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

Lambeth Council (202127410)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202127410

Lambeth Council

5 June 2023

 

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 damp and mould in the bathroom.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant at the property of the landlord. The landlord is a local authority. The property is a two-bedroom, ground-floor flat.
  2. On 8 October 2021, the resident reported damp and mould in her bathroom. On 3 November 2021, the landlord inspected the property. On 8 November 2021, works were raised to overhaul the extractor fan, mould-wash the walls, redecorate the bathroom, and repair the downpipe at the back of the property, which was believed by the resident to be the cause of the damp.
  3. On 15 March 2022, the resident brought her complaint to this service. She explained that she had raised a complaint with the landlord in December 2021 because the works raised by the landlord in November 2021 had not been completed. She also explained that she had received acknowledgements, but no response from the landlord to her complaint. Copies of the complaint or the acknowledgements have not been provided for this investigation.
  4. Following contact by this Service in April 2022 the landlord explained it had received an MP enquiry on the resident’s behalf on 29 March, which it had responded to on 5 April. The MP had explained the resident’s concern that a leaking pipe in her garden was causing mould in her bathroom, and that since reporting the matter in November 2021 there had been initial repair work by the landlord, but nothing further, and the work remained outstanding. She said the resident was concerned about the impact of the mould on her family’s health. In response the landlord confirmed that an initial inspection had been done in November 2021, and several work orders created. It acknowledged the work had not been completed, and said they had been highlighted as a priority to its contractors, and would monitor them through to completion. It said the contractors would contact the resident to arrange appointments. It also explained that it was experiencing longer wait times than usual, but apologised for the inconvenience caused.
  5. On 20 May 2022 the resident emailed the landlord and explained that the repair jobs had not been completed, despite some activity earlier in May. In June and July the resident sent this Service updates about a range of failed or ineffective efforts by the landlord’s contractors to make progress with the repair work.
  6. The landlord provided its first complaint response on 13 July 2022. It apologised for the complaint delay and acknowledged that the repairs had also been significantly delayed. It offered £250 in compensation. On the same day the resident responded and explained that the works completed so far were substandard and that she had previously explained to the landlord that she did not want the compensation credited against her rent.
  7. In response to further enquiries it received from the resident’s MP in August 2022 it explained that some work had been completed, but it had spoken with the resident who had explained her dissatisfaction with the standard of the works. It said it had created new work orders to address that.
  8. The landlord provided its final complaint response on 30 August 2022. It explained that it had investigated the resident’s concerns about the incomplete repairs for the damp and mould. It agreed that the resident should have been given more frequent updates and better communication, but said that the contractors had arranged an appointment for 8 September 2022 to finish the works. It referred the resident to this Service if she remained dissatisfied.
  9. The resident has confirmed that works were done on 8 September 2022, but she remained dissatisfied with their standard of quality. The resident has since left the property.

Assessment and findings

  1. Some of the repair records provided by the landlord for this investigation do not include important details such as dates, and repair specifics. Nonetheless, the resident has provided detailed information about the landlord’s efforts to resolve the repairs, which broadly align with the landlord’s explanations and acknowledgement of extensive delays in completing the work.
  2. It is undisputed that the landlord initially responded promptly to the resident’s repair reports. However, having identified the work needed to address the damp and mould she was experiencing in her bathroom, it then took no further action. This required the resident to have to chase the landlord for updates, and approach the Ombudsman for assistance. There is no evidence of an update to or communication with the resident until the landlord responded to her MP in April 2022, approximately four months after the matter was first reported. Nothing in the evidence explains the delay up to that point.
  3. This Service asked the landlord in mid-April 2022 to consider the resident’s concerns as a complaint and respond to her promptly. It did not provide its complaint response until mid-July. However, that delay was partly due to the time taken by this Service to respond to a query the landlord had made to us. Once that query was resolved the landlord issued its complaint response in the time frame we asked it to.
  4. In its first complaint response the landlord appropriately acknowledged the extensive delays with the repairs. It provided some explanation as to why the delays were occurring, said it had asked its contractors to prioritise the work – which it would monitor – apologised, and offered £250 compensation. If the repair work had subsequently been completed soon after that response, the landlord’s actions could have been considered broadly reasonable remedies for its failings. However, there is no evidence of the landlord doing as it said it would, and the repairs were not finished until 8 September 2022, nearly two months later.
  5.  In its final complaint response at the end of August 2022 the landlord acknowledged that the work was still not complete (although there was now a date set for completion), and that its further communication with the resident had been poor. Despite that, it did not provide any further compensation, or explain how it intended to improve the services which it itself had acknowledged had been poor. Nothing in the evidence, or the landlord’s final complaint response indicates it has taken any learnings from the resident’s complaint, or gives any assurance that the same delays and poor communication will not be repeated with other residents in the future.
  6. The resident told this Service that she remained dissatisfied with the quality of the work completed by the landlord’s contractors. This took place after the landlord issued its final complaint response, and it is not apparent if the resident raised her continued concerns with the landlord. Accordingly, this is not something which can be assessed in this investigation. Nonetheless, the landlord confirmed to this Service in April 2023 that void works had been completed to the property, and specifically the bathroom.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of the complaint.

Orders

  1. Within four weeks of this report the landlord must pay £200 compensation to the resident for its repair delays and poor communication. This is in addition to the £250 previously offered, which should also be paid now, if it has not already been.
  2. Repair delays can often occur for reasons outside a landlord’s control. When that happens, it is vital that a landlord communicates with its tenants in an effective manner, provides updates, and manages the tenants’ expectations about the possible time frame and actions needed to resolve the matter. None of that happened in this case. With that in mind, the landlord is ordered to review this case and identify how it can create a process that provides appropriate and meaningful updates and information to its repair customers. As part of this review, it should also ensure that it can show, when asked, evidence of its communications with its tenants. This review must be provided to this Service within six weeks of the date of this report.