Richmond Housing Partnership Limited (202329501)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202329501

Richmond Housing Partnership Limited

30 August 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

This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. Damp and mould in the resident’s property.
2. Repairs in the resident’s property.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 1-bed ground floor flat. The resident is disabled.
The resident made a complaint on 2 October 2023. He said he had reported a number of repair issues that the landlord had not resolved, and that disrepair had led to damp and mould at the rear of the property.
The landlord issued a stage 1 response to the complaint on 24 October 2023. It said a lot of its repair work was lost in transition when it changed contractors in June 2023, and apologised for the delays. It said it had booked repairs for the washing machine pipe, kitchen units, extractor fan, and bath inspection for 1 November 2023, and its new damp and mould contractor would contact him to arrange an appointment. It offered £100 compensation.
On 22 November 2023, the resident contacted the Ombudsman. He said the property was not fit for human habitation as a result of damp. He said various repairs had been outstanding since 2020, including a replacement bath, tiling, replacing defective windows which were letting draughts in, defective pipework in the kitchen, and the front door. He said the repairs were having a significant effect on his life due to his disability. He also said the operative who was due to attend on 20 November 2023 did not turn up.
On 27 November 2023, the landlord issued a stage 2 response to the complaint. It said the damp was caused by the failure of the damp proof course, leading to rising damp. It said it would carry out the external repair and arrange a mould wash, after which it would repair the extractor fan, fit a new bath, repair 2 windows, complete tiling in the shower, and change the sink waste pipe. It offered £200 compensation, and requested copies of the resident’s energy bills to assess the cost of running a dehumidifier due to the damp.
The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, so referred his complaint to the Ombudsman.
On 22 July 2024, the resident advised that, save for the bathroom extractor fan, the landlord had yet to carry out any of the works promised in its stage 2 response.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

Paragraph 42(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme says the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which have not completed the landlord’s internal complaints process. When providing an update to the Ombudsman, the resident said that a contractor sent by the landlord had identified further defects, including defective window handles, a window coming away from the bedroom wall, damp to the bedroom wall, a problem with the garage door, and a defect in the front door. Any issues identified after the landlord’s stage 2 response have not completed the landlord’s internal complaints process, and therefore cannot be considered as part of this investigation.
The resident said the property is not fit for habitation as a result of structural defects letting in damp. It is not within the Ombudsman’s remit to make a formal finding as to whether or not the property is fit for human habitation, as such a finding can only be made by the courts. The Ombudsman also cannot award damages in the way a court can when a property is found to be unfit for human habitation or in a state of disrepair. The Ombudsman can, however, award compensation for any distress or inconvenience the resident experienced as a result of the way the landlord handled his reports.
When referring his complaint to the Ombudsman, the resident said there had been repair issues going back to 2020. Paragraph 42(c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme says the Ombudsman will not consider complaints which were not brought to the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable timeframe (usually 12 months). As such, while previous reports may be referred to for context, this investigation will only consider the reports and landlord’s responses in the 12 months prior to the resident’s complaint in October 2023.

Policies and procedures

Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. It is also required to keep sanitary installations such as baths and waste pipes in repair. It is required to carry out repairs within a reasonable timeframe.
The landlord’s repairs policy says repairs will be completed within the following timescales:
1. Emergency repairs will be completed within 24 hours.
2. General repairs will be completed within 10 working days.
3. Other repairs which do not fall under the landlord’s usual repairs service (such as window replacement or major structural works) will be completed within 20 working days.
Under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, the landlord must ensure the dwelling is fit for human habitation throughout the tenancy. It must also ensure that the homes it provides meet the Decent Homes Standard. Section 5 of the Decent Homes Standard says the landlord should ensure that its properties are free of category 1 hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Damp and mould is listed as a potential category 1 hazard.
The landlord’s compensation policy says it will offer compensation for the cost of running dehumidifiers, and will pay £30 compensation for missed contractor appointments.

Repairs – damp and mould

On 14 November 2022, the resident told the landlord that there was damp and mould in the property. The landlord’s repair logs show it booked a damp and mould assessment appointment on 24 November 2022 and 20 December 2022. Booking an inspection was a reasonable first step, as it would need to identify the likely cause of the damp and mould before it could determine what works were needed. However, under its repairs policy the landlord was required to complete works within 20 working days. The first appointment was cancelled, with no explanation provided by the landlord. The repair logs say an operative attended on 20 December 2022, but that more time was required. It is unclear why appropriate time was not allowed for the inspection, and this led to further delays to an already delayed inspection.
The landlord arranged a further visit on 5 January 2023. Its notes say that 1 extractor fan was not working, and the other was not strong enough. Its notes from 20 December 2022 also recorded that the damp proof course needed to be replaced, and the windows needed to be sealed.
The landlord then booked an appointment for 14 March 2023, which it failed to attend. It has provided no evidence of giving any warning to the resident, who contacted it to ask why nobody had attended. Its records indicate this was due to operative sickness, and that another appointment was booked for 18 and 19 May 2023. The landlord then cancelled those appointments due to annual leave, and its notes showed it would contact the resident the following month. However, its records also show this repair being marked as being both complete and cancelled. Accurate record keeping is an essential part of providing an effective repairs service, and the landlord’s contradictory records have hampered the Ombudsman’s investigation into this complaint.
By May 2023, 6 months had passed since the resident reported damp and mould in the property. During those 6 months, the landlord failed to take any steps to remedy the cause of the mould. On 23 July 2023, the resident contacted the landlord, as it had taken no further action after cancelling the May 2023 appointment. The landlord failed to respond. He chased again in August 2023, and it again failed to respond. By the time the resident raised a complaint on 2 October 2023, the landlord had taken no further action regarding the damp and mould. This was wholly inappropriate, and indicates the landlord did not take it seriously that a vulnerable resident was living in a property affected by damp and mould.
The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on damp and mould sets out what the Ombudsman expects from landlords where damp and mould are concerned. It says landlords should take a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould, carry out proactive intervention, communicate effectively with residents, and, where significant works may be required, it should consider whether the resident should be moved from the property at an early stage. The landlord has provided no evidence to show it took any of those steps.
Instead, the landlord arranged an initial inspection outside of the timescales in its repairs policy. Following that inspection, it booked appointments to replace extractor fans and the damp proof course. It has provided no evidence of booking an appointment to seal the windows, despite that being a recommendation from its inspection. The job for the damp proof course was marked as both competed and cancelled on 16 May 2023, at which point the landlord had carried out no works. It then ignored multiple requests for updates from the resident, only contacting him or taking any steps to book repairs after he made a complaint. This was inappropriate and unreasonable.
When the resident raised a complaint, the landlord raised a repair for damp and mould works. However, by July 2024, 19 months after his report, the landlord had yet to carry out any repairs to resolve the damp and mould. The only relevant repair was replacing an extractor fan, which was insufficient for resolving damp and mould caused by a failing damp proof course and rising damp. As such, following its initial significant failings, the landlord then did not learn from the complaint. While it has referred in correspondence to the resident not giving access for repairs on 3 occasions, it has provided no evidence to support this. As such, it has not demonstrated that it was lack of access which prevented it carrying out the repairs.
The landlord told the resident that the delays were caused by a transition from one contractor to another in June 2023. However, there had already been 6 months of unreasonable delays by that stage. It also said it had tried to contact the resident 3 times in October and November 2023 but got no answer, after which there were delays because he brought a disrepair claim. However, the calls in question were after the complaint, and did not stop an inspection taking place on 13 November 2023. As such, this does not explain any delays in carrying out the repairs. The Ombudsman also notes that the resident’s letter of claim was sent to the landlord after more than a year of delays on the landlord’s part. The landlord’s statutory repair obligations do not change on receipt of a letter of claim, and the landlord’s position that a disrepair claim caused delays is unsupported by evidence.
The evidence and records provided by the landlord demonstrate that the delays were the result of inaction by its contractors and a total absence of oversight or management of the repairs on the landlord’s part, as well as its poor record keeping. By the time of the complaint, the landlord had left a disabled resident living in a property with damp and mould for almost a year. The resident has told the Ombudsman that, throughout that time, he had to run multiple dehumidifiers daily, purchase humidity monitors, and continually monitor the humidity in the property as a result of the damp and mould.
When acknowledging its poor handling of repairs, the landlord offered the resident £200 compensation. This compensation was not just for the damp and mould, but for its handling of all repairs. This offer was inadequate for the detriment caused by the landlord’s significant and ongoing failings regarding the damp and mould. The Ombudsman considers the landlord’s handling of damp and mould in the property amounts to severe maladministration. The Ombudsman has therefore considered what the landlord needs to do to put things right.
In addition to an apology for its poor handling of damp and mould in the property, the landlord must complete the repairs to resolve the damp and mould within the next 4 weeks. It must also pay the resident compensation for both the distress and inconvenience caused, and the cost of running dehumidifiers to reduce the spread of the damp and mould.
The landlord’s compensation guidance says it will offer compensation for the cost of running dehumidifiers. However, while it gives a rate for the cost of temporary heaters, it does not give a rate for the use of dehumidifiers (which generally cost less to run than temporary heaters). In its complaint response, the landlord asked the resident for 4 years’ worth of energy bills so it could calculate the appropriate level of compensation. The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence to show that the resident provided this information. It was reasonable to request energy bills to help calculate approximately how much the resident’s energy bills had increased as a result of the need to use dehumidifiers daily. However, it is unclear why the landlord requested 4 years’ worth of bills. The Ombudsman has also seen no evidence of the landlord attempting to follow this up with the resident, or to calculate the compensation in any other way (such as based on the approximate cost of running dehumidifiers). An order has been made in this regard below.
The Ombudsman also considers that the landlord should pay the resident £1,000 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its poor handling of damp and mould. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for serious failings which negatively affect a resident.
Finally, the failings identified in this report are indicative of wider issues within the landlord’s repairs service and record keeping processes which are likely to negatively affect other residents if not addressed. The Ombudsman has therefore made an order for a senior management review of this case, in accordance with paragraph 54(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.

Other repairs

The resident reported a number of internal repairs to the landlord, and said those repairs were never completed. Those included an issue with the kitchen waste pipe and a bath repair, and subsequent leak damage. The landlord accepted in its complaint response that the repairs had not been completed or handled appropriately. It said this was due to repairs work becoming lost in transition when it changed its contractors.
As the landlord has accepted that its handling of the repairs was unreasonable, the Ombudsman does not need to determine whether that was the case. Instead, it will determine whether or not the landlord has done enough to put things right.
On 3 February 2023, the resident reported that the bath had badly rusted, and that a surveyor had previously confirmed it needed to be replaced. He also reported that the washing machine pipe was backing up, and that there appeared to be a blockage. The landlord arranged an appointment for the blockage the following day, but was unable to resolve the issue. It then took no further action until the resident reported that the blockage had caused issues with the sink and toilet, and that he could not use his sink, toilet, or washing machine normally. The landlord booked a series of appointments which it then cancelled. It booked a repair for the bath on 20 March 2023. It marked this as complete, then a month later logged that a replacement bath was needed. It booked an appointment for a replacement on 26 May 2023, which it cancelled. It then took no further action regarding any of the repairs until after the resident made a complaint in October 2023.
The landlord told the resident in its stage 1 response that it had booked the repairs for 1 November 2023. It then failed to carry out the repairs, but had a surveyor attend on 13 November 2023. In its stage 2 response, it told the resident that it would carry out the repairs after it resolved the external issues with damp and mould. It has provided no explanation for why the repairs needed to wait until then, and the landlord had yet to complete the repairs as of the end of July 2024, more than a year after the reports. As such, it failed to learn from the complaint.
It is unclear from the landlord’s repair records why the repairs remain outstanding. The repair records show a number of cancelled appointments, as well as repairs being marked as both complete and not completed. More recently, the landlord has indicated there were problems gaining access to the property, with access denied on 3 occasions. However, it has no record of any such appointments in the records provided, of making the resident aware of such appointments, of attempting to access the property, or of leaving missed appointment cards. The resident has also referred to a survey in March 2024. Again, the landlord’s records include no mention of this survey, and no copy of the report has been provided to the Ombudsman.
The landlord’s records show that, from the time he reported the repair issues, the resident had to keep chasing the landlord for updates and progress. He told the landlord that he was disabled, and that its delays in carrying out repairs left him unable to use the sink, bath, or washing machine. He also told the Ombudsman that he had to use a launderette for all of his washing as he was unable to use the washing machine without having to plunge the sink, and that the lack of repairs had a significant effect on his life and ability to wash. He was also concerned about his safety, as the bath was leaking onto the tiles, creating a slip hazard.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord offered £200 compensation for delays in the repairs, as well as the time and trouble taken to chase the repairs. This included compensation for the damp and mould. This does not adequately reflect the detriment the landlord’s failings caused the resident. The Ombudsman finds there has been maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of repairs.
The Ombudsman considers the landlord should pay the resident £800 compensation for its poor handling of the repairs (in addition to the compensation above for its poor handling of damp and mould). This is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for failings which have a significant effect on a resident.
The resident told the landlord he also wants compensation for damage to his carpet, which he said was caused by the leaks. An insurer would be best placed to assess the cause of the damage and the value of any damaged items where the landlord is responsible for the damage, and the Ombudsman would only expect the landlord to consider compensation for the losses if its insurer would not cover the claim (for example, if the cause of the damage was not covered under the policy). The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the landlord provided the resident with details of its insurance or how to make a claim when he requested compensation while escalating his complaint. As such, an order to provide that information has been made below.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there has been severe maladministration with regard to the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there has been maladministration with regard to the landlord’s handling of repairs.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Issue a written apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The apology must come from a member of the landlord’s executive team.
2. Provide the resident with details of its insurance policy and how to make a claim for losses as a result of the leaks and damp.
3. Pay the resident £1,800 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings identified in this report. This is inclusive of the compensation offered as part of the complaints process, and is broken down as follows:
  1. £1,000 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor handling of damp and mould.
  2. £800 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s poor handling of the other repairs.
4. Carry out the external repairs identified by its surveyor to resolve the underlying cause of the damp and mould. It must then write to the resident within the same timeframe to confirm when it will carry out the remaining internal works. The letter must include the following, as a minimum:
  1. A list of all works it intends to carry out.
  2. A list of the booked appointments for all of the various works, and how long it anticipates the works will take.
  3. Whether it considers the resident can remain in the property for the works, or will need to be temporarily decanted. If the resident will need to be decanted, the landlord must set out the relevant arrangements.
  4. The direct contact details for a single point of contact who will oversee the repairs.
5. Write to the resident to request evidence of the costs incurred as a result of needing to run dehumidifiers daily. The landlord must then make an offer of compensation for the costs incurred in line with its compensation policy within 6 weeks of the date of this report. If the resident does not provide the required evidence, the landlord must make an offer based on an estimate of the cost of running 3 dehumidifiers daily. The landlord must provide a copy of the relevant letters to the Ombudsman.
In accordance with paragraph 54(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord is ordered to carry out a senior management review of this case to determine how it will prevent a recurrence of the failings identified in this report in future. The landlord must complete the review within 8 weeks of the date of this report, and provide the Ombudsman with a copy of its review and resulting action plan. The review must include (but is not limited to) consideration of the following:
1. The processes and procedures it has in place for responding to reports of repairs, including identifying and resolving the underlying causes of damp and mould, and ensuring that repairs are completed within a reasonable timescale.
2. The processes and procedures it has in place to ensure adequate oversight and management of contractor performance, and to ensure a change of contractor does not contribute to delays in carrying out repairs.
3. The processes and procedures it has in place to support accurate record keeping, including reports of repair issues, all actions taken in response, inspection notes, survey reports, and details of any repairs carried out.
4. Identification of the underlying causes of the failings identified in this report, the steps it intends to take to prevent them recurring in future, and when it will take those steps.
5. The training needs of all staff who handle reports of repairs, including knowledge of its repair obligations and repairs policy.
The landlord is to provide this Service with evidence of compliance with the above orders within the timescales set out above.