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

Lambeth Council (202319721)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202319721

Lambeth Council

18 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 response to the resident’s:
    1. Requests for aids and adaptations in the property.
    2. Reports of damp and mould in the property.
    3. Associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident was the secure tenant of a 1-bedroom ground floor flat owned by the landlord. She moved to a different property in November 2023. She is a wheelchair user and has other health vulnerabilities.
  2. The resident made a formal complaint on 27 June 2023, stating that the landlord had not completed adaptations in the property since 2019. She also complained about the presence of damp and mould in the property.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 26 July 2023. It stated it had referred the resident’s requests for aids and adaptations to its occupational therapist (OT). It said it conducted a damp and mould survey in the property and had raised repair jobs to remedy the issue. It apologised for any frustration and upset she had experienced because of these matters. It upheld her complaint due to delays in its service and inconvenience it caused.
  4. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response and asked it to escalate her complaint to stage 2 of its complaints process on 27 July 2023.
  5. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s escalation request on 3 August 2023 and issued its stage 2 complaint response on 21 September 2023. It said it had asked 4 contractors to submit tenders to complete the adaptation works and it would commence work when it received these. It said it had open jobs for the damp and mould related works.
  6. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and brought her complaint to this Service.

Assessment and findings

  1. In reaching a decision about the resident’s complaint we consider whether the landlord has kept to the law, followed proper procedure and good practice, and acted in a reasonable way. Our duty is to determine complaints by reference to what is, in this Service’s opinion, fair in all the circumstances.

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident reported that in 2019 the landlord completed various adaptations in the property including kitchen and bathroom adaptations. She stated that she made formal complaints in 2019 and in 2021 regarding how it managed her various adaptations requests. These complaints exhausted its complaints process in 2019 and 2021, respectively. In her correspondence to this Service, she stated that she is unhappy with how it managed her earlier complaints. She refers to adaptations it did not complete in earlier years and jobs it completed poorly.
  2. The resident reported that she raised a complaint regarding damp and mould in the property on 22 April 2021. It is unclear if this complaint exhausted the landlord’s complaints process. There is no evidence of further reports of damp and mould between April 2021 and April 2022.
  3. Paragraph 42.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme) states that the Ombudsman may not consider matters that were not brought to its attention more than 12 months after a resident exhausted the complaints procedure. This investigation will therefore largely be focused on the events that occurred after December 2022 and any reference to matters predating this are for context only.
  4. The resident has stated that she considers that the landlord’s actions and omissions had an impact on her health. This Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. She may be able to make a personal injury claim against the landlord if she considers that its actions affected her health. This is a legal process, and she should seek independent legal advice if she wants to pursue this option. We can, however, consider any likely distress and inconvenience caused because of any service failure by the landlord.
  5. Our position is in accordance with paragraph 42.f. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme which says that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, concern matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, other tribunal or procedure. Should the resident wish to pursue matters of health further, she could consider this via the courts.

Requests for aids and adaptations

  1. The resident made a formal complaint on 27 June 2023. She said the bathroom window was too high for her to reach as a wheelchair user. She could not use the general waste recycling bins because the lids were too heavy to lift. She said her wet room and kitchen required adaptations. She also requested for an automatic front door.
  2. In accordance with the Equality Act 2010, the landlord has a duty to make reasonable adjustments to premises to meet the needs of residents with disabilities. It must make adjustments if the resident asks it to and if they are deemed reasonable, taking reasonable steps to avoid a resident being disadvantaged, and providing equipment, an aid or service if it is required.
  3. The duty applies only if the resident has a disability under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010, and a disability is indicated if they have a physical or mental impairment. The landlord’s first obligation, therefore, would be to conduct an assessment, to see if a reasonable adjustment were required.
  4. The landlord’s records show the OT completed an assessment at the property on 11 July 2023. The OT reported that the resident moved into the property in 2018. Although it was a non-wheelchair standard property, she stated that she had accepted it as she was at risk of homelessness at that time. She was expecting a bigger wheelchair and there was some concern that the wheelchair would not fit through the door of the property. She informed the OT that there were outstanding agreed adaptations in the wet room and kitchen which appeared not to have been actioned over several years and she was extremely upset about this.
  5. The OT contacted the council’s wheelchair department about the issue and discussed the resident’s case with their colleague who had worked on the case previously. They arranged a joint visit with the home improvement surveyor and said they would investigate the possibility of getting the shower seat raised to a similar height to her wheelchair.
  6. The landlord’s records show the resident had been requesting for adaptations in the property since her previous formal complaint in 2021. However, there is no evidence to show that an OT assessment was completed prior to 27 June 2023. This was when she made a formal complaint about the landlord not completing adaptation works. Considering the landlord was aware of her existing requests for aids and adaptations, it should have been proactive in completing an OT assessment and agreeing what works it would complete with the resident. It did not complete this assessment until 14 days after her formal complaint and this was 27 months since her previous complaint.
  7. It is some concern that it might not have completed this survey or attempted to complete adaptation works if the resident had not made another formal complaint about this issue. The landlord, therefore, did not act promptly in accordance with the Equality Act to conduct an assessment and agree what adjustments were required.
  8. In its stage 1 complaint response on 26 July 2023, the landlord apologised for any frustration and upset the resident had experienced. It acknowledged that there had been delays in service provided to her and inconvenience caused. It said it had referred her complaint to the OT who would investigate her concerns around the bathroom, kitchen, and recycling bin adaptations. It said the neighbourhood officer would continue to collaborate closely with her.
  9. The landlord’s response was reasonable, it recognised the distress and inconvenience the situation would have caused the resident and it took reasonable steps to investigate and resolve her complaint after it completed the OT survey on 11 July 2023. However, although it acknowledged the delays in the service in provided, it did not offer any compensation for this. It would have been appropriate to offer compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
  10. The resident escalated her complaint on 27 July 2023. She was upset that the landlord did not confirm that it had prioritised the works or provide any timeline for when it would resolve the issues. It is understandable that she would have been upset at the lack of a timeline for a resolution. However, at this stage it would have been difficult for the landlord to provide a timeline without first establishing exactly what her requirements were, which it tasked the OT to do.
  11. The landlord’s internal records show that between 31 July 2023 and 7 August 2023, it had multiple conversations with the surveyor from the home improvements team, the OT, and the planning office regarding what improvements it could complete in the property.
  12. The landlord informed the resident on 7 August 2023 that the senior conservation officer confirmed that her home was within a conservation area, adjacent to a statutorily listed terrace building and therefore had a “sensitive context.”
  13. The landlord said that given the circumstances it would not be able to install a new door in the property, but it would look at the possibility of widening the existing front door to allow room to manoeuvre the new wheelchair she was expecting. It reassured her that she could choose the colour of the bathroom flooring and kitchen units. It said it would continue to work with the OT to adjust the request for quotation until this met her requirements. It said once it agreed the request for quotation, it would put these to tender and after the 3-week tender period it would request that the successful contractors would undertake works without any unnecessary delays.
  14. The landlord’s records show that between 8 August 2023 and 29 August 2023 it engaged in multiple internal conversations attempting to progress the resident’s adaptations requests. There was some difficulty with regards to how to widen her door to allow access for the bigger–sized wheelchair. It suggested that it could convert the window to a side entrance door with an access ramp. It discussed having to apply for planning permission before it could complete these external adaptations and discussed alternative ways that it could resolve the issues quicker.
  15. The OT discussed rehousing options with the resident, but she informed him that she would prefer to stay in her immediate area and in her current property. The landlord explored the possibility of her accessing a narrower wheelchair. It said if rehousing options were lengthy and difficult it would make the planning application and put a tender for contractors to complete the works urgently.
  16. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 21 September 2023. It stated that it had a proposal going through planning for the installation of a ramp and a door to access the front of the block. It had sent out tenders for the other works including widening the door and contractors were due to return the tenders by 27 September 2023. It hoped to proceed with works as soon as possible following the receipt of these. It said external access works were subject to planning permission, and it was collating documentation with a view to submitting a planning application.
  17. The landlord’s records show that, on 5 October 2023, it was looking into alternative accommodation for the resident to stay in while it completed the works. It said the contractors were willing to start the works around middle of November 2023.
  18. On 11 October 2023, the landlord received information from an OT from a different council that the resident had accepted permanent accommodation in a different area. They advised it to stop any agreed works in the property. She confirmed to this Service that she moved to a different property in November 2023.
  19. This was a complex case for the landlord to manage. It had to apply for planning permission and request tenders, both of which are lengthy processes and beyond its control. Its records show it was heavily invested in resolving the issues for the resident and it discussed rehousing options with her. The OT and surveyor fully engaged with her to understand her concerns and meet her requirements. Its contractors were available to begin work around the middle of November 2023, and it said the works would take about 10-15 days to complete. This would have been around 6 months from when she made her formal complaint. Considering, the length of time required for the planning and tendering process, this was a reasonable time limit to conclude such complex repairs.
  20. In summary, although, the landlord’s actions were mostly reasonable, it would have been appropriate to have offered compensation for its delays in conducting the OT assessment. This Service has made an order of redress for this failing below.

Reports of damp and mould

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. The Landlord also has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by the Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any damp and mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard and require remedying.
  2. The resident reported damp and mould in the property on 27 June 2023. The landlord’s damp charter states that when it receives reports of damp and mould it would attend the property within 28 days to complete an inspection and diagnose the issue. Its repairs policy states that its vulnerable users will have their repairs prioritised for quicker action.
  3. The landlord completed a damp and mould assessment on 20 July 2023, within its policy time limit. It informed the resident what actions it would take to resolve the issues, like completing mould washes in the affected areas and installing thermal board to the external walls in the bedroom and living room. It raised the repair jobs on 24 July 2023 with a target completion date of 2 August 2023.
  4. In its stage 1 response on 26 July 2023, the landlord stated that it scheduled an inspection to supply and fit thermal board to the walls in the bedroom and living room for 3 August 2023. It booked a 2-day follow on appointment to carry out mould wash in the bathroom, kitchen and bedroom on 7 and 8 August 2023.
  5. The landlord’s records show it completed these works on the agreed dates, it installed a humid fan on 10 August 2023 and inspected the property. In its stage 2 complaint response, it gave a target date of 3 October 2023 to fit the thermal boards and complete any outstanding works.
  6. The landlord’s records show its surveyor attended the property on multiple occasions and communicated regularly with the resident about the damp and mould works. Its internal correspondence show it took her reports seriously and attempted to resolve the issues as quickly as possible. Overall, its actions in resolving the damp and mould issues were reasonable and in line with relevant polices. This Service finds there was no failing in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s damp and mould reports.

Complaint handling

  1. At the time of the complaint, the landlord operated a 3-stage complaint handling process. It stated that it should acknowledge complaints at all stages within 3 working days. It should respond to complaints within 15 working days at stage 1 and stage 2 and within 20 working days at stage 3.
  2. This Service notes that since this complaint the landlord has amended its complaints policy to bring it in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (The Code), which sets out this Service’s expectations of landlords’ complaint handling practices. The Code states that landlords should respond to complaints within 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2. Paragraph 6.4 of The Code states that landlords must decide whether they require an extension to this timescale when considering the complexity of the complaint and then inform the resident of the expected timescale for response. Any extension must be no more than 10 working days without good reason, and it must clearly explain the reason(s) to the resident.
  3. The resident made her formal complaint on 27 June 2023. The landlord did not acknowledge her complaint, this was a failing and not in line with its policy. It issued its stage 1 response on 26 July 2023, within 21 working days. This was 8 days outside its time frame for a stage 1 complaint response and 29 days from when she made her complaint. Also, there is no evidence to show that it contacted her to request an extension or explain the delays. This was a further failing.
  4. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord apologised for the delay in its response, however, it did not provide any explanation for this delay or include any steps it would take to prevent delays in future. This was unreasonable.
  5. The resident requested escalation of her complaint on 27 July 2023 and the landlord acknowledged her complaint on 3 August 2023. It informed her that it would issue its stage 2 complaint response by 1 September 2023. This acknowledgement was 4 days outside its acknowledgement time limit.
  6. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 21 September 2023. Its response was 20 days outside the date it gave to respond by and 56 days from when the resident made her escalation request. Like the stage 1 complaint, there is no evidence to show that it requested or agreed an extension with her. This was a failing and not in line with its complaints policy. It is understandable that these delays would have caused her unnecessary distress and inconvenience.
  7. Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, this Service will consider whether the redress offered by it (including an apology and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, this Service considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  8. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord did not acknowledge or apologise for its complaint handling failures, nor did it offer compensation or show any learning with regards to its complaint handling. For these reasons, this Service finds failings in the landlord’s complaint handling.
  9. The Ombudsman completed a special investigation on this landlord and published a report in January 2024 in which we reviewed its complaints handling and made recommendations. The Ombudsman has therefore not made further orders around these aspects of service in this report but expects the landlord to take all relevant learning points from this case into account in its overall reviews of complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme:
    1. There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s requests for aids and adaptations.
    2. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
    3. There was maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
    1. Send a written apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident total compensation of £350, broken down as follows:
      1. £250 in relation to the delays in completing the OT assessment.
      2. £100 in relation to its complaint handling failures.
  2. The landlord must provide evidence of its compliance with the above orders within 4 weeks of this determination.