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

London Borough of Camden Council (202410608)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202410608

Camden Council

30 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 the resident’s reports of a roof leak, damp and mould.
    2. Complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a shared owner of the property. The property is a 1-bedroom flat in a 3-storey building. The landlord is the freeholder and a local authority.
  2. The resident raised his complaint on 15 August 2023. He told the landlord that there were a number of ongoing damp issues within the property. He said it had conducted inspections but not carried out meaningful remedial works and it had not provided timeframes for repairs. He told it of issues with damp in his bedroom and hallway as well as a roof leak. He said he wanted the landlord to maintain the property, confirm a plan for works with timeframes, and compensate him for the internal damage to his property and belongings.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 28 December 2023. It said the resident’s complaint was not received by its team until 24 November 2023. It listed the reported issues at the property which included damp in the bedroom and hallway. It apologised and partially upheld the resident’s complaint. It said it completed some works and accepted some recommendations had been missed. It said:
    1. It would commence its investigation from August 2022, 12 months prior to the complaint. It explained that damp proofing works were to be completed following its survey in 2019 but were postponed during Covid-19. When normal service resumed it conducted a survey on 24 August 2022 and noted damp in the bedroom, living room and hallway.
    2. It found the damp issues in the living room and hallway were historic. A CCTV survey of the front drainage was recommended. It completed this on 30 September 2022 and found no defects.
    3. Its survey recommended a full damp survey if there were no drainage defects. It accepted that it had not progressed this recommendation and apologised for the oversight.
    4. For the bedroom, there was evidence that the property was experiencing a leak during rainfall. There was a recommendation for the roof to be inspected and repairs carried out, if necessary. It attended on 21 October 2022 and completed repairs to the roof covering.
    5. The resident reported another roof leak on 9 March 2023 and it completed an inspection on 27 April 2023. It found the roof required replacing and this was referred to its major repairs team. It accepted no further progress had been made on the roof repair despite the resident’s enquiries.
    6. It would request a full property damp survey and would look at the recommendation to replace the flat roof. If its damp survey found damp proofing works were required it would appoint a contractor to attend and prepare a specification of works with costs. It would keep the resident updated on timeframes and monitor recommendations were actioned in a timely manner.
    7. It told the resident how to claim for damage to belongings.
  4. The resident escalated his complaint on 19 July 2024. He told the landlord that it had been almost 12 months since he raised his complaint. While it completed a damp survey on 28 February 2024, it did not progress other points mentioned within its stage 1 response.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 21 August 2024. It apologised for the time taken to progress work to resolve the damp issues. It confirmed the details within its stage 1 response were correct and said:
    1. It conducted a damp survey on 28 February 2024 and received the report on 24 April 2024. The moisture readings were high and it found walls were suffering from rising damp. Its report said:
      1. the area would benefit from the installation of equipment to collect surface moisture.
      2. Internal waterproof tanking repairs were required in accordance with internal insulation works.
      3. An upgrade to extractor fans was recommended to improve surface temperatures.
    2. It was awaiting costs for the roof renewal from its contractor. Once it had this information it would decide if it could complete the renewal as “spend limits” were in place.
    3. It was unable to provide a specific timeframe and said it had various targets for different issues. It explained that there could be a need for a section 20 notice if repairs were to cost more than £250 per household.
    4. It upheld the resident’s complaint and accepted its service did not meet the standards it would normally expect and said it failed to keep the resident updated. It made an award of compensation for £270, this was made up of:
      1. £150 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused.
      2. £120 for the delays and failures in providing an update since the end of February 2024.
    5. It repeated how the resident could submit an insurance claim for damaged items.
  6. The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and the outstanding work. He asked this Service to consider his complaint further.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has said he reported issues with damp at the property for a number of years. Within the landlord’s stage 1 response it has accepted that damp proofing works were to be completed following a survey in 2019 but these did not go ahead at that time.
  2. In such circumstances, the Ombudsman would usually expect the resident to have raised the issues as a formal complaint within a reasonable time, usually 12 months of matters arising. Issues that were not raised as a complaint within a reasonable time have not been considered within this report. As such, the investigation will be limited to events from 12 months prior to the resident’s complaint from August 2023. Events from before August 2022, may be referred to within this report for background purposes only.
  3. The resident has told this Service, of health concerns. In particular, he has said his living situation has affected his sleep and impacted both his physical and mental health. The Ombudsman sympathises with the resident. It is understandable that he has concerns about the impact of his living conditions on his health.
  4. It is important to explain that this Service cannot establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions, or lack of action, have had a detrimental impact on a resident’s health. The Ombudsman is therefore unable to consider the personal injury aspect of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited for consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim. However, the Ombudsman will give consideration to the general impact on the resident.
  5. The resident has also reported damage to his personal belongings. While the Ombudsman acknowledges the upset that may be caused by damaged items, it is important to explain that the Ombudsman can not make decisions on liability for damage to items which should be covered by insurance. However, this Service has considered what the landlord did following the resident’s reports of damage to his belongings.

Handling of reports of a roof leak, damp and mould

  1. The Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 requires landlords to ensure that homes are fit for human habitation throughout the duration of a lease (including shared ownership leases).
  2. The lease explains that the landlord is responsible for category B repairs which include making good structural defects. The lease says the landlord will maintain and repair the structure of the building, including roofs, foundations, external and internal walls, the window frame, amongst other things. It says this does not include interior facing parts of walls.
  3. The landlord’s housing repairs service booklet says by law it must repair and maintain the structure and outside of the property. It explains that for structural repairs where damp-proof works are required or leaseholder consultation is needed, the works would be programmed works.
  4. The landlord’s repairs policy says roof leaks are urgent repairs, where it will apply a temporary repair to make safe and stop the leak (within 5 working days). It says for roof repairs where scaffolding is needed or where leaseholder consultation is required it would also fall under programmed repairs.
  5. As mentioned previously, this report will assess the landlord’s actions from August 2022 onwards. However, for background purposes, the landlord completed an inspection of the property in June 2019. Its inspection found rising damp. It said this was due to the lack of an effective damp proof course and from a defective drain at the rear of the property. It made a number of recommendations that included damp proofing works and an inspection of drains. It is not disputed that the landlord did not action the recommendations made at that time.
  6. In August 2022 the resident told the landlord about a roof leak at the property. The landlord appropriately conducted an inspection on 24 August 2022. It found damp present in the living room, hallway, kitchen and bedroom. It said:
    1. The bedroom was situation in a one storey addition, with the roof forming a terrace area for the flat above. Rain penetrated the bedroom with “visible dripping”. It said an inspection of the roof and drainage was required.
    2. A CCTV survey to the front drainage was recommended.
    3. If the front drainage was not found to be defective, it recommended a full damp survey.

Roof leak

  1. The evidence shows the landlord received the survey report, from the August 2022 inspection, on 2 September 2022. In light of when the landlord was aware of the requirement for a roof inspection, it attended within a reasonable time on 21 October 2022. It conducted an inspection and completed work at that time. The landlord’s actions were reasonable at that time.
  2. The resident reported a further roof leak on 9 March 2023. The landlord conducted a further roof inspection on 27 April 2023 where it found the roof required replacing. It referred the matter to its major repairs team at that time. However, there is no evidence to show the landlord progressed the matter. This was not appropriate.
  3. Within the landlord’s stage 1 response, from December 2023, it accepted that no further progress had been made on the roof replacement. While it said it would look into this, it took a further 8 months, until its stage 2 response (in August 2024) to inform the resident that it was still awaiting costs for the roof replacement and was unable to provide a specific timeframe. It also informed the resident that it may need to issue a section 20 notice as the repair costs could be more than £250 for leaseholders. It is unclear why the landlord had not taken meaningful action since April 2023. It took 17 months to tell the resident of the potential need for a section 20 notice and has not explained why it is unable to provide timeframes for actions. This was not appropriate and does not demonstrate attempts to resolve the issue within a reasonable time.
  4. On 8 April 2025 the landlord told this Service that it had arranged repairs to stop water ingress, however it has not completed the roof replacement works or given a timeframe for works. It is unclear why it took the landlord over 2 years to take interim action. This was not appropriate.

Damp and mould

  1. The evidence show that following the August 2022 inspection, the landlord completed a drain check on 30 September 2022. It found the drains were clear, free flowing and in good condition. This timeframe was reasonable in the circumstances. However, there is no evidence to show the landlord conducted a damp survey at that time, as per the recommendations made within its inspection. This was not appropriate.
  2. The landlord conducted a mould inspection in March 2023. It found black mould and damp to the bedroom and hallway. It said the issue appeared structural. However, there is no evidence to show the landlord took any further action at that time despite what it knew. This was not appropriate.
  3. It took the landlord until its stage 1 response, December 2023, to realise it had not conducted a full damp survey of the property. This was not appropriate. It then took the landlord a further 2 months, until 28 February 2024 to conduct a damp survey. The timeframe of 18 months to conduct a damp inspection (August 2022 to February 2024) was not appropriate.
  4. The landlord received the damp report following its February 2024 inspection in April 2024. This report identified rising damp within the property and condensation in areas. It also made a number of similar recommendations to the landlord’s June 2019 inspection. However, there is no evidence to show the landlord completed works despite it being aware the issue related to rising damp. It has not provided evidence to show the rising damp issue was not structural or that it told the resident of work that it was not responsible for if that was the case. This was not appropriate.
  5. Within the landlord’s stage 2 response from August 2024, it explained its damp inspections findings and recommendations. However, it missed a further opportunity to tell the resident of its planned approach for damp and mould works and the issue remains outstanding. This was not appropriate.
  6. As mentioned previously, the resident reported damage to his personal belongings. Within both the landlord’s stage 1 and 2 responses it appropriately explained how the resident could claim for damaged items and provided him with the relevant information. This was appropriate in the circumstances.

Summary

  1. Overall, the landlord’s handling of the roof leak and damp and mould at the property was not appropriate. The lease confirms the landlord’s responsibility for maintaining the structure and roof of the property. The evidence does not show the landlord did enough to maintain or keep in repair the areas it was responsible for over a prolonged time. The landlord also failed to manage the resident’s expectation about how long works would take and what it would do.
  2. It took the landlord around 16 months (from April 2023 to August 2024) to tell the resident that it may need to issue a section 20 notice for the roof replacement. It has not provided evidence to show it has done this or of its planned approach to the roof replacement. It took over 2 years (from March 2023 to April 2025) to take some interim action to stop the water ingress. It has not demonstrated that it considered the impact of the leak on the internal conditions of the property. It did not consider the support it could offer the resident in light of it not completing the roof replacement within a reasonable time.
  3. In addition, it took the landlord took 18 months (August 2022 to February 2024) to conduct a damp inspection. It failed to take action to remedy the rising damp or reasonably explain how the issue was not structural to satisfy itself of meeting its wider obligations.
  4. When considering the combination of the landlord’s failings over a prolonged time, its handling of the roof leak, damp and mould at the property amounts to severe maladministration.
  5. It is accepted that the resident would have been caused significant distress over a prolonged period of time in not knowing the landlord’s planned approach to works. The evidence shows the resident regularly contacted the landlord for updates and told it of the impact his living conditions, including the “terrible” damp in his bedroom. However, despite this and what the landlord knew about the condition of the property, it failed to take meaningful action, explain its planned approach, manage expectations or consider interim measures sooner.
  6. Within the landlord’s stage 2 response, from August 2024, it recognised its lack of updates and awarded £270 compensation in total. While the landlord’s insight into its lack of updates is noted, its stage 2 response did not recognise its failure to meet its wider obligations. It missed opportunities to explain its planned approach to work or consider interim measures it could apply to support the resident. This would have added further to the resident’s frustration with its service.
  7. When deciding an appropriate remedy, this Service’s remedies guidance has been considered along with the landlord’s failings over a prolonged period of time and the impact this would have had on the resident’s enjoyment of his home. While it is difficult to determine the full extent of the condition of the property, when considering the resident’s reports about a leak, damp and mould, and the landlord’s inspection findings, it is reasonable to conclude that his living conditions would have caused him distress, inconvenience, time and trouble over a prolonged time.
  8. When considering the issues combined, the Ombudsman has decided a compensation payment of £1,500 is appropriate in the circumstances. This amount falls within the severe maladministration banding of this Service’s remedies guidance. The Ombudsman has made a further order for the landlord to explain its planned approach to works to help progress matters.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy from March 2023 sets out its 2 stage complaints process from that time. It says a stage 1 response will be provided within 10 working days and 25 working days for a stage 2 response. It explains that the stage 1 timeframe can be extended to 20 working days for complex cases.
  2. The landlord’s July 2024 complaints policy, effective from 1 August 2024, amends the stage 2 timeframe to 20 working days. It explains this timeframe can be extended by a further 10 working days.
  3. The resident raised his complaint on 15 August 2023 and the landlord did not issue its stage 1 response until 28 December 2023. This timeframe of around 4 months to issue a stage 1 response was not appropriate and significantly exceeded the timeframes set within its applicable policy.
  4. Within the landlord’s stage 1 response it said its correct team did not receive the complaint until 24 November 2023. While this may have delayed the landlord’s response, it should have had measures in place to appropriately identify complaints and ensure they were passed to the correct team to respond to.
  5. The resident escalated his complaint on 19 July 2024 and the landlord provided its stage 2 response on 21 August 2024. While the stage 2 response timeframe exceeded the 20 working day timeframe of the July 2024 policy, it is noted that the policy did not come into effect until 1 August 2024, after the residents escalation request. In light of this the 23 day timeframe to issue a stage 2 response was reasonable in the circumstances.
  6. Overall, the landlord’s stage 1 response timeframe was not appropriate as it significantly exceeded its policy timeframe of 10 working days. This would have added to the resident’s frustration with its service. While the landlord explained the reason for its delayed stage 1 response, it made no attempts to put things right at that time. This amounts to a service failure.
  7. The Ombudsman has ordered a compensation payment of £100 to acknowledge the landlord’s complaint handling failing and put things right. £100 falls within the service failure banding of this Service’s remedies guidance and has been decided as appropriate in the circumstances. The landlord’s stage 2 response timeframe demonstrates improvements in its response timeframes and as such no further order has been made for complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a leak, damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Arrange for its Chief Executive to apologise to the resident for the failings identified within this report.
    2. Pay the resident a total of £1,600 compensation. This is made up of:
      1. £1,500 for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by its handling of a leak, damp and mould. This amount includes the £270 it previously offered, if this has not been paid already.
      2. £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failings.
    3. Explain in writing to the resident, and this Service:
      1. Its planned approach for the roof replacement. It should explain the current stage of works (if this is the case) and set out a clear timeframe for when it will take action. Its response should give consideration to any impact the lack of roof replacement may have had on the internal condition of the property.
      2. Its planned approach for the damp issues in the property identified by its February 2024 damp inspection. If it decides the issues are not structural, it should provide a suitably qualified persons opinion to support this and explain why.