Haringey London Borough Council (202308169)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202308169

Haringey London Borough Council

22 September 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s:
1. Handling of the resident’s reports of damp, mould, and the associated property repairs.
2. Response to the resident’s reports of a faulty kitchen window.
3. Response to the resident’s request for it to replace household appliances.
4. Complaint handling.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of a 1-bedroom second-floor flat. The tenancy started in 2005. The landlord, a local council, has no health vulnerabilities recorded for the resident. However, the resident tells us he has received support for mental health conditions.
The resident states he has experienced recurring leaks from the property above him since the start of his tenancy. In May 2018 his property flooded due to the same issue. He sought help from his local councillor in November 2018 as he considered the landlord had not completed remedial repairs to his home.
On 14 June 2023 the resident complained to the landlord. He said recurring water leaks from the flat above had damaged his bathroom flooring and caused damp and mould in his property. He said the landlord had not fully resolved matters since 2018. The resident also said his washing machine and fridge had broken due to the landlord’s actions when doing repairs. He said he expected the landlord to replace these appliances. He also expected the landlord to trace and fix the leak, provide a schedule of remedial works, and fix a faulty kitchen window.
The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 11 August 2023. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint. It said it was satisfied it had responded to the resident’s reports of leaks within its repair timescales. It also said it had attempted to inspect the resident’s flooring on 18 April 2023 but he had not answered to allow access. It rearranged the appointment for 6 December 2023. The landlord also said it had received no previous reports of a faulty kitchen window but arranged an inspection for 5 September 2023. The landlord explained its position regarding insurance claims and gave him details of how to make a claim.
On or around 10 October 2023 the resident escalated his complaint. He said repairs remained unresolved and the landlord did not attend his property on 25 September 2023 as he had expected it to. The resident said nobody had communicated any changes to him and he considered the landlord had made false promises to fix the repairs. He also said he wanted compensation for the distress caused by the landlord’s failures.
The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 7 November 2023. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint. Its response included that it had:
1. Satisfied itself that there was no active leak on 18 October 2023 and no health and safety risk to him.
2. Arranged a mould wash on 27 October 2023 due to the identified damp and mould.
3. Rearranged this appointment for 26 January 2024 as he had not given access to the property.
4. Attempted to contact him to arrange an appointment to inspect his kitchen window but he had not answered its calls.
5. Contacted his support worker to explain the reasons for the rearranged appointments.
6. Assigned his reports of damaged flooring to its contractor to arrange an inspection.
7. Identified no record of an appointment for 25 September 2023 which he said it had missed.
8. Found it challenging to balance availability and make appointments due to its requirement to visit the resident in pairs. It said its tenancy management team would review these arrangements.
The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and brought the complaint to us. He said repairs remained outstanding and the property remained damp and mouldy. He expressed concern for the effect on his health.
Between March to April 2024 the resident’s solicitor sent a letter of claim to the landlord and arranged an independent property survey. The landlord moved the resident to temporary hotel accommodation for approximately 5 months, until September 2024. The landlord’s disrepair team completed work on 10 September 2025.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident says the landlord’s handling of his repairs affected his mental health and its actions caused damage to his possessions.
We are unable to say what caused an illness or injury or prove legal liability for damaged possessions. Any detrimental effect on a resident’s health or finances requires a decision by a court or through an insurance claim. The resident may wish to seek independent legal advice if he wants to pursue a claim for damages. We will consider if the landlord responded to the resident in line with its policies and procedures.
The resident says he experienced recurring repair issues since the start of his tenancy and following the reported flood in 2018. It is essential residents raise matters with landlords within a reasonable timeframe, normally within 12 months of the matter arising. If they are unhappy with how a landlord responds, they could then progress matters to us. This did not happen and has limited the extent to which we can investigate.
The resident also expressed dissatisfaction regarding events after the landlord’s stage 2 response on 7 November 2023. We can only consider matters that have completed the landlord’s internal complaints process. In the interest of fairness, the landlord must have the opportunity to investigate and respond to the resident’s more recent concerns. The resident confirmed he has raised these matters with his solicitor to negotiate a settlement and the landlord was undertaking remedial work.
Our role is to investigate how the landlord responded to the resident’s original complaint on 14 June 2023 and its final response on 7 November 2023. It is reasonable that our investigation considers events 12 months prior to the resident’s complaint. Any reference to other events will be to provide context only.

Handling of the resident’s reports of damp, mould, and the associated property repairs

The landlord’s damp and mould policy acknowledges its duty to assess and mitigate hazards in a property under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced in the Housing Act 2004.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy and self-assessment says it adopts the Housing Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on damp and mould recommendations. This includes:
1. Adopting a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions.
2. Ensuring it can identify complex cases at an early stage.
3. Ensuring it clearly and regularly communicates with residents about actions taken or otherwise to resolve reports of damp and mould.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy states it will respond to all referrals relating to damp and mould within 5 working days.
The landlord’s repairs handbook says it will attend an ‘agreed appointment’ within 28 days. And inspect ‘planned repairs,’ which require more complex work, within 28 days and tell residents at the inspection when it will do the required work.
Evidence shows the landlord recorded no access to inspect the resident’s bathroom flooring in April 2023. It is therefore clear the landlord was aware of the resident’s repair concerns prior to his complaint in June 2023. Having raised the repair on 15 March 2023, the landlord’s attempted visit was in line with its 28-day repair time.
While the landlord has shown it left visit cards at the resident’s address, it is unclear why it did not show any attempts to rearrange the repair appointments. It is reasonable to have expected the resident to have contacted the landlord himself. However, given he had put the landlord on notice in March 2023, it has not shown any efforts to monitor or communicate with him following the failed appointments.
On 9 May 2023 the resident reported another leak into his bathroom from the property above. It is therefore unclear why the landlord did not complete this repair until 6 July 2023, 41 days later. While there is no evidence which indicates the leak was uncontainable, the evidence does not justify a delay beyond its repair response times.
Following the resident’s complaint on 14 June 2023, the landlord raised various jobs in July 2023 to improve the resident’s bathroom and property conditions. It booked these as an agreed appointment, which it should have completed in 28 days. It is therefore unclear why the landlord did not complete this work until 3 November 2023. This was not appropriate and not consistent with the landlord’s repair times.
Furthermore, having received a report of damp and mould, it is unclear why the landlord did not respond within 5 working days. This was not consistent with the landlord’s damp and mould policy. Nor did it demonstrate the landlord giving due regard to its obligations under HHSRS.
The resident says the landlord did not keep an appointment on 25 September 2023. We have been unable to find any record of this appointment. Nor any communication between either party. Therefore, we are unable to identify evidence of a failure by the landlord.
Following an inspection on 18 October 2023 the landlord did not identify any health and safety concerns at the resident’s property. It tried, unsuccessfully, to call the resident to book further repairs on 20 October 2023. And it also recorded no access for a mould wash on 30 October 2023. The landlord says it informed the resident’s support worker of these appointment difficulties, planned another inspection on 30 October 2023, and rearranged the mould wash for 26 January 2024. The landlord appropriately arranged interim work to wash and treat the resident’s property. However, the lack of access was beyond its control.
However, having identified a need for a mould wash and treatment, it is unclear why the landlord did not prioritise this sooner than 26 January 2024. We note the landlord says a visit in pairs requirement presented challenges balancing availability and appointments. We also note the landlord recorded difficulties with the resident’s behaviour towards its operatives on 30 October 2023. This may have contributed to repair planning difficulties.
The landlord had a duty to maintain the resident’s property. Its obligation to provide timely repairs remained regardless of any arrangements to manage the resident’s behaviour. We have identified no evidence the landlord communicated internally, with the resident, nor with his support worker about access or the specific behaviour difficulties at this specific time. Therefore, it has not shown that it achieved regular communication as per its damp and mould policy.
Following the landlord’s stage 2 response in November 2023, it arranged remedial repair work in the new year. We note the resident expressed dissatisfaction about this delay. We have considered the actions and delay up to the landlord’s stage 2 response. Having inspected the resident’s property in October 2023, the landlord informed him of planned work. By arranging works in advance the landlord adhered to its repairs policy to inform him when it could start more complex planned work.
Based on our findings we find service failure with the landlord’s handling of this matter. The landlord did not always show effective communication with the resident on actions it would take to remedy his concerns. It also did not manage its visit in pairs arrangements effectively to ensure timely completion of repairs. We order the landlord to pay £150 compensation. This is consistent with our remedies guide when there have been delays in getting matters resolved.

Response to the resident’s reports of a faulty kitchen window

Within the resident’s June 2023 complaint, he told the landlord he had noticed a broken kitchen window. Although there is evidence the landlord inspected and repaired the property’s windows in 2021, we have not identified anything to suggest a repair remained outstanding.
We have identified no evidence of the resident making a repair request before his complaint. Therefore, it is reasonable the landlord could only arrange a repair once the resident had told it about the fault.
The landlord’s stage 1 response informed the resident that it had no record of a repair request prior to his complaint. However, it arranged an appointment to assess his concerns on 5 September 2023. This was appropriate and within the landlord’s 28 day agreed appointment timeframe.
The evidence shows the landlord took photographs of the completed kitchen window repair on 5 September 2023. This demonstrates the landlord’s attended as promised.
Based on our finding we find no maladministration with the landlord’s handling of this matter.
That said, we note the resident raised further window concerns in 2024. This included delays to replace a window and the independent surveyor finding poor window seals during their inspection. We have therefore made a recommendation for the landlord to inspect or ensure it has taken the necessary steps to remedy these concerns.

Response to the resident’s request for it to replace household appliances

The landlord’s repairs handbook and compensation policy encourages residents to take out contents insurance against accidental damage to their possessions.
The landlord’s compensation and feedback policies state its insurance team will manage claims for damages.
In June 2023 the resident said the landlord damaged his furniture and various appliances. He expected the landlord to replace his washing machine and fridge. Evidence shows the landlord explained its position regarding insurance claims. It confirmed the resident was not insured and it provided him with the contact details for its insurance team. This was appropriate and shows the landlord acted in line with its policies and procedures.
Based on our findings, we find no maladministration. While it is unclear if the resident made a claim, the outcome of any insurance decision is not something we can determine.

Complaint handling

At the time of the resident’s complaint, the landlord operated a 2-stage complaints process. It acknowledged complaints within 5 working days and responded at stage 1 and 2 within 10 and 20 working days, respectively. We are satisfied that this policy met the expectations of the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) 1 April 2022.
The Code also says that if the landlord needs an extension to enable it to respond to the complaint fully, both parties should agree this in advance.
The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 11 August 2023. This was not appropriate and a total of 32 working days late. While there is evidence the landlord wrote to extend its response date, it promised to send a response by 12 July 2023. It did not achieve this. Nor did it demonstrate communicating the additional delay to the resident. This caused the resident time and trouble trying to progress matters.
The resident escalated his complaint on 10 October 2023. While we have been unable to identify if the landlord acknowledged his request, it did send its stage 2 response on time.
The landlord’s stage 2 response correctly informed the resident how to escalate his complaint to us if he remained dissatisfied. This was appropriate and in line with the obligations of our member landlords.
Within the resident’s complaint, he told the landlord that the condition of his property had affected his mental health. While there was a visit in pairs arrangement in place, the resident’s comments were an expression of vulnerability. It is therefore unclear why the landlord did not use its complaints process to explore the resident’s concerns sooner. It missed an opportunity to ensure the accuracy of its customer records. We recommend the landlord considers its process around recording resident vulnerabilities.
Based on our findings we find service failure with the landlord’s complaint handling. We order it to pay £50 compensation. It failed to communicate the additional delay and failed to meet the response times set by the Code.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure with the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property and the associated repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration with the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a faulty kitchen window.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration with the landlord’s response to the resident’s request for it to replace household appliances.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure with the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

We order the landlord to take the following action within 4 working weeks of the date of this report. The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence that it has complied with these orders:
1. Pay the resident a total of £200 compensation. This is made up of:
  1. £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property and the associated repairs.
  2. £50 for the time and trouble caused by the landlord’s complaint handling.
2. Provide the resident and us with a schedule for any outstanding remedial repairs following the recent disrepair work at the property.

Recommendations

We recommend the landlord:
1. Contacts the resident to ensure its health and vulnerability records accurately reflect his current circumstances.
2. Inspects the resident’s window if it has not already completed remedial repairs or replacements since the property survey in April 2024.