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

Newham Council (202113250)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202113250

Newham Council

30 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 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 damp and mould in his property.
    2. The landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord of a fifth–floor flat in a communal block of flats.
  2. The landlord’s records showed that the resident previously reported damp in his property to it in 2012, 2014, 2017 and 2019, for which its inspections on the latter three occasions found no damp but condensation related issues at the property.
  3. The resident made a stage one complaint to the landlord on 9 July 2021, advising that damp and mould at his property were affecting his health. The complaint was closed by it on 23 July 2021. The landlord’s later justification for closing the complaint was that it had attempted to email the resident about this on 12 July 2021, but that the email was undelivered, and that its attempts to telephone the resident on 23 July 2021 had failed and so it had closed the complaint. He then contacted this Service in response, and we reached an agreement with the landlord on 10 September 2021 for it to investigate the complaint further, which it reopened on 23 September 2021.
  4. The landlord recorded that the resident subsequently reported damp at his property to it again on 8 October 2021, and that its building surveyor attended to inspect this on 11 October 2021. It once more noted that no damp was found there, but that mould was found and treated at the property at that time, and that works were completed there for this on 20 December 2021 to further treat mould, fill in holes, and overhaul kitchen and bathroom extractor fans.
  5. The landlord issued its stage one complaint response to the resident on 11 October 2021, and found poor complaint handling on its part. It gave its above justification for previously closing the complaint, and it apologised to him for this, as well as outlining that it had completed works from an appointment on 10 September 2021 for mould treatment and to fill and stain block at his property. The resident was not happy with the outcome, however, and he asked for his complaint to be escalated to the final stage of the landlord’s complaints procedure on 12 October 2021, disputing that its repair delay was due to a lack of access to the property or that it had addressed his damp reports for years. It therefore reached an agreement with him on 13 October 2021 that the case would be further investigated.
  6. The landlord then contacted the resident on 12 November 2021, advising that it had completed its further investigation, and that it had found that he had been correctly advised by it that its inspections had found that the issue at his property was not damp but was condensation related, finding no fault in its repairs handling for this. It nevertheless partly upheld his complaint in relation to its previously acknowledged poor complaint handling, and it offered him £50 compensation for this, as well as agreeing that the condition of his bathroom was poor and that it would seek to improve this.
  7. The resident again escalated his complaint to the final stage of the complaints procedure on 25 November 2021, however, as he was dissatisfied with the latest response, and the landlord issued its final stage complaint response to him on 18 January 2022, partly upholding the complaint. This was because it found that it had delayed responding to his final stage complaint. The landlord therefore offered the resident £150 compensation in recognition of its failure to do so within the timescale in its corporate complaints policy.
  8. The landlord nevertheless did not uphold the resident’s complaint relating to the time taken by it to resolve the reports of damp at his property, as its building surveyors’ inspections had only found not damp but condensation related issues there that it had treated and carried out remedial works for. It therefore advised him to ventilate the property to prevent mould from returning there by opening windows, not hanging wet washing over radiators, avoiding too many items in a room to allow airflow to circulate throughout and cleaning affected areas with mould wash, as well as signposting him to its damp and mould taskforce to contact if mould returned.
  9. The resident then complained to this Service about the landlord‘s handling of his reports of damp and mould in his property, and its delays in responding to his complaints. He wanted the damp and mould issues to be resolved, which he stated that it had “ignored” and that a private inspector and its repairs manager had “agreed was…damp”, of which he provided photographs and reported had affected his health for several years and was present since 2009 when he moved in. The resident therefore also sought increased compensation from the landlord for this, which he described as causing him to be hospitalised and receive specialist treatment that he was willing to take legal action for.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. While the resident has complained that damp and mould has been present since he moved into his property in 2009 and has been dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of his reports of this and the effect on his health for a number of years, the scope of this investigation is limited to its response to his reports from 2021 to 2022. This is because, under the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, this Service cannot investigate complaints about issues that were not brought to the landlord’s attention as a formal complaint within a reasonable period of normally within six months of the matters arising, and his stage one complaint to it about this was made on 9 July 2021. It is also not within our authority or expertise to determine its liability or award damages for the resident’s ill-health in the way that a court or insurer might.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in his property

  1. It is of concern that the landlord did not respond to the resident’s stage one complaint of 9 July 2021 about damp and mould at his property affecting his health by investigating these issues at the property at that time. However, the fact that he brought this to it in the form of a complaint instead of a report requesting a service from it in respect of the damp and mould meant that it was reasonable that it dealt with this as a formal complaint, its handling of which is considered below, and not as a service request.
  2. As the landlord also explained that its attempts to contact the resident about this via email on 12 July 2021 and via telephone on 23 July 2021 were unsuccessful, it was understandable that it did not investigate the damp and mould further at that time, as it could not reach him to arrange to do so. It additionally noted that it went on to complete works for this at his property in an appointment on 10 September 2021 for mould treatment and to fill and stain block there.
  3. The landlord subsequently responded to the resident’s damp and mould and report regarding his property of 8 October 2021 by arranging a building surveyor‘s inspection for this there one working day later on 11 October 2021, which was appropriate. It confirmed that the inspection found no damp but condensation related issues at the property. While the resident disputed this, the landlord was permitted to rely on the evidence of its building surveyor‘s inspection in the absence of any other expert evidence to the contrary.
  4. The landlord nevertheless suitably responded to the conditions that it found at the resident‘s property by treating mould there at that time. It also replied to the dissatisfaction that he expressed with this on 12 October 2021 by agreeing to consider the matter further on 13 October 2021, and by confirming that it would seek to improve the poor condition of his bathroom 12 November 2021.
  5. The landlord then arranged for further works to treat mould, fill in holes, and overhaul kitchen and bathroom extractor fans at the property on 20 December 2021. It additionally advised the resident as to how to prevent mould from returning there with ventilation on 18 January 2022 by opening windows, not hanging wet washing over radiators, avoiding too many items in a room to allow airflow to circulate throughout, and cleaning affected areas with mould wash. The landlord also signposting him to its damp and mould taskforce to contact if mould returned, which was reasonable.
  6. Therefore, there were no failings by the landlord in relation to its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in his property in 2021 to 2022, as it responded to these appropriately by carrying out an inspection and remedial works in a timely manner, arranging a further investigation and works when he remained dissatisfied, and by advising him how to avoid further mould.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord apologised that it closed the resident’s stage one complaint of 9 July 2021 prematurely on 23 July 2021, after it was unable to contact him about this, for which it reopened the complaint on 23 September 2021 and responded to this on 11 October 2021. As it additionally accepted that it had done so 45 working days later than its corporate complaints policy’s 20-working-day response timescale for stage one complaints, its stage one response remedied this by awarding him £50 compensation in recognition of its poor complaint handling. The landlord ought to have instead made further attempts to contact the resident about his stage one complaint, and given him a reasonable amount of time to respond to this, before deciding to close the complaint.
  2. As the landlord’s corporate complaints policy gave it a 15–working–day timescale to respond to the resident‘ final stage complaint of 25 November 2021, its response of 18 January 2022 was 20 working days late. Its final stage complaint response therefore acknowledged and apologised for this, and it sought to put things right by awarding him £150 compensation for its complaint handling delays.
  3. The landlord’s complaint compensation policy guidance suggests awards of £50 to £150 compensation for time and trouble incurred by the resident in relation to complaint handling, including by having to follow up the issue multiple times. Therefore, the £50 and £150 compensation offered by it to him was in line with its policy guidance and was the maximum amount that it could offer as compensation for time and trouble for his final stage complaint.
  4. As a result, the landlord‘s complaint handling failures were acknowledged by it proportionately with a reasonable level of compensation, as well as by its apologies. Although it has been recommended below to review its staff’s training needs and record keeping processes to prevent these from occurring again in the future. This is in addition to re-offering the compensation that the landlord previously awarded to the resident, if he has not received this already, and to provide him with details to enable him to submit a liability insurance claim to its or its insurers for damages for the ill-health that he reported from damp and mould.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in relation to its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in his property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 55(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the resident prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the complaint about its complaint handling satisfactorily.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Re-offer the resident the £200 total compensation that it previously awarded him, if he has not received this already.
    2. Provide the resident with details to enable him to submit a liability insurance claim to it or its insurers for damages for the ill-health that he reported from damp and mould.
    3. Review its staff’s training needs in relation to their application of its corporate complaints policy to ensure that complaints are not closed prematurely and are responded to a timely manner in every case.
    4. Review its record keeping processes to ensure that its acknowledged failures are not then followed by subsequent further failings.