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

London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (202438884)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202438884

London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham

22 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 handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak.

Background

  1. The resident lives in the property, owned by the landlord, under a secure tenancy. The property is a 1-bedroom flat on the 18th floor of a high-rise block. The landlord does not have any vulnerabilities recorded for the resident, however he made it aware when he raised his complaint that he is registered disabled. He has told this Service that the property condition has affected his health but it is not known whether he has made the landlord aware of this.
  2. On 31 October 2024, the resident reported to the landlord that there was a leak coming from the roof into his property. The landlord’s operatives attended the same day and determined that a roofer was required.
  3. The resident raised a complaint on 7 November 2024 as he was unhappy that no repairs had been carried out. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 21 November 2024, in which it apologised for the inconvenience and distress caused by the ongoing problem. It said that it had attended the initial report as an emergency, but that roofing jobs are raised with a 60 day priority, and it was still within that timescale.
  4. On 22 November 2024, the resident asked the landlord to escalate the complaint. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 13 December 2024, in which it said it was awaiting a quotation from a roofing contractor. It said that due to the height of the building this was taking longer than expected. It said that once the roof was repaired it would carry out an inspection to identify necessary internal repairs. It offered him £100 compensation to recognise the delay in arranging repairs.
  5. On 28 March 2025, the resident asked us to investigate the complaint. He said that repairs the landlord had carried out had not fixed the issue and it was still leaking every time it rained.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident has raised concerns about his health and the impact on this by the issues raised. Whilst this Service is an alternative to the courts, we are unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. Nor can we calculate or award damages.
  2. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspect of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. While the Ombudsman cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident may have experienced because of any service failure by the landlord.

Roof leak

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out the following repair priorities and timeframes:
    1. urgent emergency response – within 4 hours
    2. emergency response – within 24 hours
    3. routine – within 20 working days
    4. planned – within 60 working days
  2. The landlord’s damp and mould self-assessment, in place at the time the issue was reported, says it will:
    1. provide residents with dehumidifiers where this will help manage the situation
    2. raise damp and mould works through a dedicated workstream, meaning they can be more easily reported against and tracked
    3. report on damp and mould jobs monthly and hold weekly meetings with contractors to assess progress on open jobs
    4. work in partnership with the resident to find the best solution for them when completing works, including considering a decant where appropriate
  3. The resident reported that a leak was coming through his ceiling, which he believed to be from the roof, on 31 October 2024. The landlord sent an operative the same day, in line with its policy, and it was assessed that a specialised roofer was required.
  4. The landlord raised this work with a 60 working day timeframe, which would be in line with its ‘planned repairs’ timeframe. As the resident had reported water ingress, and the landlord has not provided an explanation as to why it used its planned works timeframe, its approach was not appropriate.
  5. The resident raised a complaint to the landlord on 7 November 2024. He said that all the rooms in the property were being affected by the leak and he was concerned the roof would give way. He told the landlord that he was registered disabled. The landlord acknowledged the complaint and what he had told it about his disabilities following day.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 21 November 2024. While it did apologise for any inconvenience and distress caused, it did not show that it had considered the internal damage and living conditions. It said that the roof repair was still within its policy timeframe and did not make any interim recommendations for the resident to manage the conditions of his home while awaiting the roof repair. This was not in line with its commitments in its damp and mould self-assessment and therefore was not appropriate.
  7. On 22 November 2024, the resident asked the landlord to escalate the complaint as he was unhappy with the damage the leak was causing in his home. In its stage 2 response of 13 December 2024, the landlord said that once roof repairs were completed it would arrange for a surveyor to attend and then internal repairs would be booked in.
  8. Again, the landlord did not consider any interim actions to manage the damp in the home, which was not appropriate. It offered £100 compensation to recognise the delay in arranging repairs, however provided no timescale for completion of the work, so this did not put things right.
  9. On 3 January 2025 the landlord emailed the resident to say that it had approved a quote for scaffolding and was just waiting on a date for this to go up. On 19 January 2025 the resident asked for an update. He said the situation was getting worse and he was ‘fighting a losing battle with mould’. The landlord responded the same day to say it would let its Damp and Mould team know. However, there is no evidence this team took any action or made contact with the resident.
  10. On 24 January 2025, the landlord told the resident that any redecoration work would need to wait until the roof was repaired. However, it said that it should be able to sort any mould out sooner. Its internal communications discussed whether a mould wash could be carried out, but we have seen no evidence this was done, which was not appropriate.
  11. On 4 February 2025, the landlord contacted the resident to say that the roof had been repaired and it would be in touch soon to carry out internal repairs. On 14 February 2025, he let the landlord know that he was still experiencing water ingress, despite the repairs.
  12. The landlord’s operatives visited the property on 27 February 2025. They found signs of water ingress and said that further investigation was required. We have seen no evidence the landlord updated the resident with its findings or provided a timeframe for further investigation and repairs.
  13. The landlord carried out internal repairs between 23 March and 8 April 2025. Further roof repairs were carried out on 30 April 2025 and repairs to a water tank on the roof were carried out on 2 May 2025. On 15 May 2025 the landlord carried out a post-work inspection. This showed that all internal redecoration work had been completed with the exception of a small area of the bathroom ceiling. It also said that repairs to external rendering were still outstanding. It is not known whether these have now been completed.
  14. We have seen no evidence the landlord communicated with the resident after 4 February 2025 to keep him updated with the progress of repairs, until it wrote to him on 25 June 2025. In this letter it confirmed that the work had now been completed, which brought the case to a close. However, it is not clear that the outstanding items were completed and the resident has indicated to us that there are still outstanding issues.
  15. The Ombudsman considers there to have been maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak. The landlord did not demonstrate that it considered its damp and mould self-assessment while repairs were ongoing. We have not seen that it considered any steps to mitigate the internal damp, such as providing dehumidifiers. Its records do not show that it worked in partnership with the resident to get matters resolved, or that it held meetings with contractors to keep on track with the progress of the work.
  16. This lack of oversight from the landlord likely contributed to the delays in repairs being completed. It took more than 6 months for the landlord to carry out the external and internal repairs, which was not in line with its repairs policy, and it is not clear from its records that these are fully complete. These failings left the resident living in damp and mouldy conditions for a protracted period. The landlord did not demonstrate that it considered his vulnerabilities and the impact this situation had on him.
  17. An order has been made for the landlord to pay the resident additional compensation of £700 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused to him by its failings. This award has been made with the landlord’s compensation policy in mind and brings the total compensation for this issue to £800.
  18. Orders have also been made for the landlord to carry out a new inspection to ensure all remedial work has been completed, and carry out a case review to learn from its failings in this case.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a roof leak.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report the landlord to:
    1. pay the resident compensation of £800, less any amount already paid during its internal complaints process to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the roof leak
    2. provide the resident with a written apology from a senior manager, recognising the failings identified in this report
  2. Within 8 weeks of this report the landlord to:
    1. carry out a new inspection of the property to confirm all remedial work has been completed
    2. provide the resident and this Service with a copy of this report, and a schedule of works, if required – if works are required the schedule should include a proposed timescale for completion
  3. Within 12 weeks of this report the landlord to carry out a case review to understand what led to its failings in this case and ensure that it can carry out repairs in line with its policies in the future – a copy of this review should be provided to this Service.