London Borough of Lambeth (202500713)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202500713

London Borough of Lambeth

29 September 2025

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and deciding 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 sent 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 handling of repairs to address leaks, asbestos and damp and mould in the property.
2. We have investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

3. The resident lives in a 1 bedroom, first-floor flat in housing block the landlord owns and manages. It let the property to her under a secure tenancy agreement in 2021.
4. The resident told the landlord that a leak affected the property between November 2023 and April 2024. The landlord’s handling of this repair was the subject of her complaint.
5. The resident raised a stage 1 complaint with the landlord on 18 April 2024. It said she was waiting for an update about outstanding repairs following an asbestos survey. She said she had mushrooms growing from walls, and the landlord had not updated her for over a month.
6. The landlord sent it stage 1 response on 4 October 2024. It said it inspected the property, and it had to do an asbestos survey before it could complete any repairs. It said its contractor had been unable to contact the resident despite leaving voicemails for her. It recognised its repair delays may have caused distress and inconvenience and it partially upheld the complaint.
7. The resident sent a stage 2 complaint to the landlord on 28 October 2024. She said the damp in the property was rapidly spreading out of control and affecting her health. She said the landlord had been using an incorrect telephone number which she was concerned about, and it should update its records.
8. The landlord sent its final response on 2 December 2024. It apologised for its delays completing an asbestos survey and repairing leaks, damp, and mould. It recognised this was outside its repair policy which it raised with its contractor to improve its services. It said it found asbestos in the water tank above the front door when it inspected the property. It said its contractor would resolve the matter as soon as possible. It said its communication should have been better, it apologised for distress and inconvenience and offered the resident £200 compensation.
9. The resident asked us to investigate the complaint. She said to put matters right the landlord should complete the repairs and resolve the issues, apologise, provide compensation, and review its policies and procedures.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

10. The resident said this situation had a detrimental impact on her health and wellbeing. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. We can consider the overall impact of the situation on the resident, but we cannot decide causation or liability for personal injury like a court can. If the resident wishes to pursue a claim she should get independent legal advice.

Leak, asbestos, damp, and mould repairs

11. The landlord’s repairs policy and section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 says the landlord must keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. It must keep the installations for the supply of water in working order (including water tanks and pipes) and it must complete repairs within a reasonable time.
12. The resident reported a leak into the property on 20 November 2023 and said it closed its previous works order without resolving the issues. There is no evidence the landlord responded to the resident’s report before a plumber visited the property on 24 January 2024. This was unreasonable under the circumstances.
13. The plumber found asbestos which he reported to the landlord and told the resident it would arrange further works and contact her. This was reasonable under the circumstances as some asbestos types can cause harmful effects if disturbed. The landlord investigated the asbestos on 2 February 2024 and produced certification of asbestos fibres on 24 February 2024. It was appropriate for the landlord to investigate the asbestos which it did within 28 working days.
14. The landlord did not update the resident on its plans to complete the outstanding repairs following its asbestos survey. This caused her avoidable time and trouble chasing the landlord on 13 and 14 February 2024. The landlord discussed the repairs with the resident on 2 March 2024 but instead of agreeing the works it confirmed it would chase its contractor for an update.
15. The landlord inspected the property again on 15 March 2024 and found boxed-in pipes causing condensation and damp. It said it suspected asbestos and recommended an asbestos survey before it could repair the leak. It is unclear whether the landlord overlooked its housing database records that confirmed it had previously investigated the asbestos, or if it needed another survey.
16. Landlords need to make sure their homes are safe, warm, and free from hazards. They must decide if homes are safe and fit to live in. Damp and mould growth and asbestos are potential hazards, and the landlord had to consider whether the identified issues amounted to a hazard and required remedying. It completed an asbestos certificate which was positive. But its repairs and maintenance policy says it would prioritise removing and treating mould within 7 days. There is no evidence it did so when it found damp on 15 March 2024. It also did not create an action plan to limit any potential hazards when the resident complained about mushrooms growing from her walls in April 2024. This was not in keeping with its repairs policy which says it will diagnose the issue within 28 days agree and write an action plan with residents to resolve the damp.
17. The landlord took no further action to address the leaks, damp, mould, and asbestos in the property before its contractor tried to arrange an appointment with the resident in September 2024. This was 108 working days after she raised the repairs in her stage 1 complaint which was unreasonable.
18. The stage 1 complaint listed an incorrect phone number, so the contractor’s contact attempts failed. The landlord explained the error in its stage 1 complaint response on 4 October 2024. However, this failing and the associated repair delay were avoidable given the landlord held alternative records for the resident.
19. The landlord took no further action to address the leaks, damp, mould, and asbestos in the property before it sent its stage 2 complaint response on 2 December 2024.
20. When a landlord has acknowledged its failings, we will consider whether the redress it offered put things right and resolved the complaint satisfactorily. In deciding this we consider whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes.
21. The landlord recognised its poor repair handling and apologised for its delays which was positive. It said it found asbestos in the water tank above the front door and its contractor would resolve the issues as soon as possible which was appropriate. It also offered the resident £200 compensation for any distress and inconvenience its repair handling caused. Offering compensation was appropriate in the circumstances and in keeping with its compensation policy. This says it would do so where unjustified delays or a failure to follow policies or published standards caused an adverse effect to residents.
22. However, the resident reported a leak into her kitchen in November 2023. It failed to repair the leak, damp, and mould in the property. The landlord identified the damp but failed to take action to remedy this despite the resident saying it rapidly spread out of control and affected her health. The landlord’s identification and handling of asbestos and its mismanagement of contact information also delayed the repairs unreasonably. Its failure to communicate with the resident, consider the impact the delayed repairs had on her, and its failure to assess the risks of asbestos, damp, and mould was inappropriate. Additionally, the landlord’s compensation offer was low considering the extent of its delays and failings over the preceding year. Taking all matters into account, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to address leaks, asbestos, damp, and mould in the property.
23. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident a further £600 compensation. This is in keeping with our remedies guidance where we have found maladministration which had a detrimental effect that the landlord has not proportionately addressed.
24. The landlord raised a further works order on 1 April 2025, over a year later, to complete another asbestos test for it to progress with the leak repairs. It also spoke to the resident on 11 August 2025 when she said it had not completed any repairs to address leaks, damp, and mould. We have therefore also ordered the landlord to inspect the property, assess if it requires any further repairs, and apologise in writing for its handling of repairs in the property.
25. We previously ordered the landlord to carry out a review of its practices, processes, and procedures following our investigation under Paragraph 49 of the Scheme. This order addressed the landlord’s handling of (repairs, knowledge and information, complaints, and compensation). The landlord provided evidence to show compliance with our earlier order. Therefore, we have not made any orders as part of this case, which would duplicate those already made to landlord. The landlord should consider whether there are any other issues arising from this later case that require further action.

The resident’s complaint

26. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaints as the landlord did not:
    1. Acknowledge the stage 1 complaint in keeping with paragraph 6.2 of our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). This says a landlord should acknowledge, define, and log a complaint within 5 days of receipt.
    2. Send its response to the resident’s complaint of 18 April 2024 until 4 October 2024 which was 109 working days later than the 10 working day complaint policy target timescale.
    3. Fully address the resident’s complaint such as by referring to the mushrooms growing from her walls. This was not in keeping with paragraph 6.7 of the Code which says landlords must address all points raised in a stage 1 complaint.
    4. Acknowledge the stage 2 complaint within 5 days of receipt in keeping with paragraph 6.11 of the Code.
    5. Send its response to the resident’s stage 2 complaint of 28 October 2024 until 2 December 2024. This was 5 working days later than the Code and the landlord’s 20 working day complaint policy target timescale.
    6. Confirm it updated it records in response to the resident’s concerns about its use of an incorrect telephone number. This was not in keeping with paragraph 6.18 of the Code which says landlords must address all points raised in the stage 2 complaint.
    7. Say if it had upheld the stage 2 complaint in line with paragraph 6.19 of the Code. This says landlords must confirm the decision on the complaint, and any reasons for the decisions made.
27. We encourage landlords to use complaints to find issues and make positive changes to service delivery. The landlord provided a sincere acknowledgement for its repair delays in its final complaint response. However, it did not clearly explain the cause of the delays and it did not provide sufficient reassurance it would resolve the repairs. It failed to explain if its contractor’s delays were temporary or how it would find a solution beyond asking why it missed the repairs policy target. It also missed the opportunity to explain how it could work with the resident to improve the situation. This was unreasonable and further evidence of poor complaint handling.
28. When a landlord is at fault it needs to put things right by acknowledging and apologising for its mistakes, explaining why things went wrong, and what it will do to prevent the same mistakes. The landlord did not consider its handling of the resident’s complaint when reviewing the services it provided. Therefore, it missed the opportunity to consider the impact of its poor complaint handling and recognise its failings caused the resident inconvenience, time, and trouble.
29. The complaint handling failings caused the resident time, trouble, and inconvenience. We have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £250 compensation. This is in keeping with our remedies guidance for matters where we have found maladministration that the landlord has not proportionately addressed. We have also asked the landlord to write to the resident to apologise for its poor complaint handling.

Determination (decision)

30. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to address leaks, asbestos, damp, and mould in the property.
31. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

32. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Apologise in writing to the resident for its handling of repairs and for its poor complaint handling.
    2. Pay the resident the £200 compensation offered in its stage 2 response if it has not already.
    3. Pay the resident an added £850 in compensation made up as follows:
       1. £600 for time, trouble, and inconvenience the landlord’s poor repairs handling may have caused to the resident.
       2. £250 for any time, trouble, and inconvenience the landlord’s poor complaint handling may have caused the resident.
    4. Inspect the resident’s property to assess if it needs any works. If it does, the landlord should send the resident and us details of the works, together with a timetable for it to carry out the works within 2 weeks of inspecting the property.
33. The landlord should pay the compensation direct to the resident and not offset this against any arrears the resident may owe the landlord, where they exist.