London Borough of Lambeth (202329603)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202329603

Lambeth Council

28 May 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 response to the resident’s:
1. Repair requests for windows
2. Reports of damp and mould
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s:
1. Complaint handling
2. Record keeping

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord since 2017. The landlord is a council. The property is a 2-bedroom first floor flat. The resident shares the property with her husband and 2 young children
On 8 November 2022, the resident reported that handles in the bathroom window and bedroom window we not opening. On 22 November 2022, the landlord attended and found that 5 window handles were damaged and required the windows required renewal. On 22 November 2022, the resident reported black mould in the bathroom and separate toilet. They had washed it several times, but it kept reoccurring. On 30 January 2023, the resident reported that they could not open the windows, and that the property was full of damp and mould.
On 6 February 2023, the resident raised a complaint. She said that the windows in the property were not opening. She reported that there was mould in the flat because they could not open the windows. She said that she had young children aged 4 and 6 years old who were breathing in mould which could affect their health. As a resolution to the complaint, she wanted the landlord to replace the windows as recommended by its surveyor.
On 6 February 2023, the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response. It did not uphold the complaint. It said that the attended to and completed the window repair on 22 November 2022.
On 17 February 2023, the resident escalated the complaint. She was unhappy that the landlord did not investigate the complaint properly to understand the issue. She clarified that the complaint was about the window replacement that the surveyor had recommended which had not taken place. She said that they could not open the windows and as a result mould had accumulated. She was increasingly concerned about the health implications of breathing in mould, particularly for their young children.
On 23 March 2023, the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It upheld the complaint. It apologised that it did not address the issues raised by the resident at stage 1. It noted that it had raised a work order to complete the window renewal, and it had raised a work order to treat the areas affected with mould. It said that its contractor would contact the resident directly to schedule the appointments. It apologised for the time, trouble, and inconvenience caused to the resident and offered compensation of £310.
On 23 November 2023, the resident brought their complaint to the Ombudsman. She was unhappy because the windows had not been replaced and there was black mould in the property. The resident had been carrying out weekly mould washes and was concerned about the health implications for her children. As a resolution to the complaint the wanted the landlord to resolve the issues and more recently reported that she wants a property move.

Events after the internal complaints process

On 12 June 2024, the landlord called the resident who confirmed that the window replacement had not been completed.
On 14 May 2025, the landlord raised a new work order to complete the window replacement.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

There is evidence that the resident had been reporting damp and mould to the landlord since 2020. However, after careful review of the evidence, it is reasonable to consider evidence from 8 November 2022. This is when the resident requested repairs to her windows and it was the landlord’s response to this request that gave rise to the complaint.
The complaint issues raised by the resident continued beyond the timeframe in which the landlord agreed to carry out the repairs, after its final complaint response. For completeness, and fairness, the Ombudsman has increased the scope of the investigation beyond the landlord’s final complaint response because the evidence shows that repairs remain outstanding.
The resident has raised concerns about the impact mould may have on the health of the household. The Ombudsman is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on the resident’s health and wellbeing. Such decisions require an assessment of liability and are decided by a court or insurer. However, the Ombudsman has considered the distress and inconvenience that may have been caused to the resident.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s repair requests for windows

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. This includes the roof, walls, windows, and external doors. The landlord is required to carry out repairs within a reasonable timeframe.
The landlord’s repairs manual says that routine repairs will be carried out in either 7 days or 28 working days, depending on the type of repair, and that planned works would be completed within 90 days.
On 22 November 2022, a surveyor for the landlord attended the property and reported that 5 window handles in property were broken and were discontinued by the supplier and the windows required renewal. After the complaint, it surveyed the property again on 15 April 2023 and placed a follow-on works order for the replacement of 5 windows in the property.
The evidence provided to the Ombudsman show that the landlord has not replaced the windows. When the Ombudsman requested evidence from the landlord, it called the resident on 12 June 2024 to find out if the work had been completed and found that it had not. As part of this investigation, we asked for further information on the window replacement and the landlord found that it had failed to raise a follow-on repair and raised a new work order on 14 May 2025. The resident has confirmed that no repair has been complete and said that the windows have fallen into further disrepair and presently only 2 windows in the flat can be opened.
Based on the evidence, it is reasonable to conclude that the landlord has not addressed the repair at all and was unaware that the repair remained outstanding when the Ombudsman requested evidence. It its stage 2 complaint response the landlord recognised the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its delay. The landlord’s stage 2 offer of £310 compensation was reasonable at that time; however, the resident has since experienced another 26 months of delays with little or no communication from the landlord.
The landlord’s failure to address the repair caused distress and inconvenience to the resident who reported difficulty in controlling the ventilation in the property to assist controlling the mould. It is reasonable to conclude that the landlord’s failure to address the window repair was a contributing factor to the damp and mould. The resident also raised concerns about fire safety, as she would only be able to open 2 windows for escape in the event of a fire.
The Ombudsman finds that there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s response to the resident’s repair request for windows. This is because it has not carried out the window replacement that its surveyor identified 30 months ago. This failure caused distress and inconvenience to the resident who reported that the lack of ventilation was contributing to damp and mould in the property, and potential fire safety issues because of the window disrepair. We have made an order of compensation of £500 in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s Remedies Guidance representing the distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to replace the windows.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould

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.
The Housing Ombudsman Service published a spotlight report on damp and mould report in October 2021, prior to this complaint. This stated that landlords should have a ‘zero tolerance approach’ to damp and mould and be proactive in identifying potential issues. It says that landlords should look beyond the immediate symptoms, such as wet walls, and look to find the cause.
The landlord’s repairs policy includes the following commitments regarding damp and mould:
1. It will prioritise the removal of the mould, with an initial wash and mould treatment to be carried out within 7 days.
2. It will arrange an inspection to diagnose the issue within 28 days.
3. It will agree a written action plan to resolve the damp. The action plan will include timeframes for action.
4. Where a home has persistent damp, the property will be allocated to a surveyor, who will be the point of contact and see the relevant repairs through to completion.
On 22 November 2022, the resident reported that there was black mould in the bathroom and separate toilet. She had washed it several times but it kept reoccurring. On 6 February 2023, when she raised a complaint, she raised concerns for the health of her household including 2 young children. Based on the evidence provided to the Ombudsman, this repair remains outstanding. The resident reports that they continue to carry out weekly mould washes because the mould continues to reoccur.
After its stage 2 complaint response on 23 March 2023, the landlord should have carried out a mould wash by 30 March 2023, in line with its damp and mould policy of carrying out an initial mould wash within 7 days. The landlord’s repair records show that the work order raised was cancelled, with no date showing when it was cancelled. There are no accompanying notes to show why it was cancelled or who cancelled the work order.
The evidence shows that the landlord carried out external works to the resident’s balcony on 10 August 2023. It cleared a downpipe and debris from the balcony which had been left by builders when scaffolding had previously been up. A further 2 work orders for damp and mould were raised to replaster a damp wall and carry out a mould wash but there are no completion notes or evidence that the landlord carried out these remedial works. The landlord’s repair records are unclear.
Based on the evidence provided to the Ombudsman, the landlord has not taken any action to address the damp and mould in the property. While the landlord’s commitments to damp and mould in its repair policy are appropriate, it has failed to apply its policy. There is no evidence that the landlord removed the mould in the first instance, diagnosed the issue, agreed an action plan, or allocated a surveyor to see the works through to completion. This was a significant failure by the landlord.
In its initial complaint response, it failed to acknowledge the report of damp and mould, despite the resident highlighting her concerns for the health of her young children. When the resident escalated her complaint, she reported that she was “increasing worried about the health implications of constantly breathing in mould, not just for myself but also for the young kids in the apartment.” In its final complaint response, it confirmed that it had raised a work order to treat the areas affected with mould. It gave no commitment to diagnosing the cause of damp and resolving it in line with its repair policy. The landlord has demonstrated a lack of empathy and a lack of urgency in dealing with the damp and mould in the circumstances.
The resident reported difficulty in controlling damp in the property because of the lack of ventilation in the property as windows in the property were not opening. The landlord could have taken remedial action to assist the control of condensation by assessing the property for ventilation fans, providing dehumidifiers, until it found the cause of damp. The landlord’s failure to take any action to assist the resident was inappropriate, particularly when she had raised concerns about the health of her young children.
The Ombudsman finds that there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould. There is no evidence that the landlord complied with its HHSRS obligations to assess the potential hazard and it failed to apply its own damp and mould policy. It did not take any action to address the mould in the first instant or diagnose and resolve the damp for the resident. It demonstrated a lack of empathy and urgency to resolve the issue. The landlord’s failure had a significant impact on the resident who raised concerns for the health of the household, in particular her young children. The landlord’s failings caused distress, inconvenience, and loss of enjoyment to the resident.
The Ombudsman made multiple findings of severe maladministration throughout the same time period as this complaint with regard to the landlord’s handling of damp and mould (such as in cases 202311129 and 202317574). This demonstrates that the landlord’s failings were persistent and systemic. Following those determinations, the Ombudsman ordered the landlord to carry out a senior management review of its damp and mould processes, its record keeping, and its staff training requirements, which it complied with. As it had previously been ordered to carry out a review relevant to the failings identified in this case, the Ombudsman will not duplicate those orders.
The resident lost enjoyment of the property and reports that she wants to move because of the damp and mould. An order of compensation has been made below to reflect the distress, inconvenience and loss of enjoyment caused by the landlord’s failure to address the damp and mould in line with the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies.
On 15 May 2025, after a further request for information from the Ombudsman, the landlord failed to provide any evidence that it has taken any action to address the damp and mould reported by the resident. An internal email states that it “stopped repairs at the property because the tenant was offered a decant”. However, the resident has remained in the property throughout and to date. In the absence of information to the contrary, it is reasonable to conclude that the landlord that the landlord has not followed up with the actions to address the mould, as it committed to in its stage 2 complaint response.
When calculating a figure for loss of enjoyment, it has been considered that the resident reported black mould affecting more than 1 room and it caused concern for the health of her children. Loss of enjoyment of the property has been calculated at 30% of the resident’s rent for a period of 112 weeks. This is from 30 March 2023, when the landlord should have applied its damp and mould policy and carried out its initial mould treatment until the date of this report. The total amount is £4,720
The Ombudsman further considers a payment for distress and inconvenience is appropriate. The resident reported having to carry out weekly mould washes and concern for the household’s health. In line with the Housing Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, and in recognition of the length of time and the distress this matter may have caused the resident, £1,000 has been awarded.

Complaint handling

Complaints can provide independent, practical, and unique insights providing an early warning system for significant problems and acting as a catalyst for organisational learning. The Housing Ombudsman Service’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out that landlord’s must acknowledge its failures and set out the actions it has taken or intends to take to put things right. When the answer to the complaint is known, outstanding actions must still be tracked and actioned promptly with appropriate updates provided to the resident
In its stage 1 response the landlord did not address the concerns raised by the resident. It failed to recognise that it had not completed the window replacement as recommended by its surveyor and it failed to address the damp and mould issue. This caused frustration to the resident.
In its stage 2 complaint, the landlord apologised for the lack of investigation at stage 1. It made an offer of compensation which was appropriate at that time, and it raised repair work orders to address the substantive issues of the complaint. However, there is no evidence that the landlord followed up and tracked the outstanding actions that it agreed as a resolution to the complaint. This was a significant failure by the landlord. Had it continued to track the outstanding actions, it would have known that the window replacement remained outstanding and that damp and mould continued to affect the property.
In her complaint the resident raised concerns about her family’s health because of damp and mould. The landlord’s complaint response failed to address the resident’s concerns for her family’s health. The landlord’s response lacked empathy to the resident’s situation in the circumstances and indicated a lack of urgency and awareness of the potential risk associated with mould. It is reasonable to consider that this failure exacerbated the resident’s distress in the circumstances.
The Ombudsman finds that there was maladministration with the landlord’s complaint handling. This is because it failed to track its agreed actions to resolve the complaint, which was significant failure in the circumstances because all actions remain outstanding. Its complaint response lack empathy in the circumstances. This caused further distress to the resident. An order of £100 compensation has been made in line with the Housing Ombudsman Guidance on Remedies to reflect the distress caused.
In January 2024, the Housing Ombudsman investigated the landlord’s complaint handling. This investigation focussed on the landlord’s complaint handling between April 2022 and March 2023. (The same timeframe as this complaint). That investigation found the same failings identified in this report and the landlord provided a commitment to improving its complaint handling. As such, we have not made any learning orders which would duplicate the landlord’s commitment. A copy of the report can be found below.

https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/2024/01/11/report-urges-lambeth-council-to-tackle-cause-of-complaints/

Record keeping

The landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records of repair reports, responses, inspections, and investigations. Good record keeping is vital to evidence the action a landlord has taken and failure to keep adequate records indicates that the landlord’s complaints processes are not operating effectively. Staff should be aware of a landlord’s record management policy and procedures and adhere to these, as should contractors.
The landlord repair records were unclear and difficult to follow. The records lacked details such as repair completion dates and information about the actual works completed. It also contained duplicate entries for the same jobs. This was highlighted in its stage 1 complaint response when it said that it had completed the window repair, when in fact a follow-on order had been raised to replace the windows. The landlord failed to understand its own records.
Furthermore, when providing evidence to the Ombudsman, the landlord was unaware that the replacement windows remained outstanding. It called the resident to confirm if it had completed the work, and as recently as 14 May 2025, it raised a new work order to replace the windows. This indicates poor record keeping which hampered its repair’s function.
The Ombudsman finds that there was maladministration with the landlord’s record keeping. This is because the evidence shows that the landlord’s poor record keeping has hampered both its own handling of repairs, its own complaint handling, and the Ombudsman’s investigation of this complaint.
In March 2025, the landlord introduced a Knowledge and Information (KIM) Strategy. The strategy is underpinned by the Housing Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on KIM and acknowledges several areas for improvement. As such, we have made no orders that will duplicate the commitments made as part of its strategy.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for window repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration with the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration with the landlord’s complaint handling.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration with the landlord’s record keeping.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

It is ordered that the chief executive office for the landlord apologise to the resident in person for the failures identified in this report.
It is ordered that the landlord pay the resident compensation of £6330 compromising:
1. £500 for distress and inconvenience caused by its failures in responding to the resident’s window repair requests.
2. £4730 for loss of enjoyment of the property representing approximately 30% of the resident’s rent for a period of 112 weeks from when it should have applied its damp and mould policy until the date of this report.
3. £1000 for distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to respond to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
4. £100 for distress caused by the failures identified in its complaint handling.
It is ordered for the landlord to carry out a survey of the windows. A qualified person should attend the property to identify any further repairs required and set out an action plan with timescales of when the work will be completed. This should be complete within 90 days in line with its timescales for planned repairs.
The landlord is ordered to complete a damp and mould survey and produce a schedule of works to rectify any underlying causes for the damp and mould, ensuring that consideration is given to any urgent action required. Follow up repairs should be complete within 90 days in line with its timescales for planned repairs.
The landlord should set a communication plan with the resident setting out timescales for works to be completed and ensure she is provided with regular updates.
The landlord should provide evidence to the Ombudsman that it has complied with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendation

It is noted that the landlord has authorised a permanent decant to the resident. It recommended that the landlord considers if it can further assist the resident with a property move through its own management transfer list or supporting an application to the local authority or mutual exchange.