The new improved webform is online now! Residents and representatives can access the form online today.

Lambeth Council (202009981)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202009981

Lambeth Council

29 February 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:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the property and garden. 
    2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Background

  1. The resident occupies a 4-bedroom semi-detached house and has a secure tenancy.
  2. The resident signed for the property on 14 June 2021. Before accepting the property, the resident complained that the garden was unsafe as it had large bulky items, rubbish, broken glass, and other debris in it. She also asked about a party wall that was leaking and covered in green algae. The resident was told that the garden would be cleared and that the wall only leaked when it rained. She was told that the wall would be repaired while in occupation and that it was not a deterrent to moving in.
  3. Between 20 July 2021 and 13 October 2021, the resident raised repairs relating to:
    1. her radiator leaking
    2. the garden was still not cleared
    3. the party wall in the garden leaking
    4. damp and mould in her pantry.
  4. On 20 October 2021 the resident complained. She told the landlord that:
    1. she had reported the garden and the party wall before moving in and nothing had been done
    2. a surveyor had been on 2 occasions and taken photos
    3. there was damp and mould in her pantry due to the leaking party wall.
  5. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 4 March 2022. The landlord:
    1. apologised for the delay in responding to the complaint
    2. told the resident that an inspection had been booked for 17 March 2022, for the leaking radiator and to investigate the damp and mould
    3. said that any jobs raised as part of the inspection would be highlighted as a priority and monitored through to completion
    4. said it had referred the issues with the garden to the housing team
    5. said it partly upheld the complaint and offered £40 compensation for the inconvenience.
  6. The resident contacted the landlord on 4 June 2022. She told the landlord that nothing further had been done and her complaints were being ignored. The landlord responded to the resident on 23 September 2022 about her complaint. The landlord said that where a customer has initiated legal action with a disrepair claim, the matter was ‘outside the jurisdiction of its complaint process’ and therefore, it was unable to investigate.
  7. On 27 October 2022 the resident requested to escalate her complaint. She said she had been complaining for over a year regarding the garden and the outstanding work in the property.
  8. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 13 January 2023. The landlord:
    1. apologised that it did not address all the issues raised in its stage 1 complaint response
    2. said the garden was cleared
    3. confirmed carbon monoxide detectors were fitted in the kitchen
    4. said the property had been decorated before the resident moved in and met the lettable standard
    5. said the outstanding repairs had been referred to the disrepair team
    6. said as it was a live disrepair case, a single joint expert surveyor would attend, and the inspection was booked for 13 January 2023
    7. said once it received the survey report, it would contact the resident on the next steps
    8. said an inspection of the garden was done on 12 January 2023 and that contractors would attend on 14 January 2023 to clear it
    9. said contractors would attend on 20 January 2023 to inspect the damp and mould and a post-works inspection would be done.
  9. On 15 February 2023 the resident asked for her complaint to be reviewed. The landlord provided a final review on 16 March 2023. The landlord said:
    1. that it had arranged to clear the garden, but the resident had refused access as she wanted additional work to be done
    2. it would not be offering compensation for the delay in clearing the garden
    3. the garden was cleared on 14 January 2023
    4. that if the leaking party wall and garden stairs were considered structural, the repairs would be covered by the current legal disrepair claim and would be for the joint expert to decide
    5. all other repair issues were covered by the legal disrepair case and any compensation would be for the court to decide.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s obligations

  1. Where a repair is reported, the law states that a landlord must inspect to determine if it is responsible to repair. Where the landlord is responsible, it must conduct a repair within a reasonable time. What is a reasonable time will depend on all the facts, including the type of repair. In most cases, landlords have repair policies which set out when repairs ought to be completed.
  2. The landlord’s repairs manual prioritises repairs as follows:
    1. Urgent (EO1) will be attended to in 2 hours and fixed within 24 hours
    2. emergency repairs (EO2) will be fixed within 1 working day 
    3. routine repairs (R1) will be fixed within 7 working days
    4. routine repairs (R2) will be fixed within 28 working days
    5. planned repairs (R3) will be completed within 90 days.
  3. The landlord’s customer care standard states that it would:
    1. make it easy to access repair services and
    2. take responsibility to keep a resident informed
    3. resolve queries at the first point of contact
    4. take responsibility for keeping residents updated
    5. apologise if it gets things wrong and put it right quickly.

The garden

  1. The evidence confirms that the housing officer said the garden would be cleared and the party wall reported for repairs. Internal emails show that surveyors were asked to get involved as the water was seeping from the neighbouring property. There is no evidence that anything further was done beyond this. This is not acceptable.
  2. On 20 July 2021 a skip was ordered to clear the garden as agreed. The job was later cancelled on 29 July 2021 as the resident is reported to have refused access to the contractors. The resident has continued to dispute this and said that no one turned up. The evidence on file suggests that the resident requested additional works above and beyond what the landlord had received a quote for.  Despite this, nothing further was done to arrange for the garden to be cleared, despite the resident continually contacting the landlord with her concerns. The garden was inspected on 12 January 2023 and cleared on 14 January 2023. This was 18 months after the landlord first arranged to clear the garden. This is not acceptable.
  3. The landlord said that it would not consider compensation for the delay, as it was due to the resident not giving access. The evidence does not show that the landlord made any attempt to respond to the resident’s emails over the 18 months about the concerns she had regarding the safety of the garden. It made no effort to complete the original order raised to clear the garden within a reasonable time. It further failed to investigate the health and safety concerns the resident has raised about the path, stairs, and wall, to consider if it is obligated to carry out any further repairs. This is not acceptable.

Leaking radiator

  1. The resident raised a repair about her radiator leaking on 22 July 2021. In line with its policy, this repair was raised as an emergency (EM1). In line with its policy, it should have responded in 2 hours and fixed within 24 hours. The job was closed on 23 July 2023 but does not say if the repair was completed. However, it was raised again on 30 July 2023 and closed on 10 August 2021 but again not logged as completed. This would suggest that the issue was not resolved at the first appointment.
  2. A further repair was raised on 13 October 2021 and logged as completed on 22 October 2021. As the landlord’s evidence is not clear about the repair being completed (resolved) at the previous 2 visits, we can only say for certain that it was first raised on 22 July 2021 and not resolved until 22 October 2021, which was 92 days after it was reported. This was not in line with its policy.
  3. It is the landlord’s responsibility to make sure that it holds and maintains accurate records to enable it to be accountable for any action it has taken to resolve a repair, it has failed to do that. This is not acceptable.

Damp and mould

  1. The resident first told the landlord that she had damp and mould in her pantry on 24 August 2021. She told the landlord that it was from the leaking party wall. The evidence shows that she contacted the landlord on 6 further occasions between 28 August and 29 September 2021 to report the same issue. There is no evidence that the landlord investigated the damp and mould. In fact, the evidence confirms that the landlord did not acknowledge the issue until 25 February 2022. This was 6 months later. This is not acceptable.
  2. The landlord arranged an inspection on 17 March 2022 for a surveyor to inspect the damp and mould. It confirmed any jobs raised from the inspection would be highlighted and monitored through to completion. We have seen no evidence of the outcome of the inspection or any inspection report. There is no evidence of any repairs being raised. This is not acceptable.
  3. The landlord provided an update to the resident on 23 September 2022. It advised that it had reviewed the issue with the disrepair manager and confirmed it was unable to investigate as it related to a live disrepair claim. It stated where a customer has initiated legal action about a disrepair claim, the matter lies outside of its jurisdiction.
  4. We have not seen any evidence that an application has been filed for a disrepair claim. The landlord has also confirmed that no legal proceedings have been issued. Therefore, we would have expected the landlord under its repair obligations, to inspect the damp and mould, identify the root cause, and take action to resolve the issue. It has failed to do this. The evidence confirms that the landlord did not address the damp and mould until 4 January 2023 when it conducted a mould wash. This is not acceptable.
  5. There were further reports of damp and mould in the property and a further order raised on 13 January 2023. An inspection was done on 20 January 2023. The landlord has said that it would conduct a post-works inspection to ensure the work was done. There is no report of the inspection, or a log of what work was done to resolve the issue and no evidence of a post-inspection. This is not acceptable.
  6. The landlord continued to refer to a live disrepair claim as the reason it had not completed the repairs. On 13 January 2023, it said that it had consulted with the resident’s legal representative and a single joint expert surveyor would attend. The surveyor identified multiple repairs within the property, including damp and mould. The works order states the landlord would complete the works identified by the surveyor within 90 days. The landlord has not produced evidence to show this work has since been completed.
  7. On 16 March 2023 the landlord told the resident that as the repairs were covered by a legal disrepair case, any compensation would be a matter for the courts to decide. It is not clear why the landlord made this statement. It confirmed to the Ombudsman that no legal proceedings had been issued and therefore, it could have considered awarding compensation where it had identified service failures.
  8. The landlord has an obligation under both the terms of the tenancy agreement and its repair obligations that where a repair is raised, to inspect and identify if it is responsible for the repair, and where it is, it should complete the repair in a reasonable time and in accordance with its repairs policy. The landlord further makes a promise as part of its customer care that it will make it easy to access repair services, resolve queries at the first point of contact and take responsibility for keeping residents updated. It has failed to do this, and this is maladministration by the landlord.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

  1. The landlord has a 3-stage complaint process. It states that a stage 1 complaint will be acknowledged within 3 working days and responded to in 15 working days. Stage 2 will be responded to in 15 working days. It also states a stage 3 review can be requested and will be acknowledged within 3 working days and responded to in 20 working days.
  2. The policy explains that if the issue falls outside of the complaints process, the customer will be told why and explained how their enquiry will be dealt with. The issues that fall outside of the complaints process include:
    1. housing matters which are dealt with under the arbitration process
    2. complaints that involve legal proceedings, court, or tribunal action.
  3. The resident first raised her dissatisfaction with the landlord on 17 June 2021. Between 20 July 2021 and 20 October 2021, she continued to raise her concerns with the landlord. No complaint was logged, and the landlord failed to acknowledge the complaints. This is not acceptable.
  4. On 20 October 2021 the resident emailed the landlord again. She said that she had been reporting the repairs to her home since before moving in and nothing had been done. The landlord has referred to this date in its stage 1 complaint response as the date the complaint was raised. In line with its policy, it should have provided its stage 1 complaint response by 10 November 2021.
  5. The landlord did not provide its stage 1 complaint response until 4 March 2022. This was after we contacted the landlord asking it to respond to the complaint the resident had raised. This was 97 calendar days after the resident lodged her complaint. This is not acceptable.
  6. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response said that it had raised an inspection and that any repairs raised as a result of the inspection, would be a priority and that it would monitor the repairs through to completion. This was a reasonable response. However, the evidence shows that this was not done, and repairs remained outstanding. The resident had to constantly contact the landlord about her repairs as nothing was done, and the landlord failed to communicate with the resident. This is not acceptable.
  7. On 23 September 2022 the landlord contacted the resident. It said that it was responding to her complaint of August 2022. This was not the date the resident lodged her complaint. It said that it had reviewed the complaint with the disrepair manager and said it was unable to investigate as it was related to a live disrepair claim. As stated in this report, we have seen no evidence of a disrepair claim. It is also not clear or explained why having a disrepair claim would prevent the landlord from responding to a complaint. The landlord failed to explain to the resident how her complaint would be dealt with under the circumstances. This is not acceptable.
  8. On 27 October 2022 the resident asked for her complaint to be escalated. In line with its policy, the landlord should have provided a stage 2 complaint response by 16 November 2022. The landlord did not provide its stage 2 complaint response until 13 January 2023, 56 calendar days later. This is not acceptable.
  9. In its stage 2 response the landlord apologised that the points raised in the stage 1 complaint response were not addressed. It provided a response that addressed the garden, damp and mould, and the repairs that were part of the disrepair claim. It explained that a single joint expert would attend and that following receipt of the report, findings, and recommendations, it would arrange for the disrepair team to contact the resident about the next steps. This was a reasonable response. However, the resident had to continue to chase the landlord for the work to be done. This is not acceptable.
  10. On 15 February 2023 the resident asked to have her complaint reviewed. The landlord provided a final review of the complaint on 16 March 2023. This was in line with its policy.
  11. The landlord said the resident had refused access to the contractors and therefore it was not responsible for the delays and would not offer compensation. It said if the party wall and garden stairs were structural, it would be covered by the disrepair claim and any compensation would be for the courts to award. The landlord failed to address the resident’s concerns, again referring to the disrepair claim that until the joint expert had been appointed, had not progressed to the point of any repairs being done. It also demonstrated a lack of empathy or support for the fact that the resident had been reporting her concerns since June 2021, which was nearly 2 years. This is not acceptable.
  12. In summary, the landlord did not manage the resident’s complaint in line with its own policy and timelines. It took the resident to send multiple emails for the landlord to log and acknowledge the resident’s complaint. Once it did, it took over 97 calendar days for it to provide a stage 1 response, and 56 calendar days to send a stage 2 response from the request to escalate. The stage 1 failed to address the issues she had raised. It said it was unable to investigate due to a disrepair claim but did not explain to the resident on how it would manage this. It failed to communicate with her, and it failed to monitor through to completion and keep her updated as promised. This is maladministration by the landlord.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in:
    1. The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs to the property and garden.
    2. The landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord, to within 28 days of the date of this decision, pay £1,850 compensation as follows:
    1. £250 for the delays in responding to and repairing the leak from the radiator.
    2. £200 for the delays in investigating and cleaning the issues raised around the safety of the garden.
    3. £1,200 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay between 24 August 2021 to 16 March 2023, for the failures to resolve the ongoing issues with damp and mould.
    4. £200 for the poor complaint handling.
  2. The Ombudsman further orders the landlord, if not already done so, to contact the resident to arrange the repairs detailed in the disrepair works order to be completed. It should provide evidence to us that it has made every reasonable effort to arrange for the repairs to be done within 30 days of the date of this decision.
  3. As per the repairs raised on 29 June 2023 to the garden, the Ombudsman orders the landlord to, within 60 days of the date of this decision, complete the following work:
    1. renew the defective concrete in the rear garden wall
    2. repave the front and rear garden paving
    3. demolish the unfinished outbuilding
    4. repoint the garden wall.
  4. The landlord must provide evidence to the Ombudsman that it has complied with the orders made.