London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (202327538)

Decision
Case ID	202327538
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	17 October 2025

Background

1. The resident lives in a 3-bedroom 2nd floor flat with his wife and children. There are vulnerabilities, including mobility issues, recorded for the resident’s family. The landlord provides a caretaking service for maintaining a clean and tidy environment in the communal areas. The resident pays a service charge for this service.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about:
   1. the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about the standard of cleaning and maintenance in communal parts of the block of flats.
   2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found that:
   1. there was maladministration in relation to the resident’s reports about the standard of cleaning and maintenance in the communal parts of the block of flats.
   2. there was service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports about the standard of cleaning and maintenance in communal parts of the block of flats

4. The landlord was aware of the resident’s concerns. The landlord did undertake cleaning inspections but there was evidence of repeated failed inspections relating to the staircase and lights. After it was informed by the resident of his concerns and the effects on his family, the landlord failed to ensure adequate cleaning in line with its cleaning schedule in a timely manner.

The handling of the associated complaint

5. The landlord’s complaint handling was delayed and was not in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration, or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order   The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 14 November 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £250 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the poor standard of cleaning and maintenance. This includes an additional payment of £75.00 for the service failure in handling the resident’s complaint. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	14 November 2025
3	Works order The landlord must undertake an inspection to identify any outstanding cleaning and maintenance work. It must arrange for this work to be carried out. The landlord must provide evidence that the works have been completed by the due date.	14 November 2025
4	Works order The landlord must provide to the resident a timetable of cleaning works and a schedule of inspection dates. The landlord must give a commitment to the resident that oversight of the cleaning schedule will be robust. The landlord must provide evidence that this has been provided to the resident by the due date.	14 November 2025

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
Provide refresher training for all complaints handling staff to ensure all staff understand the time limits for recording, acknowledging, and responding to complaints in line with The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
26 March 2024	The resident raised their complaint to the landlord. The resident said the daily cleaning duties of the caretaking team was not being carried out. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 27 March 2024.
11 April 2024	The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said: it was sorry to the resident the Contract Monitoring Officer (CMO) had done an inspection in April 2024 the scores of inspections had improved since January 2024, but the CMO had asked for further improvements the CMO carried out inspections every 6 weeks and an action plan created if issues were found when the next inspection was to take place
11 April 2024 – 16 May 2024	The resident emails further questions to the landlord about the cleaning routine. The landlord responds to these questions.
22 May 2024	The resident escalated the complaint to stage 2 as he remained unhappy. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 6 August 2024.
12 August 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It stated: the landlord received the stage 2 complaint on 6 August 2024 the most recent inspection did not meet standards, and an action plan was in place to closely monitor the caretaking apologised about the standard of cleanliness and the impact on the resident the CMO was arranging a deep clean of the specialist flooring
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident came to this Service as they were unhappy with the caretaking services which the resident states have not been provided, and the issues were ongoing.

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

Complaint	The resident’s reports about the standard of cleaning and maintenance in communal parts of the block of flats
Finding	Maladministration

6. The resident had previous reports about the cleaning and maintenance of communal areas as early as June 2023. The landlord was aware of the family’s vulnerabilities, including mobility issues.
7. The resident’s tenancy agreement states where the landlord provides a caretaking service, it will be responsible for maintaining a clean and tidy environment.
8. The cleaning schedule for the resident’s block of flats includes:
   1. a daily task to walk stairs and landings and clear bulk
   2. a weekly task of sweeping and washing staircases and balconies
9. In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord told the resident that cleaning standards were monitored through inspections every six weeks. If issues were found, an action plan would be set, giving caretakers six weeks to improve before the next inspection.
10. The stage 1 complaint response also addressed some concerns and outlined inspection procedures. But it didn’t directly resolve the resident’s specific concerns, such as the “grimy” stairs.
11. The landlord also said there was a quarterly inspection which also included representatives from the repairs team, fire compliance, the CMO and the caretaking manager. The landlord said the resident was welcome and encouraged to attend.
12. This Service has seen inspection results which shows that on these 2 occasions:
    1. the stairwells and staircase failed
    2. the lights on floor 2 failed
13. It is not clear if the tasks were carried out as described above, if landlord inspections were carried out and any action plans acted upon by the caretaking team.
14. The resident raised his concerns to the landlord. Whilst there is limited evidence of the landlord undertaking inspections it had not:
    1. shown it has learned from the stage 1 complaint
    2. shown it has considered the vulnerabilities of the resident’s family
    3. considered the distress and inconvenience to the resident through any offer of compensation to put it right
    4. shown adequate oversight of the published cleaning schedule
15. This was unreasonable in the circumstances because the landlord knew of its responsibilities under the tenancy agreement. It knew of the problems with the scheduled cleaning and the failures at the time of inspections.  It also knew of the impact on the resident and his family.

Complaint	The handling of the associated complaint
Finding	Service failure

16. In March 2024, the resident requested to escalate his complaint to stage 2. On 11 April 2024, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response, explaining why it could not consider the complaint at stage 2 due to the time from the initial complaint response in June 2023. Treating it as stage 1 was reasonable.
17. The resident continued to raise cleaning questions in April and May 2024. Despite his dissatisfaction, the landlord missed an opportunity to proactively escalate the complaint, which could have supported a better landlord-resident relationship.
18. On 22 May 2024, the resident told the landlord the issues were not resolved.
19. On 6 August 2024 the landlord acknowledged the stage 2 escalation – 54 working days later and only after this Service intervened. This delay was unreasonable because this was not in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
20. On 12 August 2024, the landlord issued its stage 2 response, apologised, and acknowledged the impact. It shared inspection outcomes and next steps, though no dates were set for further cleaning.
21. But the landlord, in its stage 2 response, missed the opportunity to tell the resident how it had learnt from the complaint in line with the dispute resolution principles. These are:
    1. be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes
    2. put things right
    3. learn from outcomes

Learning

General Learning

22. The landlord should ensure that robust processes are in place for overseeing contractors responsible for cleaning. This should include effective monitoring of contractor performance and timely follow-up on any issues that are reported.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

23. The stage 2 complaint response said the landlord received the escalation on 6 August. But the landlord’s records show it received the escalation request on 22 May 2024. This was not actioned until after intervention from this Service.
24. The landlord’s records also contain a reference to delay in responding to the resident’s emails as they were received into an inactive case file.
25. A landlord should have systems in place to maintain accurate records, responses, investigations, and communications. Good record keeping is vital to evidence the action a landlord has taken. A failure to keep adequate records indicated that the landlord’s processes are not operating effectively.

Communication

26. Whilst there is evidence of communication between the landlord and the resident; there are opportunities for the landlord to be more proactive when receiving communication from a resident to prevent issues being missed or escalated through the complaint procedure.