London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) (202314122)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202314122

London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q)

27 February 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 resident’s reports of damp and mould.
2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident is an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord. The property is a 2-bedroom ground floor flat. The resident’s 2 young children also live in the property. The landlord is a housing association.
4. The resident reported damp and mould and the landlord undertook an inspection of the property on 22 February 2023, which identified high levels of humidity, condensation and mould. Works were undertaken to treat the mould and service the ventilation unit. The resident made a further report of damp and mould and the landlord inspected in May 2023. Recommendations were again made for the ventilation unit to be serviced and for a mould wash to be carried out in the bathroom. 
5. The resident raised a complaint on 2 June 2023 about the landlord’s handling of her reports that her belongings had been damaged by the damp and mould. She said that the damp and mould had been treated and the ventilation fans in the kitchen and bathroom had been serviced. The resident stated that a member of the landlord’s staff was dealing with the issue and had advised her that the next step would be to cost up the damaged items. However, the resident had now been told that that the staff member had left the organisation. The resident said that the issue had been dealt with poorly and she had been required to report it many times. She stated that her 18-month-old child had been prescribed an inhaler because of the damp and mould.
6. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 21 June 2023, in which it:
   1. Identified that the resident had contacted the landlord on 4 occasions about the damaged items, but no response had been provided. The landlord apologised for the poor standard of communication.
   2. Stated that following 2 inspections of the property, no issues were identified that were contributing to the damp and mould and that other factors may cause this, such as lack of adequate ventilation and blocked trickle vents.
   3. Found that the resident had previously raised her complaint on 20 March 2023, but this was not dealt with to its usual standard.
   4. Advised that she could pursue a claim for damages through its insurers.
   5. Offered the resident £220 compensation, comprised as follows:
      1. £100 for complaint handling.
      2. £60 for distress.
      3. £60 for inconvenience.
7. The resident escalated her complaint on 22 June 2023. She stated that the landlord’s conclusion was unacceptable and she did take steps to keep humidity levels down. The resident stated damage had been caused to the property and her personal belongings, and that she had been required to replace or throw away many items. She also stated that there were signs of the mould returning.
8. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 17 June 2023, in which it:
   1. Concluded it had acted promptly to deal with the damp and mould issue.
   2. Stated that it was unable to locate any communication between the staff member and the resident in relation to compensating her for damaged items. 
   3. Stated it was satisfied with the £220 compensation offered at stage 1.
9. The resident raised the case with her MP, and the MP contacted the landlord on 26 July 2023. On 27 July 2023, the landlord wrote to the resident’s MP and stated that it had revised the compensation amount and had made an increased offer of £300. It said that this would likely cover the excess for a contents insurance policy claim.
10. The resident raised her complaint with the Ombudsman on 18 March 2024 and stated that:
    1. She was dissatisfied with the damp and mould repairs as the landlord initially only painted over the walls and had to return to complete a mould wash.
    2. She felt the landlord had blamed her for the issue by saying that she needed to open the windows more often. She advised the landlord that she had a newborn baby and did not want to open the windows all of the time.
    3. There are no records of the conversation about damaged belongings and the landlord had not appreciated the impact of needing to replace expensive items.
11. On 22 January 2025, the resident informed the Ombudsman that damp and mould remained an issue in the property. She said that she now has a second child who is under 1, and she is concerned about the health of both of her young children. The resident stated that she has kept windows open, as advised by the landlord, but was worried about her children being cold at night during the winter. In order to resolve her complaint, she said that the landlord should take steps to resolve the damp and mould issue. 

Assessment and findings

Scope

12. The Ombudsman acknowledges the resident’s comments about the effect damp and mould had on her child’s health. It is generally accepted that damp and mould can have a negative impact on health. However, it is not possible for the Ombudsman to determine if there was a direct link between any action or inaction by the landlord and any specific damage to the resident’s child’s health in this case. Matters of legal liability for damage to health may be better suited to a court or liability insurer to decide. The Ombudsman is able to consider any distress and inconvenience the resident experienced because of any errors by the landlord as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her health.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

13. The landlord’s damp and mould policy that has been in place since May 2023 states that the landlord will carry out an assessment of the property within 20 working days of a report. The assessment will identify the underlying cause of the damp and mould and provide the tenant with guidance on managing the mould within the property. It states that any remedial works will be raised with internal or external maintenance teams within 10 working days of the assessment.
14. The landlord introduced its Healthy Homes programme in 2020 in partnership with a damp contractor to ensure that every case of damp and mould is properly investigated. The aim of the programme is to tackle the root cause of the problem and carry out any repairs needed to prevent damp and mould from reoccurring. The landlord will make a referral to the damp contractor who will visit and provide the landlord with a report advising on the severity of the issue. The landlord will then raise required works orders.
15. The Ombudsman published a Spotlight report on damp and mould in October 2021. Based on the recommendations made in this report, the landlord developed an action plan to address damp and mould. The action plan states that on receiving reports of damp and mould, residents will receive a Healthy Homes assessment to identify any repairs. A clean and shield treatment will be carried out to remove the damp and mould and any other repairs will be raised to ensure that the onus is not solely on the resident. It states that it will then monitor the issue for 12 months following the visit.
16. After the resident reported damp and mould, a property surveyor undertook an inspection on 23 February 2023 which identified mould and high levels of humidity in the property. The landlord has provided notes of this visit to the Ombudsman, but there is no evidence that a ‘Healthy Homes’ report was compiled advising of the severity of the issue.
17. The notes of the inspection state that no windows were open in the property and that the surveyor discussed heating and ventilation with the resident. The landlord raised works orders for a mould wash and a service of the ventilation unit. The repairs records indicate that these actions were carried out in March 2023. However, the landlord’s repairs notes are limited and it is unclear whether the inspection identified any repairs issues with the ventilation unit. The landlord should ensure it maintains clear and accurate records of repairs and inspections. 
18. The resident made a further report of mould and the property surveyor carried out a second inspection on 11 May 2023, which also identified high levels of humidity. Again, there is no evidence to indicate that a report of this inspection was completed. The limited notes provided to the Ombudsman state that trickle vents on the windows were closed and that the surveyor had a conversation with the resident about heating and ventilation. The surveyor stated that works had been raised to service the ventilation unit and to treat the mould in the bathroom. The evidence indicates that these actions were completed during May 2023. It is unclear why a further service of the ventilation unit was required or whether the unit was found to be in working order.
19. In her escalation request, dated 22 June 2023, the resident reported that there were signs of the mould returning. There is no evidence that the landlord arranged a further inspection of the damp and mould at this stage. The landlord acknowledged her report approximately 3 weeks later within its stage 2 response and advised the resident to report this via the customer hub.
20. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould states that landlords should adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions. It further states that landlords should ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue. It identifies that residents living in homes with damp and mould may be more likely to have respiratory problems.
21. The landlord ought to have taken proactive steps to progress the resident’s reports of mould by arranging a further inspection upon receipt of her escalation request. Its response does not reflect that it acted urgently, or that it took into account that there was a young child in the property. This amounts to a failing by the landlord to respond in a timely manner and to act in line with its action plan, which states that the landlord will continue to monitor damp and mould for a period of 12 months.
22. The resident reported that she felt the landlord had blamed her for the damp and mould in the property. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould recommends that landlords should avoid taking actions that solely place the onus on the resident. They should evaluate what mitigations they can put in place to support residents in cases where structural interventions are not appropriate and satisfy themselves, they are taking all reasonable steps.
23. The resident advised that she did open windows in the property, aside from the window in her child’s bedroom during the night. While it was reasonable for the landlord to provide advice to the resident about ventilating the property, there is no evidence to indicate that the landlord evaluated what further mitigations it could put in place to support the resident in managing the situation. This indicates a failing by the landlord.
24. The landlord appropriately acknowledged that the resident had contacted it on 4 occasions to discuss the damage to her belongings before being informed that the staff member had left the business. Further, it appears that the landlord may have provided conflicting information to the resident about compensating her for damaged items.
25. The Ombudsman acknowledges that this caused her frustration however, it was appropriate for the landlord to advise the resident in its stage 1 response that she could make a claim under its insurance. Landlords are entitled to use liability insurance as a means of managing the cost of negligence claims and it was not obliged to pay a claim for damage to possessions outside the insurance process. It ought to have provided consistent advice from the outset.
26. Overall, the evidence indicates that the landlord did take some appropriate steps to address the damp and mould issue, but there were failings regarding how the landlord handled the resident’s reports. Where there are failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider suitable remedies in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
27. The landlord offered the resident financial redress for the distress and inconvenience caused due to the lack of communication regarding the damaged belongings. However, an order has been made below for additional compensation to be paid to the resident to remedy the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings identified in this report.
28. The resident told the Ombudsman that the damp and mould remain an ongoing issue in the property. As such, a further order has been made for the landlord to conduct a survey and carry out any required works.

The landlord’s complaint handling

29. The landlord appropriately identified that it failed to acknowledge the resident’s initial complaint raised on 20 March 2023. The landlord offered £100 compensation for its complaint handling which was reasonable to remedy this failing. It also offered £120 for distress and inconvenience; however, it did not specify whether this was only in relation to its poor communications regarding the damaged belongings or also in relation to its complaint handling. Landlords should ensure they are clear on why compensation is being offered.
30. The landlord increased its compensation offer by £80 after its stage 2 response. Again, it did not specify what this amount was for. While it is positive that the landlord reconsidered its position and made an offer of redress, it did so a week after it issued its stage 2 response. The landlord should resolve complaints through its complaints process. Given the landlord increased its offer only a week after the stage 2 response, no service failure has been identified. However, this was a shortcoming by the landlord.

Determination

31. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration regarding the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
32. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord offered redress that was reasonable to remedy its complaint handling.

Orders

33. Within 4 weeks, the landlord must:
    1. Pay the resident a total of £600 compensation to remedy the distress and inconvenience caused. This amount should be paid directly to the resident, rather than credited to her rent account. The amount is made up as follows:
       1. £300 already offered by the landlord.
       2. £300 for its handling of the damp and mould reports.
    2. Undertake a specialist survey of the damp and mould and carry out repairs identified to remedy the issue. The landlord should compile a schedule of works, with timeframes which should be adhered to. This should be provided to both the resident and the Ombudsman. The landlord should give specific consideration to reasonable steps it can take to support the resident in managing the damp and mould. 
    3. The landlord should provide evidence of compliance to the Ombudsman within the timeframe specified.