London Borough of Camden Council (202305961)
Back to Top
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202305961
Camden Council
18 February 2025
Our approach
What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The Ombudsman must determine whether a complaint comes within their jurisdiction. The Ombudsman seeks to resolve disputes wherever possible but cannot investigate complaints that fall outside of this.
In deciding whether a complaint falls within their jurisdiction, the Ombudsman will carefully consider all the evidence provided by the parties and the circumstances of the case.
The complaint
- The complaint is about the landlord’s:
- Response to the resident’s reports of leaks, damp and mould.
- Handling of various estate management issues.
- Handling of various property related issues.
- Response to the resident’s recent concerns about rubbish on a roof.
Determination (jurisdictional decision)
- When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
- After carefully considering all the evidence, we have determined that the complaints set out above are not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
Summary of events
- The resident is a secure tenant. His tenancy began in 2010. The property is a 1-bedroom, first-floor flat in a converted building. The landlord is a local authority.
- The resident reported a damp issue to the landlord in August 2022. The landlord did not resolve the problem at this point. There is evidence that the resident tried to complain to the landlord in April 2023. In mid-2023 he approached the Ombudsman for help. Around this time, he also made a legal claim against the landlord through a solicitor.
- The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 4 September 2023. It partly upheld the complaint. It awarded the resident a total of £390 in compensation. This was largely due to delayed repairs. On 18 September 2023 the resident asked the landlord to escalate his complaint. He introduced several new complaint issues at this point. He said he had previously complained to the landlord about some of them. He said the matters he had previously raised with the landlord were:
- Its response to a rat infestation that occurred soon after he moved to the property.
- A lack of grounds maintenance and security patrols.
- Its handling of a dispute between the resident and a neighbour.
- The resident mentioned other issues in his escalation request. They largely related to the property. He referenced problems with a major works programme and some general repairs the landlord had previously completed. He said he had notified the landlord in 2013 about rubbish that was thrown onto a nearby roof. He also said the rubbish was still in place. His correspondence suggests he had not raised a formal complaint with the landlord about these matters previously.
- The landlord issued a stage 2 response on 16 November 2023. It partly upheld the resident’s main complaint about damp issues. It increased its compensation award to £540 in total. It said it could not investigate his other complaint points as the incidents had happened a long time ago. It said many of the related repair issues he had raised occurred around 2013. It did not respond to his concerns about rubbish left on the nearby roof. The resident remained unhappy after the landlord’s response.
- We contacted both parties in January 2025 to obtain an update. The landlord told us there was an ongoing legal claim about the damp and mould related repair issues. It said a court hearing was due to take place on 6 February 2025. Subsequently, it provided a copy of the Particulars of Claim form. The document details and explains the resident’s legal claim against the landlord. It was prepared by his solicitor. The form referenced leaks, damp and structural cracks.
Reasons
- Paragraph 41.c of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme says the Ombudsman cannot consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, “concern matters that are the subject of court proceedings or were the subject of court proceedings where judgement on the merits was given”.
- We considered the details of the resident’s complaint and the details of his disrepair claim. His claim concerns the landlord’s handling of repairs relating to leaks, damp and structural issues. The Particulars of Claim form states he has “suffered with periods of mould and damp” in his home. It shows the resident feels the landlord is responsible and he is seeking various financial damages. Ultimately, the court proceedings match his main complaint to the Ombudsman.
- The evidence shows the resident’s complaint about leaks, damp and mould is subject to court proceedings. In line with paragraph 41.c of the Scheme, the matter is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. Given the court’s involvement, we are unable to investigate further.
- Paragraph 42.b of the Scheme says we may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion “were brought to [our] attention normally more than 12 months after they exhausted [the landlord’s] complaints procedure”.
- The resident says he previously raised his various estate management concerns with the landlord. There is no indication he did this recently. Paragraph 42.b shows residents must bring their complaint to the Ombudsman within a reasonable period after a landlord has responded to it. In this case, the evidence shows more than 12 months passed before the relevant issues were brought to us. In line with paragraph 42.b of the Scheme, this aspect of the complaint is outside of our jurisdiction.
- Paragraph 42.c of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme says the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, “were not brought to the attention of [the landlord] as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of the matter arising”.
- The resident has other concerns that relate to repair reports and issues. The landlord says it completed the relevant repairs around 2013. The resident has not disputed this assertion and we have not seen any information to the contrary. The evidence shows he complained to the landlord around 10 years after the events in question. His concerns about historical repair reports and issues are outside of our jurisdiction in line with paragraph 42.c of the Scheme.
- Paragraph 42.e of the Scheme says the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, “concern matters where a complainant has or had the opportunity to raise the subject matter of the complaint as part of legal proceedings”.
- In his escalation request, the resident told the landlord about rubbish that was left on a nearby roof. The evidence shows the landlord should have been aware of the matter in 2023. In January 2025 the resident told us the rubbish was still in place. The Particulars of Claim form referenced his escalation request and the landlord’s subsequent stage 2 response. It shows his solicitor was aware of both documents. It is reasonable to conclude the solicitor was also aware of the information the documents contained.
- The evidence shows the resident has or had the opportunity to raise this matter during legal proceedings. This aspect of the complaint is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction in line with paragraph 42.e of the Scheme. It is noted that this paragraph also applies to some other elements of the resident’s complaint.