Read our damp and mould report focusing on Awaab's Law

Hammersmith and Fulham Council (202345481)

Back to Top

 A blue and grey text Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202345481

Hammersmith and Fulham Council

29 November 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of repairs in the resident’s property, including:
    1. Damp and mould.
    2. Window repairs.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The property is a 5-bed house. The resident lives in the property with 5 siblings, 3 of whom have asthma.  
  2. The resident says there has been persistent damp and mould in the property since she moved in a number of years ago. She said she reported the most recent issues to the landlord around November or December 2022. On 6 October 2023, she made a complaint. She said she had reported multiple repair issues to the landlord more than a year earlier, but it had done nothing despite her chasing the repairs on multiple occasions.
  3. The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 20 October 2023. It said its surveyor confirmed that both kitchen windows needed to be replaced, and that the installation was booked for 22 November 2023. It said both radiators needed to be replaced, and that it would raise a new works order for replacement. It said a supervisor would inspect the other works to determine what needed to be done first, and offered the resident £150 compensation for its lack of communication and the way it had handled the repairs.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint on or around 6 November 2023. The landlord issued a stage 2 response on 15 February 2024. It said it could see it had updated the resident throughout November 2023, but it had linked its records to an incorrect complaint reference, meaning it did not respond to any of her requests for a call. It said it would re-train its staff to ensure its communication was appropriate, and had changed the way it monitored repairs. It provided the following updates regarding the repairs:
    1. It had passed the kitchen window replacement to a different contractor, as it agreed that 12 months was too long to wait.
    2. Its surveyor had confirmed that a rear window needed to be replaced, and a middle window needed to repaired.
    3. It had passed damp and mould works to its contractors, and would book works after completing an inspection.
  5. The landlord offered the resident £600 compensation. £450 was for the delays in repairs, and £150 was for its poor communication during the complaints process.
  6. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, so referred her complaint to the Ombudsman. She said there were outstanding repairs to the kitchen, bedroom and middle windows, as well as damp and mould. She said this was causing damage to her personal belongings and her health.

Policies and procedures

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. This includes, amongst other things, the walls and windows. The landlord is required to carry out repairs within a reasonable timeframe.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy says it will complete repairs in the following timescales:
    1. Emergency repairs will be completed within 24 hours.
    2. Routine repairs will be completed within 20 working days.
    3. Planned repairs will be completed within 60 working days.
  3. Under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, the landlord has a statutory obligation to ensure the dwelling is fit for human habitation throughout the tenancy. The landlord must also ensure that the homes it provides meet the Decent Homes Standard. Section 5 of the Decent Homes Standard says the landlord should ensure that its properties are free of category 1 hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Damp and mould is listed as a potential category 1 hazard.

Scope of the investigation

  1. Paragraph 42(c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme says the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which were not brought to the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable timeframe (usually 12 months). As such, while previous events may be referred to for context, this investigation will only consider the landlord’s response to reports made from 20 October 2022 (12 months prior to the complaint) onwards.
  2. The resident has referred to the effect the condition of the property had on her family’s health. The Ombudsman is unable to draw conclusions on causation of, or liability for, damage to health and wellbeing. Personal injury claims must, ultimately, be determined by the courts, as the courts can consider medical evidence and make legally binding findings in this regard. However, the Ombudsman will consider any general distress and inconvenience the situation caused the resident.

Assessment and findings

Repairs – damp and mould

  1. The resident said she reported damp and mould to the landlord in November 2022. The repair records provided by the landlord do not give any information as to how or when the resident reported any issues, or what she reported. Keeping complete and accurate records is an essential part of providing an effective repairs service, and the absence of any details related to the resident’s initial reports demonstrates poor record keeping on the landlord’s part. The earliest event in the repair logs the landlord provided to the Ombudsman is a damp and mould inspection on 21 December 2022. As such, the Ombudsman can reasonably conclude that the landlord was on notice of issues with damp and mould in the property since at least November or December 2022.
  2. The surveyor who carried out the damp and mould inspection on 21 December 2022 identified a number of repair issues which fell under the landlord’s repair obligations. The following day, the landlord raised a works order for tiling repairs, replacing defective sealant, hacking off and replacing plaster from one of the walls, carrying out a mould wash, repairing the kitchen sink top, replacing an extractor fan in the bathroom, and repointing the brickwork. However, its records then show all the works were cancelled. The landlord has provided no explanation for this.
  3. The resident contacted the landlord on 5 January 2023 to report that the damp and mould had gotten worse. The landlord attended on 15 February 2023 to inspect the brickwork, and then raised new works orders on 17 February 2023. Those included replacing radiators, hacking off the plaster and replastering, and repairing a defective concrete window sill. It has provided no inspection notes from the visit on 15 February 2023, and no explanation for why it took more than a month after the resident’s report that the damp and mould was getting worse for it to take any action. As such, the Ombudsman can only conclude that there was no good reason for the delay.
  4. After the landlord raised new works orders, its contractors advised that the works orders were incorrect, and needed to be amended because of the cost of the works. The landlord re-raised the works orders on 6 March 2023. Its contractors attended on 28 March 2023 to complete internal repairs. However, those could not go ahead, as it had not carried out the external repairs. There is then no evidence of the landlord or its contractors taking any further action until 3 August 2023, when the works were allocated to a contractor. This was despite the resident calling the landlord to chase up the repairs. This caused further unreasonable and avoidable delays.
  5. The resident called the landlord for an update on 17 August 2023. The landlord’s internal notes show it identified at that stage that it had raised a number of works orders, but completed no works. Having identified the delays, the landlord has provided no evidence of taking any action to rectify the situation, meaning it missed another opportunity to resolve the damp and mould.
  6. The landlord’s contractors say they booked an appointment for 8 September 2023, but failed to attend. They were unable to explain why they failed to attend. Following the resident’s complaint, the landlord’s contractors say they booked a further appointment for 21 November 2023, but no works went ahead, and the repairs were rescheduled for 6 December 2023. This appointment also did not go ahead, and another appointment was booked for 29 January 2024, which was then cancelled by the landlord. This was a further unreasonable and avoidable delay, for which no satisfactory explanation has been provided.
  7. Despite making various promises of inspections and works in its stage 1 response, the landlord has provided no evidence of carrying out any of the repairs following that response, save for replacing an extractor fan on 22 January 2024. It has provided no explanation for this delay, which shows it again failed to take the opportunity to learn from the complaint and put things right.
  8. When investigating the resident’s complaint at stage 2, the landlord identified that she had been waiting a significant length of time for the works to be carried out, and that its contractors had failed to action the works orders raised in December 2022, which it had since cancelled. It noted that photos showed black mould over the resident’s furniture, that her family members had asthma, and one of her family members had been taken to hospital as a result of breathing difficulties. On 1 February 2024, it raised a new works order for the repairs related to damp and mould, and told the resident in its stage 2 response that it would arrange for further inspections.
  9. However, having recognised its failings, the landlord then again failed to carry out the works. It marked the works order as complete, despite having carried out no works, and raised a further works order in April 2024, which it then cancelled with no explanation, marking them as ‘no longer required’. The Ombudsman understands that the works started in August 2024, and were ongoing as of 21 October 2024. The landlord told the Ombudsman on 5 November 2024 that various works had been completed. However, the resident told the Ombudsman that while some works are complete, there are issues with the outdoor tap and the new radiators leaking (which she says caused further damp and mould), and that the shower is loose following the tiling works. She also said that the landlord’s surveyor failed to attend an appointment to inspect the works.
  10. The landlord had a statutory obligation to carry out the repairs within a reasonable timescale. It was also required, under its repairs policy, to complete the works within 20 working days. It is unclear as a result of the landlord’s lack of appropriate records whether or not the initial survey was carried out within a reasonable time. What is apparent from the records, however, is that the landlord did not complete the relevant works in line with its policy, or within any reasonable timescale.
  11. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on damp and mould sets out what the Ombudsman expects from landlords where damp and mould are concerned. It says landlords should take a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould, carry out proactive intervention, communicate effectively with residents, and, where significant works may be required, it should consider whether the resident should be moved from the property at an early stage. The landlord has provided no evidence to show it took any of those steps.
  12. Instead, what the records show is that the landlord had been aware of damp and mould in the resident’s property since at least December 2022, and by the time of its stage 2 response in February 2024, it had failed to take any reasonable steps to resolve the damp and mould. There was no sense of urgency on the part of the landlord to resolve the issues, despite damp and mould being a potential category 1 hazard in accordance with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). It has also provided no evidence of assessing whether or not the property was fit for human habitation.
  13. Landlords are expected to be proactive when responding to reports of repair issues, and to carry out repairs within a reasonable timescale. In this case, the landlord was reactive rather than proactive with regard to the repairs, with the resident having to repeatedly chase updates and responses. The landlord repeatedly failed to take any meaningful action, to update the resident, or to create any kind of action plan to resolve the related damp and mould. By the time of the stage 2 response, the landlord had left the resident and her family living with a potential category 1 hazard for over a year. This was despite the landlord being aware that members of the resident’s household were asthmatic, and therefore particularly vulnerable to damp and mould. 
  14. The evidence also shows that these failures continued after the stage 2 response, demonstrating that the landlord repeatedly missed opportunities to resolve the damp and mould, or to learn from the complaint.

Repairs – windows

  1. The Ombudsman’s March 2019 Spotlight Report on repairs sets out the expectations the Ombudsman has for landlords where repairs are concerned. The report says landlords should keep clear, accurate, and easily accessible records of residents’ reports of disrepair and the landlord’s responses. This should include details of appointments, any inspections, any work carried out, and completion dates. Landlords should also monitor the progress of any reported repairs, and comply with the repair timescales set out in their policies as far as possible.
  2. It is unclear from the landlord’s repair records when the resident reported problems with the windows in the property. This demonstrates poor record keeping on the landlord’s part. However, given that the landlord raised a works order to overhaul the bedroom window on 16 January 2023, the Ombudsman can reasonably conclude that the landlord was aware of problems with at least 1 window since January 2023.
  3. The landlord marked the repair as complete on 17 February 2023. However, it has provided no evidence to show that any repairs to the window took place on that date, and its internal notes confirm that as of 23 March 2023, the window had not yet been replaced. Following confirmation from its contractor on 3 May 2023 that the window was beyond repair, the landlord raised further works orders on 16 May 2023. The orders were for both kitchen windows to be replaced, and to replace 2 bedroom windows.
  4. However, no contractor attended until 7 July 2023, which was outside of the timescales in the landlord’s repairs policy. The operative took measurements, and ordered parts. On 21 July 2023, the landlord recorded that parts were due to arrive within 4 weeks. On 4 August 2023, it recorded that the job was with window specialists and the resident should be updated within 7 days. It then did not update her. When she called for an update on 17 August 2023, she told the landlord that while measurements had been taken, no works had been completed. The landlord marked the works as completed the same day, despite being aware they had not been completed. This was unreasonable.
  5. The next day, the landlord’s contractor said the repairs could not be completed, and referred the works back to the landlord. The landlord then did nothing for a month, at which point it referred the works to a different contractor. When the resident made a complaint, the landlord asked its previous contractors for an update, despite the works having been taken away from them. This demonstrates that the landlord had no oversight of the works or understanding of which works it had or had not transferred between contractors. This demonstrates poor handling of the repairs, which caused further delays.
  6. The landlord told the resident in its stage 1 response that the windows would be replaced on 22 November 2023. It then failed to complete the repairs as promised, indicating it failed to learn from the complaint. When discussing the resident’s escalation request with her, it told her that only the kitchen windows had been replaced, and that the bedroom windows still needed to be replaced. However, its repair records contain no reference to the kitchen windows being replaced. As such, its poor record keeping has also hampered this investigation.
  7. The landlord arranged a further inspection on 12 February 2024. It identified that a window needed to be replaced, and raised a works order for the repair. In its stage 2 response, it accepted that the resident had been waiting over a year for the window repairs, and that this was unacceptable. However, having acknowledged its failings, it then repeated them. After booking a 20-day repair on 12 February 2024, it failed to book in any appointments within that timescale. It was only after the resident contacted the landlord on 14 March 2024 to chase the repair that the landlord booked an appointment, and completed the repairs another month later. These were further unreasonable delays, demonstrating that the landlord failed to learn from the complaint.

Repairs – summary

  1. As set out above, there have been prolonged and repeated failings by the landlord with regard to its handling of repairs. It failed to carry out any of the repairs considered as part of this investigation within the timescales set out in its repairs policy, or within any reasonable timescale.
  2. The landlord’s records demonstrate a failure to take ownership of the repairs, with works being raised with no follow-up, works being cancelled without explanation or marked as complete when no works have been completed, operatives attending appointments in the wrong order, appointments being missed without explanation, and a failure to take any action for months at a time. This was despite the landlord being aware that there were vulnerable people in the household, and that one of the resident’s family had been taken to hospital for breathing difficulties.
  3. The delays in this case were caused in part by the landlord’s poor handling of repairs, and in part by delays on the part of its contractors. However, as the contractors were the agents of the landlord, it is ultimately the landlord that is responsible for all of the delays in this case. The landlord’s poor handling of repairs caused serious and significant delays in carrying out the repairs, some of which the resident says remain outstanding as of the date of this report. It also failed to appropriately consider the vulnerability of the household, and missed countless opportunities to rectify the situation.
  4. The landlord recognised there were failings on its part, and offered the resident compensation as part of its complaints process. However, it failed to carry out repairs as promised in its complaint responses, and the £450 compensation offered does not adequately address the detriment the landlord’s inaction caused the resident. The Ombudsman considers that the landlord’s poor handling of repairs amounts to severe maladministration.
  5. The Ombudsman has previously identified repeated serious and systemic failings in the landlord’s handling of repairs, leading to us issuing a Special Report about the landlord in February 2024. As a result of that intervention, the landlord is in the process of overhauling its processes and systems. As such, the Ombudsman will not make any further orders or recommendations in that regard for this complaint. We will, however, assess what further steps the landlord needs to take to put things right for the resident in this case.
  6. As it is disputed that the repair issues are resolved, the landlord must arrange for a surveyor to visit the property within the next 2 weeks to determine what repairs, if any, are outstanding. An order to that effect has been made below.
  7. The resident has referred to having to take unpaid leave from work to allow access for the repairs. The Ombudsman does not order compensation for a resident’s loss of earnings when they provide access for repairs, as residents have an obligation to do so under the terms of their tenancy agreement. However, the Ombudsman does consider the distress and inconvenience the landlord’s failings caused the resident.
  8. Having considered all of the circumstances of this case, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord should pay the resident £1,400 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its poor handling of the repairs. This is inclusive of the £450 already offered during its complaints process. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for serious failings which have an significant impact on a resident.
  9. The resident told the landlord and the Ombudsman that various belongings were damaged by the damp and mould. An insurer would be best placed to assess the cause of the damage and the value of the damaged items, as well as whether or not the landlord was responsible for the damage. The Ombudsman would only expect a landlord to consider compensation for any such losses if its insurer would not cover the claim, for example if the cause of the damage was not covered under the policy. The landlord has provided the resident with details of how to make a claim on its insurance in its stage 2 complaint response. As the resident has not yet made such a claim, it would not be appropriate to order any additional compensation for damage to belongings at this stage.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord was required, in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, to issue a stage 1 response to the complaint within 10 working days, and to issue a stage 2 response within 20 working days of an escalation request. While the landlord issued its stage 1 response within the timescales set out in the Code, it did not issue its stage 2 response within a reasonable time.
  2. The resident escalated her complaint on 6 November 2023. The landlord was required to issue a response within 20 working days. It did not do so. Instead, it took 70 working days to issue its stage 2 response. This was not in line with the Code, its complaints policy, or standard industry practice. Its records show that the resident was chasing for a response throughout that time, and that the landlord repeatedly failed to return the resident’s calls. It said this was because it had logged her requests against an incorrect complaint reference.
  3. The resident told the Ombudsman that when the landlord issued her stage 1 response, it also attached a copy of a stage 1 response for a third party. She said this was a major data protection breach. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to investigate reported data breaches, as that would be a matter for the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). As such, the Ombudsman is unable to take this into account when investigating the landlord’s complaint handling.
  4. In its complaint response, the landlord offered £150 compensation for its poor complaint handling. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for failings which adversely affect a resident, but which have no permanent impact. As such, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord has made an offer of redress which resolves its poor complaint handling satisfactorily.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there has been severe maladministration with regard to the landlord’s handling of repairs.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53(b) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered the resident redress for its complaint handling failings prior to the investigation which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, resolves the failings satisfactorily. 

Orders

  1. Within 2 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to arrange for an appropriately qualified surveyor to visit the property and identify all repairs that remain outstanding.
  2. Within 6 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Issue a written apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report. The apology must be issued by a member of the landlord’s senior leadership team.
    2. Write to the resident to set out its plan of action for any remaining works. This must include a list of all outstanding repairs, confirmation of when the works will start, and how long it anticipates the repairs will take. If it believes that all repairs have been satisfactorily completed, it must confirm this to the resident.
    3. Pay the resident £1,400 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its poor handling of repairs. This is inclusive of the £450 offered during the complaints process. For the avoidance of doubt, the compensation must be paid directly to the resident, and can only be credited to her rent account with her express agreement.
  3. The landlord is to provide this Service with evidence of compliance with the above orders within the timescales set out above.

Recommendations

  1. If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £150 compensation it awarded through its complaints process for the failings in its complaint handling. The Ombudsman’s determination of reasonable redress for complaint handling is dependent on this payment being made.
  2. The landlord should write to this Service within 4 weeks of the date of this report to set out its intentions with regard to the above recommendation.