Citizen Housing (202230741)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202230741

Citizen Housing

24 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Background

The resident has an assured shorthold tenancy and lives with his wife and 6 children aged between 2 and 15 at the property, which is a 4 bedroom maisonette. He had lived at the property since 2019. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident.
The landlord’s repairs and maintenance policy states that residents are responsible for making lifestyle changes to resolve condensation. When condensation is likely cause of damp, it will advise the resident of the action they need to take to deal with the problem.
The landlord’s tenancy and licence management policy states as follows:
1. When residents wish to move, it will provide advice on the options available including other forms of tenure.
2. In emergencies, there may be a need to provide immediate rehousing and it may not be possible to rehouse the household within its normal arrangements. Emergency transfers will be considered where there are circumstances that threaten the life or safety of the resident or other household members, if they remained in the property.
3. It is a member of a national mutual exchange service which provides residents an opportunity to advertise their interest in finding a mutual exchange at no cost to themselves.
The landlord’s compensation policy states that discretionary compensation may be awarded at its discretion as a gesture of goodwill.
The landlord has a 2 stage complaints process. At stage 1 it will acknowledge the complaint within 5 days and respond within a further 10 working days. At stage 2 it will respond within 20 working days of the escalation request. If additional time is required at either stage it will keep the resident informed.

Summary of events

The resident advised the landlord in April 2020 that he could smell damp but there was no signs of mould. The landlord offered advice and asked him to contact it again if he required any further help. The resident contacted it again in September 2020 and advised that there was damp on the hallway walls. A contractor attended and noted internally that there was no sign of damp, mould or leaks. It noted that the smell could be from the property below.
In November 2020 the resident reported damp in the living room and that clothing smelt damp. A contractor attended and noted internally that there were “a couple of minor issues” but that it could not smell damp. It suggested a contractor attend with a damp meter and this inspection took place in January 2021. No cause of damp could be identified during the inspection and the landlord subsequently arranged for a roof inspection and a repair to the flashing on the chimney.
In May 2021 the resident reported a suspected smell of drugs from the property below. He also stated that there was a smell of damp and mould and that an operative had advised him the smell was from the property below. He asked the landlord how he could move to another property. The landlord advised him that he could complete an online application or look into a mutual exchange. The resident stated that these would take too long. The landlord advised that private renting was another option. It stated it would speak to the tenant below in respect of the concerns. Works to the roof and cleaning out the guttering were completed in July 2021.
The next record the landlord had of the resident raising a report of damp and mould was on 14 November 2022, when he submitted a complaint and stated as follows:
1. There was damp and mould in the property “every year”. It had become worse and there was damp on most of the walls.
2. He requested that the landlord repair the mould or provide him with alternative accommodation as it was causing him and his family health problems.
The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 18 November 2022 and advised that it had arranged for a surveyor to attend. The surveyor attended on 22 November 2022 and outlined its findings to the landlord on 29 November 2022 as follows:
1. There was slight black spot mould in the living room and bedroom 1.
2. The resident had a sofa against the wall in the living room and a wardrobe in a similar position in bedroom 1. It had advised the resident not to position furniture close to the walls as it prevented air flow.
3. It had agreed to issue a works order as a gesture of goodwill to treat the minor mould as follows:
  1. Lounge – wash down skirting boards with anti-fungicidal wash, prepare and apply treatment to small area (0.5m2) on wall, apply thermal paint to small area (1m2) of the external wall. Booked for 20 December 2022.
  2. Bedroom 1 – wash down skirting boards with anti-fungicidal wash, renew sealant above skirting board and windows. Booked for 20 December 2022.
  3. Kitchen – strip wall and re-skim (unrelated to damp issues). Booked for 22 December 2022.
4. The resident had 6 children living at the property and was seeking a transfer via the choice based letting scheme in order to have access to a garden.
5. The resident had advised that there was a musky smell in the property throughout the year. The surveyor noted it had not been able to smell anything. It noted that the heating was not on and the windows were open at the time of the inspection. It had advised the resident to maintain a good balance between heat and ventilation in the property.
The landlord responded at stage 1 on 30 November 2022 and stated as follows:
1. It had tried to contact the resident on 2 occasions to discuss the complaint. It apologised for the issues he was experiencing.
2. The resident had reported a smell of damp in 2020 however there had been no signs of damp or mould. The resident, at the time, had been advised to move furniture away from the walls to allow air to circulate. Following this there were “several occasions” where the resident had contacted it about re-occurring damp and mould.
3. It summarised the findings of the inspection from 22 November 2022 and the works to be carried out in December 2022.
4. It noted the resident’s preference to transfer to a property with a garden.
The resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 on 6 December 2022 and stated:
1. The mould treatment was the same as had been previously carried out. This was not permanent and the mould would return.
2. The comment about him wanting a garden was incorrect. He was unhappy with the condition of the property and the impact the damp and mould was having on the household.
3. He believed the damp and mould was caused by the tenant’s below.
4. He requested to be considered for alternative accommodation.
On 11 January 2023 the resident added as follows:
1. He was frustrated and disappointed with the repair appointments. He had tried to coordinate them for a time that suited him, however every scheduled appointment had been missed or rescheduled at the last minute. As a result he had lost wages and it had caused a great deal of distress and inconvenience. He requested to be compensated for the inconvenience and financial losses that he incurred as a result of the missed appointments.
2. There had been a lack of communication in respect of the appointments and he expected a higher level of service and reliability from the landlord.
3. He requested that immediate steps be taken to rectify the situation and schedule a repair appointment at a time convenient for him.
The landlord responded at stage 2 that same day (11 January 2023) and stated as follows:
1. It appreciated that the property was causing the resident concern, however it did not take direct applications for a transfer and it would only consider a priority move if circumstances threatened the life or seriously affect the safety of the household.
2. It provided general housing advice, including the choice-based lettings schemes for residents to bid on properties. It also provided details of housing associations who it advised may have their own waiting lists. In addition it signposted the resident to a home swapper website.
3. It apologised for any missed appointments and explained that it had experienced a high level of absence and an increase for service demand. It did not compensate for lost wages and it advised that any adult could be present for appointments. It apologised that the resident had not received the level of service expected. It had forwarded the feedback to its maintenance team to action.
4. An appointment had been booked (and confirmed by the resident) for mould treatment for 19 January 2023 for the lounge, and for 9 February 2023 for the kitchen. If there were cancellations these works may be carried out sooner.
5. There were ways for the resident to manage and prevent condensation and mould in the property by managing the humidity in the air and adequately heating the property. It signposted the resident to information and help with energy costs.
6. The Stage 1 investigation had responded to all the points in line with its policies and procedures. It apologised for the length of time it had taken for the stage 2 response to be provided.
The landlord’s internal notes recorded that the appointment arranged for 19 January 2023 was not attended by the contractor.
The resident referred his complaint to this Service on 6 March 2023 and stated as follows:
1. The landlord had failed to address the faults at the property and had not responded to complaints.
2. He had contacted the landlord multiple times over the past 2 years but had not received any satisfactory response or resolution. The problems included a leaking roof, a faulty boiler and damp, which the landlord had not taken action to fix. These issues had affected his daily life and caused inconvenience and discomfort.
3. The landlord had not responded to any of his queries or provided any indication of when issues would be resolved. This lack of communication had caused him significant stress and anxiety.
4. The landlord should repair the faults, especially the damp and mould, or provide him with alternative accommodation.
5. He requested to be compensated for the inconvenience and distress caused by the landlord’s lack of action and communication.

Correspondence following the referral to this Service

On 23 May 2023 the landlord asked the resident if, following the mould treatment, he was still experiencing mould or other repair issues. It advised that it would arrange another inspection if that was the case. The landlord advised this Service (5 June 2023) that the resident had not responded to this.
On 2 January 2024 the landlord advised this Service as follows:
1. The minor mould found by its surveyor (in November 2022) had only required the resident to wipe it down. Despite this it had agreed to carry out mould treatment.
2. During the timeframe of the report there had been disruption to its services due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

It is noted that the resident raised the issue of the impact of the mould on his health and the health of his wife and children. Whilst this Service is an alternative to the courts, it is 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 it calculate or award damages. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider any personal injury aspects of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. However, this Service will consider the landlord’s handling of the repairs and any distress and inconvenience this may have caused. This Service would expect the landlord’s response to consider the resident’s reports on how the issues were impacting on the health of the household. Such issues reflect the detriment experienced as a result of potential failures by the landlord.
The resident has stated that there have been issues with damp and mould at the property for a number of years. The landlord’s records show that the resident reported this in 2020. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlords at the time the events happened. This is because with the passage of time, evidence may be unavailable and personnel involved may have left an organisation, which makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out and for informed decisions to be made. Taking this into account and the availability and reliability of evidence, this assessment has focussed on the landlord’s response to the report of damp and mould raised within the resident’s complaint from November 2022. Reference to events that occurred prior to 2022 are made in this report to provide context.
The resident has also raised concerns about the roof and a leaking boiler. As these issues did not from part of the formal complaint to the landlord under consideration, this is not something that this Service can investigate at this stage as the landlord needs to be provided with the opportunity to investigate and respond to these reports. The resident will need to contact the landlord and, if appropriate and within the complaints policy timeframe to make a complaint, the landlord may respond to these separately. The resident may then approach the Ombudsman if they remain dissatisfied.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould

The landlord received the resident’s report of damp and mould on 14 November 2022 and it acted appropriately in arranging for a surveyor to attend in a timely manner (on 22 November 2022). This demonstrated that the landlord had taken the resident’s concern seriously and that it had taken appropriate action to try to identify the cause of the issue.
Its surveyor advised that there was slight black spot mould in the living room and a bedroom which should be wiped down. It also gave advice to the resident in respect of air flow around furniture and heating the property. The landlord’s repairs policy states that residents are responsible for making changes to resolve condensation and that when condensation is the likely cause of damp, it will advise the resident of the action they need to take to deal with the problem. The landlord’s actions in arranging mould washes to the affected areas, offering advice on preventing damp, the importance of heating and ventilation and signposting the resident to help with heating costs were reasonable steps and were in line with its policy.
The resident had requested to be moved to a different property due to the damp and mould. The landlord appropriately advised, in line with its tenancy management policy, that the situation did not meet the criteria for an emergency transfer (circumstances that threaten the life or safety of the household). It however demonstrated that it had taken the resident’s request seriously and provided him with details of the options available to him in respect of moving to a different property. In doing so the landlord demonstrated a resident focused approach.
This Service has seen evidence of 1 missed contractor appointment, whereby the mould treatment in the lounge did not go ahead as planned on 19 January 2023 as the contractor did not attend. This Service has not seen any reason for this provided by the landlord to the resident. In addition, this Service has not seen evidence to demonstrate that the resident had been informed that this would not go ahead. The date of the rearranged mould treatment appointment for the lounge was not clear, however it is noted this had been completed by May 2023. The missed contractor appointment and the lack of communication in respect of this led to the mould treatment in the lounge being delayed and caused frustration and distress to the resident.
The landlord acknowledged this in its complaint response and apologised. It is also noted that it apologised for its stage 2 complaint response being 3 days outside of its published timeframe. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it can award discretionary compensation, however missed contractor appointments are not mentioned in its policy. It is noted that the resident requested compensation for loss of wages and the landlord advised it did not compensate for such. This stance was not outlined in the compensation policy provided to this Service, however this position is reasonable and is in line with guidance provided by this Service. Whilst contractor appointments inevitably cause some inconvenience to residents, their occupancy agreement will require them to give access for repairs to be carried out as needed, and it would not be fair or reasonable for the Ombudsman to order a landlord to pay a resident reimbursement for loss of earnings for routine appointments. This Service may consider compensation to have been appropriate in recognition of the inconvenience caused by a missed appointment. In this case, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have acknowledged the inconvenience of this missed appointment and for it to have offered compensation in respect of this.
The Housing Ombudsman Spotlight report on damp and mould (published in October 2021) provides recommendations for landlords, including that they should “adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions. The report also stated that landlord’s should explore and assist residents to resolve ventilation issues. Given the amount of individuals living at the property, the landlord could have gone further to consider whether the property could benefit from additional ventilation. An order has been made below for an independent surveyor to undertake a damp and mould survey to consider this.
As the landlord could have gone further to investigate the ventilation and to acknowledge the impact of its failure on the resident, by considering compensation, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s overall handling of the case. This Service considers that compensation of £150 is appropriate to acknowledge the impact of this on the resident. This is in line with the Housing Ombudsman remedies guidance where there has been a failure by the landlord in the service it provided and it did not appropriately acknowledge this or put things right.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Reasons

The landlord could have gone further to consider whether it could assist the resident with ventilation at the property in light of the amount of occupants. It failed to consider the impact of the missed contractor appointment on the resident and that this delayed the mould treatment being completed in the lounge.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord is ordered to take the following action within 4 weeks of this report and provide evidence of compliance to this Service:
1. Pay £150 compensation directly to the resident to acknowledge the impact to the resident of the missed appointment.
2. Within 6 weeks, arrange for an independent damp and mould survey at the property. The subsequent report from this survey to be shared with both the resident and this Service, with the landlord to clarify its intentions regarding any recommended works.