Landlords can now complete the Complaint Handling Code Annual Submissions form. More information is available online.

Barnet Council (202010010)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202010010

Barnet Council

23 June 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of an end of terrace house owned and managed by the landlord.
  2. The resident first reported damp issues in late 2015. The landlord carried out some repair work on the property between then and 2020 but the damp issues kept recurring and became more extensive. The landlord’s contractor also undertook five separate damp surveys between December 2015 and February 2020. The final survey did lead to a more comprehensive set of works orders being set up in February 2020.
  3. The resident had a private surveyor carry out a damp survey and included the findings of this in the complaint she made to the landlord in July 2020.
  4. In responding to the complaint at stage 1, the landlord accepted that the resident had experienced lengthy delays over a four–year period and that it should have monitored its contractor’s involvement more closely. It said that the notes and conclusions of the first four damp reports were fairly limited and inconclusive. However, the damp report of 4 February 2020 did lead to a series of recommendations to address the damp. Work orders set up as a result of that report were subsequently cancelled due to the landlord’s relationship with its contractor ending, with a decision having been made to bring its repairs service back in-house. The landlord upheld the resident’s complaint and said it sincerely apologised for the delay and inconvenience caused.
  5. Moving forward, the landlord said it was organising a new damp survey to fully consider the issues raised in the resident’s private survey. Additionally, its Major Works Manager was going to monitor the progress of the damp survey and any remedial repairs. The new survey carried out on 19 August 2020 found significant damp issues and led to a further series of recommendations. This survey did not include the living room as the resident had declined access to that room.
  6. There were then further delays. The landlord had to chase its contractor for a copy of the damp report. That was followed by a delay in arranging the asbestos survey that was required before work could start and a delay in appointing an appropriate contractor for the works.
  7. As no work had begun on the property, the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2, which the landlord responded to on 5 November 2020. The landlord acknowledged the delays and apologised. It said it understood, given the historic concerns and delays through the year, that it must have been a frustrating, stressful and uncertain time for the resident. However, the relevant contractors had now been contacted and the plan was to have all work completed prior to Christmas.
  8. Work did commence in late November 2020. However, the resident was dissatisfied that some works remained outstanding, describing them as ‘incomplete or simple band aids’ for the multiple issues that had been identified in the property. She contacted her MP and this Service on 7 December 2020 to explain the problems she was having, such as electric wiring having been left exposed.
  9. The landlord attended the property the following day and did identify some issues with the work carried out so far, such as the electric switches needing refitting and the new paint in the bathroom already bobbling. The landlord told the MP on 15 December 2020 that the electrical work had now been completed and that work was continuing at the property, overseen by the Repairs Supervisor who was visiting three times a week. It appears that the majority of works were completed on 9 February 2021, however there was some final finishing off in March and April 2021.
  10. The repair work seemed to resolve the damp issues at that time. However, in December 2021 the resident complained that mould had returned in the bedrooms and bathroom and was now showing in the living room and kitchen as well. The landlord therefore commissioned another damp report. That report concluded that no further work was required against rising or penetrating damp but that condensation and mould was present and therefore ventilation might still be an issue. As a result, the landlord raised an order to treat, clean and remove mould in the bathroom, kitchen and living room. It also set up a works order to inspect and repair any plumbing defects in the kitchen and bathroom and to re-inspect in three months’ time. As the Ombudsman understands it, this work was completed by 8 March 2022.

Assessment and findings

  1. It has not been disputed that the resident had been experiencing a damp and mould issue for several years. While it appears that the landlord did take some steps to address this, and several inspections were undertaken, this was a reoccurring issue. The Ombudsman has not automatically considered this to be a failure in the landlord’s service, but the landlord did acknowledge that there were some delays between December 2015 and February 2020. Additionally, as the historic inspection reports were vague in detail / inconclusive, and were not shared with this Service, the Ombudsman is unable to establish whether there were any recommended works in previous years and whether these were followed up.
  2. In any case, this Service would expect the landlord to have taken reasonable action to have addressed the issue that the resident was facing, promptly. It is clear from the landlord’s own admission that it did not do this. The landlord accepted that there had previously been a lack of proper oversight and that there was inconvenience caused by the outstanding damp. It noted that it should have monitored its contractors more closely to ensure that the necessary damp works were completed in a timely manner. Still, however, while the landlord offered an apology for this, it made no offer of compensation. It subsequently failed to put things right.
  3. The Ombudsman notes that while there were several recommendations following an inspection in February 2020, and works raised to address this, these works were cancelled. It does not appear that the resident was advised of this at the time, or that the works were re-arranged prior to her contact / complaint. It has been taken into consideration, nevertheless, that the landlord’s service would have been impacted by COVID-19.
  4. On bringing her dissatisfaction to the landlord, the resident also shared the findings of a private survey she had arranged. It was fair that as the findings of the resident’s private surveyor differed from the landlord’s, the landlord arranged for a further inspection in order to fully consider the issues the resident raised. This also provided the landlord with an opportunity to obtain an up-to-date understanding of the state/condition of the resident’s property.
  5. On identifying several works to be undertaken, however, this Service is aware that the landlord still delayed in undertaking these. The Ombudsman appreciates that the landlord explained that it experienced several isues with its contractors, and that the resident was contacted to apologise for this. It also noted delays in obtaining the asbestos report. Given her experience, however, the landlord should have acted with greater urgency. Despite the resident’s request for a detailed update on what the landlord was planning to do to rectify the issue also, this was not forthcoming.
  6. It was appropriate that in an attempt to manage the resident’s expectations, and as requested by her MP, the landlord advised that works would be completed before the Christmas period. Records demonstrate, however, that as some works remained outstanding (and others completed to a poor standard, the landlord was unable to honour this. The landlord noted this for itself in its internal correspondence in January 2021 and it does not appear that this work was completed until April 2021.
  7. It is acknowledged that a new complaint was made in December 2021 as the resident reported that the damp and mould had returned in several rooms. It is unclear whether the works have been completed, however this Service notes that following an inspection, although no jobs were noted for rising or penetrating damp, repairs were raised to address the plumbing, and treat the mould. This was appropriate. This Service does note, however, that although the inspection highlighted a condensation issue also, and recommended that the property could benefit from a ventilation unit, it does not appear that the landlord made any arrangement to address this.
  8. Within the landlord’s compensation policy, it indicates that where there have been delays in providing a service (such as undertaking a repair) and / or an unreasonable time taken to resolve a situation, compensation may be offered. The policy goes on to say that when considering the outcome of a complaint, the landlord may consider compensation following a failure where a resident has had to live in poor conditions for longer than would be considered reasonable.
  9. In light of the above, the Ombudsman has determined that there was maladministration. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, as well as offering an award of compensation for the historic delay that the landlord acknowledged, upon establishing the works to be undertaken in August 2020, the landlord should have undertaken works within 15 working days as per the timeframe set out within its repairs policy. The Ombudsman appreciates that it faced obstacles in doing so, however the time taken to fully complete this (which took up until April 2021) was protracted and inappropriate.
  10. The Ombudsman does note that there was a recurrence of damp and mould in December 2021 which the resident has again complained about. As this formed part of a new complaint which the landlord is considering and had not exhausted the landlord’s process at the time of this complaint being duly made, the handling of this matter has not been included within this report. Should the resident remain dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, and its approach since raising the matter, however, she is still able to escalate her complaint.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident the total sum of £600 compensation within four weeks of receiving this determination, in recognition of its excessive delays, distress, and inconvenience.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should ensure that appropriate steps are taken to address the condensation issue raised in the previous inspection. This Service notes the landlord’s comment that it does not install ventilation systems. The landlord should subsequently consider an alternative solution. This Service will consider no action to be unacceptable.