Islington Council (202303962)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202303962

Islington Council

18 February 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 response to the resident’s:
1. Concerns regarding the condition of the property on letting.
2. Reports of damp and mould.
3. Request for compensation for damage to her personal belongings and energy bills.
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling as part of the assessment.

Background

The resident is the tenant of the property which the complaint concerns. The landlord owns the property.
The resident’s tenancy started on 3 January 2022.
The property is a 1 bedroom ground floor flat. The resident lives in the property with her partner and baby.
On 27 March 2023 the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord about the condition of the property. In summary the resident said:
1. The condition of the property was poor on becoming the tenant. She set out that the property was poorly insulated which resulted in “excessive” heat loss, damp and mould.
2. On 4 January 2022 she contacted the landlord to report that the property had damp and mould. In response an inspection was scheduled for 20 April 2022.
3. On 30 March 2022, while the inspection was outstanding, she contacted the landlord to report that the damp and mould had worsened.
4. On 20 April 2022 the landlord inspected the property. The surveyor confirmed that the property was damp as it was unoccupied prior to her tenancy. The surveyor did not take temperature readings during the inspection, only moisture readings. During the inspection the surveyor was “dismissive”.
5. Following the inspection no further action was taken.
6. She had attempted to remove the mould by washing the affected walls.
7. The mould had caused damage to her personal belongings.
8. The mould was a health risk. She had asthma and was concerned for her baby’s health.
9. On 3 May 2022 she contacted the landlord setting out that despite reporting that the extractor fan did not work on becoming the tenant of the property it had not yet been repaired. The extractor fan was “finally” repaired on 13 July 2022.
10. It was unfair that she had to wait until January 2023, the date she became a secure tenant, to be able to apply for a transfer due to the condition of the property.
The resident concluded the complaint by requesting:
1. An apology.
2. Compensation for damage to personal items and “high energy bills”.
On 2 May 2023 the resident contacted this Service for assistance as the landlord had not responded to the complaint.
On 17 May 2023 this Service wrote to the landlord to request that it respond to the resident’s complaint if it had not already done so.
On 19 May 2023 the landlord confirmed that it had registered the resident’s complaint at stage 1 of its procedure and a response would be provided.
On 7 June 2023 the landlord provided its stage 1 response. In summary the landlord said:
1. It was sorry for the delay in responding to the complaint.
2. It had reviewed its repair records which showed that a work order was raised on 16 January 2023 for a diagnostic surveyor to inspect the property for damp. The inspection took place on 20 March 2023 and the surveyor made the following findings:
  1. Hallway – area of “moderate mould growth” on the ceiling above the front door. The area tested dry on the damp meter.
  2. Bedroom – area of “heavy condensation” on the ceiling with “moderate mould growth” in the storage cupboard. The affected areas tested wet on the damp meter.
  3. Kitchen – area of “light moisture staining” on the ceiling above the window. The area tested dry on the damp meter.
  4. Bathroom – there was a patch of blown plaster on the lower door wall. The area tested wet on the damp meter.
3. Following the inspection the surveyor raised two work orders for a plasterer and painter to attend to make good the issues identified. It had asked its repairs team to contact the resident to book an appointment for the work orders to be completed.
4. The resident should make a claim for damage to her personal belongings through her contents insurance provider. If the resident did not have contents insurance she could submit a claim via its insurance team. It provided details on how to do so.
The landlord concluded by confirming that the complaint was upheld as it had delayed in carrying out a damp assessment and then completing the repairs identified. The landlord therefore apologised and confirmed that it would like to award £175 compensation comprising:
1. £50 for complaint handling.
2. £25 for delay in providing a damp inspection.
3. £100 for inconvenience.
On 12 June 2023 the resident requested to escalate the complaint as she was “not fully satisfied” with the landlord’s response. In summary the resident said:
1. It had not responded to her concerns that the property was not let to a decent standard.
2. The landlord’s offer of compensation was disproportionate to the circumstances of the complaint. Her heating bills were “over £600” and it was unreasonable for her to make a claim on her insurance policy as the damage to her personal belongings was due to the landlord’s actions.
On 6 July 2023 the landlord provided its stage 2, final, response. In summary the landlord said:
1. The resident’s tenancy at the property started on 3 January 2022 as an introductory tenant. This meant that on the first anniversary of her tenancy start date the tenancy would convert to a secure tenancy.
2. On 29 December 2021, and prior to her tenancy start date, the resident contacted it about the property. The resident explained that while the landlord had scheduled an appointment for 4 January 2022 to inspect the property for condensation, in response to concerns which she had raised following a video viewing of the property, she would like to know if there was an option to exit the tenancy, rejoin the housing list and to have her housing points reinstated.
3. On 4 January 2022 it replied to the resident confirming that she may return the keys to the property to end the tenancy. She was also informed that she would be required to speak with its Rehousing Team regarding her situation and options.
4. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic property viewings were online. The property was prepared for an incoming tenant and was signed off as ready on 6 December 2021. The video of the property, for online viewings, was taken on 12 December 2021 and the resident signed the tenancy on 20 December 2021.
5. The reports following the inspections in April 2022 and March 2023 only identified “minor dampness” in the property.
6. Although the majority of recommended works following the inspection in March 2023 had been completed, further appointments were scheduled for plastering and fan repair. It would therefore arrange for a “charge-hand” to contact the resident and inspect the property with 14 days to ensure that the repairs were completed satisfactorily.
7. It had not identified any evidence from the property’s repair notes which suggested that there was a problem with the insulation. It was aware that all households in the UK had increased energy charges. It provided information detailing how the resident may apply for assistance via its cost of living support scheme.
8. Any claims for loss or damage to personal items should be made via an insurance claim.
The landlord concluded by confirming there had been service failings in respect of the timescale in completing the repairs needed to address the damp and mould. The landlord advised that it would like to increase its offer of compensation to £1,117 comprising:
1. £50 for complaint handling.
2. £25 for delay in providing a damp inspection.
3. £792 for delay in satisfactorily completing repairs between December 2021 and 31 July 2023 (the time it expected the repairs to be completed) – 19 months at £41.66 and then rounded up.
4. £150 for distress.
5. £100 for time and effort to complain.
In an update to this Service on 3 February 2025 the resident confirmed that while the walls in the property had been treated for mould, they were still cold. She explained that she was therefore unable to put any items next to the walls, including furniture and clothing, as it would cause them to become mouldy.
On 4 February 2025 the landlord updated this Service. It confirmed that it had offered to inspect the property again as it understood that the mould was a “reoccurring issue” which would return after treatment.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

As part of her complaint the resident raised concerns regarding the landlord’s management of her housing points and her application for rehousing through the local authority’s allocations scheme. The resident has previously been advised by this Service that this matter will not be considered as part of this investigation. Therefore no further reference will be made to those matters within this report.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns regarding the condition of the property on letting

The landlord’s policy detailing its void standard details how it will ensure that properties are returned to a lettable standard following the end of a tenancy. The policy confirms that dampness checks will be made to all surfaces including windows, doors, ceilings, walls and floors for evidence of rising or penetrating dampness or surface mould by condensation. Where damp and mould is identified “appropriate repair action will be taken”.
The evidence shows that the landlord completed a void inspection on 6 December 2021. This was in line with its policy and therefore appropriate. The re-let report, also dated 6 December 2021, documenting the inspection confirmed that the property was free from damp and mould. Based on the outcome of the void inspection it was reasonable that the landlord made the property available for a new tenant as the information presented confirmed that it was in good condition.
The landlord has confirmed that a copy of the viewing video dated 12 December 2021, showing the property following the void inspection, is not available. It explained that the video was deleted due to its size. While it would have been helpful for the purpose of this investigation if the video had been retained, the Ombudsman understands why the video was deleted, as its function had been fulfilled.
The resident signed the property’s tenancy agreement on 20 December 2021 confirming that she would become the tenant on 3 January 2022. If the resident was not happy with the condition of the property following review of the viewing video, she was not required to sign the tenancy to become the tenant.
While the Ombudsman notes that damp and mould was identified in the property in April 2022 following an inspection, the Ombudsman also notes that this was approximately 4 months after the void inspection was completed. (The Ombudsman will consider the timeliness of the inspection in the next section of the report). Based on the available evidence, the Ombudsman cannot conclude that the void inspection on 6 December 2021 failed to identify damp and mould. This is because there is insufficient evidence to reach such a conclusion.
There was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of the condition of the property on letting. The landlord followed its policy in completing a void inspection to check that it was in good condition. As no issues were reported following the inspection it was reasonable that the landlord made the property available for a new tenant.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould

On 20 March 2019 The Homes (Fitness of Human Habitation) Act 2018 came into force with the aim of ensuring that all rented accommodation is fit for human habitation. It required landlords to make sure that its properties are safe, healthy and free from things that could cause serious harm. The Government’s guidance for tenants sets out that “damp and mould growth” must be considered. As the resident’s complaint concerned damp and mould the landlord was obliged to investigate and make good any issues identified.
The evidence shows that in response to the resident’s report of damp and mould on 4 January 2022 the landlord arranged to inspect the property. This was an appropriate course of action to allow the landlord to assess the condition of the property, to determine the extent of any damp and mould present and to then plan and scheduled any works identified as necessary. The inspection took place on 20 April 2022 which was approximately 75 working days after the report was made. The Ombudsman considers that this was a significantly protracted period of time. No explanation for the delay in arranging the inspection has been provided. The Ombudsman notes that while the inspection was outstanding the resident will have experienced uncertainty and distress in addition to feeling that her situation was not being taken seriously.
The report following the inspection confirmed that the property did have a damp problem. The report set out that the rooms affected were the bedroom and bathroom with the cause of dampness due to a “potential water passage from [the] bath panel”. The report confirmed a work order was raised to “trace and rectify leak in the bathroom” and “apply mist plus two coats emulsion to bedroom and hallway walls”. The report noted that the works could be carried out with the tenants in occupation which confirms that landlord did not consider that the property was uninhabitable.
The evidence shows that the work order was marked as complete on 10 June 2022 following painting in the hallway, bedroom and living room. This was approximately 35 working days following the inspection which was a protracted period of time. The Ombudsman notes that the work order does not document a repair to trace and rectify a leak. This is unsatisfactory as it was an action that was required by the inspection in order to ensure that the damp and mould was remedied properly. Furthermore by not completing this action the landlord was not able to satisfy itself, or the resident, that the potential cause of the damp and mould had been resolved.
The Ombudsman has not identified any reports of damp and mould by the resident between June 2022 and end of 2022.
The next action by the landlord in respect of damp and mould is on 16 January 2023 when it raised a work order for a surveyor to attend to carry out a damp survey. The work order was given a routine priority to complete within 20 working days. The inspection took place on 20 March 2023 which was approximately 46 working days after the survey was raised. This was significantly outside of the landlord’s target, which was unsatisfactory. Again no explanation for the delay in arranging the inspection has been provided.
The report following the inspection confirmed that the property did have a damp problem. The report set out that the rooms affected were the bedroom, bathroom, kitchen and hallway. The report confirmed that the damp meter readings from the bathroom and bedroom were “wet”. The report set out that the damp in the bathroom was due to a “potential leak from toilet pipework” and in the bedroom it was due to “surface condensation”. The report confirmed that 2 work orders were raised which could be completed with the resident in occupation. The repairs were as follows:
1. Install insulation board to bedroom ceiling above window.
2. Apply skim coat to newly installed insulation board on bedroom ceiling.
3. Carry out mould wash treatment and paint bedroom ceiling, central wall and left flank wall (cupboard) as per manufacturer’s instructions allowing drying time between applications.
4. Inspect toilet/ bathroom pipework for leaks potentially affecting bathroom door wall.
5. Hack off and reskim lower door wall in bathroom.
6. Apply mist plus two coats emulsion to skimmed section of door wall.
7. Renew section of wall tile on kitchen duct casing.
8. Apply stain block to stain on kitchen ceiling above window.
9. Carry out mould wash treatment and paint strip of ceiling above front entrance door as per manufacturer’s instructions allowing drying time between applications.
The landlord’s records confirms that all repairs with the exception of mould wash treatment and painting were completed by 31 May 2023. This included the inspection of the bathroom pipework which found “no evidence of any leaking”. The records show that the other repairs were raised on 14 July 2023 and completed by end of February 2024. In the Ombudsman’s opinion the repairs were completed over a significantly protracted period of time, a period of approximately 11 months. From the evidence for review it is not clear why the repairs were not progressed and completed within a much shorter timescale which would have been reasonable. This is unsatisfactory.
Despite the landlord committing to arrange an inspection within its stage 2 response there is no evidence that this happened. This is unsatisfactory as it was a commitment that the landlord made. An inspection would have provided the landlord with the opportunity to assess the situation, the repairs it had undertaken up until that point and whether any further intervention was required. It would also have been reasonable as the suspected cause of the damp, a leak in the bathroom, had been ruled out. This was a missed opportunity by the landlord.
The evidence shows that on 1 November 2023 the resident contacted the landlord to report that the property continued to have “severe damp issues”. In response it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have arranged an inspection for the reasons given in the preceding paragraph. There is no evidence that it did so. Again this was a missed opportunity. It would also have been appropriate as the landlord’s procedure on damp and mould sets out that a further inspection should be completed where a resident reports that its actions following an inspection have not addressed the problem.
Following the completion of the repairs in February 2024, raised in response to the survey in March 2023, there is no evidence that the landlord post-inspected the property. This would have been appropriate in order to satisfy itself that the repairs completed had been effective in addressing the damp and mould. It was not reasonable for the landlord to assume that the repairs had resolved the problem. The Ombudsman notes that both the landlord and resident confirm that damp and mould continues to be a problem within the property. It is appropriate that the landlord has offered to complete a further inspection, however it is unsatisfactory that this was not done at a much earlier time. This may have resulted in a different outcome for the resident.
In responding to this part of the complaint the landlord apologised and awarded a total of £967 compensation. The landlord’s compensation policy sets out that it “will make refunds and compensation payments to residents who have been affected by failures to meet reasonable levels of service delivery”. As the landlord identified that its repairs service had been unsatisfactory it was appropriate that it engaged its policy.
The landlord’s offer of compensation was for the period up until 31 July 2023 when it anticipated that all repairs following the March 2023 inspection would be completed. In the Ombudsman’s opinion the landlord’s offer was proportionate to the circumstances of the complaint for the period up until July 2023. This is because the landlord’s offer was within the appropriate range for cases where there were failings which had a significant impact on a resident.
The Ombudsman however considers that a further sum of compensation is due to reflect the shortfalls in service and the missed opportunities by the landlord after July 2023. This also takes into account that the landlord has acknowledged that damp and mould is still an on-going issue within the property.
There was maladministration by the landlord in how it responded to the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property. Following the end of the complaint procedure the landlord did not take responsibility to ensure that all outstanding repairs following the inspection in March 2023 were promptly completed, and by its anticipated deadline of 31 July 2023. Further it did not take steps to satisfy itself that the works it had completed had addressed the damp and mould and that no further intervention was necessary.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s request for compensation for damage to her personal belongings and energy bills

While the Ombudsman cannot comment on the outcome of an insurance claim, as we cannot determine liability, this Service will consider whether it was fair and appropriate for the landlord advise the resident to pursue an insurance claim for damage to her personal belongings.
The landlord’s compensation policy sets out that “in cases where damage to belongings occurs due to [its] negligence residents must claim against [its] public liability insurance”. As the resident alleged that the landlord’s negligence in maintaining the property had resulted in damage to her personal items it was reasonable for the landlord to advise her to make a claim on its insurance policy.
In responding to the complaint the landlord acknowledged that there had been service failings in respect of the timescale in completing the repairs needed to address the damp and mould in the property. As the landlord had acknowledged a failing in respect of the repairs service it provided to the resident it would have been appropriate for it to have considered whether its shortfalls did, or could have, resulted in damage to her personal belongings and therefore whether a sum of compensation was due in recognition of this; in addition to signposting her to its insurers. There is no evidence that it did so. This is unsatisfactory.
In the Ombudsman’s opinion it was reasonable for the landlord to decline to offer compensation for energy bills. This is because its decision was made following a review of the repair records for the property in relation to insulation and it was aware that energy prices had increased for all households across the country. It was good practice that the landlord signposted the resident to its cost of living support scheme as it understood that she may need some financial support.
There was service failure by the landlord as it did not consider whether a sum of compensation was due in response to the resident’s reports that damage had been caused to her personal belongings due to damp and mould in the property. This would have been reasonable as it had acknowledged that it had delayed in carrying out repairs to address the issue.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The resident submitted her complaint on 27 March 2023 and the landlord provided its response on 7 June 2023 which was a period of approximately 47 working days. This was significantly outside of the landlord’s own service standard for responding to complaints at stage 1. In addition the evidence shows that in order to have her complaint responded to the resident had to request intervention from this Service. This is unsatisfactory as a complaint process exists in order to ensure a resident’s concerns are addressed within a specified timeframe and that this timeframe assures the resident that their complaint will be addressed without undue delay. The delay was also contrary to the landlord’s complaint handling principle to resolve complaints at the earliest possible stage.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 2 complaint within its 28 working day service standard.
In responding to the complaint the landlord acknowledged that its handling of the complaint had not been satisfactory, including delays. The landlord therefore apologised and awarded a total of £150 compensation for this part of the complaint. This was appropriate as it demonstrated that the landlord acknowledged the impact of its poor complaint handling on the resident. The compensation offered was also within the Ombudsman’s range for cases where there has been a failure which has adversely affected the resident.
The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code sets out that a landlord must address all points raised in a complaint. The landlord did not do this in the resident’s case which suggests that it was not fully focussed on resolving the complaint or providing a comprehensive response. First the landlord did not respond to the resident’s concern that no action was taken following the damp inspection in April 2022. Second the landlord did not respond to the resident’s report that it delayed in fixing the extractor fan in spring 2022. This is unsatisfactory. Furthermore it has limited the Ombudsman’s ability to thoroughly investigate all aspects of the complaint, as we could not assess the quality or reasonableness of the landlord’s action to address those matters.
In addition the landlord also did not respond to the resident’s concerns regarding the impact of the damp on her and her family’s health. While the court may be the appropriate forum to make a legally binding decision as to whether the resident’s, and her family’s, health was adversely impacted by the landlord’s actions or inactions, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to have considered the resident’s particular circumstances and the impact of the mould on them when responding to the complaint.
In responding to the complaint it was appropriate for the landlord to explain why the resident was only entitled to apply for a housing transfer after her first anniversary of her tenancy start date. The Ombudsman confirms that, depending on the landlord, a new tenant may be offered a starter or introductory tenancy to ensure that they can manage their tenancy before giving them a tenancy with more rights.
There was service failure by the landlord as it failed to address all aspects of the resident’s complaint, and therefore she did not receive a comprehensive response to all her concerns.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman finds:
1. No maladministration by the landlord in response to the resident’s concerns regarding the condition of the property on letting.
2. Maladministration by the landlord in response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
3. Service failure by the landlord in response to the resident’s request for compensation for damage to her personal belongings and energy bills.
4. Service failure by the landlord in respect of its complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

The landlord should, within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, provide a written apology to the resident in respect of the failings identified by this investigation.
The landlord should pay the resident a total of £1567 compensation within 4 weeks of the date of this determination. This figure comprise the £1,117 which the landlord offered itself in consideration of the complaint, if it has not already been paid, in addition to an extra £450 comprising:
1. £150 in recognition that the landlord did not take responsibility to ensure that all outstanding repairs following the inspection in March 2023 were promptly completed.
2. £150 in recognition that the landlord was not able to demonstrate that the repairs had resolved the damp and mould in the property once completed and therefore that the resident’s enjoyment of the property has been impacted.
3. £75 for not considering the resident’s request for compensation for damage to her personal belongings.
4. £75 in recognition of poor complaint handling and the time, trouble and uncertainty the resident will have experienced as a result.
The landlord should arrange an inspection of the property for damp and mould within 4 weeks of the date of this determination. Within 2 weeks of the inspection the landlord should write to the resident to confirm the outcome, providing a schedule of works for any works identified as necessary. A copy should be provided to this Service.
The landlord should within 4 weeks of the date of this determination review the resident’s request for compensation for damage to her personal belonging. The landlord should write to the resident setting out its decision following the exercise. A copy of this correspondence should be provided to this Service.