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

Islington Council (202231232)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202231232

Islington Council

31 July 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 damp in the property.
  2. The Ombudsman has decided to investigate the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has held an assured tenancy with the landlord since 2016. The property is a 1-bedroom flat. The resident is disabled, has a learning difficulty, and has several health conditions which the landlord is aware of. The landlord is a local authority. The resident’s daughter acts as her representative in this complaint and will be referred to as the resident throughout this report.
  2. Between May and November 2022, the resident reported damp and mould to the landlord. The landlord carried out inspections of the property and issued works orders to its contractors. In December 2022 the resident complained that the damp and mould had not been resolved. In its complaint response the landlord acknowledged there had been service failures resulting in delays. It apologised and offered £433.28 in compensation. It said it expected to complete the works in January 2023.
  3. In March 2023 the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2. She stated the matters had not been resolved. She also complained the landlord had given her 2 days’ notice of major works which would take 10 working days to complete. She said it had not provided any detailed information about the works, she had not been able to speak to the repairs team to discuss matters and it had not taken her mother’s disabilities and health conditions into account.
  4. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 25 May 2023. It referred to the hotel booking it made for the resident for the duration of the works which the resident declined. It said it was now looking for a self-contained property for her. It apologised that she had to chase the matter and acknowledged its poor communication in respect of the moving process and the length of time it took to start the repairs. It upheld her complaint and offered additional compensation of £366.64 for the issues plus £25 for its late complaint response. The total amount of compensation offered at stages 1 and 2 was £825.00.
  5. In June 2023 the resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response and escalated the complaint to this Service. She told this Service that to resolve the complaint she would like to be moved to a different property on health grounds.

Scope of Investigation

  1. The evidence provided shows the repair issues had not been resolved when the landlord issued its final complaint response in May 2023. Therefore, as well as matters complained about, this investigation will also investigate the landlord’s handling of the matters after it issued its final response and made its compensation offer in May 2023. The records show the issues were resolved when the landlord moved the resident to a new property in December 2023. Therefore, this Service will consider the landlord’s handling up to December 2023.

Assessment and Findings

  1. The tenancy the resident holds with the landlord states it is responsible for keeping the internal structure of the property in repair. It also has a damp and mould policy. This states it will inspect reports of damp and mould within 10 working days. It will then raise any required works orders within 3 working days.
  2. In this case the resident reported damp in the toilet, kitchen, and shower room to the landlord on 26 May 2022. The landlord’s repairs records show it attended the following day to inspect for leaks or water penetration in those areas. This timescale was in line with its procedure. It identified a leak in the shower and issues with the flooring in the bathroom. It then raised a works order to carry out necessary repairs.
  3. The records show the works order was closed on 6 July 2023. The works were not completed. The reason for the closure of the works order is not clear. The landlord acknowledged in its complaint response there had been a service failure on its part but did not provide an explanation as to why it had closed the works order. This is evidence the landlord’s record keeping was not robust enough. This Service considers that a note should have been added to the record to explain why the works order was closed. This would enable transparency and accountability in its service delivery. Additionally, the landlord does not appear to have carried out an investigation into why the works order was closed. It therefore cannot demonstrate that it has learned from the issue and has taken steps to reduce the likelihood of it happening again. The impact on the resident was that she did not receive the repairs service she expected, nor any communication from the landlord, and the leak was unattended too. This was unreasonable and undermined the resident’s confidence in the landlord.
  4. On 7 October 2022 the resident contacted the landlord to report the same issues. The records show it raised a request for a damp assessment to bathroom, toilet, and kitchen walls. It raised this on a routine 20-day priority. The landlord inspected on 1 November 2022. This timescale was not in line with the 10 days set out in its procedure. While there is no evidence this resulted in detriment to the resident, the landlord is aware that damp and mould is a category 1 hazard as set out in the Housing health and safety rating system (HHSRS), as such, the landlord must ensure it responds to reports of it as soon as possible.
  5. On 2 November 2022 the landlord issued a large package of works to its contractor. The landlord’s notes reflect the resident was made aware and agreed to the proposed works. However, it then cancelled the works order. The landlord has not provided any evidence that it communicated its reasons for cancelling the works to the resident. This was unfair and unreasonable. This Service expects that when the landlord becomes aware that it will not be able to carry out works the resident is expecting, it should contact the resident at the earliest opportunity to apologise, explain and provide a new timescale.
  6. On 9 December 2022 the resident submitted a stage 1 complaint. She said no works had been carried out after its inspections in May and November. In its stage 1 complaint response dated 22 December 2022, it said it had cancelled the May works order but failed to explain why. It said it cancelled the November works order because it needed an asbestos report prior to starting works. This Service considers it a failing that it did not identify the need for an asbestos report at an earlier stage. It could have then factored this into the timescale given to the resident and managed her expectations accordingly. The landlord’s approach caused delay, inconvenience, and distress to the resident.
  7. The records indicate the landlord did not inspect again in relation to damp and mould until Thursday 23 March 2023. The landlord informed the resident it wanted to start damp and mould works the following Monday. This Service has considered this timescale given and thinks it was too short notice in the circumstances. While it is positive the landlord demonstrated urgency at this point, it should have been more mindful of the personal circumstances of the resident. The landlord’s approach caused her to be anxious and worried. Consequently, after its visit the resident contacted the landlord asking it to escalate her December complaint to stage 2.
  8. She complained she had not been given enough notice for the works which was expected to last 10 days during which the shower room would be out of use. She said she had tried to speak to the landlord to find out the precise details of the work and ask further questions but had been told the instructing officer was on leave and there was no one else to speak to. This was poor customer service and caused frustration and distress to the resident. She informed the landlord that she had disabilities and health conditions such as COPD which affected her breathing and daily living arrangements. She said she had sent medical information to it about her disabilities and medical conditions. She asked the landlord to put the works on hold. This Service has not seen any evidence that it carried out a risk assessment at this stage to ensure it took an informed and tailored approach to the case. This was a failing.
  9. As part of its complaint response the landlord organised a joint meeting with the resident and its contractor at the property. This took place on 20 April 2023. The meeting provided an opportunity for the landlord to explain its work plan in more detail and provided the space for her to explain her health issues and disabilities. As a result of the discussions the parties agreed it would be appropriate for the resident to move out during the work. The records show the landlord then booked hotel accommodation for the resident, but it has not provided any evidence that it discussed this with the resident beforehand. While it is acknowledged that hotel accommodation would be an appropriate temporary option in some circumstances, the landlord should have ensured it properly understood the details of the resident’s health conditions and disability prior to arranging the booking. Consequently, the resident declined the hotel as it was not suitable for her needs.
  10. In its formal complaint response dated 25 May 2023 the landlord said it was now looking for self-contained accommodation from within its own housing stock and it would keep her updated. It apologised that works had not been able to start and its poor communication on the issues. It offered an additional £366 in compensation up to the end of May 2023 with an additional £25 for its late complaint response.
  11. This Service can see the landlord responded appropriately to the resident’s rehousing request on medical grounds, but this did not absolve it from taking action to reduce the impact of the damp and mould in the meantime.
  12. This Service has carefully reviewed the repairs log provided by the landlord. There is no evidence that it carried out interim works such as washing and treating the mould, or carrying out temporary repairs to reduce the impact of the issues on the resident while it was finding accommodation for her. This was unreasonable. In October 2021 the Ombudsman published a spotlight report on damp and mould. It states, ‘ where significant works are required, smaller remedial works should be carried out in the meantime to  improve the resident’s living environment.’ This Service thinks it was particularly important for the landlord to have taken steps to mitigate the impact on the resident because she had health conditions affected by the damp conditions.
  13. The repairs history provided reflects that no works relating to damp and mould, or any other repairs were carried out after March 2023. The resident moved out in December 2023. This means that 19 months had passed but the issues remained unresolved. This was unreasonable.
  14. Taking everything into account, during the 19 months the landlord carried out repeat inspections but failed to carry out any works. It cancelled jobs without communicating or providing an explanation to the resident. The damp and mould repairs were unattended too and the resident had to spend time and trouble chasing the landlord on the issues. After the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2, it attempted to carry out major works at very short notice causing her to feel stressed and anxious. After this, it did not properly consider her health and disability issues resulting in an unsuitable offer of hotel accommodation. Additionally, it did not carry out any interim treatments or temporary repairs to reduce the impact of the damp and mould while it was looking for alternative accommodation for her. This was a significant failing.
  15.  This Service finds there were repeated failures in its service delivery over a significant period of time. The landlord’s delay in addressing the damp and mould had a detrimental impact on the resident. This Service finds the landlord did not complete any damp and mould repairs after its stage 2 complaint response which meant the resident continued to be negatively impacted and did not gain any relief from the issues until 10 December 2023, when she was offered alternative accommodation. This Service finds there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp in the property.
  16. Additionally, this Service considers the landlord should have identified the case had complicating factors which required effective joint working between its internal departments. This Service has seen evidence that the resident was emailing and copying in several departments seeking information and support on the different issues. On some occasions she did not receive a response from any department. This is not appropriate and caused the resident distress and frustration. In the circumstances it would have been appropriate for the landlord to hold a strategy meeting with the involved teams. These being rehousing team, tenancy management, repairs, damp and mould team and its complaints team. We know some landlord’s that operate a complex case forum or vulnerable persons panel where residents involved with multiple departments are discussed. Such an approach might have led to a better outcome for the resident in this case and allowed the landlord to effectively track and follow up the issues. This Service makes a recommendation below.
  17. This Service has considered the compensation offered by the landlord on 25  May 2023. This would have been reasonable had the landlord completed the repairs by the end of May as it had indicated in its final complaint response. However, the landlord did not carry out any repairs or interim measures after this date. Therefore, this Service considers that compensation should be paid up until 10 December 2023.
  18. This Service can see the landlord paid compensation of £41.66 per week up to the expected completion date of end of May 2023. It would be reasonable to continue with this formula up to 10 December 2023. This calculates as an additional 6 months and 2 weeks (rounded up). This Service makes an order for additional compensation in the amount of £271 (£41.66 x 6.5 rounded up).
  19. This Service also considers an additional compensation payment of £150 would be appropriate for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failure to communicate in a timely manner and for the time and trouble spent engaged with the landlord on the issues.
  20. Since the time of the resident’s complaint, the landlord has been subject to a special investigation by this Service. This is because of concerns about the landlord’s service provision in the areas of damp and mould. The Ombudsman’s special investigation found the landlord was not taking a proactive approach towards tackling damp and mould, and residents experienced a poor response from the landlord when they reported damp and mould. The themes identified in the Ombudsman’s special report of December 2022 are also present in this complaint. The landlord has since introduced a 5- point plan for dealing with damp and mould and continues to make improvements. Therefore, no further orders have been made in relation to the landlord’s approach to damp and mould.

The landlord’s complaint handling.

  1. At the time of the resident’s complaint the landlord had a 2 stage complaints process. Stage 1 and Chief Executive stage (CE stage). It said it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 21 calendar days and CE stage complaints within 28 calendar days. The landlord is a local authority and was applying and organisation wide complaints handling policy. The timescales were not in line with the Complaint Handling Code applicable at the time which stated that stage 1 complaints must be responded to within 10 working days. It is acknowledged that the landlord has since updated its complaint response times to comply with the current complaint handling code.
  2. The landlord responded to the stage 1 complaint within timescale. The records show the resident submitted a complaint escalation request on 30 March 2023. This meant the landlord’s complaint response was due no later than 2 May 2023. The landlord did not acknowledge or respond to the escalation request. This was inappropriate. The evidence shows the resident had to spend time chasing the landlord by email and telephone for its complaint response. This situation caused inconvenience and distress to the resident. She emailed the landlord on 23 April 2023 expressing that she felt she was ‘constantly going round in circles’. She asked for an explanation as to why she had not received a response to her complaint. There is no evidence the landlord provided an explanation to the resident. This was unfair and unreasonable, and the landlord failed to use its complaints process in an effective and proactive way. The landlord provided its final on response on 25 May 2023. This was 17 days past its due date.
  3. In its complaint response it apologised for its late response and offered £25. Again, the landlord does not appear to have carried out an internal investigation into why it did not acknowledge or respond to her escalation request on 30 March. This Services’ view is that the complaint handling process is the landlord’s opportunity to regain a resident’s trust when something has gone wrong. Part of this is ensuring it provides an explanation of why the issue happened and the steps it will take to reduce the likelihood of it happening again. In this case the landlord’s complaint handling compounded the issue and further undermined the resident’s trust and confidence. This Service finds there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  4. This Service has considered the £25 compensation it offered. This Service does not think this amount goes far enough to put things right. This is because it does not take into account its service failure when it failed to respond to the resident’s escalation request, nor the residents time, trouble, and inconvenience chasing the landlord up to provide its response. Having regard to the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance where maladministration exists, this Service thinks an amount of £125 would be more appropriate and makes and order below.
  5. Since the time of this complaint the landlord has been subject to a special investigation by this Service. In October 2023, the Ombudsman published a special report about the landlord, highlighting concerns with its complaint handling. As a result of this the landlord has created a dedicated housing complaints service and introduced a new digital complaints management system. It continues to work towards improving its complaint handling and this Service will continue to monitor its compliance with the recommendations made in the report. Therefore, no further orders have been made in respect of the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp in the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must:
    1. Pay the resident £1471 in compensation for the impact of the failings identified by this investigation. This comprises:
      1. £825 offered by the landlord at stage 2.
      2. An additional £271 for length of time taken after May 2023 up to 10 December 2023.
      3. £250 for distress and inconvenience.
      4. £125 for the impact of its complaint handling.
    2. Apologise to the resident for its handling of repairs and its complaint handling.
    3. Provide evidence that it has complied with the above orders.

 Recommendations

  1. The landlord should consider ways its internal departments can work together to manage complex cases and/or where there are multiple involvements across the housing departments.
  2. The landlord should inspect and monitor the effectiveness of any works it carried out at the property to ensure the damp and mould has been cured.