East Midlands Housing Group Limited (202215290)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202215290

EMH Housing and Regeneration Limited

26 June 2023

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 concerns how the landlord responded to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property’s bathroom.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, which is a housing association. The property is a flat in a communal building. At the time that the resident made her complaint, the landlord operated a three-stage complaints policy. This has now changed to a two-stage complaints policy in compliance with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (which is available on our website).
3. On 8 February 2022, the resident called the landlord to inform it of damp and mould in the bathroom. The landlord’s notes of the call state that it was informed by the resident that there were patches of mould on the walls and ceiling between the sink and bath. The landlord arranged for a specialist contractor to inspect the bathroom on 14 March 2022 and informed the resident it would raise work orders for any work recommended by the contractor.
4. The resident wrote to the landlord on 7 April 2022 and requested to raise a formal complaint into how the landlord was handling the issue. She described the elements of her complaint as:
   1. The bathroom had been in an unhealthy condition due to damp and mould for the last year.
   2. This had had an effect on her existing health condition.
   3. She did not believe that the landlord had responded appropriately to the issue.
5. The landlord sent a stage one complaint response to the resident on 3 May 2022, then a follow-up to its stage one response on 17 May 2022. A stage two complaint response was sent to the resident on 31 August 2022. A panel review was then held to consider the complaint on 12 October 2022 and a final response to the complaint was sent by the landlord to the resident on 13 October 2022. In its responses, the landlord:
   1. Informed the resident that following the inspection, that the source of the damp and mould in the bathroom was found to be from condensation and poor ventilation. It raised works to replace the extractor fan and undertake a mould wash, which went ahead on 5 and 16 May 2022.
   2. Recognised that the appointment dates for this work was changed on several occasions. The landlord apologised for the inconvenience that this caused to the resident and offered £50 compensation for not completing the work in a timely manner.
   3. Noted that following a report from the resident made on 15 August 2022 that the mould had returned, the landlord arranged for a further inspection to go ahead on 30 August 2022. This found no evidence of any leaks from the bath or shower and found the plasterboard to be dry. The inspection also found that small patches of mould had returned, and the new extractor fan turned off. The inspection recommended the fitting of a shower screen and to block stain the affected areas.
   4. Explained that the new fan that was installed was a humidistat constant trickle ventilation fan designed to remedy condensation, improve ventilation, and be left on all the time. It further explained that the fan would provide ventilation during normal conditions and that when its humidity detector recorded high levels of humidity in the bathroom, the fan level would boost in order to remove it. The landlord advised the resident to keep the fan switched on and that it would control the condensation in the bathroom and prevent further issues with mould.
   5. Noted that during the inspection held on 30 August 2022, the landlord offered to fit a shower screen and apply block stain to the affected areas, but that this was declined by the resident.
   6. Confirmed that the panel review had found that it had acted appropriately by establishing that the cause of the damp and mould was from condensation caused by poor ventilation, and that its actions in installing a new fan, undertaking a mould wash and offering to apply block stain and install a shower screen was reasonable.
6. Following the completion of the complaints process, a further inspection of the property was undertaken on 26 November 2022. Work was then arranged to fit a splash guard and apply block stain.
7. In referring the case to this Service, the resident described the outstanding issues of the complaint as that she disputed the landlord’s position that condensation was the cause of the damp and mould. As a resolution to the complaint, the resident requested that the landlord replace the plasterboard and compensate her for the length of time it was taking it to resolve the issue.

Assessment and findings

Relevant policies and procedures

8. Section 4 of the tenancy agreement relates to responsibilities for repairs. This, in part, states that the landlord agrees to “keep in repair the structure and exterior of your home, including drains, gutters and external pipes; keep in repair and proper working order the installations we provide in your home for the supply of water, gas and electricity and for sanitation (including basins, sinks, baths and sanitary conveniences)”.
9. 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 good repair. The landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by the Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth is a potential hazard, and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require action.
10. The Ombudsman’s spotlight on damp and mould (which is available on our website) recommends that landlords “should adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions” and “should ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue”. The report goes on to advise landlords to “ensure that they clearly and regularly communicate with their residents regarding actions taken or otherwise to resolve reports of damp and mould” and “ensure there is effective internal communication between their teams and departments, and ensure that one individual or team has overall responsibility for ensuring complaints or reports are resolved, including follow up or aftercare”.
11. The landlord’s repairs policy categorises its repair types as “Emergency” (attend within 24 hours) and “Appointed” (attended at a time and date agreed with the tenant). The landlord defines an emergency repair as a repair “where a health and safety hazard or potential serious detriment risk is identified”.
12. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will consider making an offer of discretionary compensation “in instances where our services have not matched published standards irrespective of actual loss or expense incurred by the customer”. The policy recommends a compensation payment of £50 to £250 “for instances of service failure resulting in some impact on the complainant. Examples include repeated failures to reply to letters or return phone calls or incorrectly addressing correspondence (so as to cause offence/upset, but not a breach of data protection requirements)”.

How the landlord responded to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property’s bathroom

13. Once it had received the resident’s report of damp and mould in the bathroom, the landlord had a duty to respond to the issue in line with its obligations set out in the tenancy agreement and published policies and procedures. The landlord acted appropriately by arranging an inspection of the bathroom by a specialist contractor. The inspection report stated that “a localised area of dampness is visible to the wall plaster between the bath and basin at low level. This would appear to be due to over splash from the bath and sink when being used. I would advise that you should take considerations to tiling the affected area and / or installing a fitted shower screen to reduce the risk of water over spilling and so that the moisture does not soak into the plaster in this area”. The report went on to note that “there is an extractor fan fitted in the bathroom, but it was turned off at the fuse spur during my visit. However the tenant reported that after being on for a period of time the fan starts making ‘unusual noises’ which is the reason they have turned it off. I would advise for the fan to be inspected and maintained to ensure it can be used as required”.
14. The landlord acted in response to the inspection report by arranging a mould wash and installing a new extractor fan to improve ventilation and control humidity. The landlord also offered to install a shower screen, but this was declined by the resident. This was appropriate action for the landlord to take, as it accepted the conclusions of the inspection and acted on its recommendations in order to resolve the issue and prevent the mould reoccurring. While the resident has stated her dissatisfaction that the landlord declined to tile the bathroom, the inspection report clearly stated that either tiling or the installation of a shower screen would reduce the risk of over-splash. The landlord also explained that as the plasterboard in the bathroom had been found to be dry, it was satisfied that a shower screen would resolve the issue. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to take the decision to install a shower screen over tiling.
15. However, there were delays in completing the work. The landlord’s contractor changed the appointment dates on several occasions. While the resident was given prior notice of the changes, the landlord apologised for not completing the work in a timely manner and offered £50 compensation. It was appropriate for the landlord to acknowledge the inconvenience caused to the resident by the changes made to appointment dates and offer redress in line with its compensation detailed above.
16. The landlord’s £50 compensation offer is also broadly in line with the Ombudsman’s own remedies guidance (which is available on our website). This recommends a payment of £50 to £100 in cases of service failure of a short duration that may not have significantly affected the overall outcome. This includes distress and inconvenience, time and trouble, disappointment, loss of confidence, and delays in getting matters resolved. A payment of £50 that recognised the number of times the appointment dates were changed and the inconvenience that this caused to the resident was reasonable in the circumstances. The measures taken by the landlord to redress what went wrong for this element of the complaint were proportionate to the impact that its failures had on the resident.
17. When the resident reported the return of mould, the landlord arranged a further inspection, offered to block stain the affected areas, again offered to install a shower screen, and provided information on how to properly use the new extractor fan in order to reduce humidity levels and lessen the chances of condensation building up in the bathroom. The landlord acted appropriately to the resident’s new reports, it noted the marked improvement in the bathroom and explained how the proper use of the fan along with the recommended additional work would resolve the issue.
18. Therefore, there is no evidence of service failure by the landlord. It acted appropriately, and in line with the guidance given in the Ombudsman’s spotlight on damp and mould, by arranging an inspection by a specialist contractor and then acting on the recommendations made in the inspection report. The landlord also explained how the new extractor fan would control humidity levels in the bathroom and how to use it properly. It also explained why it took the decision to install a shower screen rather than tile the bathroom.

Determination

19. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of redress to the resident in respect of how it responded to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property’s bathroom which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint.
20. The landlord has provided evidence that the resident accepted the compensation offer and that it has been paid. The landlord therefore does not need to take any further action.