for the landlord to assess the damp and mould in order to determine this. From the evidence provided, there is no record that it did this and so it has not been possible for this Service to assess whether its decision to raise the works order as a priority four was reasonable. The initial works order raised was cancelled due to the landlord changing repairs contractors and it took a further two works orders to be raised for this job to be completed six months later. Regardless of the severity of the damp and mould, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, this was an unreasonable delay. While it is understandable that some works may be delayed when a landlord changes its repairs contractors, it is the landlord’s responsibility to ensure that it has arrangements in place to continue to carry out repairs during the changeover period, with as minimal delay as possible.
In October 2021, the landlord carried out a mould wash at the property. While appropriate that it treated the mould in this way, there is no evidence that the landlord took steps to investigate and address the root cause of this. Its failure to do this meant that carrying out a mould wash only acted as a temporary resolution to the issue, which is evident from the residents further report of damp and mould in May 2022. In response to this report the landlord arranged an inspection of the property, which was appropriate. While a note was made following the inspection, this did not provide any detail on the severity of the damp and mould or suspected underlying causes. A works order was raised for jobs to be completed following the inspection; however, there is no record that the resident was told about this or if these works were completed. There is also no record that the landlord took steps to follow up to confirm whether its proposed actions resolved the damp and mould issues, which would have been appropriate.
The resident made a further report of damp and mould in March 2023, and requested another inspection. From the records provided it is not clear what action the landlord took in response to this; however, considering the number of reports made and the timeframe, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to carry out a specialist damp and mould survey in order to identify the underlying cause of the issue and required treatment to resolve it. The records indicate that the resident first reported this issue in December 2019 and in recent contact with this Service, the resident has advised that this issue remains ongoing. The landlord’s failure to properly address and resolve this issue means that the resident and his family have been living in a damp and mouldy property for over three years, which will have been distressing. The landlord’s communication with the resident was poor as there is no record that it communicated any kind of plan or agree follow up with him to ensure the issue was resolved. This resulted in him escalating to this Service and approaching an MP to try and get a response and action taken. The landlord’s failure to act and lack of communication was dismissive and suggested that it did not take the resident’s reports or concerns seriously, which will have been upsetting. This amounts to severe maladministration and orders have been made below for the landlord to apologise to the resident for the handling of this issue, carry out a specialist damp and mould survey at the property and pay the resident £1000 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. A further order has been made for it to review its approach to commissioning specialist damp surveys and report the outcome of this and actions to senior management.

Complaint handling

After the resident complained to the landlord on 25 October 2020 and received no response, he contacted this Service in February 2021 for assistance in progressing his complaint. While this Service made contact with the landlord in February 2021 asking for a response to be provided to the resident, it was a further four months before he received a formal response to his complaint and this was only after the resident chased the landlord twice via this Service and the Ombudsman served a CHFO in June 2021.
After the CHFO was served, the landlord provided a stage one response; however, this failed to address all of the issues raised by the resident and gave no detail on what, if any, investigation had been carried out in respect of its previous actions. While appropriate that it arranged an inspection, it told the resident that any repairs identified would be delayed as a result of a contractor change, which was unreasonable for reasons set out earlier in this report. The landlord partially upheld the complaint; however, other than arranging the inspection, there is no record that it took any other steps to put things right or learn lessons.
Overall, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling. There was a delay of around nine months in the landlord providing a formal response to the complaint and it took a significant amount of intervention from this Service, including service of a CHFO. When the landlord did respond to the complaint, it failed to carry out a proper investigation or address all of the resident’s concerns. At this point, the landlord had an opportunity to put things right for the resident but it failed to do so. It also did not consider any redress for the resident or do anything to reassure him that it took his reports seriously and would resolve the issues. It also failed to consider any wider learning from the complaint. Orders have been made below for the landlord to apologise to the resident for its poor complaint handling and pay him £700 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. The Ombudsman’s previous paragraph 49 investigation identified complaint handling failures and subsequently made orders for the landlord to review its complaint handling procedures within the special report. While no further order has been made in respect of this, orders have been made below for the landlord to provide staff awareness training on complaint handling in line with its procedure and the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code and to review how it responds to CHFOs.

Record keeping

The landlord repair records provided in this case are limited and do not allow the Ombudsman to fully understand what has happened or why; including whether works raised were fully completed and if so, when. In recent contact with this Service, the resident advised that the damp and mould issue was still ongoing, indicating that even where actions had been taken, such as mould washes, this had not resolved the underlying cause of the issue. The evidence provided does not show that the landlord was updating the resident regarding the progress of his repairs and he has told this Service that he repeatedly reported and chased the landlord for updates. While the records provided do not show this, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, it is reasonable that the resident would have been chasing the landlord for updates on these issues. The lack of records means that it has not been possible for the Ombudsman to fully understand the landlord’s actions or inactions that have contributed to the delays in this matter.
The landlord records show that the resident made complaints on 2 October 2020 and 26 November 2021; however, it is not clear from the evidence provided what these complaints were about or what, if any action was taken in response to these. The resident provided evidence of a complaint made to the landlord via e-mail on 25 October 2020; however, this was not recorded within the evidence provided by the landlord, which is concerning. The poor record keeping will have contributed to the delayed complaint handling and resulted in the resident feeling ignored by the landlord and having to escalate to this Service in order to get a response to his complaint. When a response was provided, this lacked any detail on previous actions taken and it is likely that due to poor records, the landlord was unable to determine what had happened or when, in order to account for its actions and decisions.
Overall, there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s record keeping. The poor records will have contributed to the delays in this matter, as it is not clear what happened or when and so landlord staff would have been unable to fully understand its actions when reviewing its repairs records. This would have meant it was unable to provide meaningful updates or responses to the resident, which would have been frustrating for him. While the evidence provided does not show that the resident was regularly chasing the landlord; he has told this Service that he was and in the Ombudsman’s opinion it is reasonable to assume that he was, based on the severity of the issues he was experiencing. The landlord’s poor records around complaint handling meant that responses were not provided, which resulted in the resident feeling ignored and with no faith that the landlord would resolve the issues. An order has been made below for the landlord to pay the resident £300 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor record keeping. Poor record keeping by the landlord was previously highlighted within the Ombudsman’s special report in February 2022 and orders were made for the landlord to review its record keeping practices in respect of its repairs and maintenance service, complaint handling and resident contact and so no further orders have been made at this time in respect of this issue.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was severe maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of back door repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was severe maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was severe maladministration in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s record keeping.

Reasons

There was a significant and unreasonable delay in the landlord completing the back door repairs; which resulted in the resident being left with an insecure door that leaked when it rained and flooded his kitchen.
The landlord failed to properly investigate and address the damp and mould, which has resulted in the resident living in a damp and mouldy property with his children for over three years. While inspections were done and mould washes carried out, the landlord did not seek to identify or address the root cause of the issue in order to resolve this in the long term.
The landlord’s complaint handling process was delayed by around nine months and required multiple interventions from this Service for progress to be made, including service of a CHFO. The landlord’s response lacked detail and failed to put things right for the resident or provide any reassurance that it would resolve his issues. It did not consider any redress for him or learn any lessons.
The landlord’s poor records contributed to the delays in its handling of the resident’s repair reports and complaints. This resulted in the resident chasing updates from the landlord and escalating to this Service in order to get a response. From the evidence provided it is not clear what action the landlord took to address the repairs issues, or if, they have all been fully resolved to date.

Orders

Within four weeks of this determination:
1. The chief executive is to apologise to the resident for the poor handling of repairs and complaints.
2. Carry out an inspection of the entire property to identify any outstanding repairs and provide a written update to the resident setting out what works will be completed and a timeframe for these to be done.
3. Carry out a specialist damp and mould survey at the property to identify the root cause and effective treatment. Provide a copy of the report to the resident following the survey, including details of what works will be carried out and timeframe for these to be completed.
4. Review its approach to commissioning specialist damp surveys and report the outcome of this review and actions it needs to take to senior management.
5. Pay the resident £2600 compensation, made up of:
  1. £600 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor handling of back door repairs.
  2. £1000 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor handling of damp and mould.
  3. £700 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor complaint handling.
  4. £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor record keeping.
6. Provide staff awareness training on complaint handling in line with its procedures and the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
7. Review how it responds to CHFOs to ensure that it takes appropriate investigation and action to resolve the complaint where an order has been issued.
The landlord is to provide evidence of compliance with these orders to this Service within four weeks.