Derby City Council (202440838)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202440838

Derby City Council

24 July 2025 (Amended on 3 November 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of damp and mould in the property and associated remedial works.
2. Reports of a blocked drain.

Background

The resident has a secure tenancy with the landlord which began in May 2019. The property is a ground floor flat. The landlord is a local authority. The resident has asthma and a medical condition which means she must have access to a toilet all the time. The resident also has a mental health condition. The landlord has a record of the resident’s mental health condition.
The resident first reported the damp and mould in the property in July 2019. The landlord inspected the property and found condensation to be the cause of the mould. The survey recommended the landlord replace the existing bathroom extractor fan, complete a mould wash, and consider installing a Positive Input Ventilation (PIV) unit. The resident reported the issue again in December 2022 when she informed the landlord the damp and mould in the property was affecting her asthma. The landlord completed the mould wash and offered to install a PIV unit. The resident told the landlord she would like time to think about this. The resident next reported the damp and mould in October 2022.
With regards to the drains, the resident said she had reported issues with the drains and her toilet overflowing at least twice a year since the start of her tenancy. The landlord had attended and cleared the drains but the issues continued. On 17 July 2024 the resident reported there was waste coming back into the property from the toilet.
On 17 July 2024 the resident complained that there had been an issue with her drains for years which caused her toilet to flood. When she had reported this to the landlord in July 2024, she told it the problem was with the external drains, but the call handler would not listen to her and insisted on sending a plumber. The appointments for a plumber took longer, which was a serious concern for the resident because this was the only toilet in the property and her medical condition meant she always needed access to a toilet. She also complained that the damp and mould issues in her property had been ongoing since she moved in. She had tried to redecorate but the mould always returned.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 1 August 2024. The landlord said it upheld the resident’s complaint and said:
1. It apologised that the call handler had not listened to the resident. It confirmed it had arranged for additional training to ensure this did not happen again.
2. It accepted the drains had been a reoccurring problem since 2019. However, the resident had said she had not had a problem with the drains since July 2023. It confirmed it had raised a job for a CCTV survey of the drains to see what was causing the issue.
3. It had completed a mould wash to the bathroom and bedroom window reveals on 3 February 2023.
4. It had instructed its contractor to install a PIV unit at the property. The contractor had attended on 22 December 2023 but was unable to complete the installation because the consumer unit needed upgrading.
5. The landlord had asked National Grid to install an isolator switch so that it could install a new consumer unit. National Grid would contact the resident to arrange a convenient appointment.
6. Once National Grid had installed the isolator switch, the landlord would instruct its contractor to upgrade the consumer unit, following which it would install the PIV unit.
7. It had arranged a mould wash in the kitchen, bedroom, and bathroom window for 8 August 2024.
On 30 August 2024 the resident escalated her complaint. She said the landlord had not done anything to resolve the damp and mould. She also said that a landlord employee had told her the damp and mould was not contributing to her asthma worsening.
On 4 October 2024 the landlord issued its stage 2 response. The landlord referred to the resident’s escalation request dated 30 August 2024 as well as an email dated 26 September 2024 in which the resident had told the landlord she had been unwell since moving into the property. The landlord responded as follows:
1. In relation to the damp and mould, it outlined the actions it had taken which included inspections, mould washes, and agreed to install a PIV unit. However, it said the contractor who had attended in December 2023 did not update the landlord with its findings. The landlord apologised that the miscommunication had caused delays.
2. National Grid had written to the resident on 5 August 2024 to agree an appointment date but had not heard back. The resident had told the landlord she could not recall receiving this letter. The landlord had asked National Grid to contact the resident again to arrange the appointment.
3. The landlord had arranged a further mould wash whilst the issues were ongoing. The resident had to cancel the initial appointment of 7 August 2024 due to being at work. The landlord rearranged to 8 September 2024, which the resident cancelled again. The landlord made a new appointment for 23 September 2024 which the landlord had to cancel, for which it apologised. It had rearranged the appointment to 18 October 2024.
4. In relation to the drainage issues, it confirmed its contractor had completed the CCTV survey on 27 September 2024. It said once it received the survey it would complete any suggested repairs.
5. The landlord upheld the complaint due to the miscommunication between the contractor and the landlord regarding installation of an isolator switch and consumer unit. It also acknowledged it cancelled the appointment for the mould wash on 23 September 2024.
In communication with this Service, the resident said having to deal with the damp and mould in the property and the drainage issues since 2019 had impacted upon her health and wellbeing. She said the landlord had inspected and completed mould washes, but it had not made any difference. In relation to the drains, she said when the drains blocked it backed up to her toilet, which would overflow into her bathroom when she flushed it. This concerned the resident, not only because of the hygiene implications but also because it meant she could not use her toilet until the landlord cleared the blockage.
As an outcome, the resident said she would like the landlord to resolve the damp and mould issues in her property or as an alternative she would like to move properties. She would also like the landlord to update her on the repairs it had completed to the drains to “put her mind at rest” and compensate her for the distress and inconvenience caused.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The landlord did not dispute the issues concerning the damp and mould and the blocked drain had been ongoing for a number of years. It acknowledged this within its stage 1 complaint response.
We can see the resident raised a previous complaint about the landlord’s handling of her reports of damp and mould. The landlord provided a stage 1 complaint response on 15 December 2022 and agreed to complete remedial works as an outcome. We have not seen any evidence to show the resident escalated her earlier complaint to stage 2 and it has therefore not completed the landlord’s internal complaint procedure.
In relation to the blocked drain, we can see the resident reported an issue with her toilet overflowing in January 2023. On 20 January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord to explain she was unhappy with its response and would be making a complaint.
This report will therefore focus on events from January 2023 onwards and whether the landlord’s actions were fair and reasonable. We may describe events from earlier than this where they provide important context.
Further to this, the resident has said the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould contributed to her asthma and breathing issues. We are unable to arrive at firm conclusions on the cause of the resident’s health conditions. This is because we do not have the authority or expertise to do so in the way a court or insurer might.
The resident may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if she considers that her health was affected by any action or failure by the landlord. While we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced because of any failure by the landlord.
The resident has told us that she wants the landlord to move her if it cannot resolve the damp and mould issues in her property. We can understand the resident’s reasons for wanting to move. However, we would not order the landlord to move a resident immediately as part of our investigation. This is because we do not have access to information on the availability of suitable vacant properties owned by the landlord at any one time and we do not have details of any other prospective tenants waiting to move who may have higher priority than the resident for rehousing. However, we have recommended that the landlord contact the resident to discuss her options for moving if it has not done so already.

Damp and mould

Damp and mould are potential health hazards to be avoided or minimised in line with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). The landlord as part of its obligations under section 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 must ensure the property is free from such hazards.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy, dated 9 March 2023, states it will follow its repair policy and complete any identified damp and mould works within its repair timescales.
The landlord agreed to install a PIV unit and complete a mould wash to the bathroom and bedroom window reveals as an outcome to the resident’s complaint in December 2022. These were recommendations from a damp and mould survey in 2019 which also recommended the landlord repair or replace the resident’s bathroom extractor fan.
The landlord completed a mould wash on or around 3 March 2023. The landlord did not have a damp and mould policy in place at this time. However, the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on damp and mould, issued in October 2021, stipulated landlords should have a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould ensuring their responses were timely and reflected the urgency of the issue. In this case, it took the landlord 53 days to raise and complete this work. This was unacceptable as it is the Ombudsman’s view that, although the landlord did not have a policy in place at the time, such a timescale would never be classed as reasonable.
In April 2023 the landlord’s contractor inspected the property and provided a quote to replace the bathroom extractor fan, following which the landlord logged the repair with a 60 working day target of 19 July 2023. The landlord’s contractor attended on 1 September 2023. This was not appropriate because it was 32 working days outside the landlord’s repair timescales.
The contractor was unable to install the extractor fan due to the resident being unwell on the day. The landlord rearranged the appointment to 22 December 2023. The contractor attended as arranged but did not install the extractor fan. The landlord confirmed in its stage 1 complaint response this was because the contractor had identified the resident’s consumer unit needed upgrading.
It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. If we investigate a complaint, we will ask for the landlord’s records. If there is disputed evidence and no audit trail, we may not be able to conclude that an action took place or that the landlord followed its own policies and procedures. In this case, whilst the landlord has provided its records, we have identified concerns around its record keeping.
For example, in its stage 1 complaint response the landlord referred to its attendance on 22 December 2023, which it said was to install the PIV unit, which it also repeats in its records. However, this appointment was to replace the extractor fan, not the PIV unit. While this did not affect the overall findings in this case, the landlord’s failure to accurately record repair information made it difficult for us to establish a clear timeline of the landlord’s actions in this case.
It is also concerning that the landlord’s records are not up to date in relation to the resident’s vulnerabilities. For example, we can see the resident informed the landlord that she had asthma in December 2022 but the landlord does not have this recorded on its systems. We have therefore recommended the landlord update its systems to ensure the resident’s vulnerabilities and medical conditions are recorded accurately, subject to the resident agreeing to this.
The resident contacted the landlord on 22 December 2023 to inform it the contractor had left her without a working extractor fan in her bathroom. She said the original fan had been working before the contractor’s attendance. The landlord raised a new repair with a target of 5 February 2024. The landlord’s records show it completed this repair on 12 January 2024. This attendance was appropriate and in line with the landlord’s repair timescales.
Following the resident’s complaint in July 2024 the landlord raised a further mould wash, which it initially arranged for 8 August 2024. In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord explained that it had to rearrange this appointment on at least 2 occasions due to the resident’s availability. The landlord also had to cancel an appointment on 23 September 2024 due to its driver breaking down on the day of the appointment. The landlord rearranged the appointment for the following day, but this was not convenient for the resident because she had to work. Whilst the landlord did not attend the pre-arranged appointment on 23 September 2023, the reason for the non-attendance was outside the landlord’s control.
We can see the landlord made attempts to contact the resident between September 2024 and December 2024 to rearrange the mould wash and asked the resident to provide some dates when it could attend. The landlord completed the mould wash on 10 January 2025. Whilst this was outside the landlord’s repair timescales, we can see there were mitigating circumstances to some of the delay due to the resident’s availability and the landlord’s vehicle breaking down.
The landlord has said that some of the delays in this case were caused by the resident not allowing access. Having reviewed the evidence, we can see the resident’s limited availability was due to her working commitments and not to her refusing access. We can also see that, whilst there were occasional delays with the resident responding to contact, these were only over a few days and did not affect the overall delays in this case.
In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord said it would make a note on its systems that Fridays were the resident’s preferred appointment days. Whilst it said it could not always guarantee this, this was a reasonable response. However, it is worth noting the landlord was aware of the resident’s limited availability from at least January 2023 and had it tried to work its appointments around the resident’s availability sooner, this may have reduced the overall delay and impact.
On 31 July 2024 the landlord raised repairs to upgrade the resident’s consumer unit and for National Grid to install an isolator switch. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord said the delay in it raising these repairs was due to the contractor not updating the landlord after its visit in December 2023. As outlined above, the landlord was aware damp and mould was an ongoing issue at the resident’s property since 2019. It had dealt with a previous complaint about this issue and the resident had told it how the damp and mould was impacting her. Therefore, the landlord should have chased the contractor for an update after its visit in December 2023 to establish what it found and if it needed to raise any follow-on works. Had it done this, it may have prevented the resident having to make a formal complaint. This was a failure which caused a delay of 7 months.
It was appropriate that the landlord arranged an asbestos survey before replacing the consumer unit. We can see the landlord instructed its contractor on 1 August 2024. Although the contractor said it struggled to contact the resident to arrange the appointment, it completed the survey on 12 August 2024, which we would consider to be a reasonable period in the circumstances.
The resident escalated her complaint in August 2024. Within her email she referred to a home visit and a comment made by an employee. The resident said the employee told her the damp and mould would not affect her asthma. The resident said this upset her and made her feel the landlord was minimising the impact the damp and mould was having on her health.
The resident clearly referred to this in her complaint escalation email, therefore the landlord should have investigated it and either responded to it in its stage 2 complaint response or logged it as a new complaint. There is no evidence that the landlord did either, which was a failure. We have therefore made an order that the landlord contact the resident to discuss this incident and whether she would like to raise a new complaint.
On 12 September 2024 the landlord contacted National Grid for an update. National Grid confirmed it sent a letter to the resident on 5 August 2024 but had not received a response. The resident said she had not received this letter. We have not seen a copy of this letter and therefore cannot say whether the contractor sent it or not. However, we can see the landlord referred the matter to National Grid, checked on progress, and asked National Grid to send the letter again when the resident said she had not received it, which was reasonable in the circumstances.
National Grid attended on 9 April 2025, following which they confirmed they did not need to complete any work on the isolator switch. The job to replace the consumer unit, bathroom fan, and the PIV unit remain outstanding at the date of our investigation. The landlord has advised that it found asbestos in the backboard behind the consumer unit and its contractor needed to complete a survey to see if it could replace the consumer unit without removing the asbestos. In relation to the PIV unit, the landlord raised a job to complete a PIV survey and quote on 20 June 2025. The landlord has informed us that it has an appointment to install the PIV unit and extractor fan on 15 August 2025.
We understand that delays can occur when trying to deal with complex repairs which involve several contractors. In this case, there were external contractors such as National Grid who were not agents of the landlord. However, in such cases we would expect the landlord to refer the issue to the contractor within a reasonable time and take reasonable steps to compel it to do the repairs in a timely manner. The delay in referring the isolator switch to National Grid delayed the landlord being able to progress the other repairs.
We have considered the mitigating factors surrounding the resident’s lack of availability to provide access and the issues the landlord faced with having to wait for an external contractor before it could commence the work. However, this does not remove the landlord of its responsibility to take proactive measures to resolve the damp and mould issue, which remained outstanding from at least January 2023 until the date of our investigation. This delay exceeds what could be mitigated by the resident’s availability and reliance on an external contractor.
In summary, we have identified maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould for the following reasons:
1. The landlord delayed in completing the mould wash in March 2023.
2. The landlord failed to attend the appointment to replace the bathroom extractor fan in September 2023 within its repair timescales.
3. There were delays in the landlord raising the repairs to replace the consumer unit and the isolator switch.
4. The landlord delayed in installing the consumer unit.
5. The landlord delayed in installing the bathroom extractor fan.
6. The landlord delayed in installing the PIV unit.
When there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord (apology, repairs and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The landlord acted fairly by apologising to the resident for the delay in progressing the repairs. It showed its attempt to put things right by completing mould washes and raising repairs. However, it did not offer any compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused. In this case, the resident had been reporting damp and mould in the property from at least January 2023, and the remedial works were outstanding up to the date of this investigation.
We have ordered the landlord to compensate the resident for failing to resolve the damp and mould that affected her living conditions and well-being within a reasonable time. We have considered that the landlord has said it experienced difficulties arranging appointments, but this does not remove the landlord’s responsibilities. We have ordered the landlord to pay £1,000 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s delay in completing the works.
This sum reflects our remedies guidance which says such a sum would be payable where there has been a significant impact on the resident. It also reflects the resident’s vulnerabilities which meant the delays to remedial works and the landlord’s handling of it may have had a more severe effect on her compared to other residents in the same position without her vulnerabilities.

Blocked drain

The resident’s tenancy agreement states the landlord is responsible to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property, which includes the drains, gutters, and external pipes. It also states the landlord will keep in repair and good working order all the installations in the property for the supply of water and sanitation.
On 18 January 2023 the resident reported her toilet was overflowing when she flushed it. The resident told the landlord this had been an ongoing issue since she moved into the property. She told the landlord this was the only toilet in the property, and she had a medical condition which meant she always needed access to a toilet. The landlord logged the repair and sent a plumber. Although the resident disagreed with the landlord’s decision to send a plumber, it was reasonable that it wanted to inspect the repair to establish what action it needed to take.
The plumber attended on the same date. The landlord’s records show it was unable to gain access and left a card asking the resident to contact the landlord to rearrange the appointment. The resident said she was in at the time of the visit. Based on the documentary evidence available, we are unable to make a finding on this point. However, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have followed this up with the resident by other means such as a phone call or an email, given her health needs.
The resident reported the issue again on 20 January 2023. The landlord attended on the same date and identified the issue was due to blocked drains. This attendance was appropriate and in line with the landlord’s repair timescales. However, because this attendance was after 5pm on Friday 20 January 2023, this meant the landlord left the resident with an overflowing toilet until it raised the follow-on works the following week.
The landlord’s repair policy says it considers urgent repairs to include total or partial loss of services such as a blocked toilet (with no others available). The policy says it will respond to urgent repairs of this nature within 24 hours. The policy also says it will consider the individual circumstances of the resident and judge the impact of the problem on their situation. The resident said she informed the landlord of her medical condition and why she needed access to a working toilet. There is no evidence that the landlord considered the resident’s individual circumstances or the impact on her at this time, which was a failure.
The landlord arranged for its drainage contractor to attend on 25 January 2023 to clear the drains. Following which it raised the following repairs:
1. Reseal the pan connector to the resident’s toilet with a target of 28 February 2025. The landlord marked the repair complete on 20 February 2023.
2. Repair to the manhole cover and pipework to prevent further blockages with a target date of 21 April 2023. The landlord marked the repair complete on 16 March 2023.
Both attendances were appropriate because they were within the landlord’s repair timescales.
The resident reported the blocked drain again on 5 July 2023 and 19 July 2023. The landlord’s contractor attended within 1 working day and jetted the drains until clear. Both attendances were appropriate because they were in line with the landlord’s repair timescales.
On 17 July 2024 the resident reported her toilet was leaking from the bottom. She said the call handler again decided to send a plumber, despite her explaining the issue was with the external drains, not internal. We can see the landlord logged the repair with a target of 25 days. This was not appropriate because it was not in line with the landlord’s repair policy. Further to this, the landlord again failed to consider the resident’s individual circumstances.
Following the resident’s complaint the landlord arranged a CCTV survey for the manhole outside leading to the resident’s property. It updated the resident of this via email on 24 July 2024. The landlord logged this repair with a 1-day target. The contractor completed the survey on 27 September 2024 which was outside the landlord’s target. However, we can see the contractor informed the landlord that it was having trouble contacting the resident to arrange the appointment with her. Further to this, having considered the landlord’s repair policy which says it will complete non-urgent repairs, where it needs specialist equipment, within 12 weeks, we would consider this attendance to be reasonable in the circumstances.
However, it is concerning to this Service that it took the resident to raise a formal complaint before the landlord fully investigated the drainage issue, considering the length and number of times the resident had been reporting the issue.
The CCTV survey found there were structural issues to both drainage pipes from the resident’s property. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord confirmed its contractor had completed the CCTV survey and said it would schedule any identified repairs when it received the report. The landlord said it completed the recommended repairs to the drains on 15 October 2024. The resident has told us the landlord did not update her on the findings of the CCTV survey or the repairs it completed. This left her not knowing what action the landlord had taken, if any. She said if the landlord had updated her this would have ‘put her mind at rest’. The resident has told us that, as an outcome to her complaint, she would like the landlord to update her on what repairs it completed to the drains. We have therefore made an order below to reflect this.
We can see the resident raised a further repair for a blocked drain on 6 January 2025, which the landlord attended on 8 January 2025. The resident has not reported any further issues with her toilet or drains.
In summary, we have identified maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the blocked drain for the following reasons:
1. The landlord failed to log follow-on works in line with its repair policy following its visit on 20 January 2023.
2. The landlord failed to consider the resident’s individual circumstances when logging repairs in January 2023 and July 2024.
3. The landlord failed to update the resident on the repairs it completed to the drains in October 2024.
The landlord acted fairly by it apologising for the way its staff member made the resident feel during the telephone call in July 2024, and the inconvenience caused due to the delays in repairing the drains. It demonstrated learning from outcomes in its stage 1 complaint response by arranging additional training for its staff member to ensure it could identify key information when receiving calls in the future. It showed its attempt to put things right by repairing the drains.
However, it did not offer any compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused. In this case the resident had explained how her medical condition meant she always needed access to a toilet and not having this severely impacted her. We have therefore ordered the landlord to pay compensation of £600 to the resident to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused in its handling of the resident’s reports of a blocked drain. This is in line with our Remedies Guidance.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a blocked drain.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord must, within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
1. Provide the resident with a full written apology for the failures identified in this report. The apology must come from a manager.
2. Pay the resident compensation of £1,600 which is comprised of:
  1. £1,000 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould.
  2. £600 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the blocked drain.
  3. All payments must be paid directly to the resident and not credited to the rent account unless otherwise agreed by the resident.
3. Provide the resident, and this Service, with an action plan, setting out when it will replace the consumer unit, PIV unit, and bathroom extractor fan. The action plan must set out:
  1. when it intends to commence the works.
  2. when it is likely to complete the works.
4. The landlord must then use its best endeavours to ensure the work is started and completed within the timescales it sets out.
5. Contact the resident to discuss the conduct of the staff member at the home visit around August 2023 and establish if the resident wishes to make a new complaint.
6. Provide the resident with an update on what repairs it has completed to the drains.
7. Update its systems to record the resident’s medical conditions, subject to the resident agreeing.
The landlord must, within 6 weeks of the date of this report, complete a review of this case to identify what went wrong and what learning it can take from it. Specifically, around identifying individual circumstances of a resident when logging repairs. The landlord must share the review with this Service.
The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of how it has complied with the above orders within 6 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

We recommend the landlord contact the resident to discuss her rehousing options.