London Borough of Lambeth (202428770)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202428770

Lambeth Council

29 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

1. The complaint is about the landlord’s:
   1. handling of reports of damp and mould.
   2. understanding of the household’s vulnerabilities and support needs.
2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Background

3. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local authority. She occupies a 2-bedroom ground floor flat conversion with her two sons. She advises her younger son has autism, anxiety and asthma, and her older son experiences migraines.
4. In late January 2023 the resident reported to the landlord that mould was reappearing due to ongoing leaks from above despite repairs having been made previously. The landlord arranged a pre-inspection for 23 February 2023 to mould wash and redecorate the bathroom walls and ceiling. Subsequently, a reinspection survey was completed on 17 October 2023 and a further mould wash was undertaken on 19 October 2023.
5. On 15 February 2024 the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord. She said that she had been promised that a dehumidifier would be delivered, but this had not happened. She added that, despite her efforts to mitigate damage caused by damp and mould including purchasing her own dehumidifier, the situation had worsened and it had affected the household’s health. As a resolution, she wanted immediate action taken to address the damp and mould.
6. On 15 March 2024 the landlord issued its stage 1 response. It apologised for the effect damp and mould had on the household. It said the resident was contacted by its repairs team on 22 February 2024 to arrange a visit by a surveyor on 7 March 2024 to inspect the damp and mould. Following this inspection, the surveyor raised remedial works to redecorate and put in place preventative measures with a target date of 24 April 2024, and said the resident would be contacted to arrange a convenient appointment for these. 
7. The landlord’s contractor attended on 16 April 2024 to carry out high pressure jet washing followed by a CCTV survey. The landlord then attended on 28 May 2024 to commence the remedial works raised by the surveyor, and the resident chased next day to query when the work would continue. On 21 June 2024 the resident emailed the landlord again, explaining the ongoing repairs were incomplete and that she had taken the day off for an appointment but no one attended. She was unhappy that, although work had commenced on 28 May 2024, it was left incomplete after one and a half days and there was a lack of communication from the landlord despite her repeated efforts. She added the walls were crumbling and mould had spread further, and reiterated her concerns about her sons’ health.
8. On 24 June 2024 the landlord asked the resident if she wished to escalate her complaint since the works had not been completed. On 26 July 2024 the resident confirmed she wanted to escalate her complaint. The landlord issued its stage 2 final response on 2 September 2024. It said its contractor manager and senior surveyor visited her property the previous week when the specification for the work was shared and a detailed timeline agreed reflecting the resident’s input. It added they had also agreed on temporary relocation for one week to facilitate the full bathroom upgrade. It apologised for the significant delays and inconvenience suffered, and committed to complete all necessary repairs by around 9 September 2024. 
9. In the resident’s referral to the Ombudsman, she said there is currently mould throughout the property: in the bathroom, both bedrooms, living room and behind kitchen cupboards. She added the kitchen windows needed replacing for which she had an appointment scheduled for 27 May 2025. She also said replacement of the extractor fan remained outstanding. Regarding the household’s vulnerabilities, she advised she had sent every medical form to the landlord. As a resolution, she wanted compensation, reimbursement for incurred costs and the landlord to take accountability for its handling of the matter and to fully recognise the household’s vulnerabilities and support needs.

Assessment and findings

The scope of the Ombudsman’s investigation

10. In the resident’s complaint to us, she said that she reported damp and mould issues in 2019. While this may be the case, we think it would have been reasonable for the resident to have pursued such a report at that time: the length of time that has since passed without her doing so would impact the Ombudsman’s ability to reliably assess the facts. Accordingly, this report will focus on the relevant events from the resident’s report in January 2023 to the landlord’s final response in September 2024 and any commitments it made.
11. The Ombudsman notes the resident’s assertion that damp and mould affected the household’s health and contributed towards her son developing asthma. It is beyond the expertise of the service to determine a causal link between the landlord’s actions (or lack thereof) and the impact on health. Where there is a dispute over whether someone has been injured or a health condition has been made worse, the courts are better equipped to access and assess all the relevant evidence including an expert opinion of the cause of any injury or deterioration of a condition. This would be a more appropriate and effective means of considering such an allegation and, should the resident wish to pursue this matter, she should do so via this route. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience that the situation may have caused, and this investigation will consider whether the landlord acted in accordance with its policies and obligations and whether it acted fairly in the circumstances.

The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould

12. The landlord does not dispute that there were failings in its handling of this matter. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the landlord took reasonable and appropriate steps to respond to the resident’s reports and offered appropriate redress. In considering this, the Service assesses whether the landlord’s actions were in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: Be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
13. On receiving reports of damp and mould, the landlord should arrange an inspection, investigate to determine the cause/s, carry out a risk assessment and, if necessary, undertake remedial repairs within a reasonable timescale that will deal with the cause and consequences of damp and mould – not simply treat the symptoms. The landlord should be able to demonstrate that any delays were unavoidable, and that it did everything it reasonably could to resolve issues appropriately.
14. The landlord’s repair and damp policy dated August 2023 sets out its commitments to handling reports of damp and mould. These include:
    1. Communicating with residents in a sympathetic way and arrange an inspection to diagnose the issue within 28 days, or sooner in emergency situations
    2. Agreeing an action plan to resolve the damp including timeframes.
    3. Allocating a surveyor who will arrange necessary work, be point of contact and stay in touch until completed in the event of persistent damp.
    4. A ‘rapid-response’ mould removal and treatment service that it can quickly deploy to remove mould ahead of any preventative or remedial action.
    5. Prioritise the removal of mould with the initial wash and treatment to be carried out within 7 days.
    6. Carry out annual property visits to vulnerable residents to inspect and address any damp issues found.
15. Following the resident’s report on 22 January 2023, the landlord acted fairly by arranging an inspection to diagnose the issue, including an initial mould wash, just slightly outside 28 days. This was a satisfactory initial approach. It is unclear what prompted the reinspection in October 2023, but this included a further mould wash.
16. We have not seen the resident make any further reports until her formal complaint of 15 February 2024. In response to this, the landlord’s surveyor inspected the property on 7 March 2024. The Ombudsman has not seen this inspection in the landlord’s repair records. This may indicate issues with record keeping; however, we have made no orders in this respect. This is because we have made a number of record keeping orders to Lambeth Council in late 2024 and have seen the landlord take steps to improve this.
17. In the landlord’s stage 1 response, it advised the target date for the recommended remedial works as 24 April 2024. However, the landlord did not keep to this commitment. While the landlord’s records indicate high pressure jet washing took place on 16 April 2024, the internal remedial works did not commence until 28 May 2024, over 1 month after it committed to complete them. Additionally, the resident advised that the landlord’s operatives only attended for a day and a half and that work remained incomplete. The landlord’s notes indicate it contacted its contractor on 29 May 2024; however, no further meaningful action was taken until late June 2024. This delay caused distress and inconvenience to the household which was left in damp conditions for a prolonged period despite the landlord being on notice and the resident’s efforts to progress matters.
18. on 21 June 2024 the resident explained to the landlord that she had taken a day off work to accommodate an appointment where its contractor did not attend. While the landlord briefly acknowledged this in its final response, it missed an opportunity to offer compensation to the resident for this. In line with the landlord’s compensation policy, a sum of £20 may be credited to a tenant’s rent account by way of compensation for a missed appointment.
19. On 5 July 2024 the landlord carried out work to the bathroom and undertook a CCTV survey of the drains, followed by jetting. In the landlord’s final response of September 2024, it acted fairly by apologising for the significant delays. It also acted fairly by considering a temporary accommodation in order to complete a full bathroom upgrade. These were suitable steps for it to take to address the damp and mould issues reported. It also committed to ensure all necessary oworks would be carried out by the end of the week. At this point, the resident was entitled to believe all repairs would be completed promptly. However, this did not happen and there were lengthy delays and poor coordination on the part of the landlord in arranging for its contractors to attend.
20. The landlord advised a temporary decant took place for a week from around 29 August 2024 so it could upgrade the bathroom. The landlord’s records show this upgrade was completed on 6 September 2024. The Ombudsman has heard that the resident felt the decant was poorly managed and that she was given insufficient time to plan considering the disruption and the effect a decant may have on her younger son. We have seen limited communication and evidence on file about the decant, and a recommendation has been made.
21. Landlords should take a zero-tolerance approach, be proactive in identifying potential problems, and clearly communicate with residents about planned actions. Where inspections result in recommended works to tackle damp and mould, landlords should ensure they act on the recommendations in a timely manner. In this case, these works should have been completed much sooner following her formal complaint of February 2024. The landlord failed to keep to its commitments and its delay caused inconvenience to the resident who went to extra efforts to progress matters because she was concerned about the safety of her children.
22. Additionally, the Ombudsman has not seen that the landlord carried out a risk assessment nor did the surveys appear to consider the household’s vulnerabilities. The potential detriment of damp and mould to a resident’s health and wellbeing has been highlighted in the Ombudsman’s October 2021 Spotlight report entitled “Damp and mould: It’s not lifestyle” and it is the case that, the longer it is left untreated, the more damaging it can be to a person’s health. Under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, damp and mould growth is classified as a hazard. In this case, the resident advised the landlord during the complaints process about the household’s circumstances and that she had provided medical information to it.
23. In the circumstances, the landlord might reasonably have been expected to offer some compensation in respect of the inconvenience caused to the resident by the substantial delays in carrying out repairs to ‘put things right’. Further, given the fact that the complaints process did not serve to move the repairs forward, and that some issues remain unresolved, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord’s apology in its stage 2 response was not sufficient to recognise the impact of its failings on the resident.
24. The resident reported extra costs incurred such as “purchasing various products, including dehumidifiers” to the landlord. In line with the landlord’s compensation policy, it may consider factors such as quantifiable additional expenditure including increased utility bills arising from its service failures such as failing to carry out repairs in a reasonable time. From the evidence submitted, it is not clear if this has been addressed by the landlord, and a recommendation has been made below.
25. Moreover, as part of the resident’s initial complaint she said she had experienced damaged clothing, indicating some of her personal belongings may have been affected by the mould. Indeed, the resident shared pictures with us showing this damage. However, across the landlord’s formal responses, it did not address this point. In the circumstances, it would have been reasonable to signpost her to its own liability insurer and provide information for her to initiate a claim. A recommendation has been made in this regard.
26. Overall, the landlord failed to undertake a number of repairs within a reasonable time and missed an appointment and failed to keep the resident updated. Additionally, the landlord did not undertake a risk assessment nor did it provide any alternative solutions such as dehumidifiers when it was made aware that the damp issue persisted. Although the landlord offered various mould washes, it did not monitor the remedial repairs raised by the surveyor appropriately or in line with its own policy. This would have undeniably caused distress to the resident who had to chase repairs. Further, while the landlord detailed its learning in its stage 2 response, it did not appear to take this on board as repairs remained outstanding over 8 months later. Considering the circumstances of this case, the remedy offered was not proportionate to the detriment experienced by the resident. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests that compensation from £100 should be considered where there has been a failure that has a significant impact on the resident. The Ombudsman has considered this as part of its orders.
27. In late November 2024, the resident requested an update on outstanding works as she had not received any communication. She said thermal boarding was not installed in the bathroom as recommended by the surveyor. She also requested a mould wash and asked when the works to the kitchen windows, trunking and extractor fan were to be scheduled. The Ombudsman has seen a number of works were completed between October 2024 and February 2025 including jetting of blockages, fitting flooring covering, draught proofing all windows, hallway works, and mould washing and painting with mould resistant paint. The landlord advised us in late May 2025 that having spoken with the resident on 21 May 2025 she confirmed all damp and mould works were completed, but there were outstanding repairs including a faulty kitchen extractor fan and the replacement of two kitchen windows. The landlord has since advised us that these were to be completed by the end of May 2025. This has been considered as part of the orders.

The landlord’s understanding of the household’s vulnerabilities and support needs

28. The landlord’s vulnerable tenant’s policy sets out its staff may may referrals if to the neighbourhood housing office when they believe a tenant may be vulnerable or where the tenant claims to be vulnerable but there is no vulnerability flag on the system. This is so a vulnerability assessment may be carried out. Where a vulnerability assessment has already been carried out, vulnerabilities will be recorded. Throughout the policy there is an emphasis on being sensitive to the needs of service users, making  reasonable adjustments where appropriate and collaborative working with health, social care and voluntary sector partners to support early identification and engagement.
29. In the resident’s formal complaint she explained that the mould had a significant effect on her son’s asthma. In this respect, it is concerning that the landlord advised the Ombudsman that there were no vulnerabilities or health conditions noted for the household.
30. The resident said she supplied medical letters relating to the household, but we cannot see in her formal complaint or escalation request or in correspondence prior to the landlord’s final response that she told the landlord her son has autism. The landlord has stated that no records or health evidence was provided by the resident and that it was not aware of any vulnerabilities or support needs for the tenant or the family, but the resident disputes this. She clearly felt her household’s circumstances in terms of vulnerabilities and support needs were not taken into account when carrying out the repairs and during the complaints process, nor during the decant of summer 2024.
31. The landlord did in fact acknowledge in its stage 2 response that her son had asthma. While the landlord could have done more to reassure the resident that it had fully taken on board the health of the household and updated its records accordingly, it did commit to carrying out works and a number of other actions in response to the resident’s report. In this case, the landlord did not appear to treat the household differently or unfavourably, given their support needs. A recommendation has been made in this regard.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

32. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints process. At the first stage, local resolution, a response is due within 10 working days; and at the second stage, final review, a response is due within 20 working days. If a complaint cannot be responded to within these timescales, an interim response should be sent explaining the reason for the delay and when a response can be expected.
33. The resident made a formal complaint to the landlord on 15 February 2024. However, the landlord did not log the complaint and send an acknowledgement  in 5 working days. Instead, it issued its stage 1 response on 15 March 2024. This was 21 working days after receipt of the complaint and outside its policy timescales. This was inappropriate and caused distress and inconvenience to the resident who may have felt her concerns were being ignored. Additionally, there is no evidence the resident was informed of any delays as required by the policy.
34. The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 26 July 2024. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 2 September 2024. This was 26 working days later and, again, outside its policy timescales. This caused further distress. Given the delays at both stage 1 and 2, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to apologise for the delays. However, it did not and it did not take appropriate action to ‘put things right’ for the resident, nor did it recognise these delays at any point across its formal responses.
35. Additionally, it did not offer any financial compensation as a remedy. The landlord may choose to do this in line with its compensation policy which states it may pay discretionary compensation from £50 for time and trouble beyond that routinely incurred when making a complaint. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance states compensation of up to £100 where there has been service failure which has had an impact on the resident but was of short duration and may not have significantly affected the overall outcome for the resident. Given the circumstances and length of time these issues took to resolve, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to offer some compensation for its complaint-handling failures. This has been considered as part of our orders.

Determination

36. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould.
37. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s understanding of the household’s vulnerabilities and support needs.
38. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Orders and Recommendations

Orders

39. The landlord must, within 28 days of the date of this report:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £470 made up of:
       1. £20 for the missed appointment on 21 June 2024.
       2. £400 for the failing identified in the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould.
       3. £50 for the failings identified in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.
    3. Inspect the drains, guttering and property including windows and extractor fan to ensure that all the work committed to has been undertaken. If it considers further work is required, it should carry this out in a reasonable time and keep both the resident and the Service informed throughout until completion.
40. The landlord must provide evidence it has attempted to comply with the orders above within 28 days of the date of this report.

Recommendations

41. The landlord should:
    1. Ensure when arranging temporary accommodation that the household’s circumstances are fully taken into account and any reasonable adjustments made, where appropriate.
    2. Contact the resident requesting evidence of her increased utility bills for use of a dehumidifier during the period that the assessed repairs were not carried out and consider appropriate reimbursement.
    3. Contact the resident and establish if she wishes to commence a claim on the landlord’s insurer for the damage to her belongings, if it has not done so already.
    4. Liaise with the resident to ensure that it has a full record of the vulnerabilities in the resident’s household. The landlord should request any evidence it needs to ensure that this is on file.