London Borough of Croydon (202317525)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202317525

London Borough of Croydon

2 October 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of a leak from the living room ceiling, and damp and mould within the property.
2. Request for it to carry out repairs to the windows and doors.
3. Reports of drainage issues in the garden.
4. Concerns about not being provided with gas and electrical safety certificates when moving into the property.
5. The associated complaint.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant. He suffers with emphysema. The landlord is aware of this.
On 26 January 2023 the resident reported a leak in his living room ceiling. He also said that the patio doors in his bedroom were defective. In February 2023 the landlord’s surveyor attended the property to inspect these repairs. The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence of the results of this survey.

On 27 April 2023 the resident raised a complaint about the landlord’s handling of the leak in his living room ceiling, and the defective patio doors. He said that he suffered with emphysema which was being exacerbated by the damp and mould created by the water ingress at the property. The resident also reported further repairs in his bathroom and that he was concerned that the front door to his property was an internal door. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint the same day. It said it would respond within 20 working days.
On 18 May 2023 the landlord raised a job for the following works to be completed at the resident’s property:
1. Carry out a full inspection of the property. This was to include an assessment by its damp and mould team.
2. Repair the hot water tap in the bathroom.
3. Assess the patio doors at the property.
Between May 2023 and June 2023 the resident asked the landlord to respond to his stage one complaint. During this period the landlord’s contractor carried out 2 visits to the resident’s property, and submitted a quote for works which the landlord approved on 28 June 2023. These works included the following:
1. Overhaul the front door.
2. Complete a patch repair and replaster the living room ceiling.
3. Carry out a mould wash and stain block, then redecorate.
4. Complete a patch repair to a crack in the wall.
5. Overhaul and renew the double-glazed patio doors.
6. Install a drainage system outside the patio doors to prevent further water ingress from the garden.
Between July 2023 and August 2023 the resident asked the landlord to respond to his complaints. He also said that the contractor that completed the survey at his property had made him feel unsafe. The Ombudsman intervened on 14 August 2023 and advised the landlord to provide the resident with its stage one complaint response.
On 15 September 2023 the resident continued to chase the landlord for it to respond to his complaints and outstanding repairs. The resident also raised a further complaint about the following:
1. Drainage issues in his garden where there were puddles of standing water against the retaining wall.
2. That he had been living in his property without a gas or an electrical safety certificate.
The landlord provided its stage one complaint response on 26 September 2023. It apologised for not originally responding to the resident’s complaint. The landlord arranged for a full inspection of the resident’s property, which it carried out on 4 October 2023. On 9 October 2023 the resident said he was unhappy with the landlord’s response. He requested the landlord escalate his complaint.
On 18 October 2023 the landlord acknowledged the resident’s request to escalate his complaints. In November 2023 the landlord completed its gas safety, and electrical inspections at the property. It also repaired a number of electrical sockets during this time.
Between November 2023 and December 2023, the resident asked the landlord to provide its final response to his complaints. The Ombudsman also advised the landlord to provide its final complaint response to the resident by 14 December 2023.
On 19 December 2023 the landlord provided its final response to the resident’s complaints. It apologised for its significant failings in not originally responding to his reports of a number of repairs and subsequent complaints back in April 2023. It awarded the resident £275 compensation in view of this. The landlord said it had carried out the mould wash in addition to some of the other repairs. The landlord said it would not replace the resident’s front door as it was fully functioning. It then said it would carry out the following outstanding works in the near future:
1. Address the drainage issues in the garden.
2. Inspect the patio doors in the resident’s bedroom.
In January 2024 the resident said a number of his repairs remained outstanding. The resident reported that he still had damp and mould in his bedroom which had damaged clothes and meant he was no longer able to use his wardrobe. In April 2024 the landlord carried out a further inspection of the resident’s property. Its drains contractor carried out a high-pressure jetting of the resident’s drainage system, followed by a CCTV site survey in May 2024.
The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response to his complaints. He brought his complaints to the Ombudsman stating that his repairs remained unresolved. The resident said his desired outcome was for the landlord to carry out the outstanding repairs at his property.

Assessment and findings

When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. There are three principles driving effective dispute resolution: Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
The Ombudsman must consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes.’

Scope of Investigation

The Ombudsman was sorry to hear the resident’s account that his health had been impacted by the damp and mould in his property. It is widely accepted that damp and mould can cause damage to health, particularly for those with respiratory problems or a weakened immune system. It is outside the Ombudsman’s remit to assess the specific impact of any action or inaction by the landlord on the resident’s health. Matters of liability for personal injury are better suited to court or liability insurance to determine. This is in accordance with paragraph 42.f. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, which states we may not consider matters where the Ombudsman considers it quicker, fairer, more reasonable, or more effective to seek a remedy through the courts, or other tribunal procedure. However, consideration has been given to the general impact of the damp and mould would have had and the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports that his health had been affected due to a repair issue.

Policies and procedures

The landlord’s repairs policy states that its repairs fall into the following 2 categories:
1. Emergency repairs – The landlord describes this as a repair which presents an immediate risk that must be carried out immediately. It states it will make safe this type of repair within 2 hours, and that further subsequent repairs may be required.
2. Non-emergency repairs – The landlord states that these repairs will be carried out by appointment at the resident’s convenience. The landlord’s target is to complete these repairs within 12 days of the repair being reported.

The landlord’s repairs policy states that the landlord is responsible for carrying out repairs to the roof, walls and ceilings, drains, gutters and down pipes. It is also responsible for repairs to windows, frames, external doors including the frames and hinges. This policy states that the landlord will respond to reports of repairs under the following 2 categories:
1. Emergency – It will respond to these within 2 hours.
2. Appointment – These are repairs that it will carry out from Monday to Friday with an allocated time slot.
The landlord’s lettable standard policy states that it will carry out a full gas check and service, and that all electrical fittings will be tested. The resident will be provided with a copy of the Landlord Gas Safety Record (LGSR) and the electrical safety certificate at the start of their tenancy.
The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process. It will provide its written responses at stage one and stage 2 within 20 working days. The landlord will provide the resident with an explanation and agree a timescale with them if it requires more time to respond to a complaint at either stage. It will keep the resident updated on its progress throughout its handling of the complaint.

Reports of a leak from the living room ceiling, and damp and mould within the property.

On 26 January 2023 the resident told the landlord that there was a leak coming through his living room ceiling. The resident has said that a surveyor visited his property at the end of February 2023, which was followed by a contractor in March 2023. The Ombudsman has not seen any records relating to these visits and understands that none of the repairs raised by the resident at that time were carried out. This was not appropriate. The landlord should have communicated with the resident following its survey of the property. It should then have scheduled an appointment to carry out these repairs in line with its repairs policy as set out above.
On 27 April 2023 the resident raised a complaint about the landlord’s handling of the leak in his property. The landlord carried out an inspection of the leak on 21 June 2023. This further inspection was 101 days after the resident had initially reported the leak, and 56 days after he complained about the damp and mould in his property. It was appropriate that the landlord carried out a further inspection following the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

However, the delay in carrying out this inspection at the resident’s property was significant. The landlord should have communicated sooner with the resident than it did, and the inspection should have been completed within 28 days, in line with industry best practice for routine repairs. The resident had also raised that his health was being impacted by the damp and mould. The Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that the landlord considered or communicated with the resident about his health condition during this period. The landlord should have taken into consideration that the resident had been diagnosed with emphysema when managing this repair. It should have assessed if there was a need to prioritise these works, as the resident had disclosed that it had been affecting his health. The Ombudsman understands when the resident said that this, in addition to the delays exacerbated his distress and inconvenience.
On 28 June 2023 the landlord received a quote from its contractor to carry out works to repair the leak, and to address the damp and mould at the resident’s property. The resident then chased the landlord between June 2023 and September 2023, asking for it to complete these outstanding works. The Ombudsman also intervened during this period, advising the landlord to respond to the resident about this repair. The Ombudsman has not been provided with any evidence as to why the landlord did not authorise for its contractor to carry out the works quoted for. The landlord should have arranged for a second quote for the works, if it had been dissatisfied with the original quote. Or the landlord should have authorised for its contractor to complete the repair within its target date of 12 days, in line with its repairs policy. The landlord should also have kept the resident updated during this period of time. This is evidence of poor handling of its repairs process.
Records reviewed by the Ombudsman show that the landlord’s contractor had repaired the leak and carried out a damp and mould wash at the resident’s property between November 2023 and December 2023. On 19 December 2023, in its final response to the resident’s complaint, the landlord apologised for its delays in carrying out these repairs which it had signed off as completed on 7 December 2023. It was appropriate the landlord carried out these works, and that it apologised for its significant delays. However, an apology by itself was not enough to put things right for the resident and the landlord should have also offered compensation.
For the reasons described above, the Ombudsman makes a finding of maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak from the living room ceiling, and damp and mould within the property.

It was positive the landlord recognised and apologised for its failing to initially address this repair raised by the resident. However, the Ombudsman has considered our own remedies guidance (published on our website) and considers that the landlord’s response failed to fully address the detriment caused to the resident. Therefore, the landlord is to pay the resident £400 compensation. Examples of this level of compensation in the guidance include where the landlord has made failures which adversely affected the resident, causing them distress and/or inconvenience. Also, where the landlord has recognised that it has made errors and attempted to put things right, but its offer has failed to provide a proportionate offer of compensation.

The resident’s request for the landlord to carry out repairs to the windows and doors.

On 26 January 2023 the resident told the landlord that the patio doors at his property were defective. A surveyor attended the property in February 2023. As already stated above, the Ombudsman has not seen any record relating to this visit. The landlord should have inspected the patio doors and then carried out any necessary repair to them within 28 days in line with industry best practice. It is accepted that if a door needs to be fully replaced this can take longer than 28 days as the new door would need to be measured, manufactured and fitted.
On 27 April 2023 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord that it had not repaired his defective patio doors. At the same time, he advised the landlord that his front door was an internal door, and requested an appropriate front door be fitted. Between April 2023 and June 2023 the resident chased the landlord to carry out the repairs to these doors at his property. The landlord did not respond to many of the resident’s correspondences and did not carry out the repairs during this period. This was not appropriate. The Ombudsman understands that the landlord’s failure to respond to the resident only exacerbated the distress and inconvenience caused to him during this time.
In June 2023 the landlord’s contractor carried out an inspection of the doors at the resident’s property. The contractor submitted a quote to the landlord on 28 June 2023 that included the following :
1. Overhaul the front door to the property.
2. Overhaul double doors and renew large, double-glazed unit.
It was reasonable for the landlord to request a quote for the works to be completed to both doors. However, the evidence reviewed by the Ombudsman shows that the landlord failed to follow up on this quote. The landlord should have scheduled for the works to be completed when its contractor informed it that they were not fully functioning. This is evidence of poor handling of its repairs.
Between June 2023 and September 2023, the resident chased the landlord for it to carry out the repairs to the doors at his property. He repeated to the landlord that the window in the patio door was broken and that it was insecure. He also said the front door sometimes did not open from the outside.
On 4 October 2023 the landlord carried out another inspection of the resident’s doors and windows at his property. In its final response to the resident’s complaint on 19 December 2023 the landlord said that the resident’s front door was fully functioning and did not require replacing. It was reasonable the landlord inspected the resident’s front door. However, in its communication with the resident it did not respond to his concern that it was an internal door. The resident has also said the lock mechanism remained faulty following the landlord’s inspection. Therefore, the Ombudsman will make an order as part of this report that the landlord carries out a further inspection of the front door, and confirms it is a correctly fitted front door and that the locking mechanism is in a good working order. The landlord should share the findings of this inspection with the resident in writing. If any repairs are identified as necessary following this inspection, the landlord should carry these out in line with the timescales in its repairs policy.
In the landlord’s final response to the resident’s complaint, it stated it would schedule the overhauling of the patio doors at his property in the near future. This was an unreasonable response. It is reasonable for landlords to schedule major works such as door replacements in advance. However, this applies to items which remain functional but require replacement as they are at the end of their expected lifespan. The landlord should have replaced the resident’s patio door upon knowing it was not fully functioning. This should have been fitted in line with industry best practice. The Ombudsman has not been provided with any further evidence that the patio doors at the resident’s property have since been replaced. Therefore, it will make an order for the landlord to complete these works as part of this report.
For the reasons described above the Ombudsman makes a finding of maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request for it to carry out repairs to the windows and doors. The Ombudsman has considered our own remedies guidance as set out above, and the landlord is to pay the resident a further £300 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by errors in its handling of this aspect of his complaint.

Reports of drainage issues in the garden.

In June 2023 the landlord’s contractor carried out an inspection of the resident’s property. The contractor identified that there were drainage issues where water was penetrating through the patio doors at the property, from the resident’s garden. The contractor recommended and provided a quote to the landlord for installing a drainage system near to the patio doors on 28 June 2023. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence that the landlord acted on these recommendations. The landlord should have sought a second opinion if it disagreed with the quote, or it should have completed the works in line with its repairs policy.
On 15 September 2023 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord about drainage issues at the property. He said that he had puddles of standing water in his garden and the retaining wall to the property was wet. Between September 2023 and November 2023, the resident asked the landlord to respond to his requests to investigate this repair. The Ombudsman has seen no evidence that the landlord provided any updates during this period to the resident about this repair. This was not appropriate. The landlord should have kept the resident up to date, carried out an inspection, and then set out a schedule of the works required within 28 days, in line with industry best practice.
In the landlord’s final response to the resident’s complaint on 19 December 2023, the landlord said it would request for its contractor to investigate his reports of drainage issues at the property. It was right for the landlord to raise these works. However, it should not have taken it 3 months to do so. This is evidence of poor communication by the landlord.
On 13 May 2024 the landlord’s drainage contractor completed a high-pressure jetting of the resident’s drains followed by a CCTV site survey. This was 146 days after the landlord told the resident it had raised this repair. The Ombudsman has not been provided with any evidence that explains this significant further delay in its contractor attending to this repair at the resident’s property, therefore we can only conclude the delay was unreasonable.
The Ombudsman has not been provided with a copy of the site survey. There is also no evidence that the resident has chased the landlord about the drainage issues since the contractor completed the works described above. Therefore, it would be reasonable for the landlord to have believed the works carried out on the 13 May 2024 had solved the drainage issues at the resident’s property. If there are ongoing problems with drainage, the resident should let the landlord know and the landlord should investigate and carry out further repairs as required.
For the reasons described above the Ombudsman makes a finding of maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of drainage issues in his garden. The Ombudsman has considered its own remedies guidance, and in line with this, the landlord is to pay the resident a further £150 compensation for its handling of this aspect of his complaint.

Concerns about not being provided with gas and electrical safety certificates when moving into the property.

The resident commenced his tenancy agreement at the property with the landlord in August 2022. He was not provided with either a Landlord Gas Safety Record (LGSR) or the Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR), also known as the electrical safety certificate during this time. The landlord should have provided this at the start of the resident’s tenancy, as set out above in its lettable standards policy.
Records reviewed by the Ombudsman show that the landlord had completed the relevant gas and electrical tests and had in its possession the relevant certificates in April 2022. However, the Ombudsman has not been provided with any evidence that the landlord completed the yearly Gas Safety check which was due by 25 April 2023. The landlord has a legal duty under the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 to do the following:
1. Complete a gas safety check at the property every 12 months.
2. Provide the resident with a gas safety certificate within 28 days of the check being completed.
3. Retain a copy of the gas safety certificate for 2 years.
This yearly check in April 2023 was a legal requirement. The landlord is responsible for taking positive steps to ensure it fulfils its legal obligations through arranging the appointments and carrying out the safety checks of its properties. It should retain records of such inspections as proof that it has carried them out. The landlord’s failure to carry out these checks by the required deadline was a significant breach of its responsibilities.
In September 2023 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord that it had failed to provide him with the relevant gas and electrical safety certificates since moving into his property. Following it stage one complaint response, the landlord carried out an inspection of the resident’s property on 5 October 2023 and agreed to carry out a full gas safety and electrical check. The landlord then confirmed that the gas safety check was completed on 11 November 2023.

It was appropriate the landlord responded to the resident and completed these necessary checks. However, the Ombudsman has not been provided with any evidence that these certificates were provided to the resident as required both under the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998, and the landlord’s own lettable standards policy. This was not appropriate, and they should have been provided, as explained above in this report.
The Ombudsman makes a finding of severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about not being provided with a gas and electrical safety certificate when moving into the property. This is because of the serious failing that the resident lived in the property for 200 days without a gas safety check being completed. The records reviewed by the Ombudsman also demonstrate that the landlord’s systems in place at that time had not triggered that these important safety checks were outstanding. Therefore, it was only the resident raising the matter as a complaint that the issue was then highlighted, which raises serious concerns, and is evidence of a significant failing in its record management systems.
The Ombudsman will make a wider order under paragraph 54.f. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme as part of this report that the landlord carry’s out a full review of its current practices to gas safety, and electrical safety checks to ensure appropriate recording, and handling of this legal requirement is carried out going forward.
The Ombudsman has considered its own remedies guidance, and in line with this, the landlord is to pay the resident £600 compensation for its handling of this aspect of his complaint. Examples of this type of award includes where there was a single significant failing by the landlord in its service which had a seriously detrimental effect on the resident.

The associated complaint.

On 27 April 2023 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord about the leak in his living room ceiling, and the repairs to his windows and doors at the property. Between April 2023 and September 2023 the resident chased the landlord for it to provide its stage one complaint response.

On 15 September 2023 the resident requested for the landlord to raise a further stage one complaint about drainage issues and that he had been living in the property without a gas or electrical safety certificate. The landlord provided its stage one complaint response to the resident’s complaints on 26 September 2023. This was 98 working days after the resident had made his original complaint. This delay was unacceptable. The response should have been provided within 20 working days, in line with its complaints policy as set out above. The Ombudsman understands that this delay would have caused the resident inconvenience over a prolonged period.
On 9 October 2023, the resident asked the landlord to escalate his complaints. The landlord provided its final response to the resident’s complaints on 19 December 2023. This was 51 working days later. This response should have been provided within 20 working days, in line with the landlord’s complaints policy. The Ombudsman has seen evidence that the resident had continued to chase the landlord during this period. However, the Ombudsman has not seen any evidence that it responded to the resident during this period about it needing to extend its timescale for providing its final response. This is evidence of poor complaint handling.
However, the Ombudsman has taken into consideration the landlord’s apologies in its final complaint response in which it accepted its significant failing in not responding to the resident’s complaints in a timely manner. It awarded the resident £275 compensation for this. The Ombudsman has considered our own remedies guidance. The Ombudsman considers the landlord’s apology and level of compensation to have been a reasonable and proportionate response in these circumstances. Therefore, on this basis, the landlord is not required to do anything further in respect of its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of a leak from the living room ceiling, and damp and mould within the property.
2. Request for it to carry out repairs to the windows and doors.
3. Reports of drainage issues in the garden.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about not being provided with gas and electrical safety certificates when moving into the property.
In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves concern about its handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord is to apologise to the resident in writing. The apology should come from a senior member of staff at director level or above within the landlord’s organisation. This apology is to be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance that it acknowledges the severe maladministration and maladministration in the handling, and expresses a sincere regret for its handling of the resident’s:
1. Request for it to carry out repairs to the windows and doors.
2. Reports of drainage issues in the garden.
3. Concerns about not being provided with gas and electrical safety certificates when moving into the property.
The landlord is to pay the resident £1,450 compensation. The breakdown of this compensation is as follows:
1. £400 for distress and inconvenience caused by errors in its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak from the living room ceiling, and damp and mould within the property.
2. £300 for distress and inconvenience caused by errors in its handling of the resident’s request for it to carry out repairs to the windows and doors.
3. £150 for distress and inconvenience caused by errors in its handling of the resident’s reports of drainage issues in the garden.
4. £600 for distress and inconvenience caused by errors in its handling of the resident’s concerns about not being provided with gas and electrical safety certificates when moving into the property.
The landlord is to pay the resident the £275 compensation it awarded him in its stage one and stage 2 complaints process if it has not already done so.
The landlord should provide evidence of compliance of the above orders to the Ombudsman within 28 days of this report.

The landlord is to carry out an inspection of the resident’s front door within 4 weeks of the date of this report. It is to confirm in writing to both the resident and the Ombudsman that it is a correctly fitted front door, and that the locking mechanism is in good working order. If not, the landlord is to overhaul the resident’s front door within 8 weeks of the date of this report and should update the Ombudsman that it has done so, within those 8 weeks. If the door requires a full replacement, this should be completed within 12 weeks of the date of the inspection.
Within 12 weeks of this report the landlord is to replace the patio doors at the resident’s property as per its previous inspection reports, and its schedule of works order raised on 17 April 2024. The landlord should provide evidence to the Ombudsman that it has complied within those 12 weeks.
In accordance with paragraph 54.f. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the Ombudsman makes the following wider order, which the landlord must complete within the next 16 weeks:
1. Carry out a full review of its recording management system in respect of both the Landlord Gas Safety Record (LGSR) certificate, and the Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR) certificate for all its properties. The review should be conducted by a team independent of the service area responsible for the failings identified by this investigation and should include as a minimum (but is not limited to):
  1. An exploration of why the failings identified by this investigation occurred in respect of gas safety and electrical safety certificates.
  2. Identification of all other residents who may have been affected by this similar issue, but not necessarily engaged with its complaints procedure. This is to confirm that each resident has a valid gas safety check for their property and provide the resident with the gas safety certificate, if this has not been done already.
  3. Provide each resident with a valid copy of the Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR) for their property, unless this has been done already.
2. Following the review, the landlord should produce a report which it is to share with the Ombudsman within these 12 weeks setting out:
  1. Its findings and learning from the review.
  2. Recommendations on how it intends to prevent similar failings from occurring in the future.
  3. The number of other residents who have experienced a similar issue.

The steps it proposes to take to provide redress at the earliest opportunity to the residents who have been similarly affected by the identified failings. This should include consideration of compensation commensurate to the level of detriment a particular resident has experienced if caused by a failing on the part of the landlord.

This wider order is to include oversight from the landlord’s governing body and member responsible for complaints.