London Borough of Lambeth (202422146)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202422146

Lambeth Council

23 June 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:
1. Repairs in the resident’s kitchen following a leak from an upstairs flat.
2. Damp and mould.
3. Window repairs.
4. External drainage repairs.
We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident lived in a 3-bedroom ground floor flat. She had a secure tenancy with a local council landlord. Her tenancy started in September 2010.
In November 2023 a water leak from the property above the resident’s caused water damage to the resident’s kitchen. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord on 18 December 2023.The landlord responded to the complaint at stage 1 of its process on 21 December 2023 and stage 2 on 26 March 2024. She said that the leak was ongoing for 3 days and caused severe damage to the kitchen ceiling, units, and countertops. The resident said it had taken the landlord too long to make the ceiling and the electrics in the kitchen safe. Additionally, the resident successfully pursued a claim against the landlord’s insurers for the elements of the kitchen she had installed.
The resident raised another stage 1 complaint on 16 May 2024. She said:
1. The landlord had replaced windows in her property but failed to make good the areas around the windows.
2. There was mould throughout the property.
3. The landlord had failed to restore the kitchen to the same condition it was in prior to the leak from the upstairs flat.
4. She was unhappy with the lack of communication from the landlord.
The landlord responded to the complaint on 14 August 2024. It set out its understanding of the resident’s complaint and apologised for its delayed response. Additionally, the landlord said:
1. It had recently changed its repairs contractor.
2. It had made an appointment to carry out repairs at the resident’s property on 22 August 2024. It listed the repairs which included:
  1. Hack off wall and replaster.
  2. Check ducting for leak.
  3. Repaint the ceiling in bedroom 1.
  4. Repaint the ceiling in the kitchen.
  5. Hack off the wall in the kitchen.
  6. Overhaul the kitchen window.
  7. Living room window (the landlord did not specify the repair needed).
3. It attended the resident’s property on 15 July 2024. It said the resident had said she did not want the landlord to do the mould wash. It told the resident to advise if she now wanted the landlord to complete the mould wash.
4. It had completed repairs to the kitchen.
5. The resident should confirm if any additional works were needed.
The resident escalated her complaint on 22 August 2024. She told the landlord:
1. It had incorrectly raised a job for damp and mould.
2. Its surveyor had told her the walls needed to be taken back to brick to treat the damp.
3. The issue with the windows was still outstanding.
4. There was sewage coming out of the external drains.
5. She was unhappy with the landlord’s lack of communication.
The landlord responded to the stage 2 complaint on 2 October 2024. It apologised for its delayed response and explained its understanding of her complaint. The landlord also listed the works it had completed up until that point and future appointments to complete any outstanding works. It said:
1. It had hacked off and replastered the wall in the bedroom.
2. It had completed works to resolve the drainage issues. However, if the resident was still experiencing issues, she should raise another repair.
3. It had made an appointment to complete the painting on 30 October 2024.
4. It would also make good the windows on 30 October 2024.

Post-internal complaints process

The resident reported another leak from the property above. She also said the issue with the outside drains remained unresolved. In January 2025 the resident reported mould in every room in the property.
The resident permanently moved out of the property around the start of May 2025.

Assessment and finding

The landlord’s handling of repairs to the resident’s kitchen

According to its repairs policy, the landlord categorises and responds to repairs based on their priority. It states that a repair is an emergency if it causes serious health and safety problems or severe damage if not fixed or made safe quickly. It aims to fix emergency repairs within 1 working day. Its website lists flooding that is damaging a property as an emergency repair.
The landlord classifies a repair to a ceiling as a routine repair and aims to complete this within 28 working days. It aims to complete any plaster work after repairs within 90 working days, as a planned repair. The landlord’s repairs manual states that its response time for routine and planned repairs starts the day after the resident reports the repair.
The resident reported a leak into her kitchen on 28 November 2023. The landlord raised an order to trace and resolve the leak on the same day. Evidence showed the leak was likely from a hot water pipe. The landlord attended on 29 November 2023 to make safe the electric sockets.
The landlord’s repairs notes showed the resident reported the leak again on 29 November 2023 and booked an emergency call out. Additionally, the landlord recorded in its notes that it would need to make safe the resident’s kitchen ceiling. However, the landlord did not raise a works order to resolve the leak and make safe the ceiling until 30 November 2023.
It is not clear from the landlord’s notes when the leak was resolved. However, the resident maintains that the leak was ongoing for 3 days. The landlord has not disputed this. The landlord failed to fix the leak within its published timescales. This was not appropriate.
The landlord’s repairs notes showed that it attended the resident’s property on 4 December 2023 and found the ceiling to be ‘fine’. In her complaint to the landlord on 18 December 2023, the resident said the landlord could not have inspected the ceiling when it said it did as she was not at home. The landlord did not dispute the resident’s account. This demonstrates poor record keeping.
The landlord attended to inspect the ceiling on 20 December 2023. It raised a repair to renew boxing to the pipes, overhaul the kitchen units, and hack off and re-plaster the damaged section of the ceiling.
It responded to the resident’s complaint on 21 December 2023. It partly upheld her complaint and told her the surveyor would consider the best way forward to resolve the leak and arrange for remedial works. This was a reasonable response and demonstrated that the landlord was keen to reach a resolution.
Evidence showed that the ceiling was repaired and re-plastered on 13 February 2024. This was 51 working days after the landlord recorded that it would need to be made safe. Consequently, outside of its 28-day repair timescale but within its 90-day timescale for plastering damaged areas. Overall, the repair to the ceiling was completed within an appropriate timescale in line with the landlord’s policy.
Additionally, evidence showed the landlord completed the remaining repairs to the kitchen, which included making good the boxing for the pipes and supplying and fitting damaged hinges and hinge repair plates to the kitchen unit doors to realign them, on 18 March 2023. This was within its planned repair timescale.
The landlord’s repairs manual states resident’s are responsible for decoration within their own homes. However, it adds that it will repair any decorations that are damaged because of other work it has done. The landlord’s notes dated 12 February 2024 showed that it made an appointment to stain block and paint the ceiling on 4 April 2024.Given that the plaster would need time to dry and in order to fit in with the resident’s work schedule, this was a reasonable timescale.
In its stage 2 response on 26 March 2023, the landlord explained that it had liaised with the resident to arrange repairs at a time that fit with the resident’s work schedule and it would complete remaining kitchen works in April. This was reasonable and demonstrated that the landlord was keen to reach an acceptable resolution.
However, there is no evidence to suggest the landlord completed the painting in April 2024. In addition, the resident raised a further complaint about outstanding repairs in her kitchen on 16 May 2024.
In its stage 1 response on 14 August 2024, the landlord confirmed to the resident that it had completed all kitchen works raised by its surveyor in December 2023. Additionally, it told the resident it had raised a works order to paint the kitchen ceiling. It said it would do this on 22 August 2024. It also told the resident that if there were additional repairs, she should report them. It was reasonable for the landlord to remind the resident to report any further issues.
It is not clear based on the evidence provided why the landlord failed to paint the kitchen ceiling in April 2024 nor is it clear why it then took the landlord until 17 July 2024 to re-raise the works order. Additionally, in an email to the resident on 12 July 2024, the landlord told the resident its records showed its original works order did not include redecoration.
The landlord failed communicate clearly with the resident in respect of this aspect of the repairs and this caused the resident distress. Additionally, it took longer than would be reasonably expected to reach a resolution.
It is not clear from the evidence provided if the kitchen ceiling was painted on 22 August 2024 as per the landlord’s suggestion. Nevertheless, it potentially took the landlord at least 170 working days from the date the landlord first inspected the property on 20 December 2023 to complete all the repairs for which it was responsible. This was not appropriate.
On 13 December 2023 the resident told the landlord that she had paid for and fitted the kitchen units herself and asked the landlord to repair the damage caused by the leak from the property above. The landlord explained that it would not repair or replace the kitchen units, and the resident could make an insurance claim for compensation. This is in line with the landlord’s policy which states that residents are responsible for the upkeep of anything not provided by the landlord. The landlord further confirmed this to the resident on 26 January 2024, explaining that it would only ‘overhaul’ the units. However, it did not explain what it meant by this. It would have been helpful if it clearly explained to the resident what it meant by ‘overhaul’. Evidence showed it realigned the kitchen cupboard doors on 18 March 2024.
The landlord repeated its position on the replacement of kitchen units in an email to the resident on 12 July 2024. It was reasonable that it maintained its position in respect of the kitchen.
Overall, the landlord was responsible the painting in the kitchen for which the landlord was responsible took too long, and at times the landlord failed to communicate clearly with the resident. This caused the resident distress as she did not know when repairs would be completed.
Having considered all evidence available, we find maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the kitchen repairs for which it was responsible. We are satisfied that the landlord’s advice to the resident about a replacement kitchen was correct. However, it took the landlord at least 170 days to complete the decorating in the kitchen for which it was responsible.
In considering an offer of compensation, we have referred to the landlord’s compensation policy which states it will pay compensation where there has been service failure that had an adverse effect of the complainant. We consider £150 to be a proportionate amount of compensation for the inconvenience to the resident caused by the delays in completing the repairs.

The landlord’s handling of damp and mould

The landlord’s damp charter outlines that it will inspect properties with damp to diagnose the issue within 28 days of a report. It also states that it will agree and write an action plan with the resident to resolve the damp. It continues that if a home has persistent damp, a surveyor will act as the resident’s point of contact. They will arrange the necessary work and stay in touch until the works are completed.
The resident reported mould in the living room and bedroom of her property on 7 March 2024. On 14 May 2024 she contacted the landlord for an update and submitted a formal complaint on 16 May 2024. She explained there was mould throughout the property.
On 12 June 2024 the landlord booked a damp and mould pre-inspection for 11 July 2024. However, the surveyor failed to attend on this date and the landlord failed to notify the resident.
There is no evidence that the landlord carried out a damp and mould inspection. However, according to its repairs notes, it attended the property on 15 July 2024 to carry out a mould wash, but this was declined by the resident. The resident explained to us that she regularly completed her own mould washes, and the landlord had not offered anything that she could not achieve herself.
It took the landlord 89 working days from the resident’s report of mould on 7 March 2024 to visit the resident’s property. This far exceeded the timescale set out in the landlord’s damp charter. Additionally, there is no evidence that it agreed an action plan with the resident, in line with its policy.
The landlord raised a works order linked to the damp and mould issue on 17 July 2024. It included the following:
1. Hack off wall and replaster.
2. Check ducting for a leak.
In its stage 1 response on 14 August 2024, the landlord confirmed an appointment had been made to complete the works on 22 August 2024.
It is not clear from the landlord’s evidence the extent of the work the landlord completed on 22 August 2024. However, according to the resident, the landlord had plastered, although it was not clear for which room in the property.
In the resident’s escalated complaint on 22 August 2024, she told the landlord she had been told by an attending operative that walls in the property were wet and would need to be taken back to brick to fully treat the damp.
According to the resident, the landlord was due to attend to complete a repair for damp and mould on 2 September 2024. We have not seen any evidence of an appointment having been made. However, the landlord has not disputed the resident’s account.
The resident told us that she estimated that the landlord carried out 3 or 4 damp surveys at the property but never provided her with a copy of its report. While we would not expect landlords to provide its residents with copies of its damp and mould surveys, in this case, the landlord’s charter states it will agree and write an action plan with the resident to resolve the damp. There is no evidence that it did this.
Additionally, the landlord has not provided us with any survey reports in relation to the damp and mould. A survey report would have taken into account the extent of the damp and mould in the property and would have assisted the landlord in considering the appropriate action to take to resolve the damp. Additionally, it would have acted as an audit trail to show the landlord’s actions.
The evidence provided by the landlord in respect of damp and mould works is limited, as such we have relied on correspondence between the 2 parties and the landlord’s complaint responses.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 2 October 2024. It did not uphold her complaint about its handling of damp and mould. It said it had attended the resident’s property on 23 September 2024 to make good the back wall and made a further appointment for 30 October 2024 to complete painting. Although it did not say where.
In correspondence with us on 15 November 2024, the resident told us that although the landlord was carrying out repairs to the back room in the property. There was still mould present in her children’s bedroom.
The resident told us that the damp and mould was worse in her children’s bedrooms. She said she moved her child’s bed into the middle of the room in order to distance her from the mould on the wall. Additionally, she said in her other child’s room she lifted the carpet and found the floor underneath was wet.
Evidence showed that the resident continued to report damp and mould in her property after the landlord’s final complaint response. An internal email dated 19 February 2025 suggested the landlord should arrange for a senior surveyor to inspect the property as there was evidence of rising damp. However, the resident moved out of the property around May 2025 and the landlord has not provided evidence of an inspection having taken place.
After having carefully considered all evidence available we find maladministration for the landlord’s handling of damp and mould. We have taken account of the resident declining a mould wash on 15 July 2024. Despite this, we are satisfied that the landlord failed to respond to the resident’s initial reports within its published timescale for a response. Additionally, it did not agree an action plan with the resident. Furthermore, the landlord failed to reach a quick diagnosis of the cause of the damp, as per its charter. This caused the resident distress and inconvenience. We have seen evidence of at least 2 occasions where the landlord failed to attend a pre-arranged appointment and failed to notify the resident of its non-attendance.
In considering an offer of compensation we have reviewed the landlord’s compensation policy and our own remedies guidance. The resident explained to us that the landlord’s failure to resolve the damp and mould caused her distress and concern for the health of her household. While we cannot draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and well-being we can consider the general distress and inconvenience the situation may have caused. The issues described had an adverse impact on the resident and her family. Additionally, the resident spent more time than would be considered reasonable pursuing a resolution. We consider a total of £500 a proportionate amount for distress caused by the landlord’s failings and the time the resident spent pursuing a resolution. In addition, the landlord must pay the resident £40 compensation for the 2 missed appointments, as per its compensation policy.

The landlord’s handling of window repairs

In May 2024 we investigated a complaint raised by the resident about the landlord’s handling of window repairs, case reference 202320751. Following our determination, the landlord confirmed on 11 June 2024 that it had replaced the windows in the property. However, it noted that the resident had raised some ‘making good’ works to the windows. The landlord said it had passed this to its contractor to deal with. On 12 July 2024 the landlord confirmed to the resident that the ‘making good’ works were still outstanding and would need to be followed up by its contractor. The landlord told the resident it was in the process of changing its repairs contractors and it may pass the outstanding works to the new contractor to complete.
In is stage 1 response on 14 August 2024, the landlord said that it had raised repairs for the kitchen window and living room window. Although it did not specify the type of repair.
In her escalated complaint on 22 August 2022 the resident told the landlord there were holes around the bay window and some of the windows either did not open or would slam shut.
In its final response, the landlord upheld the resident’s complaint about the windows and apologised. It said it would ‘make good’ the windows during the appointment on 30 October 2024.
We have not seen any evidence that the landlord ‘made good’ the windows on 30 October 2024. Evidence showed the resident continued to raise concerns about the windows after this date.
Landlords must be in control of their repairs service at all times to avoid unnecessary delays and poor service delivery. As outlined in the knowledge and information spotlight report published by this Service in May 2023, the Ombudsman expects landlord’s to maintain clear and detailed records so that they can provide efficient and effective services and to ensure that any decision or actions taken are based on good quality information.
Evidence from the landlord about the issue complained about is limited. However, it showed that the repairs to the windows were still outstanding at least until 14 April 2025. The landlord failed to carry out the repairs within its published timescales. This was not appropriate and caused the resident distress.
Having carefully considered all evidence available we find service failure for the landlord’s handling of window repairs. The landlord failed to complete the repairs to the windows and window surrounds within an appropriate timescale.
In considering compensation we have referred to the landlord’s compensation policy. We consider £150 compensation a proportionate amount for the resident’s time and trouble pursing a resolution.

The landlord’s handling of external drainage repairs

The landlord’s repairs manual does not specify a timescale for unblocking of external drains. However, it states that it will attend to an emergency repair when the problem could cause serious health and safety problems within 1 working day. Additionally, it will fix blocked sinks, baths, or basins within 3 working days and repair a manhole cover within 7 working days.
On 12 July 2023 the resident reported the exterior drain outside her property was blocked. She explained that it was preventing her from accessing her home.
Evidence showed that an operative attended the following day to unblock the drain. According to the landlord’s notes, the resident said that the drain was often blocked and overflowing. The operative jetted water between the manhole and gully and saw that the water was flowing but suggested that the pipework could be damaged. They recommended a new manhole cover and gully grid and a camera survey of the gully.
The landlord responded within an appropriate timescale and recommended a reasonable solution to resolve the blocked drain. Evidence showed that the resident reported the blocked drain again on 19 July 2023 and 12 August 2023.
Although the landlord responded to the initial report within an appropriate timescale and made appropriate recommendations for a resolution, it then took the landlord 23 working days to replace the manhole cover on 12 August 2023. This exceeded the timescale set out in the landlord’s repairs manual. Additionally, there is no evidence it attended to the resident’s report of a blocked drain on 19 July 2023 within a reasonable timescale. This was not appropriate.
According to its repairs notes the landlord completed a camera survey of the drain on 12 August 2023. The landlord has not provided a copy of the survey report. Consequently, we do not know if any follow-on works were recommended.
However, we have not seen any evidence of further reports from the resident in respect of drainage issues until her escalated complaint on 22 August 2024, in which she stated that there was sewage water overflowing from the external drain and blocking access to her home.
A drainage contractor attended on 29 August 2024, unblocked the drain, tested the water flow and confirmed it was free flowing. The landlord arranged for an appropriate specialist contractor to attend and unblock the drain within 7 working days this was reasonable.
In its stage 2 response on 2 October 2024 the landlord said it understood the drain had been unblocked. It reminded the resident to report any further issues. This was a reasonable suggestion.
The same day the resident reported to the landlord that the drain was blocked daily and consequently she was unable to safely access her home due to the sewage. The following week the resident asked the landlord to jet and clean the drains. Evidence showed that the resident reported issues with the external drains up until she moved out of the property.
Although the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of issues with the external drainage in 2024 was reasonable, we have identified failings with its handling of the drainage issues in 2023.The landlord failed to replace the manhole cover within the timescale set out in its repairs manual. Additionally, it has not provided any evidence of how it responded to the resident’s report of a blocked drain on 19 July 2023. We therefore find service failure for the landlord’s handling of external drainage repairs.
In considering an offer of compensation we have referred to the landlord’s compensation policy and our own remedies guidance. We consider £100 a proportionate amount of compensation for the distress and inconvenience to the resident caused by the landlord’s handling of the external drainage repairs.
The resident reported further issues with the external drainage after the conclusion of the complaints process, we therefore recommend that the landlord instructs an appropriate specialist to carry out a thorough camera survey of the drain and resolve any issues.

The landlord’s complaint handling

The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints process. According to its policy, it will acknowledge complaints at both stages of its complaint process within 5 working days. It states that it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days of acknowledging the complaint and to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of the acknowledgement.
Across both complaints, the landlord failed to respond within its published timescales.
It took the landlord a total of 63 working days to respond at stage 1 of its complaints process and a total of 29 working days to respond at stage 2 of its complaints process. The landlord failed to respond to the resident’s complaints within its published timescales.
Despite acknowledging its delayed stage 2 response the landlord failed to offer any redress to put this right. The landlord’s failure to respond to the resident’s complaint within the prescribed timescale caused the resident detriment as she was prevented from reaching a resolution within a reasonable timescale. We therefore find a service failure for the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.
In considering an offer of compensation we have referred to the landlord’s compensation policy and our own remedies guidance. We consider £100 a proportionate amount of compensation for the inconvenience to the resident caused by the delayed response.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme we find:
1. Maladministration for the landlord’s handling of the kitchen repairs.
2. Maladministration for the landlord’s handling of damp and mould.
3. Service failure for the landlord’s handling of window repairs.
4. Service failure for the landlord’s handling of external drainage repairs.
5. Service failure for the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report we order the landlord to apologise to the resident for the failures identified in this report.
Pay directly to the resident a total of £1040, which comprises of:
1. £150 for the inconvenience to the resident caused by the delayed kitchen repairs.
2. £500 for the distress and inconvenience and the time it took the resident pursing a resolution for the damp and mould.
3. £40 for 2 appointments missed by the landlord.
4. £150 for the resident’s time pursuing a resolution for the window repairs.
5. £100 for the distress and inconvenience to the resident caused by the landlord’s handling of external drainage repairs.
6. £100 for the inconvenience caused to the resident by the delayed complaint response.
The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the orders within the timescales set out.

Recommendations

We recommend that within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord instructs an appropriate specialist to carry out a camera survey of the external drains and complete any repairs as required.