West Kent Housing Association (202333042)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202333042

West Kent Housing Association

13 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 resident has complained that the landlord missed an appointment to inspect damp and mould in her home.
2. The Ombudsman has also assessed the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident has been an assured shorthold tenant of the landlord since August 2022. She lives in a 2 bedroom ground floor flat.
4. The resident reported that she had damp and mould in her property on 8 August 2023. The landlord booked appointments for 14 August and 25 September 2023. The resident rescheduled both appointments as neither were convenient.
5. The landlord booked another appointment for 26 October 2023. However, it did not attend. On the same day the resident made a complaint that it had missed the appointment. She also said the landlord had not resolved the damp and mould in the flat before she moved in and asked for a copy of its void inspection report.
6. On 2 November 2023 the resident asked the landlord to reschedule the missed appointment. She asked for it to be booked for 18 December 2023 as she already had an appointment scheduled for that day.
7. On 9 November 2023 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said:
   1. Its computer system was updated at the beginning of October 2023. The appointment that had been booked for 26 October 2023 did not transfer onto its contractor’s system during the update. This meant the contractor was not aware of the appointment and did not attend.
   2. it apologised for the frustration and inconvenience the missed appointment had caused the resident.
   3. it had rescheduled the appointment for 18 December 2023 as requested by the resident.
   4. It wished to offer £50 compensation for the inconvenience caused by the missed appointment.
8. On 11 November 2023 the resident escalated her complaint. She reiterated her concerns and explained that she had not received the copy of the void report. She added that on 2 November 2023 the landlord attended to inspect the damp and mould although she had told it that she would not be available. She explained that she worked full time on weekdays.
9. The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 5 December 2023. It reiterated its stage 1 response and said on 30 November 2023, it had offered the resident an appointment for Saturday 9 December 2023 as a “goodwill” gesture. The resident did not accept it and had told it that its appointment offer had come “too late”. 
10. The landlord reoffered the £50 compensation for the missed appointment. It offered a further £50 compensation for the inconvenience it had caused by attending on 2 November 2023. It is noted that the landlord inspected the resident’s property in December 2023.
11. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, so referred her complaint to this Service.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

12. The resident has told this Service that the damp and mould in her property affected her health. While we note the resident’s concern, we are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim.   Where the Ombudsman identifies failure on a landlord’s part, we will however consider the resulting distress and inconvenience on the resident.
13. The resident has also told this Service that the landlord had installed a unit in to attempt to resolve the damp and mould in her home. She said that the unit emits constant noise, and the landlord should have not installed it. While the Ombudsman empathises with the resident’s situation, in the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint. This is because the landlord should be given the opportunity to investigate and respond to the resident’s concerns in the first instance. Any new issues that have not been subject to a formal complaint can be addressed directly with the landlord and progressed as a new formal complaint if required. As such, the resident may wish to refer her concerns to the landlord to see if a resolution can be found.

The landlord’s handling of the missed appointment

14. In her complaint, the resident explained the distress and inconvenience the landlord had caused by failing to attend the appointment on 26 October 2023. She explained that she had previously had difficulty arranging the inspection, due to work and personal issues.
15. In response, the landlord explained that the appointment date did not transfer over to its contractor records when its computer system updated. This meant that the contractor was not aware of the appointment and therefore did not attend. It apologised and offered the resident £50 compensation in recognition of the inconvenience that the error had caused.
16. The landlord’s explanation for the missed appointment was clear and transparent. It was also appropriate that the landlord offered the resident some compensation for the inconvenience that had been caused. The landlord’s complaint and compensation policies do not set out that a fixed amount of compensation may be offered for missed appointments. Therefore, we have assessed its offer against our Remedies Guidance. We are satisfied that the landlord’s compensation offer was in line with our guidance and was reasonable and proportionate for this service failure.
17. The resident also said in her complaint that the mould and damp was getting worse. She expressed concern about the impact of this on the health of her household. The resident also explained that 26 October 2023 was the last day weekday she was available before she started a new job where she would be working Monday to Friday. The evidence shows that because of this, she asked the landlord to reschedule the appointment for 18 December 2023. This was because she already had another appointment with it that day.
18. The landlord agreed to schedule the appointment for 18 December 2023, as per the resident’s request. However, it is noted that on 30 November 2023, the landlord offered the resident a Saturday appointment for 9 December. It is unclear why this – or another Saturday appointment – was not offered sooner. However, that it was not, was a shortcoming in the landlord’s overall handling of matters.
19. The resident also complained that the landlord had attended on 2 November 2032, after she had advised that this time and date were not suitable. In response the landlord apologised for the error and offered the resident £50 for the distress caused. This was again a reasonable response.
20. Overall, while the landlord could have offered the resident a weekend appointment earlier, this was a shortcoming rather than a failing.  It acknowledged, apologised and appropriately compensated the resident for its missed appointment. Therefore, we have found that there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of its missed appointment.

The landlord’s complaint handling

21. In her complaints, the resident raised concerns that the landlord had not resolved the damp and mould in the property when it was void before she moved in. She asked it for a copy of its void report for the property.
22. However, the landlord failed to acknowledge or address this in its complaint responses. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) states that landlords should address all aspects of the complaint.  The landlord’s failure to address the resident’s specific concern meant that she incurred time, trouble and inconvenience chasing this matter within her complaints and after the landlord had issued its final response. The evidence shows that the landlord gave the resident the report in January 2024. This was approximately 3 months after she had initially requested it. It is noted that landlords are not obligated to share such reports with their residents. However, in this case the landlord decided to do so, therefore, while the reason for the delay is unclear that there was one is unreasonable.  
23. Overall, the landlord failed to address the resident’s concern that it did not resolve the damp and mould in the property when it was void in its response. It also failed to provide her with its void report in a timely manner. Therefore, we have found that there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.
24. It is noted that the resident has raised concerns that the damp and mould in her home has affected her health and damaged her personal belongings. Therefore, an order has been made for the landlord to refer her to its insures if she wishes to make a claim.

Determination

25. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concern that it missed its appointment to inspect her home for damp and mould.
26. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

27. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord must:
    1. apologise to the resident for its complaint handling failures identified in this case.
    2. pay the resident £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures.
    3. pay the resident the compensation it offered in its complaint responses if it has not done so already.
    4. contact the resident to ascertain what her specific concerns about the condition of the property when it was let are. It should then investigate the resident’s complaint and ensure that it responds to the resident’s concerns in accordance with its policy timescales and the Code.
    5. provide the resident with information about making a claim via its public liability insurer for injury to health and damage to her personal belongings
    6. remind staff that all aspects of complaints should be addressed in its responses.