Richmond Housing Partnership Limited (202328167)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202328167

Richmond Housing Partnership Limited

11 September 2024

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. response to the resident’s reports about damp and mould;
   2. complaints handling.

Background

2. The resident has been an assured tenant at the property of the landlord since December 2016. The landlord is a registered provider of social housing. Throughout the period of the complaint, the resident was pregnant. The landlord was aware of this.
3. Throughout 2017, the resident reported damp and mould in her property. The landlord’s surveyor assessed the photos provided by the resident. The landlord subsequently provided its position that the damp and mould was being caused by condensation due to lifestyle issues. It provided links to online videos about how to address the condensation.
4. In or around January 2023. The resident reported again that she was experiencing issues with damp and mould. The landlord’s surveyor attended around this time and promised to provide an update. The resident chased this update on several occasions between February and June 2023. On each occasion, she was informed by the landlord that the surveyor would get back to her, but this never happened.
5. The resident raised a formal complaint on 28 June 2023. The landlord subsequently provided its stage one response on 17 July 2023, which included the following:
   1. It detailed the disruption to its repairs service, including a changeover in staff and the appointment of a new contractor.
   2. It apologised for the delay this had caused.
   3. It advised that a specialist damp and mould surveyor would contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It did not provide an indicative timeframe.
   4. It offered £150 compensation for the distress and inconvenience the delays had caused.
6. The resident chased up the landlord for the arrangements for the specialist damp and mould surveyor twice in July 2023, but she did not receive a response.
7. On 26 July 2023, the resident requested that her complaint be escalated to stage two. The landlord acknowledged this on 22 August 2023. It did not provide an explanation for the delay to its acknowledgement.
8. The landlord provided its stage two response on 19 September 2023, which included the following:
   1. It noted the ongoing delay and that the works had been passed to a new contractor.
   2. It also noted that a mould wash had been completed that day and that it was awaiting a report from the contractor. It advised it would action any recommendations raised.
   3. It offered a further £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
9. The resident replied and expressed her concern that the mould wash didn’t solve the issue. She also reported that mould had returned in November 2023.
10. It is evident that a further inspection took place in or around December 2023. A report was provided in January 2024, and works to improve the extractor fans were raised. The resident has advised this service that these have now been installed.
11. The landlord also gave advice about heating the property; however, the resident advised that she was struggling with the affordability of doing so. In December 2023, she also advised that she had been heating the property, but this had not prevented the mould from returning.
12. The resident has advised this service that while she has not experienced any further damp and mould during the summer months of 2024, she is concerned it will return in the winter.

Assessment and findings

Policies and procedures

13. The landlord operates a responsive repairs policy. The policy notes that non-emergency repairs will be addressed within 20 working days.
14. The landlord also has a damp and mould policy. This policy notes that for moderate or mild damp, it will arrange for a routine mould treatment within 28 days. It may also give advice regarding managing condensation. It will further consider any recommendations following any surveyor inspections.
15. The landlord operates a two stage complaints policy. The policy notes that a stage two escalation will be acknowledged within five working days, and a response will be provided within 20 working days. It also notes that if the landlord is unable to meet this timeframe, it will discuss this with the resident.

Damp and mould

16. Following the resident’s reports in January 2023, the landlord arranged for a surveyor to inspect the property within the timeframes of its policy. However, where such action is taken, there is a reasonable expectation that the landlord will provide an update about the outcome of its inspection. This did not happen, which led the resident to have to expend time and trouble chasing the update. When the landlord did answer the resident’s request for updates, it made further promises of a callback which did not happen. This would have added to the resident’s frustration.
17. Similarly, as per the landlord’s damp and mould policy, the resident had an expectation that action, such as a mould wash, would be taken within 28 days. This did not happen, and it is not evident that any surrounding communication was given. This would have been distressing for the resident.
18. While the landlord may have been unclear about the cause of the damp and mould following its initial inspection, it is not disputed that damp and mould was present. In such circumstances, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to consider what mitigating interim action it could take. This could include providing dehumidifiers or even advice about management of the mould. However, it is not evident that the landlord considered this or provided any meaningful assistance.
19. This is of particular concern as the landlord was aware that the resident was pregnant at the time of the reports. The Ombudsman expects the landlord to take into account the vulnerabilities of a resident when considering how to provide its service. It is not evident that the landlord did so, which would have added to the resident’s distress at its lack of contact or concern.
20. In its stage one response, the landlord explained that the delays had been caused by its changeover of staff, systems, and contractors. While this may be an explanation, it is not an excuse. The landlord should have had robust systems in place to ensure minimal disruption to its service. Where it was aware of disruption, it should have ensured it communicated this to the resident at the time, which it failed to do.
21. While it was appropriate that the landlord assured the resident that it had assigned her case to a specialist contractor, it failed to provide an indicative timeframe or any further details about this process. Given the history of the case, the resident’s vulnerabilities, and its own acknowledged failings, this was an opportunity for the landlord to take ownership of the complaint and repair the landlord/tenant relationship. However, instead, its contractor failed to progress the works, despite the resident expending further time and trouble chasing updates.
22. In its stage two response, the landlord acknowledged there had been an issue with the initial contractor and noted that it had since instructed a new contractor and completed a mould wash. This action came some nine months after the resident initially reported her concerns, throughout which there had been minimal communication and repeated failings with the landlord’s service delivery. The landlord also raised the resident’s expectations of further action and advised it would enact any recommendations from its contractor. It was therefore concerning that, when alerted to the resident’s concerns that the mould wash would not solve the issue, it did not provide its position or raise any further inspections until two months later, when the resident advised the mould had returned.
23. On this occasion, the landlord appropriately raised a thorough inspection and carried out the repairs to the extractor fans as recommended. Given, however, that the resident raised concerns about the affordability of heating the property, it missed the opportunity to provide relevant advice or signpost her to any organisations that may be able to assist.
24. Across its formal responses, the landlord offered £250 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its delays and poor communication. It also apologised. While these were appropriate steps, the amount of compensation offered was not proportionate to the failings identified and the impact caused to the resident. Given that these issues were raised in January 2023 but not addressed until December 2023, an order for £825 compensation has been made, being £75 per month that the landlord did not complete a full inspection. This reflects the resident’s distress and inconvenience at having to live with the damp and mould issue for this period, along with the time and trouble spent chasing the issue due to the landlord’s poor communication and service delivery.
25. The Ombudsman notes that the resident remains concerned that the issues will return in the winter months. Given that the landlord has completed the recommendations from the report in January 2024, and presently the mould has not returned, it is reasonable that it does not complete any further repairs at this time. Given, however, that the issue has reoccurred several times over a number of years, should the issue return, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to consider what other action may be necessary, such as a ventilation survey.

Complaints handling

26. Following the landlord’s stage one response on 17 July 2023, the resident requested that her complaint be escalated to stage two on 26 July 2023. The landlord’s policy notes that this should have been acknowledged within five working days. However, this was not the case, and the landlord did not acknowledge the escalation until 22 August 2023.
27. The landlord’s policy also notes that where a complaint response may be delayed, the landlord will discuss this with the resident and set out a new indicative timeframe. This approach is in line with this service’s Complaints Handling Code. However, it is not evident the landlord did this, nor did it apologise for the delay in either its late acknowledgement, or its subsequent stage two response.
28. This delay, without explanation, was unreasonable in the circumstances and would have been frustrating for the resident. A finding of service failure has therefore been made. An order for £100 compensation to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident has also been made.

Determination (decision)

29. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in respect of its:
    1. response to the resident’s reports about damp and mould;
    2. complaints handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

30. The Ombudsman orders the landlord to pay compensation of £925 comprising:
    1. £825 for any distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its failings relating to the damp and mould;
    2. £100 for its ineffective complaints handling.
31. This replaces the landlord’s previous offer of £250. This amount (less any amount already paid by the landlord as part of its previous offer) must be paid within four weeks of the date of this determination.

Recommendations

32. The landlord is to consider what advice or assistance it can provide with the resident’s concerns about heating the property, including signposting her to any organisations that can help.