London Borough of Ealing (202319198)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202319198

London Borough of Ealing

29 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

1. The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of damp and mould, and the associated repairs.
2. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local council. The tenancy started in February 1997. The property is a 3-bedroom mid-terraced house, and the resident lives alone.
4. The landlord’s evidence does not indicate that it was aware of any vulnerabilities at the start of the tenancy. However, it became aware of the resident’s respiratory health condition as the complaint progressed. The resident’s daughter acts as her representative.
5. On 6 June 2023, the resident submitted a stage 1 complaint to the landlord. She said in April 2023, the landlord completed repair works, but they were unsuccessful because the damp and mould returned. She wanted a permanent solution to the mould and damp. Further, the damp and mould had damaged her personal belongings.
6. On 12 June 2023, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It apologised and scheduled an inspection. But said that it did not uphold the resident’s complaint.
7. On 9 August 2023, the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process. She said:

a.     On 15 June 2023, the landlord told her that the property needed significant repair works.

b.     In August 2023, she declined a mould wash because she was told the property needed drying-out first. The landlord also told her that a roof and mould specialist would arrange another inspection.

c.      She repeatedly tried to contact the repairs team to schedule the required inspections and subsequent works.

d.     Many of the windows in the property were damaged and did not close.

e.     She was concerned regarding her respiratory illness because of the prolonged exposure to the damp and mould.

8. On 10 October 2023, the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It said the damp and mould lead had carried out an investigation. The landlord:

a.     Confirmed that an inspection was completed in June 2021. At that time although mould was observed, it was recorded as minor and a mould solution applied.

b.     Acknowledged that no further action was taken because the surveyor was on long term leave.

c.      Advised that a further inspection was completed in June 2023.

d.     Confirmed that the resident refused access for a mould wash. This was due to a mis-understanding and poor communication.

e.     Advised that an action plan had been completed and the following works would be scheduled:

1. Within 3 days, a specialist will be in contact to book an appointment to treat the damp and mould.
2. The resident’s health was the priority.
3. A contractor will schedule appointments to treat the cause of the damp and mould, identified from the inspection in June 2023.
4. A complaints officer will contact once works are completed to ensure the works carried out are satisfactory.

f.        Apologised for the delay and for the inconvenience caused. Confirmed that it upheld the complaint.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

9. It is evident that the resident reported leaks, mould, and damp conditions since 2020. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlords at the time the events happened. This is because with the passage of time, evidence may be unavailable. This makes it difficult for a thorough investigation to be carried out and for informed decisions to be made. Taking this into account and the availability and reliability of evidence, the investigation will focus on the information evidenced to us from 12 months prior to the stage 1 complaint (6 June 2023) up to the landlord’s stage 2 response (9 August 2023).
10. We consider complaints reasonable if they go through the landlord’s complaints process and reach us within 12 months. In this case, although the landlord dated the stage 2 response October 2023, the resident says she did not receive it until February 2025. We accept that this delay was not the landlord’s fault. Therefore, it is reasonable to investigate the matter up to the end of the internal complaints process in October 2023.
11. The resident has informed us of further repair issues, however these are outside the scope of this investigation. This is because they have occurred in a period significantly after the period of investigation. However, the resident has the option to complete the landlord’s complaint process with regards to these concerns and refer to this service if she remains dissatisfied with its response.
12. The resident said that the damp and mould within the property had an effect on her health. While we do not dispute the resident’s position, we are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be better dealt with as a personal injury insurance claim or through the courts. The resident may wish to consider taking independent legal advice if she wishes to pursue these concerns.
13. The resident has also referred to damaged items caused by the damp and mould. While we can acknowledge the upset that may be caused by damaged items and personal belongings, it is not our role to consider if the damage was due to any failing by the landlord or its contractors or if it is liable to pay the resident compensation as this is a matter for the parties’ insurers.
14. What we can consider is whether the landlord responded fairly and appropriately to the resident’s requests for repairs, the landlord’s communication about the matter, and whether this was timely, clear, and accurate. Where we find a failing, we may award compensation or order an apology.

Damp and mould

15. The landlord has a statutory duty under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property. It is obliged to complete repairs within a reasonable time.
16. Under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, the landlord must ensure the property is fit for human habitation throughout the tenancy. It 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. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under this legislation.
17. The landlord’s repairs policy says that routine repairs will be carried out in 28 working days and planned works within 60 days. It also prioritises repairs for vulnerable tenants.
18. The landlord’s damp, mould and condensation policy dated July 2023, outlines its commitments to residents affected by damp and mould. It is the landlord’s responsibility to keep housing safe and free from health hazards. And when dealing with damp and mould, it will:

a.     Take prompt action and investigate permanent solutions to solve problems.

b.     Maintain a register, which is reported to a task force every 2-weeks.

c.      Use diagnostic tools to triage cases. Within 5-working days, high risk cases will be inspected by a specialist contractor.

d.     Complete a risk assessment. This will include any health and wellbeing concerns, alongside the type and extent of any damp found.

e.     Proactively communicate with residents more susceptible to damp and mould in their homes because of fuel poverty, type of property lived in or vulnerability.

19. On 27 May 2021, the resident’s housing officer reported that damp and mould was found throughout the property. In June 2021, an inspection was completed and a mould wash applied. This was a reasonable first step to take, as it was required to identify the cause of the damp and mould before it could carry out the relevant repairs.
20. The landlord said that a report was sent to the surveyor, who subsequently went on long-term leave. It is evident that the surveyor’s absence left the landlord unaware what repairs remained outstanding. However, the landlord should have robust systems in place to appropriately record this information. The failure to create and record information accurately has resulted in the landlord not taking appropriate or timely action, which had a detrimental impact on the resident.
21. It is evident that the resident chased the outcome of the inspection several times between October 2021 and August 2022. There is no evidence that the resident received a response until 22 August 2022. On this date, the landlord’s employee escalated the resident’s concerns because she was distressed regarding the severe damp and said she had chased the works more than 29 times. The landlord’s lack of communication with the resident worsened the situation, delayed the resolution of the substantive issue, and significantly contributed to the impact on the resident.
22. On 24 August 2022, the landlord’s records show that the resident’s concerns regarding the damp and mould were passed to a different surveyor. Given the time which had passed since the first inspection, the landlord suggested it should reinspect the property to understand the full extent of the disrepair. It was appropriate for the landlord to arrange to re-inspect the property.
23. However, following the inspection, it is noted that the roof repairs were not raised until 14 October 2022. And repairs for water damage not until March 2023. The landlord has provided no explanation for this delay. In the absence of any explanation, the significant delay to the repairs were both inappropriate and unreasonable and not in line with its repairs policy.
24. On 6 June 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and said the works completed had not resolved the issue. On 15 June 2023, the landlord completed a further inspection. It was appropriate of the landlord to raise a further inspection to understand the resident’s concerns. This was completed in a timely manner.
25. On 26 June 2023, the resident chased the outcome of the inspection. She said slugs were in the property, walls were crumbling, and windows unsafe. There is no evidence that the resident received a response or that the landlord communicated further with her regarding her concerns. This was a further missed opportunity for the landlord to engage with the resident, understand her frustrations, and work towards a resolution.
26. Following the June 2023 inspection, the landlord said that the resident declined a mould wash. This was due to a misunderstanding based on the assumption that this was the only action the landlord was taking. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to have communicated with the resident regarding the failed repair to understand her reason for refusal. In this case, improved communication would have assisted in dealing with the confusion and addressed any concerns in a timely manner.
27. On 26 June and 9 August 2023, the resident reported damaged windows. On 3 November 2023, the landlord placed an order to supply and fit 5 UPVC windows. The landlord took approximately 95 working days to acknowledge the complaint and order the windows and a further 50 working days for the windows to be replaced. This was not in keeping with the landlord’s targets within its repair guide. The landlord acted inappropriately.
28. Within the resident’s stage 2 complaint, she provided information regarding the damage caused by damp and mould to her belongings. The landlord failed to acknowledge this within its complaint response and did not provide any advice and guidance to support the resident to make a claim on its liability insurance. It was unreasonable of the landlord not to provide this information. Further, this should have been provided at the earliest opportunity (within the stage 2 complaint response).
29. It is evident the landlord was informed that the property conditions had an adverse effect on the resident, who has suffered with a respiratory illness. There is no evidence that the landlord acknowledged or addressed this concern in line with its statement on supporting vulnerable residents. Nor did it risk assess the situation or seek to prioritise repairs in line with its policy. This was inappropriate and affected the landlord and tenant relationship.
30. Overall, the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint was unreasonable and inappropriate. At the time of the stage 2 complaint, the resident had lived in a property with ongoing damp and mould for over 2 years. This would likely cause a significant level of distress, which was worsened by the landlord’s repeated failure to take appropriate remedial action.
31. Further, despite implementing a damp and mould policy in July 2023, it did not consider applying the principles in this case, and it failed to consider the vulnerabilities of the household.
32. The failings with regards to the landlord’s handling of damp and mould and the associated repairs amount to maladministration. Our remedies guidance suggests that compensation is appropriate where there has been a significant impact on the resident. And where the landlord has failed to acknowledge its failings and made no attempt to put things right.
33. Having considered all the circumstances of the case, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord should pay the resident a total of £1,000. This can be broken down as £700 compensation for the distress and inconvenience of the resident continuing to live with outstanding damp and mould and £300 for the time and trouble caused to the resident by the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould.

Complaint Handling

34. The landlord’s complaints policy outlines a 2 stage formal complaints process. Complaints are acknowledged within 5 working days, with stage 1 complaints responded to within 10 working days. And stage 2 complaints responded to within 20 working days.
35. Effective dispute resolution requires a process designed to resolve complaints. Where something has gone wrong a landlord must acknowledge this and set out the actions it has already taken, or intends to take, to put things right.
36. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response lacked clarity and substance in addressing the resident’s complaint and was a missed opportunity to resolve the complaint at the earliest stage. Specifically, the landlord:

a.     Did not provide any reason for the decision it reached.

b.     Failed to explain why delays to repairs had occurred, or what it intended to do to resolve them, or consider the resident’s frustration or distress.

c.      Failed to offer any redress for the error, or impact on the resident. It also failed to identify any learning or actions it would take to prevent a similar situation happening again.

37. While the landlord’s stage 2 response covered the resident’s complaint in more detail, its stage 2 complaint response was provided 45 working days after the complaint. This was not appropriate, as it was not consistent with its policy and no explanation was provided.

28.   Having considered all the circumstances, we have found maladministration in the landlords complaint handling. The landlord should pay the resident £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for failures which have adversely affected the resident and where the landlord has failed to address the detriment to the resident.

Determination

29. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould, and the associated repairs.

30. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

31. Within 4 weeks, the landlord must provide evidence that it has:

a.     Provided a written apology to the resident for the failures identified in this report.

b.     Paid the resident a total of £1,250, which comprises of:

c.      £1,000 for distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble caused by the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould.

d.     £250 for distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble caused by the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

e.     Compensation payments should be paid directly to the resident and not credited to the resident’s rent or service charge account.

Recommendations

32. The landlord ensures that the vulnerabilities of the household are accurately updated.
33. The landlord should review the Ombudsman’s Spotlight report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) which contains best practice guidance and recommendations.