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

Peabody Trust (202303351)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202303351

Peabody Trust

28 May 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 handling of:
    1. The resident’s reports of damp and mould in her kitchen.
    2. The repayment of expenses claimed by the resident during a decant.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling as part of this investigation.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord at the property. The tenancy started on 28 November 2011. The property is a two- bedroom flat. The landlord confirmed it had no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
  2. The resident told the landlord on 8 June 2022, that there was damp and mould to some of the kitchen cupboards. A contractor attended on 21 June 2022 and told the resident the affected cupboards would need to be removed to treat the mould.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 14 July 2022. She said the contractor had attended that day to clean but the whole cupboard had been affected by mould. She said this had caused her health issues and requested compensation. The landlord sent the resident a stage 1 complaint response on 26 July 2022. A copy of this was not provided to this Service. The landlord confirmed it offered the resident £100 compensation for the delay and breakdown of communication.
  4. The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and escalated her complaint on 29 July 2022. The resident said the issues were still ongoing and the mould was impacting on her health. She said the landlord had told her previously it would remove the cupboards and rectify the issue. She said it was now saying it would look at the cupboards and decide if they would be replaced. Following further investigations, works to treat the mould and the affected cupboards were completed in December 2022. During this time, the resident was decanted for around 5 days.
  5. The resident contacted this Service in April 2023. She said she had not received a repayment of her expenses during the decant period. The resident told this Service the landlord had not replaced the affected kitchen cupboards and had put them back. She said the mould was affecting her health. The resident said she had escalated her complaint on 29 July 2022 but had not received a response.
  6. Following contact from this Service, the landlord sent the resident a further stage 1 response on 7 June 2023. The landlord said its contractor had visited the resident’s property on 2 June 2023. The contractor advised it would need to take off the kitchen units and investigate further. It said it would be in touch to arrange this. The landlord said it was sorry for the delay to the repairs and offered the resident £520 of compensation. This was broken down as £300 for time and trouble, £120 for the subsistence payment, and £100 for poor complaint handling. The resident remained dissatisfied and escalated her complaint again on 13 June 2023.
  7. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 13 July 2023. It said the following:
    1. A contractor visited the resident’s property on 21 June 2023 and identified a leak penetrating through the wall which had created mould to the plasterboard, inside the cavity, and to the back of some of the kitchen units.
    2. The contractor had removed defected units and mould washed the outside of the plasterboard. The defected area of plasterboard would need to be removed and replastered once the leak from the neighboring property had been resolved.
    3. It had not been able to access the neighbour’s property to investigate and had arranged a further appointment for 18 July 2023 to attempt access.
    4. It confirmed it would only replace kitchen units which were found to be defective due to mould. The landlord said this was consistent with the advice given throughout the repair.
    5. There had been a service failure in the timeliness of the initial works.
    6. It was not clear why the landlord had not taken action after the residents reports from December 2022.
    7. Once the landlord was able to attend the neighbour’s property to address the root cause of the issue, it would arrange to complete the treatment of the resident’s kitchen.
    8. It was unclear why it had not made the £130 expenses repayment to the resident.
    9. It was confident any future repairs would be responded in within a timelier manner. This was because the previous landlord’s systems would be integrated into the landlord’s winder structure by October 2023.
    10. The landlord offered the resident £1579.29 of compensation. This was broken down as:
      1. £600 for time, trouble, and inconvenience.
      2. £130 for the decant expenses as previously owed.
      3. £300 financial hardship payment
      4. £200 for the complaint handling.
      5. £349.29 for the resident not being able to fully use her kitchen. This was calculated at 5% of the rent from 12 December 2022 until 19 June 2023.
  8. The work to treat the mould in the kitchen was completed in October 2023. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and her complaint was accepted for investigation by this Service on 18 January 2024. The landlord confirmed to this Service that the resident had raised further concerns about the kitchen cupboards which had not been replaced. The landlord said a further survey took place at the property on 29 January 2024 and no signs of damp and mould were found.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation.

  1. The resident raised further concerns about the replacement of her kitchen cupboards and damage to her cooker with the landlord after 13 July 2023. This investigation has mainly considered matters from the date of the reports of damp and mould in June 2022 to the date of the landlord’s final response on 13 July 2023. In accordance with the Ombudsman’s jurisdictional authority under the Scheme, and in the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions prior to the investigation of this Service. Any further issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord and progressed as a new formal complaint if required.
  2. In raising her complaint, the resident referred to the situation impacting upon her health. While this Service is able to assess the service the landlord provided, and any overall distress or inconvenience this may have caused, the investigation cannot directly assess any reported impact on health or the liability for impacts on health and wellbeing, as this is better suited for the courts.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her kitchen.

  1. The tenancy agreement says the landlord will keep in good repair the structure and exterior of the property. This includes plasterwork and internal walls. This does not include internal painting and decoration. The resident is responsible for keeping the inside of the property in a good clean condition, and in good decorative order.
  2. The landlord’s compensation policy says compensation payments are considered when a resident has experienced a delay or has incurred additional costs because of a service failure. When considering a complaint, the landlord investigates and considers time, trouble and inconvenience, and pays up to a maximum of £600. The landlord can make an award for poor complaint handling using the following scales: £1-£50 for a minor failure, £51-£150 for a moderate failure, and £151-£250 for a severe failure.
  3. If the landlord assesses a room or property unusable, a resident can receive a percentage of the weekly rent. For a kitchen this is 25% of the weekly rent after the first 48 hours. If a resident experiences a partial loss of a room, the percentage of compensation will reflect this.
  4. The landlord’s responsive repairs policy at the time says the landlord aims to complete routine repairs within an average of 10 working days. It says some repairs may have taken longer to resolve, due to their complexity or specialist nature. Where this is the case, it informs residents of the timescales and keeps residents informed throughout the repair process.
  5. The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation policy effective from February 2023, says it will investigate all reports of damp and mould where it has responsibilities for repairs. It says depending on the complexity of the issue, diagnosis of damp, mould and condensation is carried out by in-house surveyors, specialist consultants or repair delivery teams. The landlord will monitor all of the work it completes to tackle the issue for a year afterwards. The landlord says it will temporarily rehouse people in critical situations where there is a risk to their health and safety.
  6. The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord was required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
  7. This Service published a spotlight on damp and mould report prior to this complaint. This stated that landlords should have a ‘zero tolerance approach’ to damp and mould and be proactive in identifying potential issues. It says that landlords should look beyond the immediate symptoms, such as wet walls, and look to find the cause.
  8. The resident first reported the damp and mould to the back of kitchen cupboards on 8 June 2022. Following initial treatment and investigations in August 2022, the landlord completed larger works to treat the mould in December 2022. In January 2023, the resident told the landlord there was still a smell of mould in the kitchen and the cupboards needed to be replaced. The landlord responded to advise it had not agreed to replace the cupboards. However, it did not take action to investigate the resident’s reports of further mould until the resident contacted this Service to escalate her complaint in May 2023. The landlord visited the resident’s property on 2 June 2023. This was a delay of over 5 months after the resident had reraised the issue. This did not meet the timeframes set out in the landlord’s repair policy.
  9. In its final complaint response, the landlord said it was not clear why it had not taken action following the resident’s report of further mould. The landlord acknowledged its service failure here. The landlord said former systems were in the final stage of being integrated into its wider structure and this was due to be completed in October 2023. It said this would mean future repairs raised would be responded to in a timely manner. The landlord here demonstrated that it had investigated the reasons for its poor response to the resident’s complaints and had taken learning from this.
  10. It was evident the resident told the landlord on 17 October 2022 that a neighbouring property had also reported issues with mould on the adjoining wall, however the landlord did not arrange to inspect the neighbouring property until 30 June 2023. This was after the resident had advised the landlord, via this Service, that she believed the damp and mould to be caused by a leak from the neighbouring property. The delay in the landlord investigating the resident’s reports of mould on the neighbour’s adjoining wall was excessive.  The landlord told this Service that the delay had been due to difficulty accessing the property. However, there was no evidence the landlord had attempted to gain access until June 2023.
  11. The landlord arranged further works to remove the kitchen cupboards and inspect for mould in response to the resident’s concerns that the kitchen cupboards needed to be removed. The landlord took the appropriate action of investigating this further. It also completed a mould wash to the area in the interim. The landlord told the resident in its final response defective areas of plasterboard needed to be removed and replaced once a leak from a neighbouring property was resolved. In consideration that the previous repair to the damp and mould in December 2022 had not resolved the issue, this was an appropriate response from the landlord to ensure it was investigating the root cause of the damp and mould to the resident’s kitchen.
  12. The landlord confirmed to the resident that it would complete the work required in her kitchen after it had addressed the root cause. The landlord confirmed to the resident on 18 July 2023 it had accessed the neighbour’s property and had found no signs of damp and mould. Following further works required to remove and replace the cavity wall, the landlord completed the repairs to the damp and mould in the kitchen in October 2023. This was 16 months after the resident had first reported the issue.
  13. While it took a long time to resolve the problem, the Ombudsman does acknowledge that certain problems can be complex and take time to diagnose, with an element of trial and error involved. However, it was evident that the delay in the landlord taking action over the resident’s reports of the damp and mould reoccurring in January 2022 had a significant impact on the overalldelay to the investigations into the root cause.
  14. For complex repairs that may require additional time to be completed, this Service expects the landlord to keep in communication with the resident and update them on the progress of the repairs. The resident followed up with the landlord several times to find out what was happening with the repairs during and after the complaint process. This included a missed appointment on 17 August 2023. The resident had here experienced inconvenience, time and trouble by having to request updates from the landlord. The landlord was not consistently proactive in keeping the resident updated about the progress of the damp and mould repair works.
  15. The resident had informed the landlord in June 2022 that she had asthma. During the complaint process she repeatedly raised to the landlord that she was concerned about the impact of the damp and mould on her health. She told the landlord she had been off work with skin rashes and had an allergy to mould. The landlord demonstrated that it had taken this into consideration when completing works to the damp and mould. It had decanted the resident while the works took place in December 2022 and again in October 2023.
  16. The resident repeatedly contacted the landlord about the damp and mould in the kitchen and the impact on her health. The landlord did not demonstrate that it had taken this into consideration in the timeliness of its response to her reports. Landlords should consider appropriate timescales for their responses to reports of damp and mould to reflect the urgency of the case. The landlord had not demonstrated it had taken the resident’s health concerns fully into consideration. The landlord also failed to respond to the health concerns raised by the resident in its complaint responses. By failing to respond to the resident on her health concerns, the landlord had not demonstrated it had sufficiently taken her concerns into account in its overall handling of the case. The landlord also missed the opportunity to provide the resident reassurance that it had taken this into account.
  17. The resident raised concerns to the landlord throughout the complaint period that it was not replacing the mould damaged kitchen cupboards. It was understandable the resident was concerned about this, given the damp and mould had returned following repair work in December 2022. The resident told the landlord in July 2022 that she had been told by the landlord, the cupboards would be replaced. This service is unable to evidence the conversation that had taken place at this time. However, it was evident the landlord had confirmed to the resident several times throughout the complaint process that it would only replace cupboards that were damaged, and this would be the closest match to the resident’s current units. This Service acknowledges, this would have been disappointing to the resident who had understood that the units were being replaced. However, the landlord had here taken appropriate steps over the complaint period to set the resident’s expectations about its repair obligations.
  18. The landlord confirmed to this Service in March 2024 that it had instructed a further inspection to the kitchen cupboards to determine if mould was still present and replacement required. This was an appropriate step to take, given the resident’s concerns that mould may still be present. A recommendation has been made for the landlord to provide the resident with the outcome of this inspection and a timescale for the completion of any further work required to the cupboards.
  19. To provide a fair response, landlords are expected to resolve complaints by addressing both the main issue raised and any inconvenience that happened. When a landlord agrees that it failed to provide a service, the expectation is for the landlord to offer redress. The landlord attempted to resolve the substantive complaint through a total offer of compensation of £949.29. This was broken down as £600 for time, trouble, and inconvenience and £349.29 for not being able to use the kitchen fully between 12 December 2022 and 19 June 2023.
  20. While the offer of redress made by the landlord shows good practice in trying to resolve complaints and learn from outcomes, the compensation was not appropriate for the failings identified. The damp and mould in the kitchen had a significant and detrimental impact on the resident’s enjoyment of her home and she had spent time and trouble chasing the landlord for responses throughout and after the complaint process. It also did not account for the continuation of the repair work until October 2023.
  21. In summary, the resident had experienced delays to both the investigation into the damp and mould and the works ordered to rectify this. The work identified as required to the property was not fully completed until 16 months after the resident’s report of mould in June 2022. While the landlord had here taken appropriate steps to arrange mould washes, completed investigations, and raised works to prevent the recurrence of the mould, this had taken too long. Despite the resident informing the landlord of a potential leak behind the cupboards in October 2022, the landlord delayed in carrying out investigations into this. As such the resident continued to live with the damp and mould behind her kitchen cupboards for an excessive period of time. The landlord was aware of the resident’s health concerns during the complaints process. It had appropriately arranged for a decant on 2 occasions while the work was ongoing. However, it did not demonstrate that it had taken the resident’s health concerns into consideration in the timeliness of its responses.
  22. As a result, the resident had experienced significant distress and inconvenience over an extended period of time, which included concerns over the impact of the damp and mould on her health. The landlord had attempted to put this right for the resident through its offer of compensation and had acknowledged some of its failures. This included the partial loss of the use of the kitchen. However, its offer of redress did not go far enough to reflect the full impact of its failures here to take into consideration the full 16 months the resident endured the damp and mould and was unable to fully use her kitchen. As such there was maladministration in the landlords handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her kitchen.
  23. A total amount of £1169.36 of compensation has been ordered. This includes the £600 compensation as previously offered by the landlord and £569.36 for the loss of the full use of the kitchen. This had been calculated as 5% of the gross weekly rent from 12 December 2022 until the work was completed on 15 October 2023 ( 5% of £258.73 per week for 44 weeks).
  24. In addition, a recommendation has been included for the landlord to review its staff training needs in regard to the importance of communicating with residents throughout the repair process.

The landlord’s handling of the repayment of expenses claimed by the resident during a decant.

  1. The landlord’s decant policy at the time of the resident’s decant, said the landlord paid a disturbance allowance for both permanent and temporary moves to tenants and homeowners to cover any reasonable costs for items or services that have resulted from moving home.
  2. The landlord confirmed to the resident on 9 January 2023 that it had processed and approved the receipts from her expenses during a decant in December 2022. It said the amount was £130. The resident told the landlord on 9 January 2023, she had not received this payment. At the time of the landlord providing its stage 2 complaint response on 13 July 2023, the resident had still not received this payment. This delay of over 6 months was excessive. The landlord’s failure here to reimburse the costs incurred it had already approved, had a financial impact on the resident.
  3. The resident also had to take the time and trouble to follow up with the landlord on the reimbursement of her costs. The resident contacted the landlord on 21 January 2023 to confirm she had not received the repayment, and also followed up on her email on 12 March 2023. She then contacted this Service about the matter in April 2023. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s emails about the repayment. The landlord had here not demonstrated a customer focused approach.
  4. The landlord acknowledged in its final response it was not clear on the reasons it had not paid the £130 to the resident. It was a concern that the landlord did not have accurate records to determine why the payment had not been made. The failure to create and record information accurately can result in landlords not taking appropriate and timely action, missing opportunities to identify that actions were wrong or inadequate, and contributing to inadequate communication and redress.
  5. In accordance with paragraph 54(f) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord was ordered to carry out a review of its practice in relation to responding to requests for repairs due to damp and mould in a case determined on 28 November 2023. This included a self-assessment using the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on knowledge and information management. Compliance with this order was received in April 2024.
  6. In its final response, the landlord offered the resident compensation which included the £130 payment and an additional £300 of compensation for the financial hardship caused. This was appropriate and demonstrated the landlord had recognised the financial impact to the resident of having to wait in excess of 6 months for the repayment of her expenses.
  7. The resident experienced a significant delay to the repayment of the costs she had incurred during a decant in December 2022. Despite the landlord confirming in January 2023, it had approved the repayment of the expenses, she had to continue to follow up with the landlord in order to receive a response of this. This included raising the issue as a complaint and seeking support from this Service. The landlord acknowledged its failures here in its stage 2 complaint response and had attempted to put this right through an offer of compensation of £300 and the payment of £130 for the decant expenses. This offer of compensation showed the landlord had acknowledged the financial impact on the resident of having to wait an excessive amount of time for her payment. Therefore, it is the opinion of this Service that the £430 offered here was reasonable redress by the landlord.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. The landlord has a 2 stage complaints process. Complaints are logged within 5 working days as a stage 1 complaint and a response is provided within 10 working days. If the complaint is escalated to stage 2, the response will be provided within 20 working days of the request being received. Extensions to the response timescales will only be extended if more time is needed to complete the review fully.
  2. The resident contacted this Service in April 2023 because she had not received a response from the landlord to her request to escalate her complaint. It was evident the resident had asked the landlord to escalate her original stage 1 complaint on 29 July 2022. The landlord had acknowledged in an email to the resident on 26 August 2022 that it had misunderstood the resident’s request and thought the resident had wanted to wait until the repair investigations were completed before deciding on escalation of the complaint. Despite this acknowledgement, the landlord did not provide a stage 2 response to the resident.
  3. The landlord told the resident in its final response that she had agreed to allow the landlord time to resolve the complaint in July 2022. However, at the time, the landlord did not clarify this with the resident. As such she was expecting a stage 2 response.
  4. The landlord’s failure to escalate the resident’s complaint at this time had resulted in a protracted complaints process for the resident. The resident did not receive a satisfactory resolution to her original complaint and her access to an investigation by this Service was then delayed while she awaited the completion of the landlord’s internal complaint process. The resident also had to take the time and trouble to contact this Service for assistance in escalating her complaint.
  5. It was evident the landlord had not provided the resident with an explanation about why it was responding at stage 1 again rather than escalating the resident’s complaint. As a result, it was not clear to the resident that the complaint process was starting again. The landlord should have provided the resident with the reasons why it had opened a further stage 1 complaint.
  6. The landlord did not provide evidence to this Service of its original stage 1 response it had sent to the resident on 26 July 2022. This again indicated a poor standard of record keeping.
  7. This Service contacted the landlord on 5 May 2023 and requested the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint escalation. The landlord raised a further stage 1 complaint and provided its response to the resident on 7 June 2023. This was a timeframe of 21 working days. This did not meet the timescales set out in the landlord’s complaints policy or the Code. It was noted the landlord emailed the resident on 24 May 2023 to confirm it would provide a response by 8 June 2023 due to waiting for a response from contractors.
  8. The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 13 June 2023. The landlord provided its final response on 13 July 2023. This was a timeframe of 22 working days which again did not meet the timescales set out in its complaints policy.
  9. The landlord offered the resident £200 in its final response for its complaint handling. While this went part way to putting things right for the resident, it did not fully reflect the impact on the resident of its delay to escalate her original stage 1 complaint.
  10. Overall, the landlord’s complaint handling was poor. The landlord had failed to escalate the resident’s complaint escalation in July 2022. This caused the resident the inconvenience, and time and trouble of having to follow up with this Service for advice on escalating her complaint. This had also limited the resident’s access to the full complaints process for a period of time. The landlord’s further stage 1 and final response took too long. The landlord did acknowledge its poor complaint handling and offered the resident £200 of compensation to account for this. This was not enough to fully account for the significant delay the resident experienced in escalating her complaint.  As such, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  11. It would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £300 for the inconvenience, time, and trouble caused by its poor complaint handling. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies for instances which have adversely affected a resident and where a landlord has failed to acknowledge its full failings.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her kitchen.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was reasonable redress offered by the landlord in respect of its handling of the repayment of expenses claimed by the resident during a decant.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders.

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
  2. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident a total of £1909.36 in compensation. This amount includes the £1579.29 of compensation offered during the complaints process. Compensation not already paid, should be paid directly to the resident, and not offset against any arrears. The compensation comprises of:
    1. £600 as previously offered for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her kitchen.
    2. £569.36 for the loss of the full use of the kitchen from 12 December 2022 until 15 October 2023.
    3. £10 as previously offered for a missed repair appointment.
    4. £300 as previously offered for financial hardship as a result of the landlord’s delay in repayment of expenses claimed by the resident during a decant.
    5. £130 as previously offered for the repayment of expenses claimed by the resident during a decant.
    6. £300 for the inconvenience, time and trouble caused by the landlord’s poor complaint handling.
  3. The landlord is to provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to this Service within four weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations.

  1. If it has not already done so, the landlord should provide the resident with the outcome of the further inspection planned and a timescale for the completion of any further work required to the kitchen cupboards.
  2. The landlord should review its staff training needs in regard to the importance of communicating with residents throughout the repair process.