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

Leeds City Council (202013938)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202013938

Leeds City Council

23 March 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 response to the resident’s reports about damp and mould in her property.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord and the property is a flat within a block of flats.
  2. In January 2021 the resident’s partner informed the landlord that he had raised issues about damp several times, yet nothing had been done (no evidence of these reports was provided). He said that the family could not live in the property in its current condition, especially as their child was ill because of the damp.
  3. On 26 January 2021 the resident raised a formal complaint to the landlord, in which she said that nothing had been done to resolve the damp and mould in the property, despite having first reported the issue in August 2020. She believed that the surveyor who attended her property in January 2021 had not completed thorough checks, and that his finding that the damp was due to condensation was incorrect. The resident said she believed that the damp and mould in her property had impacted her children’s health. She also explained that she was expecting a baby and did not want to bring her newborn into the property in its current condition. She requested that the landlord investigate the issues and rehouse her and her family while the repair works were ongoing.
  4. In response to the resident’s complaint, the landlord arranged for its operatives to visit the resident’s property. A surveyor inspected the kitchen, bedrooms and living room. The surveyor completed various checks, including an asbestos test on the wall coating and moisture meter readings. They found that the damp was restricted to the surface plaster and not the structure of the walls and diagnosed the issue being as caused by condensation. The landlord’s operatives cleaned, treated and applied anti-mould paint to the affected areas in the living room and smaller bedroom. The landlord had a plasterer strip and thermal board two external walls in the living room, to improve the thermal resistance. The landlord’s repair records showed that it arranged to renew the storage heaters in the property and provided oil filled radiators while the heating system was being renewed. Advice was provided to the resident on preventative methods for controlling damp and information on how a lack of air circulation could cause mould.
  5. It is noted that the resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. The resident believed the repairs should have been completed the previous year and requested compensation for this delay.
  6. In response, the landlord and its operatives attended the resident’s property on 28 January 2021. A second inspection was carried out and the surveyor found that the original diagnosis of condensation was correct. The surveyor identified that the humidity levels were high, there was a lack of ventilation, and the storage heaters were not being used. The landlord confirmed that it had received the resident’s repair report in August 2020, but it was not followed through appropriately, as the repairs team had no record of the resident’s report. It apologised to the resident for its handling of her reports in 2020 and advised that it would raise the issue with the housing manager to improve future communication. The landlord explained that the inspections suggested that the issues in the resident’s property could be “alleviated by managing [the] home better”. The landlord explained that it was unable to provide temporary rehousing during the repairs as it was not standard practice for the type of work carried out. It said that advice was provided to the resident around bidding for a new property at the time of its visit.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has explained that the damp and mould in the property impacted the health of her children. Whilst we do not doubt the resident’s comments about her family’s health, the Ombudsman cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. The resident may be able to make a personal injury claim against the landlord if she considers that her family’s health has been affected by its actions or inaction. This is a legal process and the resident should seek independent legal advice if she wants to pursue this option. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident. This is an accordance with paragraph 39(i) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme which says the Ombudsman will not investigate complaints which concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, a designated person, other tribunal or procedure.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould

  1. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord is responsible for repairing and maintaining the structure and exterior of the property. It states that the landlord is responsible for the repairs and maintenance of installations in the property including heating.
  2. The landlord’s website states that following a report of damp and mould, it should inspect the property and carry out repairs within a reasonable time. The landlord has demonstrated that it took adequate steps to investigate the complaint and to resolve the issues in a timely manner. It acted appropriately by arranging an inspection of the property and carrying out various checks, which determined the cause of the damp and mould was condensation, poor heating and ventilation. The repair works the landlord raised to resolve the damp and mould issues were also appropriate and in line with its repairs policy. Its repair policy states that damp proofing work falls under non-urgent repairs, which should be completed within 60 days. The landlord’s records showed that the repairs were completed within its timeline. It was also reasonable for the landlord to inform the resident about preventative measures to reduce damp and mould and how to properly heat and ventilate the property. This was in line with the landlord’s procedures on damp and mould.
  3. The resident requested to be temporarily rehoused during the repair works. The landlord advised her that it was unable to accommodate her request as it was not standard practice to decant (temporary move) for the type of work being carried out. It explained that the repairs were routine in nature and could be done whilst the property was occupied. The landlord’s temporary decant procedure states that the need for a decant is established following a surveyor’s inspection and assessments of the works to be carried out. In this case the surveyor’s report to the landlord did not indicate that a decant was necessary. The landlord was entitled to rely on the conclusions of its appropriately qualified staff and operatives; who deemed that rehousing was not required during the works. Accordingly, the decision not to decant the resident was reasonable in the circumstances.
  4. The resident requested compensation for the initial delay and lack of investigation into her reports of damp and mould in 2020. The landlord recognised that it failed to appropriately respond to the resident’s repair request in August 2020 until November 2020. It recognised that it “made an error” and had not followed through appropriately with the resident’s reports. It apologised and advised it would liaise with the housing manager to improve communication. It was reasonable for the landlord to acknowledge its mistake and to apologise for it. However, it did not show that it had considered the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident, as a result of the delays in addressing the damp and mould in the resident’s property. This constitutes service failure by the landlord and the landlord should offer compensation as detailed below in view of this.
  5.  As the landlord does not have a compensation policy the Ombudsman has assessed the level of compensation which should be paid using our own remedies guidance, which is published on our website. The remedies guidance suggests that the Ombudsman may award compensation in the range of £50 to £250 for instances of service failure by the landlord resulting in some impact on the resident, but where the service failure was of short duration and may not have significantly affected the overall outcome of the complaint. Examples include failure to meet service standards for actions and responses but where the failure had no significant impact. In this case there was a four-month delay in completing repairs, and compensation of £200 is due in view of this.  

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in respect of its response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property.

Order

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £200 compensation in recognition of any distress and inconvenience experienced from its delays in responding to her reports of damp and mould.