London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202222555)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202222555

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

13 March 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of reports of repairs issues, and damp and mould.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s:
1. Complaints handling.
2. Record keeping.

Background

The resident has occupied the property, a 4 bedroom house, along with his wife and four adult children on an assured tenancy since 2009. The family was decanted from the property temporarily from August 2022 to March 2023 for repairs to be done.
The landlord has liaised with the resident as well as other family members, including one of his children who is acting as his representative. In this investigation, all such communications are considered to have been made on behalf of the resident. For ease of reference within this report, all communications from/to members of the resident’s family are stated to have been made by/to the resident.
The resident has told this Service the 4 key issues complained about in respect of repairs are that:
1. There was a leak from the boiler which leaked in to a bedroom and caused damp and mould. It eventually leaked so much it caused the garage ceiling to collapse.
2. There was a leak from the toilet in the bathroom on the first floor which caused damage to flooring. There was also a leak from the ensuite shower.
3. There was damp and mould in the bathrooms apparently caused because insulation had been moved in the loft when work had been done. This caused damp spots in the bathrooms and the insulation needed to be fixed.
4. There was mould in the kitchen by the sink and when operatives attended to deal with it, the gas pipe to the hob was damaged and it caused a gas leak and the hob had to be replaced.

Summary of events

The resident reported an issue with the boiler on 22 November 2018 as there was no heating. A repair was carried out on 27 November 2018 although it is not clear what action was taken by the operative to fix the problem.
A leak was reported on 22 July 2019 from underneath the bath which was entering an adjacent bedroom causing the wall and carpet to get wet and leaving black mould marks on the wall. The landlord’s records say it was repaired on 16 October 2019, but it has not provided any details of what work was done to resolve the problem.
On 10 December 2020 a repair was raised for the boiler as the resident had no heating. This repair was carried out on 14 December 2020. A further leak from the bathroom was reported on 14 January 2021. While some work was noted as being done that day, the record says the operative was asked to send the job back, and it would be dealt with as follow on works. However, there is then no further work recorded in the bathroom until 3 September 2021 when a leaking bath was replaced and a repair to fix the toilet that was not flushing well.
In the meantime the landlord attended on 5 June 2021 as a result of an “uncontainable leak” from the boiler room in to one of the bedrooms. An operative attended the same day to repair it but the landlord’s records do not say what caused the issue or what action was taken when completing the repair.
An “uncontainable leak” was also reported coming from the bathroom on 3 September 2021 which was soaking floors. The job sheet contains no information about the cause of the leak or what action was taken to remedy it.
On 18 January 2022 the landlord attended to a report of the garage roof collapsing as a result of a leak from above. The garage was full and needed to be emptied before work could be done. The landlord records follow on works to complete the repair being carried out on 4 May and 26 October 2022.
A further “uncontainable leak” was reported from the boiler room on 6 February 2022, and that the boiler was also smoking. An operative attended the following day to repair it, although the repair log contains no information about what caused the issue or how it was repaired. On 25 February 2022 a report was made that the boiler was not working again and the resident had no heating or hot water. The landlord’s records say work was completed to deal with mould that day, but not what action was taken. The boiler was not repaired until 28 February 2022.
A Healthy Homes report was carried out on 2 March 2022 and it found that there was evidence of damp as a result of a longstanding leak from the hot water tank. The leak needed stopping and follow on works were required (to skirting boards, the garage ceiling, and carpets). It found that the removal of insulation in the loft had contributed to the presence of mould in the ensuite. It also noted that the resident was not following behavioural advice in 8 areas to reduce the presence of damp and mould in the property (such as, properly heating it, decluttering, using extractor fans, cleaning mould and drying clothes outside). The report concluded that mould needed to be cleaned from surfaces, and the loft insulation and heating system needed to be repaired.
A leak from the bathroom toilet was reported on 22 April 2022 and the landlord attended the same day, but it is not known how it was repaired.
The resident reported the boiler was leaking again on 30 May 2022. The landlord says a repair was carried out on 3 June 2022 but no details of the repair have been provided. Its records say on 31 May 2022 it was to investigate mould growth, but there had been a visit in March 2022 (which there is no record of) and it was too soon to assess any further mould growth. No further action in respect of mould is recorded.
Records show operatives attended to look at the garage on 7 and 8 July 2022 but there are no details of what work, if any, was carried out.
The landlord has said on 24 August 2022 the floors of both the bathroom and ensuite were repaired. However, its job record contains different information. It says 24 August 2022 was the date of the repair being logged and it was 21 November 2021 that the work was completed. However there is also an additional entry which shows on 9 June 2022 a job was created to renew vinyl flooring to the bathroom and ensuite and it says that work was completed on 22 September 2022. It was also noted the boiler was still leaking and an operative attended the same day. Although no details of what work was done have been provided, the landlord’s records note a lot of damage had been caused to 2 bathrooms as a result of the leak.
A Healthy Homes follow up report was commissioned on 26 August 2022 which said the property suffered from mould/mildew. It found the resident was not following behavioural advice in 3 areas (shutting doors when using the bathroom and cooking, heating to a constant temperature and drying clothes outside). It found there were no concerns that needed further action, but went on to say that the insulation needed pushing down to avoid cold spots, and the leak repair was outstanding (the resident confirmed a repair appointment had been scheduled). Overall, the property was deemed a ‘Category 2’ due to the extent of mould in the garage.
The landlord has a record dated 28 October 2022 that the garage ceiling had collapsed as a result of a leak above. However, no further information is provided.
The resident called the landlord on 6 December 2022 and complained about the delay in the repairs, having been decanted in August 2022. Specifically that:
1. There had been damp and mould in the property for about 4 years and there had been 2 leaks.
2. One of the occupants had breathing difficulties while pregnant which they said was a result of damp and mould in the bedroom. Therefore they had to sleep on the lounge floor and this led to a pinched nerve in the neck and other health issues.
3. The boiler did not work and this led to occupants having respiratory conditions and antibiotic treatment.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 7 December 2022. It upheld the complaint and said there was a work order for a contractor to check the loft insulation. It had contacted the area supervisor to ask for repairs to be raised and booked in and once the insulation work was complete, its Healthy Homes team would then work with a contractor to treat the damp and mould. It apologised for the length of time it was taking to address the repairs.
The resident asked the landlord to escalate his complaint to stage 2 on 16 January 2023. This was noted the same day but the landlord did not acknowledge the request until 27 January 2023. It then sent its stage 2 response on 3 February 2023, in which it said a complaint had been made on 6 December 2022 regarding the leaks, repair delays, the impact on the family’s health, the lack of heating and the presence of damp and mould.
The landlord:
1. Apologised for the delay in responding at stage 2.
2. Accepted there had been issues with appointments, with some contractors being booked to attend before it was necessary, and other work needed completing before contractors could undertake their jobs.
3. Noted some departments had delayed dealing with matters.
4. Set out a chronology of events since September 2021 and identified various repair issues that had arisen since then.
5. Accepted the resident had been asked to decant the property in August 2022. However, work remained outstanding partly due to a lack of qualified contractors at the current time, and no-one monitoring the repairs and booking them in as they should have. It then detailed the extensive works that still needed actioning in the kitchen, boiler room, bedroom, garage, and top floor ensuite.
6. Noted the boiler was working and it would be checking the loft insulation had been replaced. It said the work would be monitored.
7. Provided details of its insurer in case the resident wanted to make a claim for any damaged effects.
8. Noted that between September 2021 and December 2022 the resident either chased for information or expressed frustration over the work being done and delays at least 4 times.
9. Offered compensation of £1,990, made up of:
  1. £1,440 for the distress, time, effort, and inconvenience this may have caused the resident. It included an issue with the washing machine and pest infestation.
  2. £500 for the right to repair and as a gesture of goodwill for the service failure.
  3. £50 for the complaint handling at stage 1 and the late stage 2 Review.
10. Reiterated the apology given at stage 1.
A loft inspection was reported as being needed as a result of leaks on 6 and 13 February 2023, with the landlord’s records stating the work was completed on 13 February 2023; although there were no details of the work carried out.
On 21 February 2023, the resident notified the landlord that, when the contractor had been at the property on 17 February 2023, it had evidently damaged the gas supply. As a result, there had been a gas leak, which had only been noted when he visited the property that day and had to call an emergency gas engineer out.
The landlord replaced the hob on 1 March 2023 and added the silicone seal on 20 April 2023.
The landlord apologised to the resident on 8 March 2023, that not all works had been completed prior to him moving back. It acknowledged the hob had to be replaced and there were issues with the carpets as well as electrical work.
The resident complained to the landlord on 16 March 2023, that having moved back in about a week before, the property was still not ready to be lived in. The landlord responded the following day to say it would look to revise its compensation offer when the works were complete. It had asked for the loft works to be brought forward and had made enquiries about the other outstanding work (particularly the carpet and bedroom). It noted the resident had agreed to call the heating company to install the hob, and it had arranged £80 vouchers as a goodwill gesture to recognise the lack of cooking facilities.
Between 21 and 24 March 2023 the landlord liaised with the resident about the outstanding works. The resident explained that extensive work was outstanding to the kitchen, bedroom, ensuite, bathroom, and electrics.
A job was created on 23 March 2023 for the landlord to “inspect and renew” the garage and this work is recorded as being finished on 23 April 2023. The resident notified the landlord on 3 April 2023 that the stove and gas had been reconnected, 3 weeks after moving back in, and the carpet had been fitted. However, he was unhappy with the way the carpet fitting had been carried out, because carpet had to be replaced due to a leak and the quality and colour were not what had been agreed. H ealso commented on landlord staff being dismissive over the standards of the work provided.
The landlord responded the same day and confirmed the lighting and vent in the ensuite had been raised as jobs and someone would be in touch about the shower and sealant in the bathroom and kitchen worktop. It apologised for the delays.
The resident made another complaint on 27 April 2023 that, despite being decanted to complete the works, the family had returned to find issues with workmanship and some work not completed, such as carpet not being fitted and the gas hob not being connected. He also complained about the previous damp and mould reports not being taken seriously and the poor communication during the decant process. The family were told the property was ready when it was not and then not told when the decant was extended. It meant they had to continually pack and unpack and live with uncertainty.
The landlord responded the same day and apologised for no-one having contacted him about the repairs. This had been flagged to senior managers and somebody would be in touch soon to monitor the repairs. On 4 May 2023 the landlord liaised with the resident who said he was unhappy with the standard of repairs in the property and highlighted a number of outstanding repairs. He was told the contractor would return to deal with the necessary repairs.
The resident contacted the landlord again on 5 May 2023 to say he was concerned the contractor would be doing repairs as he was unhappy with the quality of the works carried out. He again referred to outstanding repairs on 15 May 2023, which the landlord apologised for the same day. It confirmed someone new had been allocated to monitoring the repairs and they should be following up with the operatives.
The landlord liaised with the resident in May and June 2023 and the resident confirmed some work had been completed. The landlord apologised for the further issues and said it would increase the compensation to recognise this. On 14 and 15 June 2023 the landlord repaired a leak from the top floor ensuite which was affecting the bathroom on the first floor.
The resident chased up the final repairs on 26 June 2023, and it was acknowledged by the landlord on 29 June 2023. Steps were then taken to chase up the outstanding works. On 30 July 2023 the landlord noted that work was still outstanding in the bathroom, kitchen and bedroom.
The landlord reviewed its stage 2 response on 10 August 2023. It apologised that its communication had been poor since its stage 2 response in February 2023 and noted the distress and frustration caused. It accepted the contractor and surveyor had provided a poor service in terms of completing the repairs and that work was still outstanding. It offered an additional £1,130 compensation (£680 for the distress, inconvenience, time & effort; £250 for the right to repair; and £200 for the lack of clear monitoring of outstanding repairs). It confirmed that an inspection would be carried out to check on the works.
On 17 August 2023, the landlord sent a cheque to the resident for £1,130 (cashed on 19 September 2023) and it confirmed with the resident on 6 September 2023 that all outstanding repairs had been completed, with the exception of the loft. On 8 September 2023, an appointment was made for 2 October 2023 for operatives to check insulation in the loft was fitted correctly, but nobody was home. Operatives then attended on 3 November and 12 December 2023 to pull away loft insulation to allow ventilation and prevent mould.
The resident has told this Service that the works have been completed and, while he does not think the quality of the work is very good, he has decided not to pursue this further. He has confirmed there is an active claim against the landlord’s insurer for items damaged as a result of the works and for personal injury.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of reports of repairs issues and damp and mould.

The landlord’s Routine Repairs Responsibilities policy says the landlord is responsible for the structure and exterior of the building and all fixtures and fittings for water, gas, electricity, heating and sanitation. Its policy says “for routine day to day repairs, we will aim to complete the repair in an average of 25 calendar days. at the earliest mutually convenient appointment. For emergency works, where there is an immediate danger to the occupant or members of the public, we will attend within 24 hours. For emergency works that occur out of hours, we will attend within four hours. The out of hours service will be to ‘make safe’ and lower the immediate risk. The follow-on repair will then be completed at the earliest mutually convenient appointment.”
Aside from a minor repair to the boiler in 2018, it was a combination of significant leaks from both bathrooms and the boiler that caused major issues over a long period of time. The onus was on the landlord to resolve the issues and minimise any delays. When it was presented with a report of damp and mould, it should have dealt with it as a matter of urgency in order to identify, resolve, and prevent damp and mould from entering the property or worsening. It is highlighted in this Service’s damp and mould spotlight report (“It’s Not Lifestyle”, published October 2021 and available on the Ombudsman’s website) that landlords must take a proactive and urgent approach to reports of this type.
Since the spotlight report was produced, the landlord has taken steps to identify areas for improvement in the way it deals with cases of this nature, and that is important. It has said when reports of damp and mould are made, residents receive a Healthy Homes assessment to identify any repairs required and receive a clean and shield treatment to remove the damp and mould (monitored for 12 months following the visit). It has also introduced proactive inspections and humidity sensors have been installed in many homes.
While the landlord did arrange for these assessments to take place, for about 4 years the resident suffered with several issues which caused a great deal of damage throughout the property. While these assessments made recommendations in terms of the resident’s behaviour which may have helped with things like ventilation, the crux of the issue was the leaks, which he was not responsible for. While operatives sometimes attended the property on the same day as an issue arising, the lack of narrative against the landlord’s job records means it is not possible to know what work it did to deem the issues ‘resolved’ each time. What is clear though, is that the recurring leaks show the underlying issues in the bathroom and boiler room were not being fully addressed. This eventually led to a ceiling collapsing and causing extensive damage to the garage, bathroom and bedroom.
In July 2019 and June 2021 the landlord noted that leaks were affecting a bedroom, but failed to investigate how this affected the family. The resident has said this led to there being times when they had to sleep downstairs in the living room. The Healthy Homes follow up assessment carried out in August 2022 also identified the bathroom was locked as it could not be used due to the leak. Therefore, there were 2 rooms that became unusable at times, so it was a sensible approach to decant the family in order to resolve the issues.
While the landlord took appropriate steps to remove the family from the property while repair work was carried out, it has accepted the work was not complete by the time they returned. In addition, the resident had to chase on several occasions for updates. It then took another 9 months for the landlord to complete the repairs which is unacceptable, having had several opportunities to fix issues before the family was decanted, and 7 months to carry out repairs. Overall, there were serious failings in the landlord’s handling of, and communication about, the repairs. The cumulative failings constitute severe maladministration, having caused significant distress and inconvenience, and time and trouble, over a protracted period.
The landlord was aware the resident was vulnerable yet it had to be chased for updates and despite a 7 month decant, the family suffered significant disruption from at least July 2019 to December 2023; over 4 years.
A significant point of note when reviewing the evidence provided by the landlord, is the lack of detail in the narrative of the jobs it recorded. The resident says there were issues with the boiler from before the first lockdown as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. That would mean it had not worked (properly) since before March 2020. However, apart from a minor repair in 2018, the landlord’s records show the first leak as occurring in June 2021. Bearing in mind how the landlord’s existing records are lacking in any detail, the Ombudsman accepts it is entirely possible leaks were reported prior to 2019, but no records were kept.
There were several reports of the boiler not working or of leaks occurring either in the bathroom or from the boiler, and although the landlord claims repairs were carried out, there is no information about what action was taken at each visit. Bearing in mind the number of times the resident reported issues with the boiler, and leaks in the bathroom, the landlord’s poor record keeping (more on this below) meant it is not possible to know whether work carried out at each visit was intended to be a temporary or permanent fix and whether there was a significant issue that was overlooked.
The landlord did not take adequate steps to proactively manage the repair, and to ensure it found and fixed the problems promptly. Its Compensation policy states the prescribed period for dealing with leaking from water or heating pipe, tank or cistern is 1 working day. It clearly did not meet that obligation but did meet its other obligation; to consider paying discretionary compensation as a result of a loss of service.
The resident has said that damage was caused to the hob when operatives attended. The lack of clear landlord records makes it difficult to establish a clear timeline or what actually happened. The resident did report the gas supply/hob had been damaged on 21 February 2023 and there is reference to it being replaced on 1 March 2023, and the silicone being applied on 20 April 2023. It is not known what date exactly the resident moved back in to the property, in order to know for certain whether he was inconvenienced by not having a usable hob, or for how long that was the case. The landlord ultimately replaced the hob and gave the resident £80 vouchers to recognise the inconvenience caused.
The resident commented that there was a period when the family ate takeaways and unhealthy food as a result of not having a hob and not owning a microwave, and indicated he wished to be compensated for that. While the Ombudsman accepts the family may have been inconvenienced by not having a hob, it is not possible to say for certain how long that was for from the evidence available. In addition, although not having a hob may have been difficult, it is too remote to link that to the choices the family made when ordering takeaway food.
Therefore, with the limited information available, the landlord replacing the hob and sending £80 vouchers was a reasonable remedy. The landlord has also provided the resident with details of its insurer, so it complied with its Compensation policy in order for the resident to be able to claim for damage to personal possessions and injury.
In terms of the other repairs and the damp and mould, the landlord offered total compensation of £3,070 (an initial £1,940 plus an additional £1,130). The landlord’s Complaint Compensation Standard Operating Procedure says where poor service has had a high impact, compensation for distress and inconvenience would usually be £40 – £60. For time and effort, it may award £100 – £200 compensation. The landlord rightly awarded compensation for the right to repair. Its Compensation policy said compensation of £10 would be paid, plus an additional £2 per household per day (for every extra day the repair is not fixed) capped at £50. However, an additional discretionary payment may be made acknowledging the impact, inconvenience, distress, and time/effort required of the resident. In this case the landlord awarded far more than its policy stated and rightly acknowledged the extensive impact the distress and inconvenience of its poor service caused.
Having said that, the landlord’s Complaint Compensation Standard Operating Procedure says it would also consider paying compensation for the loss in usage of rooms as a result of disrepair/mould for example. In this case, the landlord does not seem to have applied this procedure when making the resident an offer to resolve the complaint. Its procedure states that where there is a loss of a bedroom in a 4 bedroom house a compensation calculation would be on the basis of 25% and for a bathroom it would be 50%.
The landlord has said it does not recall the resident saying they could not use a bedroom. However, when the uncontrollable leaks were reported, it was noted this affected one of the bedrooms and the carpet was wet. The resident also informed the landlord that someone had to sleep on the living room floor as they could not sleep in the bedroom, when they made their complaint in December 2022.
Therefore, the landlord was on notice the bedroom was not being used. In addition, the Healthy Homes follow up report noted the bathroom was shut off. As such, the landlord was also on notice that that room was not being used at that time. As a result, when offering compensation, it should have considered the impact the loss of these rooms also had on the resident and his family.
The resident has been unable to say for certain when both the bathroom and bedroom were not used. They said the bathroom was closed off for a while, but some of the family continued to use it as needed. Therefore, while there was some inconvenience, there was not a total loss of service. In terms of the bedroom affected by the leak, the resident has said they think it was about May to September 2021 and January to August 2022 when it could not be used and they had to sleep on the living room floor. This is only an estimation though.
It is apparent the resident was inconvenienced by not being able to use the bathroom and bedroom for certain periods of time. However, he and his family did have use of another ensuite bathroom and it is not possible to know the exact period each room was entirely unusable. Therefore, a compensation payment according to a percentage reduction in rent is not appropriate in this case.
The compensation already offered by the landlord is significant and recognises the number of issues and the length of time the issues have gone on for. However, as well as general inconvenience caused, to recognise that the resident and his family did also suffer loss of amenities for a substantial period of time, it is reasonable to recognise that separately by directing the landlord to make an additional compensation payment of £1,000.
The landlord also said in August 2023, that it would carry out an inspection of all works, but no evidence has been provided to show it adhered to that. The landlord is also directed to ensure this is done.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

The landlord’s stage 1 response was issued within 10 working days and its stage 2 response within 20 working days, both in line with the timeframes set out in its Complaints policy. However, while the landlord apologised at stage 1 for the length of time the repairs were taking, and set out actions it needed to take, it failed to consider compensating the resident for the delays and inconvenience caused. It should not have taken the resident escalating the complaint for that to happen.
The landlord’s offer of £50 compensation at stage 2 was in line with its Complaints policy which says this amount is reasonable to recognise when there has been medium or moderate impact as a result of poor complaints handling. However, having not offered any compensation at stage 1 knowing there had been significant delays, it is the Ombudsman’s view the later offer of £50 compensation was inadequate.
It is important to recognise though, that when the resident complained further about the property not being ready after the decant and issues with workmanship, the landlord responded promptly and said it would consider offering additional compensation later. While further issues were raised, they were linked to the original one, and it was therefore appropriate for the landlord to respond to these points straight away and agree to potentially revise its position if needed. It went on to acknowledge that communication had been poor since it issued its stage 2 response in February 2023, apologised for that and significantly increased its offer of compensation. It also accepted there had been a failure to monitor the outstanding repairs.
Overall, while the landlord made reasonable attempts to deal with the resident’s complaint, it should have given more consideration to the impact the poor service had had at stage 1. Its failure to offer compensation initially meant it lost the opportunity to resolve the complaint at an early stage. Having said that, at that point a lot of work remained outstanding, and in order to be fair and reasonable, the landlord would have always needed to have reconsidered its position later, in order to address the further work needed and the associated inconvenience.
Therefore, while its stage 1 response could have been more substantial and amounts to maladministration, overall the effect of the landlord not offering compensation at that stage is moderate. As such the compensation already offered for poor complaint handling should only be increased from £50 to £100.

Record keeping

The landlord has provided a document entitled “AM Unit History” which is a record of when work orders were made and completed. It also contains a description of the problem logged. However, it does not provide details of what happened at each visit or what action was taken to resolve each problem. Despite being asked for the details of each job, the landlord has been unable to provide all the information requested.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Knowledge and Information Management May 2023 said, “If information is not created correctly, it has less integrity and cannot be relied on. This can be either a complete absence of information, or inaccurate and partial.” It also highlighted that “creating a detailed record may take time, but it will save a great deal more time and trouble later when it is easily located and referred to when resolving an issue”.
This is particularly key in this case. While reports were regularly made about leaks, repairs, and damp and mould, the lack of information recorded by the landlord meant it was unable to verify what action was taken at each visit. It has also meant that when reviewing what happened over a long time, there are gaps in the information held by the landlord, making investigation of the complaint more difficult.
There was clearly an ongoing issue with leaks in the bathroom but more significantly from the boiler, which caused a huge amount of damage over an extended period of time, as it created damp in the bedroom next door making it unusable, and caused the garage ceiling to collapse. The landlord’s records should have been clear on what action was taken every time an issue was reported. Had it done so, the person allocating the work as well as the next operative would have been clear what action had already been taken and could have potentially flagged that more robust action to address matters needed to be taken, more promptly.
There has been maladministration in terms of the landlord’s record keeping. The lack of clear information about what happened at each visit has been detrimental to the investigation of this complaint, and importantly it may have led to the landlord failing to identify quickly enough that the issues being reported were not being resolved.
Therefore, as well as paying the resident compensation of £250 to acknowledge the impact this poor record keeping had for about 4 years, the landlord should also review its processes. This is to ensure it is incorporating areas of learning, as a result of its recent self-assessment of its service against the Ombudsman’s damp and mould spotlight report. In addition, it should ensure that going forward it always records what work took place on each job and any follow on work needed.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was:
1. Severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of repairs issues, and damp and mould.
2. Maladministration in relation to the landlord’s:
  1. Complaint handling.
  2. Record keeping.

Reasons

The landlord failed to fully resolve the repair issues and the damp and mould for about 4 years.
There was a failure to consider paying the resident any compensation at stage 1 despite there being an impact on the resident as a result of a failure in service.
The landlord did not record the action taken on each visit, or details of any further works meaning significant issues were not adequately identified early enough.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord should:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
2. Carry out an inspection of the property and identify any follow on work that is needed.
3. In addition to the £3,070 compensation already paid to recognise the distress, inconvenience, time and effort, as well as lack of action in relation to repairs in respect of damp and mould caused, pay the resident £1,000 compensation to recognise the loss of amenities as a result of its handling of repairs.
4. Pay £100 compensation to recognise its poor complaint handling (incorporating the £50 offered at stage 2).
5. Pay £250 compensation to recognise the landlord’s poor record keeping had a negative impact on the resident as a result of the lack of information held about the issues reported and the effect that had on complaint handling.
6. Ensure a process is in place to record what work took place on each job and any follow on work needed. It should also ensure someone actively monitors any live jobs to ensure ongoing issues are identified promptly.