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

Haringey London Borough Council (202325599)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202325599

Haringey London Borough Council

18 October 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of:
    1. damp and mould.
    2. damage to belongings due to the damp and mould.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant. She succeeded the tenancy from her late mother in March 2021. The property is a 3–bedroom house. The resident occupies the property with her daughter.
  2. The resident has said her late mother reported damp and mould to the landlord a number of times over the years. The resident provided evidence that shows she reported the issue soon after she succeeded her late mother’s tenancy. She provided evidence of events from June 2021 onwards. This evidence included text messages and a voicemail from the landlord. The resident has said the text message are her chasing the landlord about damp and mould in her property between June 2021 and May 2022. They suggest the landlord’s contractor visited the property on 8 October 2021. It is unclear if the contractor completed any repairs. The records are limited on what happened afterwards.
  3. The landlord inspected the property around May 2023. An information sheet shows there was damp and mould in the kitchen, living room and hallway. Repair records show the contractor completed some structural and treatment works to address the issue.
  4. On 16 June 2023 the resident complained to the landlord. She said the damp and mould in her home had got worse and spread to all the walls and flooring downstairs. This included the kitchen, living room, hallway, bathroom, bedroom and some large cupboards. On 3 August 2023, the resident chased the landlord for updates. She said that the damp and mould was damaging her furniture and sentimental items. She said it was having adverse effect on her and her daughter’s health.
  5. On 4 August 2023, the landlord responded to explain it would attend with the contractor on 10 August 2023 to establish the necessary works. The resident emailed the landlord on 24 August 2023. She asked the landlord how this situation would be resolved. She reiterated damp and mould had damaged her personal property.
  6. The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 12 September 2023. It said:
    1. It was sorry its complaint response was delayed
    2. It was continuing to liaise with the contractor to establish a start date.
    3. It would let the resident know once it has a start date.
    4. Directed the resident to her home insurance policy. She could pursue a claim through the landlord’s insurance team after the works had been completed.
    5. It had failed to diagnose the cause of the damp and provide a suitable remedy and awarded her £500 for the impact.
  7. On 23 January 2024, the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2. As there had been a lack of repairs and communication from the landlord since October 2023. She expressed concern about living in a property with damp and mould.
  8. The evidence shows a damp inspection took place on 21 February 2024.The landlord did not provide the inspection report to this Service. The landlord received a quote for exploratory work from the contractor on 22 February 2024. On 5 March 2024, the contractor had been booked in for the investigation work which would commence on 8 March 2024.
  9. On 6 March 2024, the landlord issued a stage 2 response. It said:
    1. It was sorry for the delay in completing the outstanding work and that there had been no contact since October 2023.
    2. Its contractor was working through a backlog of repairs.
    3. The repairs had been allocated to the specialist contractor who visited the property on 22 February 2024. The specialist contractor would be back on site on 8 March 2024 to continue with the recommended exploratory works. The specialist contactor had written to her about what was planned.
    4. It offered her an additional £200 in recognition in the delays for the communication and the remedial work.
  10. The resident remained unhappy following the landlord’s stage 2 response. She told the Ombudsman she wanted further compensation and the works to be completed. In September 2024 the resident told this Service that no work has been undertaken by the contractor.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has said she considers that the issues affecting her property had impacted her late mother, her, and her daughter’s health. The Ombudsman does not doubt the resident’s comments and notes the impact of damp and mould on resident’s health is well documented. However, it is beyond the expertise of this Service to make a determination on whether there was a direct link between the damp and mould within the property and the resident’s health. The resident therefore may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if she considers that her health has been affected by any action or lack thereof by the landlord. Whilst we cannot consider the direct effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any service failures by the landlord.
  2. We can look at how the landlord handled the resident’s reports of damage and if this was appropriate and in line with any policy. Where the Ombudsman finds failure on a landlord’s part, we can consider the resulting distress and inconvenience. Unlike a court, we cannot establish liability or award damages. This means we are unable to determine whether the landlord was responsible for any damage to the resident’s personal belongings.
  3. It is recognised the situation is distressing for the resident. The evidence shows it has been ongoing for a considerable period of time. The resident said her mother initially reported the damp and mould to the landlord in 2017. She said her mother had repeatedly reported the issue between 2017 and 2021. Issues that predate the resident’s tenancy are beyond the scope of our assessment. This Service will consider the timeframe from 2021 until 2024 as the resident started contacting the landlord about the damp and mould from 2021. The scope of an Ombudsman investigation can be limited by various factors. This includes the amount of time that has passed since the events in question.

 

Damp and mould

  1. The landlord has not provided us with a repairs or damp and mould policy. We have looked at its repairs handbook. This states regardless of what category the repairs fall into, the landlord aims to sort the problem out as efficiently as it can and to have a satisfied customer. It says it will carry out an inspection within 28 days.
  2. Sections 11 and 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 require the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the resident’s property in repair, and to ensure that the property is fit for human habitation throughout her tenancy. Landlords are required to look at the condition of properties using a risk assessment approach called the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). HHSRS does not set out any minimum standards, but it is concerned with avoiding, or minimising potential hazards.
  3. Damp and mould are potential category 1 hazards that fall within the scope of HHSRS. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under HHSRS. The landlord is expected to conduct additional monitoring of a property where potential hazards are identified. The lack of records about the potential safety hazard around this time is a serious failing.
  4. There was communication between the resident and the contractor through text between June 2021 and May 2022. There was no evidence of the landlord and contractor’s visit about the damp and mould in the property in October 2021. The landlord was unable to evidence its action for 19 months between October 2021 and May 2023. There were failings in the landlord’s recording keeping for this period.
  5. The repairs history showed a damp and mould inspection took place in May 2023. There is no evidence of what prompted the inspection. The damp survey identified high damp meter readings and suspected rising damp. Later that month the landlord undertook work to tackle the damp and mould. These included chemicals being injected into the wall and mould wash and paint being applied. The landlord’s action to send out a contractor to investigate and treat the damp and mould in the resident’s property was reasonable.
  6. In June 2023 the resident told the landlord the damp and mould was getting worse. The landlord responded to the resident to explain it would investigate the matter. The resident then chased the landlord again on 3 August 2023 about the health impact of the existing damp and mould on her and her daughter. There is no evidence to show these concerns were addressed or acknowledged by the landlord at the time. It was unreasonable for the landlord not to respond to the resident’s health concerns. The landlord has not provided evidence that it considered the impact of the damp and mould on the household. It could have taken mitigation measures to improve the ventilation of the home for the resident. It could have considered supplying the resident with fans along with a dehumidifier. There is no evidence of the landlord considering this approach earlier and it missed opportunities to review its position.
  7. It appears the landlord did not respond to the resident until 4 August 2023. The landlord’s communication with the resident about the damp and mould was therefore not consistent and it failed to manage her expectations. This compounded the resident’s dissatisfaction with the landlord. The landlord also frequently failed to keep the resident informed of matters affecting her. She understandably believed that it was not taking any action to resolve the damp and mould issue.
  8. From the landlord’s records it undertook a joint inspection with the contractor in August 2023 which established rising damp. In September 2023 in its stage 1 response, it explained it was arranging a date for remedial work to start. It also gave the resident £500 for failure to diagnose the cause of the damp issue and provide a suitable remedy in a timely manner. Considering the landlord’s compensation policy this is the maximum amount it could award. This was an appropriate remedy and amount of compensation for the delay of at least 6 months. However, the landlord has not considered the health impact on her and her daughter’s health. There was an adverse impact on the resident and undermined her confidence in the landlord.
  9. In January 2024, the resident contacted the landlord as she had received no communication from it and no remedial works had taken place. It was unreasonable for the landlord not to update the resident for 4 months. The landlord has not explained the delay.
  10. In February 2024, a specialist contractor visited the resident’s property. Exploratory works were arranged to start on 8 March 2024. At stage 2 the resident was offered £200 for the delay. This was not the appropriate level of compensation for the landlord to award the resident. From the stage 1 response, it took nearly 6 months to arrange a specialist contractor. This was compounded by its failure to keep the resident updated or informed. The overall period was excessive, with the resident left without any explanation as to why it took until February 2024 for a specialist contractor to visit the property.
  11. However, there were further delays following the final response between March 2023 and October 2024 to conduct the outstanding repairs. The landlord did not keep to its commitments set out in its complaint response. It should have proactively monitored the repairs in view of the serious failings it had already identified. In September 2024, the resident has explained to this Service that no works have been undertaken and there is still damp and mould in the property. We have received no response from the landlord about when the remedial works will be taking place. It is unreasonable of the landlord not to keep the resident updated and to have not given the resident a date of when remedial works will start.
  12. In relation to the failures identified, the Ombudsman’s role is to provide fair and proportionate remedies where maladministration or service failure has been identified. In considering this, the Ombudsman takes into account our Dispute Resolution Principles: Be Fair, Put Things Right and Learn from Outcomes as well as our own guidance on remedies.
  13. In this case it is evident that distress and inconvenience was caused to the resident and her daughter for which financial compensation is appropriate and proportionate. The resident told the landlord about the damp and mould was having an impact of her and her daughter’s health. In the landlord’s complaint responses, it explained what actions it had taken to remedy the damp and mould issue. It had arranged to carry out surveys for damp and mould but there is limited evidence these were followed up. While the landlord apologised it did not go far enough in putting things right in a timely manner for the resident. It did compensate the resident for the delays and poor communication. However, the landlord did not follow up from its complaint commitments. The resident’s property is still affected by the damp and mould. The Ombudsman finds there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould issue. The landlord appeared to have limited oversight of the issue but has not provided an effective solution. Considering the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, the Ombudsman has awarded the resident a further £1,000 for the landlord’s delays of at least 18 months in resolving the damp and mould issue. Our calculation will reflect the evidence both parties provided.

The landlord’s response to damage to belongings due to the damp and mould.

  1. In August 2023 in the resident’s initial complaint, she said some of her personal belongings were damaged as a result of the damp and mould. The landlord addressed this point in its stage 1 response in September 2023. The landlord said it could not offer compensation for the resident’s personal belongings. However, the landlord recommended that the resident contact her insurer or contact the landlord’s insurer to make a claim. The landlord provided the insurance information to the resident within a reasonable timeframe. This was in line with the landlord’s compensation policy and the Ombudsman’s expectations (for instances where a resident holds a landlord responsible for damage to their personal items).
  2. The Ombudsman has found no maladministration by the landlord in its actions regarding the damage to the resident’s personal belongings.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord has provided us with a copy of its formal complaint’s policy. The policy shows the landlord must issue a full response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days. For stage 2 it should be 20 working days. Where these timescales are not possible, this will be communicated to the resident.
  2. It took 42 working days to respond at stage 1. This is not including the 17 working day extension which it informed the resident about on 30 June 2023. It took 32 working days at stage 2. The landlord failed its timescales when responding for both of the resident’s complaints. There is no evidence to show that the landlord communicated these delays to the resident.
  3. In both responses the landlord’s apologised. It should have considered if financial redress was needed for its service failure, given the duration of the delay. An apology is typically only sufficient to address a small one-off failure such as a delay of 2 or 3 days. Since it failed to fulfil an important commitment, the landlord should have redressed the resident accordingly. To avoid similar issues, the landlord should routinely consider its own complaint handling during every investigation. This includes establishing the full complaint timeline and addressing any delays or procedural issues accordingly.
  4. The evidence shows the landlord’s complaint handling was unfair, inappropriate, and contrary to its own procedure. Given the circumstances, the landlord’s previous apology was disproportionate given what went wrong. Overall, there was maladministration in respect of this complaint point.
  5. There was approximately a 3-month delay for the resident to receive the landlord’s complaint responses. This caused the resident time, effort, and inconvenience to chase the landlord.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to reports of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to reports of damage to belongings due to the damp and mould.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of complaint handling.

 

Orders

  1. The Ombudsman orders the landlord, within 4 weeks of the date of this report, to:
    1. Pay the resident £1,900, comprising:
      1. £700 previously offered
      2. £1,000 for the landlord’s poor handling of reports of the damp and mould
      3. £200 for the landlord’s complaint handling
    2. Contact the resident to confirm in writing when the remedial works for the damp and mould will be completed. It should provide a schedule of works. To confirm any additional action, it will be taking to the resident and this Service in writing.
    3. To meet with the resident to understand any impact the situation has on her and her household’s health and explain what steps it can take to mitigate any risk.
    4. Provide evidence of compliance with the above to this Service.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord is recommended to contact the resident to find out if she needs any assistance is making a claim to its insurers.