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

Camden Council (202313316)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202313316

Camden Council

21 January 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 damp and mould at the resident’s property and her damaged belongings.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The resident is elderly and a wheelchair user, and the landlord is aware of this. The resident is being represented by her daughter in this complaint. For ease of reference, the resident and her daughter will both be referred to as “the resident” in this report.
  2. Following a report from the resident about damp and mould within her property, on 15 February 2023, the landlord raised a work order for a damp and mould inspection to be carried out on 22 February 2023. However, the appointment did not go ahead because of an error with the wrong appointment times being communicated to the resident. The landlord booked a new inspection appointment for 9 March 2023, but the landlord’s surveyor did not attend.

 

  1. On 24 March 2023, the resident submitted her complaint to the landlord. She explained she had contacted the landlord several times to report the damp and mould in her property. However, the landlord had not carried out any works to resolve the damp and mould. The resident also stated that she had recently come out of hospital due to having pneumonia and explained she was worried that the damp and mould was going to make her unwell.
  2. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 12 April 2023. It explained during April 2023, its mould supervisor carried out a survey of the property and identified that there was moderate mould within the property and a possible leak. The landlord confirmed it arranged for a plumber to inspect the leak, and it also provided the resident with a dehumidifier to help dry out her property. It also explained that it provided the resident with the rehousing list details, as she needed to be rehoused prior to works being carried out at the property. The landlord offered the resident £100 compensation to recognise its delay in investigating the damp and mould.
  3. On 12 April 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and requested her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process. She explained that the £100 compensation offer would not cover the cost of replacing all her items when rehoused. The resident also stated she was still waiting for an update about being rehoused and stated that the smell of damp and mould was horrendous. She explained she would like to be rehoused at a property on her estate with the same adaptations she had in her current property.
  4. On 13 April 2023, the resident submitted a legal disrepair claim to the landlord in relation to the damp and mould. The resident’s solicitor wrote to the landlord about the damp and mould conditions within the property and asked for the landlord to provide its proposals and compensation within 20 working days. In addition, on 10 May 2023, the resident’s solicitor arranged for a surveyor to inspect the resident’s property. The surveyor identified high levels of humidity and moisture within the property.
  5. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 12 May 2023. It explained in response to the resident’s statement about her damaged items, that any claim for damaged items should be made through the resident’s contents insurance or if she did not have contents insurance, she could submit a claim on the landlord’s public liability insurance. The landlord explained the resident refused a temporary accommodation offer from the landlord due to her being a wheelchair user and asked for a like–for–like property with disability adaptations. In addition, the landlord confirmed it offered the resident a permanent move to a property on the same housing estate and stated that the resident had now moved into the property. It also explained it agreed with the compensation amount awarded in its stage 2 complaint response and stated it rehoused the resident within a reasonable timescale.
  6. On 18 May 2023, the landlord’s legal team wrote to the resident’s solicitor about the disrepair claim. It explained that it did not accept liability for the damp and mould at the resident’s property. It stated that a poorly fitted washing machine caused dampness at the property. The landlord’s legal team also explained that it offered a permanent move to a like for like property on the same housing estate and the resident accepted the property. It also explained that it was not responsible for the resident’s damaged carpet, and she should claim on her own contents insurance. The landlord’s legal team explained that it previously offered the resident £100 compensation and would not be making any further offers of compensation. The disrepair claim is no longer ongoing as the resident and her solicitor chose not to pursue it further.
  7. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated that her desired outcome was for the landlord to provide compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused and compensation for her damaged belongings.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

  1. The resident has mentioned as part of the complaint that the damp and mould may have impacted her health. She stated due to becoming unwell, in April 2023 an ambulance attended her property. The Ombudsman acknowledges the resident’s concerns. We understand this has been a difficult time for her. It is outside the Ombudsman’s role to determine whether there is a direct link between the landlord’s actions or inaction and any specific impact on the resident’s health. It would be more appropriately suited for a court or liability insurer to investigate this as a personal injury claim. Courts can award damages in a different way to the Ombudsman and review medical evidence. However, it is generally accepted that damp and mould can pose a significant health risk, particularly to those with breathing conditions such as pneumonia. This service can consider the general risk, and distress and inconvenience caused by any errors by the landlord as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her health.

Policies and Procedures

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy explains that the landlord is responsible for appliances and fittings that use water inside a resident’s home and damp-proof work.
  2. The policy also includes the following response timescales for repair categories:
    1. Emergency repairs – the landlord will respond and make the repair issue safe before 8pm or if the repair issue poses a risk of immediate danger, it will attend within 2 hours.
    2. Urgent repairs – the landlord will respond and complete the repair within five working days.
    3. Routine repairs – the landlord will respond and complete the repair within 20 working days.
  3. In addition, the landlord’s repairs policy explains that the landlord is not normally responsible for any damage or loss of resident’s fixtures, including:
    1. Furniture
    2. Carpets
    3. Clothing
    4. Other household items such as contents of a fridge freezer.
  4. The policy states that this is usually the case even if it is linked to a repair that the landlord is responsible for. Therefore, the landlord strongly recommends that residents take out home contents insurance.
  5. At the time of the resident’s damp and mould report and complaint, the landlord did not have a damp and mould policy in place. However, it created a damp and mould policy shortly after, in December 2023. Therefore, the Ombudsman has not made any recommendations with regards to the landlord’s policies in this report.

Damp and mould at the resident’s property.

  1. On 15 February 2023, the landlord booked a damp inspection to be carried out at the resident’s property following a report of damp and mould. The landlord acted appropriately by arranging a damp inspection. It booked the inspection for 22 February 2023. However, the appointment did not go ahead because there was a miscommunication between the landlord and resident about the appointment time. The Ombudsman recognises the miscommunication would have caused inconvenience to the resident.
  2. Shortly after the missed appointment, the landlord took reasonable steps by rebooking the inspection appointment for 9 March 2023. However, considering the resident’s vulnerabilities, it would have been appropriate to book the inspection for an earlier date, if possible. The landlord’s surveyor failed to attend the inspection appointment on 9 March 2023, resulting in the resident chasing the landlord for an update on the outstanding inspection. The delay by the landlord in completing the damp and mould inspection was unreasonable.
  3. Due to the damp and mould inspection remaining outstanding, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord on 24 March 2023. She explained she had contacted the landlord on several occasions for an update on the damp inspection. The resident also stated that the damp and mould within the property was bad and stated that she would need to be moved to another flat on the same housing estate if works were required to be carried out to resolve the damp and mould.
  4. Following the resident’s complaint submission, on 30 March 2023, the landlord booked an appointment for the damp inspection to be carried out on 3 April 2023. The landlord’s repairs log confirms that the damp and mould inspection was carried out on the agreed date. The surveyor identified black mould and damp within the living room, hallway, hallway cupboards and bedroom. In addition, the surveyor stated that the floor within the property was very wet, which was being caused by a leak. The surveyor recommended for the leak to be investigated and resolved, then following this, a mould wash and remedial work to be completed. The landlord took reasonable steps by completing the damp and mould inspection. However, it took around 7 weeks from when the initial damp and mould issues were raised for the landlord to carry out the inspection. This was unacceptable considering the resident was vulnerable and had recently come out of the hospital due to having pneumonia.
  5. Shortly after the damp inspection was carried out, the landlord’s plumber attended the resident’s property on 4 April 2023. The plumber identified the cause of the leak was from a copper pipe connected to the resident’s washing machine. The plumber completed the necessary works to resolve the leak, and the landlord also provided the resident with a dehumidifier to help dry out the property. The landlord responded quickly to the leak identified during the inspection and acted reasonably by carrying out the repairs to stop the leak.
  6. Following the repair of the leak, there was still repairs required to resolve the damp and mould at the resident’s property. The landlord agreed with the resident that she would need to be decanted (temporarily moved) to alternative accommodation for the works to be carried out. On 5 April 2023, the landlord offered to decant the resident to a hotel whilst the damp and mould works were carried out. However, the landlord stated the resident declined the offer of hotel accommodation because of her being a wheelchair user. The resident told the landlord that she would only consider a move to a like for like property on the same housing estate with the relevant adaptations for her disability. Following the resident’s request, the landlord provided the resident with the rehousing list details. The Ombudsman is not questioning the resident’s reasons for declining the hotel accommodation. However, hotel accommodation usually offers accessible rooms and can accommodate wheelchair users. Therefore, the landlord acted reasonably by offering hotel accommodation to the resident.
  7. In response to the resident’s request for a like for like property on the same housing estate, the landlord provided the resident with application details for its rehousing list. This was a reasonable step taken by the landlord as it should operate an application system for rehousing to be consistent and fair to all applicants for its properties. The application would ensure the landlord had the information it needed to make a decision on the resident’s rehousing request.
  8. On 12 April 2023, the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response to the resident. It acknowledged that there had been a delay in it completing the damp and mould inspection at the resident’s property. It apologised for the delay and offered the resident £100 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay. It was a positive step that the landlord offered compensation. However, the amount offered was not sufficient to recognise the distress and inconvenience the resident would have experienced as a result of the landlord’s errors, particularly as she was vulnerable. On the same day the stage 1 response was issued, the resident asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 of the landlord’s process. She explained the £100 compensation offer would not cover the cost of replacing all her damaged items when rehoused.
  9. The landlord arranged a property viewing for a like for like property on the same housing estate on 25 April 2023. The resident accepted a permanent move to the property and signed the new tenancy agreement on 28 April 2023. Shortly after this, the resident’s belongings and her adapted furniture were moved to the new property. Following this, the resident permanently moved to the new property. In this instance, the landlord acted over and beyond its obligations, as it was not required to offer the resident a property on the same housing estate or offer a permanent move. A temporary move would be considered acceptable whilst repairs were completed as the property could be repaired to make it suitable for the resident’s requirements again. A permanent move is generally only required when a property cannot reasonably be repaired or adapted to make it suitable for the resident’s needs.
  10. Besides the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould, the resident also raised as part of her complaint to the landlord that some items in her property, including her sofa and carpet, were damaged by the damp and mould. The landlord responded to the resident’s concerns in its stage 2 complaint response and explained that any claim for damaged possessions should be made through the resident’s contents insurance. However, it explained if the resident did not have contents insurance, she could submit a claim on the landlord’s public liability insurance, and it provided her with a copy of its public liability insurance form.
  11. The Ombudsman recognises it must have been difficult for the resident dealing with her belongings being damaged. However, in this case, the landlord considered the resident’s request and provided a reasonable response. The landlord would only be responsible for reimbursing the residents for their possessions if there was sufficient evidence to confirm the landlord was directly responsible for the residents’ possessions being damaged through its actions or inaction. Therefore, it was reasonable for the landlord to refer the resident to claim on her contents insurance policy, if she had one, or claim on its liability insurance if she did not have a contents insurance policy in place. Landlords are entitled to use liability insurance as a means of managing such claims and the landlord was not obliged to consider a claim outside the insurance process. The resident informed the Ombudsman in January 2025 that she claimed under her contents insurance and received a settlement of approximately £1200 for her damaged belongings.
  12. The compensation awarded is in line with the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation, which is set out in our remedies guidance (published on our website). The remedies guidance suggests awards of £50 to £100, where there was a minor failure by the landlord in the service it provided, and it did not appropriately acknowledge these and/or fully put them right. In this case, the landlord offered some compensation to the resident, however, the amount offered was not enough to recognise the impact the delay would have had on the resident. The landlord should therefore pay the resident an additional £100, bringing the total compensation to £200.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was a service failure in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould at the resident’s property and her damaged belongings.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of the damp and mould at her property. This amount is in addition to the £100 the landlord offered in its stage 1 complaint response.
  2. The landlord must comply with the above order within 4 weeks of the date of this report, providing evidence to the Ombudsman that it has done so by the same date.