Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Leeds City Council (202329274)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202329274

Leeds City Council

11 July 2025


Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration,’ for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice, or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman, and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
    1. Reports of damp and mould and a request for preventative external work.
    2. Reports of draughty windows.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant and has lived in the 3-bedroomed house since April 2003. The resident lives with his son, his son’s partner, and grandchildren. The resident has informed the landlord he has asthma.
  2. The resident reported damp and mould in the bedroom on 3 October 2023. The landlord inspected the property on 12 October 2023 when it confirmed there was condensation due to high levels of humidity, but said there was no evidence of damp or mould.
  3. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 4 October 2023. He said:
    1. there was damp in the bedroom despite the windows being open for ventilation
    2. the landlord was taking too long to inspect the property, and asked why only one person would be going
    3. communication from the landlord was poor and he only knew about the appointment because of his Councillor
    4. he wanted to know why the Housing Officer (HO) would not give him the contact details for the damp team, and felt the Housing Manager (HM) should be dealing with the issue
    5. the damp had been a problem for over 10 years, but the landlord had only completed mould washes when the property needed to the “rebricked” and insulated with cladding
    6. he was claiming for damages to belongings caused by the damp
    7. he had asthma
  4. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 17 October 2023. In summary the landlord said:
    1. it had made several attempts to contact the resident to arrange an appointment, but there was no answer and no voicemail facility
    2. an appointment for 9 October 2023 was rearranged to 12 October 2023 at the resident’s request, and only 1 officer was needed to complete the survey
    3. the inspection on 12 October 2023 confirmed there were high levels of humidity in the bedroom but there was no mould, and the walls were dry when they were tested with the damp meter
    4. it had explained the causes of high humidity, the resident understood and confirmed his understanding as to why the clothes felt wet
    5. it had offered additional ventilation via an air vent, but this was declined by the resident as he said it would be too cold in the room
    6. it recommended a dehumidifier and provided the resident with an advice leaflet regarding the management of condensation
    7. it had explained the issues around the external wall insulation and would make a referral to planned works team to log the request
    8. the resident had not approached the HO for over 6 months, and the HO confirmed it did not refuse to provide contact details as no conversation had been held
    9. there had been several conversations in the past between the resident and the HM, but a repair issue should be dealt with by the HO and not the HM
  5. The resident asked for this complaint to be escalated on 24 November 2023. He remained dissatisfied with:
    1. being told to buy a dehumidifier when he thought the landlord should provide one
    2. the landlord suggesting a mould wash as a solution
    3. his property not being “rebricked” when properties nearby area had been
    4. the upstairs landing window letting in wind and rain
    5. a call received from the contractor’s planner who was rude to him
  6. The landlord provided its final complaint response on 10 December 2023. In summary it confirmed:
    1. it had inspected the property again on 7 December 2023, explained the problem was condensation and not damp, there was no evidence of any water on any of the walls, and there was no black mould anywhere in the bedroom
    2. it had not told the resident to buy a dehumidifier but had suggested it could help extract the moisture from the air, preventing it from presenting on the cold surface of the walls
    3. the resident had understood how a dehumidifier could help, but he could not afford one
    4. condensation was not a repair issue and could be managed effectively, however the effects of condensation could become a repair issue which it had addressed through treatments, washes, and paints
    5. it had discussed the request to insulate the home which the resident said was the only outcome he would accept, it explained the work previously done near the resident did not include his property, and confirmed there was no decarbonisation work planned for the resident’s property
    6. a contractor had measured the landing window on 30 November 2023 and once manufactured, the contractor would arrange a date to install the replacement window as a priority
    7. it would arrange an overhaul of all the windows to ensure they were as draught free as possible, and the contractor would arrange an appointment
    8. the contractor’s Customer Service Manager was investigating the resident’s allegation relating to the conduct of its staff during a phone call, and apologised to the resident
    9. it had included an insurance claim form for the resident to complete for the damage to belongings
  7. The resident referred his complaint to us on 15 December 2023. He said he was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of the cold, damp and mould in the property and wanted the landlord to resolve the problem via external preventative work as he had previously requested.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has stated the damp and mould problem has been ongoing for over 10 years. This is not disputed, however we expect residents to raise a formal complaint with the landlord within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of a matter arising. There is no evidence the resident raised a formal complaint with the landlord prior to the one described above, it is therefore fair and reasonable to focus on events from October 2023 to December 2023, the date of the final complaint response.
  2. The resident has referred to the impact the situation has had on the health of him and his family, along with damage to personal belongings. We can consider the impact the situation has had on the resident and whether the landlord acted reasonably, but we cannot determine liability for damage to health or belongings. As discussed with the resident, these are matters better suited to an insurance claim or court therefore will not be included in this investigation. Any compensation offer will be assessed in line with our remedies guidance. If the resident wishes to pursue these matters further, he should seek legal advice.

Reports of damp and mould and a request for preventative external work

  1. The landlord’s Damp and Mould Policy states:
    1. all reports of damp and mould will be fully assessed and responded to appropriately to minimise the risk of conditions returning
    2. it will investigate reports of damp and mould to determine the cause, and carry out remedial actions in accordance with the Tenancy Agreement and industry guidance
    3. residents will have access to and/or will be provided with comprehensive advice and guidance on managing and controlling damp and mould
  2. The landlord’s Tenant Handbook states it will:
    1. attend emergency repairs within 3 hours and complete an emergency repair within 24 hours
    2. aim to complete urgent repairs within 3-working days
    3. aim to complete routine repairs within 20-working days
  3. The resident reported damp and mould in the bedroom on 3 October 2023. The landlord made an appointment to inspect the property on 9 October 2023, however it was rearranged to 12 October 2023 at the resident’s request. This was appropriate.
  4. The landlord included the inspection findings in its stage 1 complaint response on 17 October 2023. The inspection confirmed there were no signs of damp and mould, but did confirm high humidity levels. The landlord explained how this was causing condensation which is why the resident’s belongings felt wet. The landlord explained an air vent could be installed to provide additional ventilation in the bedroom, but the offer was declined by the resident who said it would make the room too cold. It therefore recommended a dehumidifier to help resolve the humidity and gave the resident a leaflet on managing condensation. The landlord’s actions were appropriate as they were in line with policy.
  5. The resident asked the landlord to “rebrick” his property (install imitation brick to make the property warmer from the outside, in), and install external cladding. The resident said the landlord had done this work on more than 100 properties in an area close by. The landlord said it would forward on the request to the team responsible for the work. This was reasonable, however the landlord did not indicate who the resident could expect a response from or when by. This would have been helpful to set the resident’s expectations.
  6. The resident escalated his complaint on 24 November 2023. He was unhappy with the fungal wash as a resolution to the problem and asked again if the landlord would rebrick his property. He said he lived in the end house and had no protection from the weather.
  7. The landlord visited the resident again on 7 December 2023 to discuss his concerns and inspect the property. This was reasonable. In its final complaint response on 10 December 2023 the landlord confirmed the issue was condensation and not damp and mould. The landlord repeated its suggestion of a dehumidifier and explained the benefit of having one. The landlord apologised if this suggestion of having one in its stage 1 complaint response had made the resident feel the problem was being passed to him.
  8. The landlord confirmed condensation was not a repair issue, and that it had managed the effects of condensation via the treatments it had applied. The resident confirmed he had received the leaflet on how to manage condensation but said he could not afford to buy a dehumidifier. While not a failure, it would have been helpful if the landlord offered the resident a dehumidifier on a temporary basis to determine if it had a positive impact on the levels of condensation. There is no evidence it did this.
  9. The landlord confirmed the scheme previously completed was part funded and only covered the properties that received work. It confirmed there was no more decarbonisation work planned for the resident’s property.
  10. In his complaint, the resident raised concern with the communication from the landlord, in particular his HO and HM. He had asked why the HO would not give him the details of the damp team and why the HM would not speak to him and manage his repairs. The landlord’s records demonstrate it investigated the concerns and found the last contact with the HO had been 6 months before and was in connection with a separate issue, not linked to damp and mould. The HO confirmed it had not refused to provide the contact details as there had not been any conversation. The evidence supports this therefore the landlord’s investigation and response were reasonable.
  11. The resident also stated he was not happy that the HM was not managing his repairs. The landlord confirmed repairs were dealt with by the HO or the Housing Assistant (HA). With no evidence of a request for the issues to be escalated, the landlord’s explanation and response was reasonable as it confirmed the standard process for managing repairs.
  12. Considering the above, we find no maladministration. This is because the landlord:
    1. inspected the property twice in a timely manner
    2. confirmed the problem was condensation and provided evidence to confirm there was no damp and mould in the property
    3. suggested a way to improve the ventilation and suggested the use of a dehumidifier to reduce the humidity in the bedroom
    4. provided guidance leaflets on how to manage condensation in the home and how to heat the home to minimise condensation
    5. confirmed the work done on other properties was part of a funded scheme and there was no decarbonisation work planned for the resident’s property
    6. investigated the communication concerns and provided reasonable explanations

Reports of draughty windows

  1. The resident raised an issue with the landing window on 13 November 2023 when he said the frame was faulty and it was hard to close. The landlord raised a repair the same day and a contractor attended on 23 November 2023 to inspect the window. This was appropriate as it was in line with policy.
  2. The resident raised the issue in his complaint escalation on 24 November 2023 when he also raised concern with the conduct of contractor staff during a phone call he received while the contractor was inspecting the window. He said the planner was rude to him on the phone, but when he called the contractor to discuss the issue, it did not know who had called him. While the landlord was not expected to carry out the investigation into the allegation, it was expected to raise this with the contractor to ensure it could investigate the issue. The evidence confirms the landlord contacted the contractor directly to discuss the issue. The contractor agreed to investigate the complaint which involved trying to locate the telephone recording from the system. The landlord’s handling of the allegation was therefore reasonable.
  3. The landlord’s repair records confirm the contractor had inspected the window on 23 November 2023. It had taken measurements to replace the full window, however due to the manufacturing time, it would not be ready until the new year. The landlord confirmed this to the resident in its final complaint response when it said the contractor would fit the window as a priority in the new year. This was reasonable as it set the resident’s expectations and kept him updated. The window was replaced on 8 January 2024.
  4. In addition to the landing window, the landlord overhauled of all the windows in the property to make them as draught free as possible. This was reasonable and demonstrated it had listened to the resident’s concerns and was attempting to resolve them. The work was completed on 18 March 2024.
  5. Considering the above, we find no maladministration. This is because the landlord:
    1. raised a repair for the landing window the same day it was reported, and the contractor inspected it in line with policy timescales
    2. made the decision to replace the landing window and asked for it to be done as a priority
    3. completed an overhaul on all the windows to stop the draughts reported by the resident
    4. reported the allegations relating to the conduct of the contractor staff directly so an investigation could be carried out

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould and a request for preventative external work.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, the Ombudsman finds no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of draughty windows.

Recommendation

  1. As the resident has advised he is still experiencing issues with damp and condensation, the landlord should consider completing a further inspection of the property to confirm if any circumstances have changed since its visit in December 2023. The landlord should share its findings with the resident and confirm if any work is required.