From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new cases by email. Please use our online webform to submit your complaint. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Call us on 0300 111 3000

London Borough of Harrow (202324259)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202324259

London Borough of Harrow

21 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the removal of asbestos floor tiles from the resident’s flat.

Background

  1. The resident has a flexible tenancy for a flat. She moved in on 15 May 2017.
  2. The landlord is a council. It was aware of her vulnerabilities.
  3. The landlord repaired broken asbestos floor tiles in the living room, kitchen and hallway in November 2019. It also fitted vinyl flooring in the living room and hallway.
  4. On 11 August 2023 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord. She said:
    1. Her floor coverings were worn and cracking.
    2. She was concerned if she replaced the floor coverings it would disturb the asbestos floor tiles underneath and her and her son would be exposed to it.
    3. She had reported this in May 2023 and the landlord had not responded to her.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 22 August 2023. It said its surveyor would inspect the condition of the resident’s flooring. It also said the resident was responsible for replacing the floor coverings if the floor tiles had to be removed.
  6. On 19 September 2023 the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint as the surveyor had told her the landlord would only remove the living room floor tiles. She said she wanted the asbestos floor tiles to be removed in all rooms and for the landlord to replace the floor coverings.
  7. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 16 October 2023. It said:
    1. The resident told its surveyor she wanted to fit carpet in her living room. It’s decision to remove the living room floor tiles was to allow her to do this.
    2. It was unable to remove the tiles as the resident had not removed her furniture before the arranged appointment.
    3. It understood the resident’s concerns about asbestos in other rooms. However, it would not remove floor tiles unless they were damaged.
    4. It expected the resident to arrange installation of underlay and carpet once the tiles were removed.
    5. It will allow the resident time to remove furniture. It’s contractor could do remove her furniture, however, the resident would need to pay for this service.
    6. It had reached out to her housing officer to explore potential support options.
    7. It would carry out another asbestos survey to ensure the property was safe.

Events following completion of the landlord’s internal complaints process

  1. The landlord instructed an independent company to carry out an asbestos survey on 22 October 2023. The survey said that the asbestos was a ‘very low risk’.
  2. On 26 October 2023 the landlord removed the living room floor tiles.
  3. The resident asked us to investigate her complaint as she felt she should not have been left with bare concreate floors in her living room and she wanted the asbestos floor tiles removed in the other rooms of her flat.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident told us she was concerned about the impact the asbestos was having on her and her son’s health. While we are an alternative to the courts, it is not within our expertise to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health or wellbeing. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident.

The landlord’s handling of the removal of asbestos floor tiles

  1. We find no maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the removal of asbestos floor tiles. The reasons for my findings are below.
  2. The resident’s concerns and anxiety about asbestos materials within her home are noted. However, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to investigate the level of asbestos or the risks involved, but to provide an independent review of the landlord’s actions in response to the resident’s concerns.
  3. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) confirms that asbestos can be found in any building built before 2000. It confirms that if asbestos materials are in good condition, and in a place where they are unlikely to be disturbed, then they should not cause any harm. It is only when the materials are damaged or disturbed, that asbestos can become a concern.
  4. The HSE states that asbestos in poor condition must be sealed or removed. The HSE recommends that if asbestos is likely to release dust and cannot be easily repaired and protected or is likely to be disturbed during routine maintenance work, then it must be removed.
  5. In the resident’s complaint dated 11 August 2023 she said she had raised concerns about the asbestos floor tiles since 19 May 2023. We did not receive any evidence of communication between the resident and landlord before the complaint. Therefore we could not determine whether the landlord acted appropriately at this time.
  6. In its stage 1 response the landlord told the resident she would be responsible for replacing any floor coverings. This was appropriate as it was in line with the landlord’s repairs policy, which states residents are responsible for carpets and laminate flooring.
  7. The landlord acted appropriately by instructing its surveyor to inspect the resident’s flooring on 18 August 2023. This was in line with it’s asbestos policy which states it will carry out a survey when a resident requests to make an alteration to the property. The survey was carried out on 24 August 2023. Although the landlord did not provide us with a copy of this survey, its records show the surveyor instructed the landlord to remove the living room floor tiles on 25 August 2023. The landlord was proactive which showed it wanted to resolve the complaint as soon as possible.
  8. The landlord’s records state on 31 August 2023 the resident said she did not want her living room floor tiles removed, as she wanted the landlord to remove the floor tiles in all other rooms too. The landlord cancelled the job with its contractor. There was no evidence the landlord contacted the resident at this time to discuss this. The landlord’s poor communication resulted in the resident escalating her complaint to stage 2 on 19 September 2023, where she said she had been ignored by the landlord’s surveyor.
  9. The landlord wrote to the resident on 10 October 2023 and said she needed to remove her furniture before it could remove the floor tiles. The landlord was aware of the resident’s vulnerabilities. Although it did not offer her support in removing her furniture straight away, it did address this in its stage 2 response on 16 October 2023. It was also positive to see the landlord had contacted the resident’s housing officer to look into the resident’s care and support needs. 
  10. The landlord responded to the resident’s continued concerns about the asbestos by instructing an independent company to inspect the asbestos on 22 October 2023. The survey confirmed the asbestos floor tiles were a ‘very low risk’. Although, the independent company recommended that the floor tiles were removed in all rooms, it said there was a very low potential for the floor tiles to release fibres, even if they were disturbed. It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on its surveyors findings that the floor tiles in the other rooms did not need removing because they were not damaged, and the resident had not said she wanted to remove the floor coverings in the other rooms.  
  11. The landlord removed the living room floor tiles on 26 October 2023. Although this was outside the target timescale of 20 working days for non-urgent repairs, as stated in its repairs policy. It had tried to remove the tiles in August 2023, but the resident did not give permission for the work to go ahead.
  12. The resident raised concerns to this service that she was left with a bare concrete floor in her living room. The landlord had made it clear in its stage 1 and 2 response that the resident would be responsible for replacing the floor covering. This was in line with the landlord’s repairs policy. We would usually expect a landlord to consider the impact of leaving a vulnerable resident with bare concrete floors. However, in this case the issue with the asbestos floor coverings only occurred because the resident told the landlord she wanted to install a carpet in her living room. It was therefore reasonable for the landlord to assume she would arrange this once the floor tiles were removed. It was unclear why the resident changed her mind or delayed doing this.
  13. It is vital that landlords keep clear, accurate and easily accessible records to provide an audit trail. It is our opinion that the landlord failed to maintain adequate records, which impacted our ability to carry out a thorough investigation. This has been highlighted at various points throughout the report. Although this was a failing, there was no detriment caused to the resident. A recommendation has been made for the landlord to review its record keeping practices.
  14. In summary after receiving the resident’s complaint the landlord arranged its surveyor to inspect the resident’s property within a reasonable timescale. It was reasonable for the landlord to rely on its surveyors findings that only the living room floor tiles needed replacing. The landlord’s record keeping was poor and there was evidence of poor communication between August and September 2023. However, the landlord had made it clear it was only removing the floor tiles because the resident wanted to replace her floor covering, and it was her responsibility to buy and fit this. It listened to her concerns about asbestos in other rooms and obtained a further survey from an independent company. There was a delay in the living room floor tiles being removed, however, this was outside the landlord’s control.

Determination

  1. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the removal of asbestos floor tiles from the resident’s flat (paragraph 52 of the Scheme).

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should review its record-keeping practices. If it has not done so already, it should consider implementing a knowledge and information management strategy, in line with the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management.