Peabody Trust (202231175)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202231175

Peabody Trust

28 March 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:
1. Handling of reports of damp and mould at the property.
2. Handling of reports of leaks.
3. Complaint handling.
4. Record keeping.

Background and summary of events

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 1 bedroom basement flat within a four-storey block of flats. The landlord is a housing association and it has no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident.

Landlord’s obligations

The tenancy agreement says the landlord is responsible for keeping in repair the structure and exterior of the building. This includes, amongst other things, the drains, gutters, internal walls, floors, ceilings, chimneys and plasterworks.
The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation policy from February 2023 says that a damp home is not enjoyable and can pose a serious risk to health and safety.
The landlord’s responsive repairs policy says that programmed repairs which include damp works are to be completed within 60 calendar days, with a target of 33 days. It also says that non-urgent repairs are to be completed within 28 calendar days, with a 10 working day target.
The landlord’s complaints procedure explains its 2 stage complaints process.
1. Stage 1 – will be acknowledged within 5 working days and a response provided within 10 working days. This can be extended by a further 10 working days.
2. Stage 2 – will be acknowledged within 5 working days and a response will be provided within 20 working days from the date of escalation.
The landlord’s complaints and compensation policy sets out the compensation amount it can award. For time, trouble and inconvenience it says a maximum payment of £600 can be awarded and £250 as a maximum for poor complaint handling.
The Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould: it’s not a lifestyle, published in October 2021 made a number of recommendations for landlords. These recommendations included:
1. Identify complex cases at an early stage and have a strategy for keeping the resident informed.
2. Should ensure that the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue. It should have a zero tolerance approach to damp and mould.
3. Ensure they clearly and regularly communicate with their residents regarding actions taken or otherwise to resolve reports of damp and mould.
4. Identify where an independent qualified surveyor should be used and share the outcome of the survey/inspection with the resident to help them understand the findings and be clear on next steps.

Summary of events

The Service has been provided with photos of the property which are dated April 2019. The photos show:
1. Partially removed flooring and what is described as “black mould” on floors and walls in the living room.
2. Kitchen- wet walls and flaking paint behind a cupboard and “mould” above a kitchen cupboard.
3. Bedroom- water staining to the chimney breast and to a wall.
In summary, the resident made a number of reports about the property in 2019, which included, amongst other things:
1. On 23 April 2019 she said the living room had “black mould” on floors and around windows. Bedroom and bathroom also had “black mould” on walls and skirting boards. She also reported window seals were causing mould issues.
2. On 3 May 2019 she said there was mould above kitchen cupboards.
3. On 3 June 2019 she reported a leak from pipes in the kitchen.
4. On 24 June 2019 she reported a further leak in the kitchen, but from under the sink.
5. On 2 August 2019 she reported damp on the walls in the hallway and on a bedroom wall.
6. On 4 September 2019 she reported an “unidentifiable leak” from the kitchen floor and reported concerns about damp in the hallway and bedroom.
7. On 30 September 2019 she reported leak from the boiler.
The landlord’s repairs log show it did some work to resolve some of these issues and in May and June 2019 it completed mould related work. It is noted that it referred the damp issue to a surveyor in September 2019.
Between December 2019 and January 2020 the resident continued to report damp issues in the kitchen and under the flooring in the hallway and bathroom. It is understood that the landlord attempted to arrange appointments at that time. The landlord’s records note that on 20 January 2020 the resident told it that it looked at the issues last year but “nothing went ahead”. Its records also show it completed another inspection on 7 February 2020 and said there were “no damp or water issues and that the resident responsibilities” to fix.
On 17 April 2020 the resident reported damp issues in the kitchen, under flooring in the hallway and bathroom. It was noted that the flooring was lifting.
The Service has seen photos of the property dated August 2021 and October 2021. These show:
1. Mould on a coat in the hallway.
2. Water staining on a hallway wall.
3. Kitchen – water staining above a cupboard and on the wall next to the window.
4. Bedroom – water staining to chimney breast and to the corner with built in wardrobe.
On 9 November 2022 the resident raised a complaint. We have not been provided with a copy of the initial complaint, however, it is not disputed that the complaint relates to reports of leaks, damp and mould at the property.
On 17 November 2022 the resident expressed dissatisfaction with the landlord’s contact about an increase in rent.
On 23 November 2022 the landlord issued its stage 1 response, it said:
1. The complaint was about a leaking gutter and the resident wanted it repaired to resolve her complaint.
2. It said the repair was raised on 18 August 2022 and accepted that it visited several times but the repair was outstanding. A repair appointment had been made for 30 November 2022 and following this it would make good the areas that have been affected at the property.
3. It accepted its standard of service and care had fallen below what it aimed to deliver. It explained it did not aim for repairs to be “dragged out” but understood that the repair could have been completed sooner.
4. It said its next step was to complete the outstanding repair to the gutter. It said it had identified the scope of works and would monitor the progress until works were completed.
5. It said once the works were completed it would then be in a position to calculate some form of compensation offer.
The Service has been provided with photos from December 2022, these show:
1. Hand written note on the wall saying there was a “38% moisture level” in the hall way.
2. Water leak to the kitchen ceiling above the window. With hand written note saying “19% moisture level” to the kitchen ceiling above window.
3. Hand writing on the wall saying “33% moisture level” to the kitchen wall at the right of the window and 28% moisture level to the left of the window.
4. “Water ingress” in the hall way underneath electricity meter box.
We have also been provided with photos from March 2023, these show similar information to the other photos.
On 19 March 2023 the resident escalated her complaint to the landlord. She said:
1. She had been dealing with damp and water leaks in her hallway, bedroom and kitchen since she moved to the property in April 2019 and had been reporting the issues since then.
2. She said it treated black mould in 2019 but not the cause of the “water ingress” from the chimney.
On 3 April 2023 the landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate her complaint to stage 2 of its complaints process. It said it aimed to respond within 15 working days from the date of escalation and that due to a high number of escalations it extended the timeframe to 26 April 2023.
On 24 April 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 response. It said the complaints were about the leaking gutter and a rent increase letter whilst the repairs were ongoing. It said:
1. In response to the resident’s unhappiness about receiving a rent increase letter. It said it applied rent increases in line with government formula for 2023/2024 and meant rent deductions could not be given as compensation as part of a rent related complaint. It said it explained on 17 November 2022 that it would investigate the repair work complaint and if applicable, it would provide compensation in line with its policies.
2. It explained that the rent increase was in line with the 7% cap applied by the government for social landlord’s. It referred the resident to the First-tier Tibunal, Property Chamber if she wanted her rent independently reviewed.
3. It apologised for the delay in sending its acknowledgement of the resident’s escalation request.
4. It spoke to the resident on 23 April 2023 and was sorry to learn the repair work was still outstanding. It said the surveyor’s appointment to check damp in January 2023 did not go ahead and that she received no contact since December 2022.
5. It apologised that the stage 1 resolution manager did not manage the completion of the repairs as agreed. It said this was not the level of service it expected and was sorry for the impact caused to the resident.
6. It had fed back on training for the stage 1 resolution manager and would deal with the matter internally. It explained how it had recently completed a “large scale merger” and was focusing on the root cause of complaints as part of this. It said it had increased its staffing levels and provided further training so that complaint handling issues were not repeated.
7. It offered the resident £600 compensation for the time, trouble and inconvenience taking account of the length of time the repair had been outstanding and the impact of this. It said this was the maximum compensation for extensive disruption.
8. It also offered £250 compensation for its complaint handling delays. Again it said this was the maximum award for complaint handling.
9. It said it had arranged for a surveyor to contact the resident for a further inspection on the damp and water leak issue. It said it would monitor the work and contact the resident once the works had been completed. It said it would then discuss further compensation, if needed.

After internal complaints process

On 25 April 2023 the resident provided comments in response to the landlord’s letter. She said:
1. She told it on 25 November 2022 that not all the damp and water leak problems were due to malfunctioning gutters.
2. She appreciated the apology but the landlord’s response omitted her stage 2 complaint submission form had gone “missing” in the complaints system. She said this only came to light when she contacted it on 30 March 2023, despite submitting the complaint on 19 March 2023.
3. She was told by its surveyor in December 2022 that it needed another visit to assess how the damp patches were developing. She said she was told she would be contacted about this but was not.
4. She appreciated the landlord’s offer of compensation and said she would accept it. She said she would also ask the Service to assess the fairness of the total compensation as she did not feel it was proportionate to the true impact of the longstanding repair issues in her property.
5. The landlord’s position to only look at outstanding repairs reports no longer than 6 months was too narrow. She said it only looked at issues from 9 November 2022 instead of looking at the full timeline of the same problems. She told it she was disappointed that the complaints about the same issues since April 2019 had not been addressed. She described the issues as:
  1. Extensive damp damage to the bedroom, kitchen and hallway.
  2. Mould infested walls, kitchen cupboards and property.
  3. Rainwater repeatedly flooding the electrical board of the boiler and leaking through light fixtures and the kitchen ceiling.
On 8 August 2023 the landlord listed all the recommended work. The resident responded the same day providing some suggestions on the works.
On 24 August 2023 the resident highlighted the work that was outstanding despite the contractors attending. The landlord’s response the following day explained that the contractor had not attended the final appointment.
On 1 September 2023 the landlord told the resident that it would start paint and mould work on 4 September 2023. On 5 September 2023 the resident told the landlord that new stains had appeared on the chimney breast. She said the mould removal in the kitchen did not go ahead, nor did painting in areas as the “water ingress” issues were not resolved. She told it about the condition of the property and provided photos.
On 22 September 2023 the landlord told the resident that its surveyor would attend on 3 October 2023 to investigate a decant request due to the leak at the property. However, on 4 October 2023 the resident issued a letter of claim. This related to reports of damp and mould at the property since 2019 and an ongoing leak.
An expert witness report dated 22 November 2023 made a number of recommendations which included, amongst other things:
1. Hallway- a leak detection specialist to inspect the property and to replace damp affected plasterboard ceiling at the entrance hallway.
2. Bedroom – inspect if property impacted by rising damp, remove and replace “damp and rot affected” skirting boards
3. Kitchen – remove and replace ceiling, make good plaster to wall, remove external eroded/defective bricks.
4. Work to windows, redecoration work and external work to slabs and brickwork.
5. The report also provided pictures of the property which show damp stains, a bowed kitchen ceiling, cracks to the brickwork and readings within the ‘red’ band of the protimeter (a moisture measuring tool).

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

Despite requests for surveys and inspections conducted by the landlord, it has not provided this information. The evidence provided shows gaps in the chronology of events and at times it is unclear when the landlord conducted inspections and what was recommended at that time. While the landlord’s failure to provide the requested information will be addressed later within this report, for the purposes of the complaints about the reports of damp and mould and leaks, inferences have been drawn where it is fair and reasonable to do so.
It is noted that the resident has raised concerns about the landlord’s rent increase. It is important to explain that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which under paragraph 42 (e) of the Scheme “concern the level of rent or service charge or the amount of the rent or service charge increase”. Here the resident has raised her unhappiness with the rent increase, in relation to the condition of the property. While the complaints relating to leaks, damp and mould will be considered within the report, concerns about the level of rent increase would be most effectively decided upon by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).

Handling of reports of damp and mould at the property

From April 2019 onwards the resident reported issues of damp and mould in the living room, bedroom and kitchen. The landlord appropriately completed some cleaning work to the mould in May and June 2019 and referred the matter to a surveyor in September 2019.
The landlord has not provided a copy of its surveyor’s report and without any evidence to the contrary it is reasonable to accept that following the landlord’s survey, in or around September 2019, it did not complete work. This was despite what it knew about the property. This was not appropriate.
The landlord’s records note that in January 2020 the resident said it looked at the damp issue last year but “nothing went ahead”. Its repair log notes another inspection was completed in February 2020, where it noted there were “no damp or water issues” and that it was the resident’s responsibility to fix. The landlord’s position in early 2020 was contradictory and would have caused the resident confusion in it saying the non-existent issues were the resident’s responsibility.
The landlord’s lack of appropriate action meant the resident had to repeatedly tell it about the worsening conditions of the property which involved reports of damp and mould in the hallway, bedroom and kitchen.
The Service has seen photos of the property from April 2019, August 2021, October 2021, December 2022 and March 2023. These show markings relating to water staining and writing describing moisture levels as between 19% and 38% in the hallway, kitchen and bedroom. The photos also show mould on the resident’s belongings. However, there is no evidence to show the landlord completed any work to the property following the further reports of damp and mould and what it was aware of. There is also no evidence to show the landlord investigated the cause of the damp or water issues at that time. This was not appropriate.
While the landlord’s stage 1 response from November 2022 said it raised repair work in August 2022, it took too long to get to this stage, it did not complete the work at that time and it is unclear whether the work relating to damp and mould remains outstanding. This was also not appropriate.
Overall, the landlord’s failure to investigate the cause of water staining, damp and mould, complete work relating to this, its failure to monitor the work and to identify a complex case at an early stage was not appropriate and amounts to severe maladministration.
When deciding an appropriate remedy, the Service’s remedy guidance has been considered along with the scale of the damp and mould issues and the impact this would have had on the resident’s enjoyment of her home for a significant period of time. When considering the landlord’s repeated failings for over 4 years, a rental based compensation of 15% has been decided as appropriate in these circumstances. The landlord has confirmed the monthly rent was £587.66 at that time, 15% of this is £88.14.
When deciding an appropriate timeframe for compensation, it is acknowledged that the landlord did some work to treat the mould and it is understood that since October 2023 the resident has declined repair work. This has been taken into account when deciding a reasonable timeframe. As such a 50 month timeframe has been decided as appropriate in the circumstances. £88.14 multiplied by 50 equals £4,407 in rental compensation.
It is important to explain that this calculation is not exact and as such a further order for compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience has been made.

Handling of reports of leaks

The photos provided to the Service from August 2021 and October 2021 show that the landlord identified water leaking into the kitchen. Photos from December 2022 and March 2023 also detail water leaking into the kitchen. However, there is no evidence to show the landlord looked further into the issue at that time. The landlord failed to appropriately investigate the leak, or complete repair work in line with its policy. It did this despite the resident’s repeatedly raising the leak issues with it and raising a complaint. This was not appropriate.
It is noted that within the landlord’s stage 1 response it said it would monitor the issue, however, it failed to do this and the resident had to contact it again about the same issue and outstanding repairs. The landlord’s failure to do what it said it would was not appropriate.
The evidence shows that the resident continued to report the kitchen leak and raised concerns about a leak into the hallway. It took the landlord until September 2023 to suggest a decant while it investigated the leak. While it is understood that the decant did not go ahead and a letter of claim was issued in October 2023. The landlord’s failure to appropriately investigate the reports of leaks from August 2021 to September 2023 was not appropriate. The landlord failure to complete the associated repair work in line with its policy was also not appropriate.
It is understood that a report from 22 November 2023 noted that the kitchen ceiling was “bowed” and recommended a leak detection specialist inspect the hallway. When considering this, the landlord’s failure to identify the issues sooner was not appropriate and would have had a significant impact on the resident’s enjoyment of her home.
The landlord’s handling of the reports of leaks was not appropriate and amounts to severe maladministration.
It is noted that within its stage 2 response the landlord offered the resident £600 compensation for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused in relation to its handling of the leak issue. The resident has asked the Service to consider the landlord’s compensation offer, which is something we would usually do in such circumstances. When considering the almost 2 year timeframe that the landlord failed to appropriately investigate the leak and it significantly exceeding its repair timeframe, a greater compensation amount would be more appropriate to recognise the landlord’s repeated failings. The Ombudsman has made a further order for compensation.

Complaint handling

The resident escalated her complaint on 19 March 2023. It took the landlord 2 weeks to acknowledge the resident’s complaint, this timeframe was unreasonable and meant the resident had to contact it see if it had received her escalated complaint. In response the landlord said it would issue its stage 2 response by 26 April 2023. It met this timeframe and issued its stage 2 response by 24 April 2023.
While it met its timeframe, its stage 2 response did not address the damp and mould issues despite this forming part of the resident’s escalation request. It is clear that the resident reported the same issues about damp and mould repeatedly from April 2019, the landlord’s decision to not consider the same events as part of its final response or explain why it could not within its stage 2 response, was not appropriate.
Within its stage 2 response the landlord offered the resident £250 compensation in recognition of its complaint handling delays. However, it failed to acknowledge its response not covering all the resident’s escalation points. This meant the resident had to contact it again explaining what it had omitted. As such the Ombudsman has made a further order for compensation in light of this.

Record keeping

Paragraph 10 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme confirms the Ombudsman’s expectation in relation to the provision of information, it says:
1. The landlord must provide copies of any information requested by the Ombudsman, that is, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, relevant to the complaint. This may include the following records and documents:
  1. Any internal files, documents correspondence, records, accounts or minutes of meetings in hard copy or electronic form.
As part of our investigation the landlord was asked to provide copies of surveys and inspection it conducted at the property as well as evidence to show the work it did. While the landlord has provided some information, it has not provided all the information requested. It is unclear what its surveyor found, what work was recommended at that time and whether it completed what was recommended following its inspections or surveys.
A landlord should have systems in place to maintain records of its surveys, the recommendations made and the works it completed. Good record keeping is important to evidence the actions a landlord and its contractor have taken. A failure to keep adequate records indicated the landlord’s repair processes are not operating effectively.
Overall the landlord has not provided the Service with the information mentioned above. It had failed to provide details of its surveys or inspection in response to reports of leaks, damp and mould. It has also failed to explain why it has been unable to provide this information. As such there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s record keeping.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s:
1. Handling of reports of damp and mould at the property.
2. Handling of reports of leaks.
3. Record keeping.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Reasons

The landlord repeatedly failed to investigate the cause of damp and mould at the property, it did this despite what the resident told it about the condition of the property. When the landlord did eventually raise repair work it failed to complete this or to monitor a potential hazard.
The landlord failed to investigate a leak over a significant period of time and also failed to complete the associated repair work. While it acknowledged its failing within its stage 2 response it did not do enough to put things right.
The landlord took 2 weeks to acknowledge the resident’s complaint. When it did respond, it failed to address the resident’s repeated concerns about damp and mould since April 2019.
The landlord has not provided the Service with information requested or provided an explanation on the reasons why it could not provide this information.

Orders

The Ombudsman orders the landlord to arrange for its chief executive to apologise to the resident for the failings identified within this report, in person (or in writing if preferred by the resident). This should be within 4 weeks of the date of this report.
The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay the resident a total of £6,857 compensation within 4 weeks of the date of this report. Compensation should be paid directly to the resident and not offset against any arrears:
1. £4,407 for the loss of enjoyment of the property.
2. £750 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by the highlighted failings relating to its handling of damp and mould.
3. £750 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by the highlighted failings relating to its handling of reports of leaks.
4. £100 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by its complaint handling failings.
5. £600 it already offered the resident, if it has not already paid this.
6. £250 it already offered the resident, if it has not already paid this.
The Ombudsman orders that within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord conducts an inspection of the property to assess its condition and decide the further work required. An appropriate specialist should conduct this inspection. Within 2 weeks of this inspection, the landlord should provide a copy of its survey report to the Service and the resident. It should confirm in writing:
1. If further work is required to the property. If so, it should explain why and provide a schedule of work.
2. The measures it will put in place to monitor whether the proposed works remedy the leak, damp and mould issues at the property.