Camden Council (202231395)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202231395

Camden Council

16 August 2024

 

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:
    1. handling of reports of damp and mould.
    2. complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident holds a secure tenancy with the landlord in a 2-bedroom flat. The household is elderly, and they have physical health conditions including chronic asthma which the landlord is aware of. The resident’s son acted as their representative during the complaint – both will be referred to as “the resident” in this report.
  2. On 17 August 2022 the resident formally complained to the landlord. He was unhappy with its lack of action regarding damp and mould in the property and explained that the issue had been ongoing since 2010. He raised several historical reports from 2016 and added that he had not heard anything from the landlord since. He said the bathroom was unusable and mould was affecting the physical and mental health of the household. On 2 September 2022 the resident reported a ‘large amount’ of damp throughout the house, including the bathroom and bedroom, which he said was due to rainwater entering the property.
  3. In mid-September 2022 the landlord responded to the complaint at stage 1 of its complaints process. It partly upheld the complaint on the basis that the resident had been dealing with ongoing damp and mould for a number of years, with no satisfactory resolution. It said that this matter was only brought to the attention of its damp and mould team on 9 September 2022 and it had instructed a specialist contractor to carry out a full damp survey of the property. It added that its subcontractor would carry out a mould wash and that both would happen in the next couple of weeks. It explained that it could not comment on the history of damp and mould, but it noted there was a previous issue in July 2022 with external parts of the building and that remedial works were completed at the time.
  4. In the resident’s escalation request of 16 September 2022, he was unhappy with the landlord’s communication. He queried why the damp and mould team were unaware of the issue as previous works had been carried out on the property. He also questioned what part of the complaint it was not upholding. He explained that he had mentioned there was flooding in the bathroom due to water coming into the property from outside and felt there were severe plumbing issues. As a resolution, he wanted compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused over the last few years.
  5. On 22 September 2022 the landlord inspected the property and requested that a supervisor look at the amount of work needed. On 29 September 2022 its contractor carried out a damp and mould survey. They found extensive mould throughout and commented that the property was in ‘very’ poor condition. They subsequently recommended multiple remedial works, including repairs to the brickwork, plaster and replacement of the bathroom flooring. On 11 October 2022 the landlord’s subcontractor carried out a mould wash throughout the property. The same day the resident reported that the bathroom was flooded and that the damp and mould had worsened and asked for an update.
  6. On 6 December 2022 the landlord issued its stage 2 final response. It fully upheld the complaint and apologised for any distress and inconvenience caused. It said it had visited the property on 30 November 2022 and decided that a number of works were required, and its site manager would lead on this following the surveyor’s report.
  7. In the resident’s referral to this Service, he said the landlord had not followed up on the recommendations and was unhappy that the onus was on him to chase things up. He was also unhappy that the landlord had not considered compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused and felt its final response did not address everything, and he was unclear on what it proposed to do to resolve the complaint. He added that the landlord had shown no urgency in resolving the problem and had failed to consider the age and medical history of the household.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident advised that this situation has been ongoing for a number of years. Indeed, the landlord has provided this Service with repair logs which show historical reports of damp and mould as far back as 2015. However, under the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, we may not consider complaints that were not brought to the landlord’s attention as a formal complaint within a reasonable period (usually within 12 months) of the matters arising. This is in accordance with paragraph 42c of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The historical issues provide contextual background to the current complaint, but this assessment is focused on the landlord’s actions and handling of reports from August 2022 when regular reports began to be made.
  2. The resident has also advised that the handling of this matter by the landlord has led to a deterioration in the health of the household. The Ombudsman cannot conclude the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This is outside our jurisdiction, but this Service has considered the general distress and inconvenience that may have been caused to the resident and the landlord’s response to the concerns he raised about the health of the household.

The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould

  1. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. This is high level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution:
    1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.
    2. Put things right.
    3. Learn from outcomes.
  2. The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred and, if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.
  3. The Ombudsman would reasonably expect that on receiving reports of mould, the landlord should respond, arrange an inspection and investigate to determine the causes of damp and mould and, if necessary, carry out remedial repairs within a reasonable timescale. The landlord’s repairs policy states it will attend to reports of damp and mould within 10 working days. It adds that it will assess the mould and agree next steps.
  4. In the resident’s 17 August 2022 complaint, he stated that the mould was so bad that the household had to visit the doctors with ‘mould-related health problems’. The resident reported the damp and mould issue again on 2 September 2022. The landlord subsequently arranged a specialist damp and mould survey for 29 September 2022 over 1 month after the resident’s initial complaint. This was an unreasonable delay, and the landlord failed to inspect the property within its policy timescales. As it had recorded similar issues in the past during the resident’s occupation of the property, this should have put the landlord on notice that the damp required urgent attention, especially considering the reported health concerns.
  5. While the landlord acted appropriately by carrying out a full mould wash in October 2022, the specialist survey in September 2022 found that the mould was extensive. The contractor subsequently recommended multiple remedial works to the property. However, the landlord did not appear to act on these recommendations or update the resident on the next steps. This led to him chasing the landlord for updates. This was a failure on the part of the landlord.
  6. The landlord’s final response said it visited the resident on 30 November 2022 to look at the outstanding works. While this is not disputed, this Service has seen no evidence to confirm the details of this visit, which indicates problems with the landlord’s record keeping. In any case, it is unclear why it took the landlord around 2 months to act following the specialist survey. This was another unreasonable delay that would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident who would have likely felt the landlord was not taking the situation seriously.
  7. The landlord’s final response stated it would be organising the works required at the property. Although it did not provide any timescales for completion, the landlord’s repair policy states that programmed repairs, such as ones that are complex and involve specialist work, will be completed within an agreed timescale. Given the circumstances of this case, this Service would have expected the landlord to start and complete the work within a reasonable timescale and to keep the resident updated on progress.
  8. However, the evidence showed that this was not the case. Indeed, the resident had to chase the landlord for updates on several occasions after its December 2022 final response. Furthermore, the landlord did not explain to him what work was needed nor did it give due regard to the age and vulnerability of the household and whether any adjustments were required.
  9. The resident informed this Service at the beginning of August 2024 that some of the recommended works remained outstanding. The landlord has provided this Service with repair records that showed that it completed some works to the property in late 2023. However, it is unclear what work it had agreed to, what of the recommended works it has completed and what remains outstanding. In view of this, this Service has made an order below for the landlord to set out a schedule of works.
  10. The Housing Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould outlines that ‘landlords should recognise that issues can have an ongoing detrimental impact on the health and well-being of the resident and should therefore be responded to in a timely manner’. It continues that ‘landlords should consider appropriate timescales for their responses to reflect the urgency of the case and set these out clearly to manage resident’s expectations’. In this case, the resident was left exposed to damp and mould in his property for a prolonged period because of the landlord’s inability to organise and complete the required remedial works within a reasonable timescale. Further, it failed to keep the resident updated throughout.
  11. Overall, the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould was unsatisfactory, and it did not act fairly in this case. There were unreasonable delays, from August 2022 to December 2022. Although the landlord carried out some works in July 2023 to October 2023 it appeared it had not followed through on all the works proposed in the specialist damp and mould survey of September 2022. The landlord did not act within its policy timescales, its communication was poor, and the resident had to regularly chase for updates. In addition, the landlord did not deal with the situation with the level of urgency required given it was aware of past issues with damp and mould and the household’s health needs.
  12. This amounts to maladministration on the part of the landlord. Although the landlord fully upheld the complaint and apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused, it did not offer any compensation to put things right. Furthermore, some of the recommended works appear to remain outstanding. This is particularly concerning given this Service has seen comments from a local councillor around June 2023 that acknowledged to the resident that the property was ‘uninhabitable’.
  13. It is the Ombudsman’s view that the failings identified in this report would have had a significant impact on the resident and the household. This Service’s remedies guidance suggests awards from £600 should be considered where there has been a significant adverse effect on the resident. In addition, the landlord’s compensation policy suggests awards of up to £1,000 are appropriate for severe and prolonged distress. Therefore, an order of compensation has been made below in line with this guidance.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord issued its final response on 6 December 2022, over 2 months after the resident’s 16 September 2022 escalation request. This was contrary to its 25-working day stage 2 policy timescale. This was an unreasonable delay that would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident who would have likely felt that the landlord was ignoring his concerns. Moreover, the landlord made no reference to the households’ health needs in either of its formal responses.
  2. After the landlord’s final response, the resident was unhappy with the progress of the remedial work and raised concerns about the landlord’s lack of communication. He subsequently informed the landlord around June 2023 that he wanted the matter investigated and for the landlord to relook at the original complaint, taking into account his ‘recent experience’. As the issues raised were new and after the landlord’s December 2022 final response, it should have raised a new stage 1 complaint and responded within its set timescales. However, it failed to do so. This would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident would have felt that the landlord was not properly addressing his concerns.
  3. Overall, the landlord’s complaint responses were poor. While it acknowledged there had been failures in its ‘previous customer service’, it did not offer any compensation to put things right nor did it identify learning from the complaint. In addition, the landlord should have provided a timescale for the required work. Instead, its final response put the onus on the resident to contact it for updates. This was inappropriate and would have caused time and trouble for the resident. Further, it missed opportunities to raise a new complaint after its final response. In view of these failings, the Ombudsman has determined there was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling and orders are made below for remedy.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders

  1. The landlord must do the following within the next 4 weeks:
    1. Provide a written apology for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident compensation of £950 comprised of:
      1. £800 for the significant distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould.
      2. £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s complaint handling.
    3. Write to the resident to set out a schedule of works for the outstanding repairs to resolve the damp and mould. This should provide timescales for completion.
    4. Give the resident a point of contact who will oversee the works to completion and pro-actively give them updates.
    5. Consider whether any additional compensation is due to reflect the delay in completing repairs for damp and mould from the date of its stage 2 response until the date it completes the outstanding works. It must write to the resident to confirm its decision.
  2. Within the next 8 weeks, the landlord must:
    1. Review this report and the failures set out within it. The landlord should consider if its repairs and complaint handling staff need any feedback and/or training based on the failures found in this report. In doing so, the landlord must:
      1. Consider the cause of each of the failures in this report.
      2. Assess why they occurred.
      3. Outlines what it will do to prevent these failures from happening again.
  3. The landlord should provide this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.