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

Haringey London Borough Council (202330177)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202330177

Haringey London Borough Council

23 December 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 handling of:
    1. The repairs at the property.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident signed a lease agreement in 2021. The property is a 3-bed flat within a block. The resident lives in the property with her mother. The landlord is a local authority.
  2. On 20 January 2023, the resident raised a repair to the landlord. She said there was damp and mould in the bathroom of her property. The resident believed this was caused by a broken drainpipe on her balcony that was allowing water to leak into the external wall of her bathroom.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 5 December 2023. She said she had contacted the landlord “more than 12 times” requesting an update and was still experiencing damp and mould.
  4. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 19 December 2023 and said it would send the resident a full response by 19 January 2024. The landlord did not formally respond to the resident at stage 1 of its internal complaints process.
  5. On 2 April 2024, the Ombudsman wrote to the landlord and asked it to respond to the resident’s complaint by 9 April 2024. We wrote again on 7 June 2024 and requested for the landlord to respond to the resident’s complaint by 4 July 2024.
  6. The landlord responded at stage 2 of its internal complaints process on 10 July 2024. It found it had been 18 months since the resident raised the issues and it had not completed the repairs. It offered her £500 compensation for the “poor management of the works” and the impact caused to the resident.
  7. The resident has told this Service the repair to the drainpipe and the damp and mould repairs to the bathroom were completed in September 2024.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

  1. In her correspondence with this Service, the resident has raised similar matters that occurred after those which are the subject of this investigation, that have not yet been referred to the Service. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to matters which completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure on 10 July 2024.
  2. The resident has informed this Service how she was concerned for her health and the health of her family. This was during the time she lived with damp and mould in the bathroom of her property. Where the Ombudsman finds failure on the landlord’s part, we can consider the resulting distress and inconvenience. This means we are unable to determine if the landlord was responsible for any health impacts to the resident and her family. However, where the Ombudsman finds failure on the landlord’s part, we can consider the resulting distress and inconvenience.

The landlord’s handling of repairs at the property

  1. On 20 January 2023, the resident contacted the landlord to raise a repair. She said she was experiencing damp and mould in the bathroom of her property. The resident said there was a “damaged” drainpipe on her balcony, connected to the property above. She believed this to be the cause of the damp and mould. The resident said that despite using preventative measures in her bathroom, the damp and mould was getting worse.
  2. The leasehold agreement states the landlord will “maintain” and” repair” the drains at the block of flats and its external structure. The landlord’s damp and mould policy states it will attend a damp and mould repair within a maximum of 28 working days. The landlord’s repairs policy states for non-emergency repairs an appointment will be offered within 28 working days.
  3. The evidence provided shows the resident chased this repair with the landlord on 5 June 2023. However, there is no evidence the landlord took action following this. On 12 June 2023, the resident contacted the landlord again. It noted the resident said this was the third time she had rang to chase the repair.
  4. The evidence shows the landlord attended the property on 12 May 2023 to address the damp and mould in the bathroom. However, the resident said the landlord did not carry out any work at the appointment following an inspection of the damp and mould. The landlord said the repairs to the drainpipe on the balcony needed to be completed first as the root cause of the problem. The resident said it also attended on 18 May 2023; however, the landlord told her the appointment needed to be rearranged. It did not give her a reason why.
  5. On 29 June 2023, the resident emailed the landlord and said the following:
    1. The mould in her bathroom was “progressively worsening”.
    2. The asphalt on the balcony of her property had a crack and this was allowing more water into the exterior wall of the bathroom and exacerbating the issue. (Asphalt is a type of material that can be used in the construction of balconies).
    3. She had made more than 4 phone calls to the landlord chasing the repairs.
    4. The resident requested the matter be escalated with the “up most urgency”.
  6. The resident sent further emails on 20 and 23 July 2023 to the landlord. She said she had “not received any update” or contact regarding the repairs to her property. The resident said urgent action was required as she was worried about the effects the damp and mould were having on her household and her family. There is no evidence to show the landlord responded to these emails or attempted to arrange the repairs needed to the property following this communication by the resident. The landlord’s failure to adhere to its policy for repair time and lack of communication with the resident was significant.
  7. The resident complained to the landlord on 5 December 2023. She said there was damp and mould in her property caused by a broken drainpipe. The resident said she had been in contact with the landlord “more than 12 times” requesting an update on her case.
  8. The landlord sent a stage 1 acknowledgement to the resident’s complaint on 19 December 2023 and said the following:
    1. An inspection was completed around 6 months previously. The work required was noted as the “asphalt surrounding the drain gully” needed replacing. It said it could see the repair had not been actioned any further and it apologised for this.
    2. It would instruct a “specialist contractor” to start work on the week beginning 18 January 2024.
    3. Further investigation would take place, and a “full response” would be given to the resident for her complaint no later than 19 January 2024.
  9. The resident contacted the landlord to chase its full response to her complaint on 21 January and 6 February 2024. The landlord did not provide the resident with a formal response at stage 1 of its internal complaints process.
  10. Following intervention from the Ombudsman on 2 April and 6 June 2024, the landlord replied at stage 2 of its internal complaints process on 10 July 2024. It said the following:
    1. It had failed to formally respond to the resident at stage 1 of its internal complaints process and it apologised for this.
    2. These “types of jobs” are usually completed within 6-8 weeks. However, it had been almost 18 months since the resident had first reported the drainpipe repair and subsequent damp and mould.
    3. It had taken time to reflect on the “causes of the delay” and the landlord’s need to improve communication to residents.
    4. It was reviewing policies, providing additional staff training and feedback to staff on this case.
    5. A “specialist asphalt contractor” had been commissioned and would be in touch with the resident within 4 weeks. A damp and mould survey was booked in for 10 July 2024.
    6. It offered the resident £500 compensation for the “service failure”.
  11. The repairs took from 20 January 2023 to September 2024 to complete – which was some 20 months. 
  12. In the landlord’s stage 2 response it acknowledged and apologised for the “long time” it had taken in dealing with the repairs at the resident’s property. The time to complete the repairs was in excess of the landlord’s repairs policy and therefore inappropriate. It was also far below the level of service the resident could reasonably have expected. The landlord’s prolonged inability to remedy the situation, despite being aware of the action required, will have caused significant distress and inconvenience.
  13. However, the landlord did acknowledge its failure and take steps to try and put things right for the resident. The landlord’s compensation policy states where the landlord has full responsibility for the issue and there is a high impact on the resident, it can award up to £500 compensation. This is for serious and persistent failures over a long period of time. The compensation awarded by the landlord to the resident was therefore in line with its compensation policy.
  14. The landlord also provided evidence that it was learning from the outcome of this complaint by reviewing its policies. It also said it would provide additional training to staff.
  15. In summary, the landlord acknowledged it had taken too long to complete the repair works for the resident. The landlord attended the property on occasions. However, the evidence shows the internal repairs were unable to be completed as the landlord had identified it failed to tackle the root cause of the issue first. This caused distress to the resident. This was due to her living with damp and mould in the bathroom of her property for longer than if the repairs had been handled as could reasonably have been expected.
  16. There were long periods of time where the repairs were not organised, and the landlord failed to communicate with the resident. The resident has told this Service the landlord completed the repair to the drainpipe and the damp and mould repairs to the bathroom in September 2024.
  17. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by it put things right. We will also consider if it resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances.
  18. The landlord’s offer of £500 compensation reflects the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies where there has been a failure by the landlord which has adversely affected the resident but where there has been no permanent impact. The landlord has been able to evidence it made reasonable efforts to resolve the complaint and learn from the outcomes of the case. It “put things right” in accordance with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles and a determination of reasonable redress is made in regard to the landlord’s handling of repairs at the property.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

  1. The resident complained to the landlord on 5 December 2023. The landlord sent an acknowledgement to the resident’s complaint on 19 December 2023, around 10 working days later. It said it would give the resident a “full response” to her complaint no later than 19 January 2024.
  2. The landlord’s complaints policy states it will send a “full response” to a complaint within 10 working days. Paragraph 5.1 of the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) 2022 also states landlords must send a stage 1 response within 10 working days of the complaint being logged. It also states the response time should not exceed 10 working days “without good reason”.
  3. The resident informed this Service on 14 March 2024 that, despite the landlord informing her that it would send a further full reply to her complaint, she had not received one.
  4. On 2 April 2024, the Ombudsman wrote to the landlord. We asked it to respond to her by 9 April 2024. The landlord did not respond to the resident or to the Ombudsman. We wrote again to the landlord on 6 June 2024. We asked it to investigate and respond to the resident’s complaint by 4 July 2024.
  5. The landlord responded at stage 2 of its internal complaints process on 10 July 2024, around 6 months after the resident first raised her complaint. The landlord said it had failed to send a full response to the resident’s complaint at stage 1 due to staffing issues.
  6. In its stage 2 response the landlord recognised the delay in processing her complaint, but it made no offer of compensation for errors in its complaint handling. The level of service the landlord gave to the resident was not in line with the landlord’s complaints policy, this was inappropriate. The unreasonable delay to respond and progress her complaint caused avoidable distress and inconvenience to the resident.
  7. In summary, the landlord did not investigate or send a full response to the resident at stage 1 of its complaints process. The evidence also shows there was a lack of engagement with the resident and the Ombudsman by the landlord. This resulted in the resident’s complaint being unanswered at stage 1 and effectively being denied access to escalation within the landlord’s complaint process. There was an avoidable delay in the resident achieving resolution due to the landlord’s inaction.
  8. The landlord did not attempt to put things right for the resident, which leads to a determination of maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.  An order for £200 compensation is made below to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident as a result of the landlord’s failures.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.


Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord must, no later than 7 January 2025:
    1. Provide the resident with a written apology for the failings outlined above.
    2. Pay the resident £200 compensation for its failures in complaint handling.
    3. The compensation balance must be paid directly to the resident and not offset against a rent or service charge account.
  2. The Ombudsman reissued the Complaint Handling Code on 8 February 2024. This Code sets out the requirements landlords must meet when handling complaints in both policy and practice and applies from 1 April 2024. The Ombudsman has a duty to monitor compliance with the Code. We will assess landlords using our Compliance Framework and take action where there is evidence that the requirements set out in the Code are not being met. In this investigation, we found failures in complaint handling. We therefore order the landlord to consider the findings highlighted in this investigation when reviewing its policies and practices against the statutory Code.

Recommendations

  1. The finding of reasonable redress in respect to the landlord’s handling of repairs relies on it providing proof of payment to this Service. The landlord should provide this evidence within 4 weeks to show it has paid the £500 compensation awarded to the resident for its handling of repairs.