London Borough of Hackney (202343128)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202343128

London Borough of Hackney

17 March 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 handling of the resident’s reports of:
1. Faults to the boiler.
2. Damp and mould.
We have also considered the landlord’s:
1. Record-keeping.
2. Complaint handling.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local authority. She moved into the property in April 2022 and confirmed she has asthma.
On 13 February 2024, the resident reported no heating or hot water to the landlord. An emergency work order was raised on 14 February 2024 and attended to the same day. The operative recorded that the boiler needed to be connected to the power.
On 15 February 2024, the landlord raised a “normal priority” work order (which should be completed within 20 working days) to repair the boiler. The job was attended to on 11 March 2024, but the boiler was not repaired.
On 6 March 2024, the landlord emailed the resident, referring to a complaint she had made on 5 February 2024. However, the landlord has not provided any evidence of this complaint. The landlord said that:
1. It had responded at stage 2 of its complaints process in February 2023 and had made several attempts to access the resident’s property to complete necessary repairs.
2. It attended the property on 15 February 2024 to connect the power to the boiler, but the resident cancelled a subsequent appointment.
3. It withdrew the complaint, stating that it had already been addressed.
4. The resident was advised to communicate with the stage 2 officer for further assistance.
On 12 April 2024, the resident reported damp and mould throughout her property. The landlord raised an urgent repair. A surveyor attended on 18 April 2024 and recommended works to test and repair the kitchen fan, treat mould by the front door and in the bathroom, and decorate.
The resident contacted us in May 2024 regarding her complaint. We asked the landlord to log a new complaint and review the issues after its previous stage 2 response (in February 2023).
On 28 May 2024, the landlord issued a stage 1 response. It said:
1. Following the surveyor’s inspection on 18 April 2024, the landlord contacted the resident on 21 May 2024 to offer dates to complete the repairs. The resident said she could not accommodate the works due to her work commitments.
2. On 30 May 2024, a new work order was raised to test the boiler; however, the resident requested that the appointment be cancelled.
3. The resident did not need to be temporarily moved for the repairs to be completed.
4. The landlord offered £620 compensation for the avoidable repair delays and the time and trouble caused to the resident.
The resident remained dissatisfied because she said the repairs were outstanding and wanted to be moved.
The landlord sent a stage 2 response on 18 June 2024. It said:
1. It had missed 2 appointments related to the boiler repairs and apologised. The resident had not provided access for 12 appointments and had cancelled 4 (between April 2022 and May 2024).
2. The resident was required to provide access as outlined in her tenancy agreement.
3. It offered £50 for the 2 missed appointments, bringing the compensation to £670.
The resident contacted us in August 2024 after she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. She said that operatives arrived but could not complete repairs, and she had lost faith in the landlord. She asked to be moved.
In February 2025, we contacted the resident, who confirmed that the repairs were still outstanding. She expressed her wish to move to another property. She said she had not denied the landlord access to her property; she felt frustrated by the continuous attempts to carry out the same repairs without resolving the issues, which impacted the amount of time she needed to take off work to facilitate the repairs.

Assessment and findings

Record–keeping

The landlord failed to provide detailed records of repairs, inspection reports, and correspondence with the resident and contractors, which made it hard for us to piece together the timeline of events and understand what happened.
Our Spotlight report on repair complaints emphasises the importance of landlords maintaining clear, accurate, and accessible records. Additionally, our report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) highlights that without accurate information recording, landlords may fail to act promptly, miss opportunities to recognise issues, and suffer from poor communication and resolutions.
The landlord’s poor record-keeping has made it difficult to manage repairs and address the main issue in the complaint. As a result, the complaints process failed to resolve the situation, causing distress and inconvenience for the resident.
We found maladministration in the landlord’s record-keeping and have made orders aimed at the landlord improving its record-keeping.

A fault with the boiler

The landlord’s repairs policy outlines the following:
1. An emergency repair: an immediate threat to health, safety, or security. Or could cause substantial damage to the property and should be repaired within 24 hours.
2. An urgent repair should be attended within 7 working days to avoid serious problems. This includes issues like partial heating loss or discomfort that aren’t immediately dangerous.”
3. Routine repairs are non-urgent and will be completed within 20 working days.
The resident’s tenancy agreement confirms that she must allow the landlord access to complete necessary repairs, maintenance, and inspections. If she refuses access, the landlord may pursue legal action to gain entry.
On 13 February 2024, the resident reported a lack of heating and hot water. The landlord categorised the report as an emergency repair, which should be addressed and resolved within 24 hours. The landlord responded within 24 hours but did not repair the boiler. The records do not show why the boiler was not fixed but noted that power needed to be connected.
Despite knowing the resident had no heating or hot water, the landlord failed to ensure she had access to these essential services during the winter. The landlord should have considered the resident’s vulnerabilities. The evidence does not show that the resident was offered temporary heating, which was unreasonable.
In its complaint response, the landlord said it arranged to fix the boiler on 22 February 2024, but the resident cancelled it. The landlord did not provide any other records that support this.
The landlord classified the subsequent boiler repair as a “normal” priority. It was expected to respond to the repair request and complete the necessary work within 20 days. Considering the resident’s asthma and the cold weather, the landlord should have treated the repair as urgent. It is unclear why it did not.
On 11 March 2024, the landlord returned 18 working days after the initial appointment. Given the situation, this delay was considerable. Records indicate that the operatives did not finish the boiler repair that day because they felt uncomfortable with the resident’s behaviour.
Our guidance for landlord’s states that they must manage unacceptable behaviour by treating all residents fairly, honestly, consistently, and appropriately, including those whose actions are unacceptable. Residents have the right to be heard, understood, and respected.
We expect landlords to provide evidence of communication with residents, explaining what the landlord considers acceptable behaviour in line with their policies. There is no evidence that this was explained. Consequently, the resident was unable to understand the expected conduct or to modify her behaviour. This lack of information likely caused further delays in repairs.
The landlord recognised that the boiler was broken but did not take the necessary steps to fix it quickly. According to the repairs policy and section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord must keep the heating, hot water, and sanitation working properly. This obligation means the property must always be liveable. Not having heat or hot water, especially in cold months, is unacceptable and can impact the residents’ well-being.
The landlord said it had trouble arranging repair appointments with the resident. The resident stated she never refused access but was frustrated because the landlord came several times without fixing the boiler. She also had to take time off work for these appointments. Our Spotlight report on repair complaints confirms that landlords must give residents enough notice and accommodate their preferred schedules. However, the landlord did not provide evidence of appointment letters or emails, which are crucial for informing residents about appointments, providing reasonable notice and ensuring access is granted.
The landlord’s repair policy requires residents to allow reasonable access for necessary repairs. If residents fail to do so, they might face legal action. The landlord can enter the property without notice in urgent health and safety cases. However, it is unclear why the landlord delayed accessing the property earlier. The only evidence mentioned was in the stage 2 response, where the landlord referred to the tenancy agreement’s access terms. This response came 5 months after the landlord was first notified of the issue, which is a significant delay.
On 28 May 2024, the landlord replied to the stage 1 complaint but did not outline any plans to fix the boiler. By then, the resident had been without heating or hot water for 3 months during a cold season. This situation should have prompted the landlord to communicate with the resident, assess vulnerabilities, provide temporary heating, and escalate intervention. The landlord did not take these actions, so the resident endured poor living conditions for an unreasonable time.
In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord offered compensation of £620. The stage 2 response explains that the £620 compensation was offered for the bathroom repair delays. It is unclear what bathroom repair delays it is referring to. However, it is reasonable to assume that this was related to the 2 February 2024 inspection when a Housing Officer visited the resident who reported a lack of hot water from her shower. We can reasonably conclude this was related to the boiler, as the landlord noted on 22 May 2024 that a repair needed to be reported but required the gas boiler to be reinstated first for hot water to be available.
The landlord failed to arrange an urgent repair for the resident’s hot water. After the landlord’s visit on 2 February 2024, there was no evidence of any further repairs related to the shower, even though the landlord knew that the resident’s access to hot water was compromised.
The landlord knew the boiler repairs were still outstanding when it issued its stage 2 complaint response on 18 July 2024, 5 months after it became aware of the repair. The boiler was repaired on 24 July 2024. The landlord did not explain why it did not take appropriate action to ensure a repair was completed. Because of this, a vulnerable resident lived without heating and hot water for 5 months.
The resident informed us that the boiler had not been permanently fixed following the repair. In August 2024, the landlord requested the installation of a new boiler, which has yet to be completed. The landlord said no access was provided on 15 August 2024 or 30 October 2024. We do not have evidence that the landlord scheduled these appointments with the resident to guarantee her availability for access.
In March 2025, the landlord confirmed that the boiler installation had not been completed despite its efforts. The landlord cannot continue to leave issues unresolved. If access is denied, the landlord must ensure that repairs are completed.
We expect to see evidence of the appointments and that the staff made reasonable and repeated attempts to gain access. Additionally, we would expect to see evidence of the landlord emphasising the urgency of the repair and that it would escalate, if necessary, to ensure access, as stipulated in the tenancy agreement as a resident requirement. The landlord has not demonstrated that it has done this, beyond detailing the terms of the tenancy agreement in its stage 2 response.
In summary, we have found severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the boiler repairs as it failed to:
1. Act in accordance with its repairs policy to address an emergency repair.
2. Ensure the resident had access to hot water and heating while the boiler was not working.
3. Consider the impact on the resident, especially during the colder months.
4. Take necessary action to intervene to ensure it had access to repair, despite knowing that the resident was without heating and hot water for months.
5. Send formal warning letters emphasising the urgency of repairs.
6. Provide evidence that appointments were scheduled and agreed upon with the resident.
7. Evidence any learning from the complaint as the boiler repair remains outstanding at the time of our investigation.
We have reviewed the landlord’s compensation offer in line with our remedies guidelines. The landlord offered £670 during stage 2 of its complaints process. Our guidance suggests that compensation should be £1,000 or more for significant failures that severely impact the resident.
We ordered the landlord to pay an additional £600 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the resident’s lack of a working boiler. While determining a proportionate compensation amount, we considered the mitigating factor of access difficulties.

Reports of damp and mould

The landlord’s published information on damp, mould and condensation confirms that it will inspect all reports within 5 working days.
In its stage 1 response in May 2024, the landlord said that a Housing Officer visited the resident on 2 February 2024 to address the repairs. During the inspection, the landlord noted that the resident had reported issues since 2022, including damp and mould.
The landlord did not provide notes from the visit or an inspection report. There is no evidence that they responded to the damp and mould report within 5 working days, which is not in line with their published information.
On 12 April 2024, the resident reported damp and mould again. The landlord acted appropriately by arranging an inspection on 18 April 2024. However, the landlord has not provided the inspection report, which hinders our ability to assess the situation’s severity.
The landlord said that the surveyor did not determine the underlying cause of the damp and mould, which was unreasonable. The landlord did acknowledge that the absence of heating could contribute to the damp and mould in the property which was reasonable. Follow-up works were raised to treat the damp and mould, redecorate and test and repair the extractor fans.
The landlord said it tried to contact the resident to schedule repairs on 21 May 2024, 22 days after the inspection. This delay was unreasonable and unexplained. We have not seen evidence of the contact attempts. The landlord emailed the resident on 15 July 2024 to ask for suitable dates for the repairs.
The records show that the resident declined to schedule the repairs and said that her property was in poor condition because of the damp and mould, but she could not take time off work to facilitate the repairs.
The works remained incomplete when the landlord issued its Stage 2 response on 18 July 2024. The landlord failed to follow up proactively on the repairs, despite published information confirming that it prioritises swift and effective measures to address damp and mould. The landlord and resident confirmed that the repairs identified in the April 2024 inspection are still outstanding.
The evidence does not reveal the extent to which the damp and mould affected the property. The landlord’s failure to provide inspection reports concerning the damp and mould represents another failing, particularly in recognising that the issue may have arisen from inadequate heating. The landlord was unlikely to address the damp and mould until the boiler was repaired, as this worsened the problem within the property.
The resident informed the landlord that her asthma had worsened due to the conditions in her property, resulting in considerable distress. The landlord’s published information regarding damp, mould, and condensation states that these issues can lead to serious health problems. The landlord is committed to addressing matters promptly and will inspect reports of damp and mould within 5 working days. Furthermore, our Spotlight report on damp and mould underscores the importance of considering the specific circumstances of each household, including any vulnerabilities. However, the evidence suggests that the landlord did not adequately consider this when managing the damp and mould.
We have considered the mitigating factors surrounding the resident’s lack of availability to provide access; however, this does not absolve the landlord of its responsibility to take proactive measures to resolve the damp and mould issue. The matter remains unresolved at the time of our investigation, and the delay significantly exceeds what could be excused solely by the resident’s availability. If the resident was unresponsive or refused access, the landlord should have escalated the issue to gain access, to ensure that the resident did not have to live in unsatisfactory conditions for an unreasonable amount of time.
In summary, we have identified maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould situation for the following reasons:
1. Despite an urgent repair request in April 2024, the landlord took 22 days to contact the resident to arrange repairs.
2. The landlord did not consider the resident’s vulnerabilities, despite its policy recognising the health risks associated with damp and mould.
3. The landlord recognised that the boiler issue could have exacerbated the damp and mould but failed to address it promptly.
4. The landlord did not proactively resolve the issues, such as escalating matters to gain access.
5. The landlord provided dates when the resident refused access but has not provided evidence of scheduled appointments.
The landlord is ordered to compensate the resident for failing to resolve the damp and mould that affected her living conditions and well-being. We have considered that the landlord has said it experienced difficulties arranging appointments, but this does not negate the landlord’s responsibilities. We have ordered the landlord to pay £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failing to resolve the issue.

Complaint handling

On 5 February 2024, the resident complained to the landlord. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) says that landlords must log and investigate complaints fairly while determining whether the complaint pertains to a new or ongoing, unresolved issue. The landlord dismissed the resident’s complaint, citing a previous complaint from 2023. This dismissal was unreasonable, particularly because the resident indicated that the issues had not been resolved.
By rejecting the complaint, the landlord extended the frustrations and distress experienced by the resident. Instead of seeking a resolution, the landlord’s approach overlooked the resident’s concerns, prolonged the resolution of substantial issues, and wasted the resident’s time.
The resident contacted us in 2024. In May 2024, we asked the landlord to log a new complaint. The landlord provided a stage 1 complaint response on 28 May 2024.
The landlord’s responses to complaints referenced actions taken as far back as 2022 rather than addressing how it would rectify the current situation. The landlord placed the responsibility on the resident to schedule appointments, failing to recognise the duration of the outstanding issues and neglecting to adopt a proactive stance on completing repairs. This pattern continued even after the complaints process concluded, leaving significant issues unresolved. This suggests a lack of learning from the complaint.
The landlord acknowledged missing two appointments and delaying repairs. The landlord provided significant compensation despite identifying only two failings related to the missed appointments. While this compensation was appreciated, it did not address the issues, particularly the need to complete all repairs.
The landlord’s rationale for the compensation was ambiguous. The stage 2 response noted that compensation was being provided due to the “degree of fault in conducting bathroom repairs.” We requested clarification regarding the compensation offer. The landlord explained that the total compensation was £520 for delays in repairs and £100 for the distress caused by damp and mould. However, the stage 1 and 2 responses did not mention any compensation for the damp and mould. This discrepancy highlights the landlord’s failings in record-keeping.
The landlord has not demonstrated that it “learns from outcomes,” given the ongoing difficulties in gaining access to complete repairs and in communicating effectively with the resident after the complaints process concluded.
The landlord’s response to the resident’s complaint was poor, resulting in an ineffective use of the complaints process to resolve the dispute. This contributed to failings in the landlord’s management of the substantive issues. Consequently, we have identified maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling, and orders have been made regarding the failings.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was severe maladministration by the landlord in its handling the resident’s reports of repairs to the boiler.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its record–keeping.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its complaint handling.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report. This apology should come from the Chief Executive.
2. Pay the resident £1,150, made up of:
  1. £600 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the boiler.
  2. £400 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould.
  3. £150 for the failings in its complaint handling.
  4. This is in addition to the £670 offered at stage 2. It should be added to the total amount if it has not already been paid.
  5. The money should be paid directly to the resident.
3. Complete the installation of the new boiler.
4. If access remains an issue, the landlord must take appropriate steps to gain access under the terms of the tenancy agreement.
5. If the boiler is not replaced within 4 weeks (28 days), the landlord should offer temporary heating or consider temporary accommodation if necessary.
6. Complete outstanding damp and mould works, ensuring all affected areas are treated and repainted.
7. If additional repairs are needed, these must be scheduled within 28 days.
8. The landlord must provide the resident and us with written confirmation of the completed works.
Within 12 weeks from the report date, the landlord must:
1. Conduct a thorough assessment of its repair management, focusing on record-keeping and escalation procedures to prevent future delays.
2. Evaluate the procedures for addressing damp and mould, ensuring compliance with the landlord’s policies regarding damp, mould, and condensation timelines. Identify why the failings occurred in this case and confirm what steps it has taken or intends to take to prevent similar mistakes.
3. Clearly outline the improvements made or planned to prevent similar issues from arising, which should be documented in a report to us.

Recommendations

The resident told us she wants to move from the property. We recommend that the landlord consider her request and discuss her housing options.