London Borough of Hackney (202427913)

A blue and grey text

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202427913

London Borough of Hackney

24 July 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 handling of the resident’s:
1. Window repairs.
2. Banister repair.
3. Reports of damp and mould.
We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident has a secure tenancy with the landlord which began in October 2010. The property is a 3-bedroom maisonette which is situated on the second and third floors. The resident lives with her 4 children, aged between 15 and 26. The resident has informed this Service that she has a mental health condition, one of her children has asthma and another has bronchitis. The landlord is a local authority and has a long-term lease of the building. It has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident or the household members.
In January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord regarding the windows at the property. The landlord referred the matter to its contractor and asked it to renew 2 bedroom windows because they were rotten, damaged, and dangerous. The contractor said it was unable to contact the resident on the numbers provided by the landlord. On 1 and 6 March 2024 the resident reported she could not close one of her bedroom windows. She said her son slept in this bedroom, that he had bronchitis and the cold was affecting this. She asked the landlord to inspect all the windows because they were rotten. The landlord attended in March 2024 and April 2024. It managed to close the bedroom window but had to screw it shut to make it safe. On both occasions the contractor noted the windows were rotten and needed renewing.
On 19 March 2024 the resident complained that she had been reporting repairs to the windows for almost 13 years. She said 2 out of 5 windows in the property were unusable and the landlord had screwed them shut because they were unsafe. She reported that black mould had formed due to lack of ventilation in the property. She said the landlord had measured the windows in January 2024 for renewal. She said she had tried to obtain an update on this on several occasions but she was still waiting to hear if the landlord would complete the works.
The resident asked the landlord to replace the windows and treat the black mould. She also asked it to compensate her for the redecoration of the property, which she was having to do more frequently to paint over the mould. In addition to this, when the resident spoke to the landlord about her complaint she raised additional repairs which were outstanding. This included the upstairs banister which she said had detached from the staircase.
On 16 May 2024 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. It said the resident had first reported the windows in March 2017. However, its complaint policy only allowed it to investigate issues which had occurred in the past year. In relation to the repairs raised in January 2023, it said it had rejected a quote to replace the windows as it did not consider it to be value for money. The landlord explained it had attempted to conduct an inspection on 22 April 2024 but was unable to access the affected bedrooms. It said the surveyor had informed the resident that their could only complete remedial repairs to the windows and could not replace them. This was because it could only replace windows under its planned asset management (PAM) programme when it occurred in the resident’s area. It added it had launched its new asset management strategy in January 2020, which was on a 7-year inspection cycle and the resident’s property was on year 4 of the cycle. It said was in the process of procuring new contractors and, when the time came, it would contact the resident.
The landlord said it had arranged for a carpenter to attend on 21 May 2024 and complete any remedial works until the PAM programme began. It said it upheld the resident’s complaint on the basis that it had rejected the estimate for the works in January 2023. It said it should have found a way forward to prevent the delays. In relation to the banister repair, the landlord said it would inspect this at the same time as the damp and mould inspection, which it had arranged for 21 May 2024. It apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused and offered £1,030 in compensation. £1,000 for the failures in dealing with the window repairs and £30 for the delay in sending its stage 1 complaint response.
On 7 August 2024 the resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint. She said that she still had 2 bedroom windows screwed shut. She also said the landlord had boarded one of the bedroom windows approximately 3 years previously when the glass had smashed. She told the landlord she had been advised not to use one of the bedrooms because of the damp and mould and the impact this could have on health. She referred to her daughter being asthmatic and how the presence of the damp was putting her health at risk.
On 12 September 2024 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It outlined the repairs it had raised and attended, some of which it said had been no access. It outlined its attempt to complete remedial repairs to the windows. It confirmed it had completed a damp and mould inspection on 9 August 2024 and set out its findings and the recommendations made to address this. It accepted failures for the time taken to resolve the reported repairs and offered an apology. It said it had arranged another appointment to inspect the windows on 16 October 2024, following which it would complete the repairs. It offered compensation of £2,176.19, which it broke down as follows:
1. £1,200 – for the distress and inconvenience caused
2. £320 – for the avoidable delays
3. £30 – for the delay in providing its stage 1 complaint response
4. £626.19 – rent refund to reflect the lack of amenity in the bedroom affected by the inability to fully use the window
The resident has told us the windows in the property were an issue from the start of her tenancy. She said the property was very cold in the winter due to the boarded window. She added it was also very hot in the summer because of the windows that were screwed shut.
She told us that having to deal with these issues over a long period of time had affected her mental health and referred to having a mental health breakdown 4 years ago. In relation to the additional repairs raised as part of the resident’s complaint, the resident confirmed the banister repair was outstanding. As an outcome she said she would like the landlord to replace the 2 bedroom windows so that she can open them safely and ventilate the property and for it to repair the banister. She said she would also like the landlord to increase its offer of compensation because she did not feel it correctly acknowledged the distress and inconvenience the situation had on her and her family by having to live in these circumstances for such a long period of time.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

The landlord does not dispute the issues concerning the resident’s windows have been ongoing for a number of years. The landlord acknowledged within its stage 1 complaint response that it had a repair record for the windows dating back to March 2017. However, the landlord’s complaint policy says that it will not accept a complaint which was not reported to it within 12 months, without good reason. For example, if the resident was in hospital. Therefore the landlord started its investigation from January 2023 which was approximately 12 months before the resident raised her complaint.
Further to this, while the resident has informed us that she has complained to the landlord about these issues previously, she has told us this was the first time she had progressed her complaint to this stage.
This report will therefore focus on events from when the resident reported the windows in January 2023 onwards and whether the landlord’s actions were fair and reasonable. We may describe events from earlier than January 2023 where they provide important context.
The resident has said that the landlord’s handling of the repairs impacted upon the health and well-being of her and her family. While the Ombudsman has no reason to disbelieve the resident, we cannot make firm conclusions on the cause of the resident’s health conditions, determine liability for them, or award damages for these. This is because we do not have the authority or expertise to do so in the way a court or insurer might. The resident may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if he considers that their health was affected by any action or failure by the landlord.
While we cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the family experienced because of any service failure by the landlord.

Record keeping

The landlord failed to provide detailed records of repairs, inspection reports, and correspondence with the resident and contractors, which made it hard for us to piece together the timeline of events and understand what happened.
Our Spotlight Report on Repair Complaints emphasises the importance of landlords maintaining clear, accurate, and accessible records. Additionally, our report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) highlights that without accurate information recording, landlords may fail to act promptly, miss opportunities to recognise issues, and suffer from poor communication and resolutions.
The landlord’s poor record-keeping has made it difficult to manage repairs and address the main issue in the complaint. As a result, the complaints process failed to resolve the situation, causing distress and inconvenience for the resident. This was a failure by the landlord and contributed to the other failures identified in this report.

Window repairs

We have not seen the long-term lease which the landlord holds for the resident’s building. However, there is no dispute as to the landlord’s repair responsibilities in relation to the building as outlined in section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
The landlord conducts periodic planned major works to meet obligations for components such as windows. The resident has informed us that the landlord informed her in 2012 and 2018 that it would be replacing the windows, but this did not happen. Then in March 2024 the resident informed a contractor that she had an appointment in April 2024 for renewing her windows, again this did not happen. The Ombudsman cannot say from the evidence if this was the case, and it is not in our authority or expertise to determine when the landlord should complete cyclical works. Our main consideration is whether, in the timeframe of the complaint, the landlord managed the reports about the windows correctly.
In January 2023 the resident contacted the landlord regarding her windows. It is not clear from the repair records exactly what the resident reported at this time. Further to this, we have asked the landlord to clarify when the resident reported the smashed window and what action it took in relation to this. The landlord has failed to provide any further information in relation to the smashed window, which the resident said occurred approximately 4 years ago. Therefore we do not know when what action the landlord took, or what it told the resident about replacement of the glass. However, we can see the landlord referred the resident’s report in January 2023 to its contractor and asked it to replace 2 bedroom windows, which shows the landlord knew about both the windows at this time. The repair notes state the windows were rotten, damaged, and dangerous.
There is then a gap of over 12 months until the landlord chased the contractor for an update on this repair, which it did following contact from the resident in March 2024. The contractor informed the landlord it had attempted to contact the resident on the telephone numbers provided but these had not been in use. Due to lack of adequate records we cannot see when the contractor called the resident or if the landlord or its contractor made other attempts to contact the resident to progress the repair, such as a letter or email, within the period of delay. Considering the landlord was aware of the dangerous condition of the windows it should have made further attempts to contact the resident to progress the repair in 2023. There is no evidence that it did which was a failure.
In her initial complaint the resident referred to the contractor measuring the windows and sending a quote to the landlord in January 2024. She said she had chased the landlord on several occasions for an update but the landlord had not confirmed to her whether it had accepted the quote or not. In its stage 1 complaint response the landlord said it had rejected the quote because it did not consider it to be value for money. While it was reasonable of the landlord to ensure value for money with its repair service, it should have updated the resident in relation to its decision making. It did not do this, which left the resident not knowing what was happening. This was a failure. It should also have considered using another contractor to deliver the repair. There is no evidence that it did this which was another failure.
At the beginning of March 2024 the resident contacted the landlord on 2 occasions regarding her windows. On 1 March 2024 she asked the landlord to inspect the windows again because they were rotten and reported that she could not close a bedroom window. The landlord arranged an inspection for 3 April 2024. However, it should have also logged a repair for the window. The landlord’s repair guide says it considers repairs which cause a serious inconvenience to the household as an emergency for which it will attend within 24 hours. In this case the resident had explained she could not close the bedroom window and it was during the winter months. It was therefore likely to have caused a serious inconvenience to the household due to the colder weather. The landlord failed to recognise this which meant the resident had to report the issue again on 6 March 2024. She explained her son slept in this bedroom and the cold was affecting his bronchitis. Following this, the landlord logged an emergency repair and attended on 7 March 2024.
The repair notes state the contractor managed to close the window but had to screw it shut to make it safe and a new window was needed. The landlord inspected the windows on 3 April 2024. The repair notes state the bathroom, bathroom toilet, and bedroom windows needed replacing because they were rotten.
Following the resident’s complaint the landlord arranged for its surveyor to inspect the windows on 22 April 2024. The landlord’s records show it tried to arrange the appointment with the resident over the telephone but was unable to speak with her. It left a voicemail that the surveyor would be attending on 22 April 2024 and for the resident to call back if the appointment was not convenient. On arrival at the property the resident told the surveyor that she was not aware of the visit and she could not allow the surveyor into the affected bedrooms because household members were asleep in them. The surveyor asked the resident to send photographs of the affected windows. The surveyor informed the resident that the landlord was only able to complete holding repairs until the PAM programme of window replacement occurred on the resident’s estate.
Landlords need to make sure their homes are safe, warm, and free from hazards. When a resident reports a risk such as windows that cannot be opened or closed, the landlord should quickly inspect the property to check for hazards. They must determine if the home is safe and fit to live in. Ignoring hazards can lead to serious consequences for everyone involved.
It was reasonable of the landlord to attempt an inspection on 22 April 2024. However, considering the resident reported the landlord had screwed 2 bedroom windows shut and she could not open them, the landlord should have arranged to inspect the property again so that it could assess the risks to the resident and her household. Whilst we can see the complaint team asked the surveyor to attend again, this did not happen.
The landlord’s surveyor discussed the windows with the PAM team and asked if it would expedite the timeframe for the window renewals on the resident’s estate. The PAM team confirmed the resident’s block was on year 4 of its capital works programme, which it launched in 2020. However, it was still in the process of procuring contractors and therefore the landlord would not consider the resident’s property for window renewal until 2030. If the landlord wished to replace any windows outside the PAM programme it would need approval from a senior manager.
The landlord explained in its stage 1 complaint response that due to the expected timescales in it delivering the PAM programme, it had arranged another inspection of the windows on 21 May 2024 to see if it could complete any remedial repairs. The repair records show the appointment went ahead and again the landlord noted the windows were unrepairable.
Following the resident’s escalation the landlord arranged for a manager to attend on 8 August 2024 to see if there was anything else it could do. While we do not know if this visit went ahead, we have seen an internal email dated 10 September 2024 which states a senior manager had approved replacement of the 2 bedroom windows.. The landlord confirmed in its stage 2 complaint response that the contractor would attend on 16 October 2024 to inspect the windows and provide a quote for the required work.
The records indicate this appointment did not go ahead due to issues with the contractor. In November 2024 the landlord reassigned the job to another contractor. The records show the contractor attended around January 2025 and submitted a quote to the landlord. The landlord rejected the quote in May 2025 and again in July 2025 because the contractor had quoted for UPVC windows. The resident’s property was in a conservation area and the windows needed to be like for like, timber frames. The window replacement remains outstanding at the date of this report.
In summary, we know the landlord screwed one of the bedroom windows shut in March 2023. The resident said it had screwed another bedroom window shut years earlier and it had also boarded this window, following accidental damage by the resident. It is our opinion that both windows would have affected the ventilation in the rooms, which is likely to have contributed to the damp and mould in the property. While we do not know exactly when the landlord boarded the second window, we do know it was aware 2 bedroom windows were rotten, dangerous and needed replacing from at least January 2023.
Although the landlord approved the replacement of the windows in September 2024 we understand they have not replaced the affected windows up to the date of this report. Given the significant amount of time the disrepair went unresolved, the significant hazards posed to the resident and other household members during this period, the Ombudsman finds severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s window repairs.

Bannister repair

On 20 March 2024 the landlord telephoned the resident to discuss her complaint. During this call the resident raised additional repairs which she said were outstanding. This included the banister rail which she said had detached from the wall when she first moved into the property. The resident told the landlord it had previously assessed the banister and informed her it needed replacing. She said it was a health and safety issue which required immediate attention.
Due to lack of adequate records we have been unable to establish if the landlord was aware of this repair earlier than March 2024. However, it was appropriate that the landlord included this issue in the resident’s complaint and agreed to inspect the banister, which it said it would do at the same time as the damp and mould inspection.
As outlined below the landlord cancelled the first damp and mould inspection which it had arranged for 2 May 2024. The landlord spoke to the resident on 14 May 2024 about her complaint when the resident told it the banister repair was outstanding. The landlord said it would raise a ticket to get the banister looked at. There is no evidence that the landlord raised a repair for the banister and no reference to the banister in its subsequent damp and mould inspection on 9 August 2024.
The landlord’s repair guide says it considers a loose or detached banister as an urgent repair, which it will attend within 5 working days. The landlord should have logged the banister as a separate repair when the resident reported it in March 2024. Had it done so this would have meant the landlord could track the repair and ensure it completed it within its repair timeframe. There is no evidence that it did this and we understand the repair is still outstanding. We have therefore made a finding of maladministration due to the failure to respond to the repair within its repair timescales and that the repair remains outstanding 16 months later. We have made an order the landlord complete the repair within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Reports of damp and mould

Landlords need to make sure their homes are safe, warm, and free from hazards such as from damp and mould. When a resident reports a risk, the landlord should quickly inspect the property to check for hazards. It must determine if the home is safe and fit to live in. Ignoring hazards can lead to serious consequences for everyone involved.
On 19 March 2024 the resident complained to the landlord that black mould had formed in her property. She said the property was extremely cold in the winter months and difficult to keep heat in, and very hot in the summer months. She said the extreme temperatures and lack of ventilation, due to the issues with her bedroom windows, had caused damp and mould to form in the affected rooms.
We have not seen the landlord’s Damp and Mould Policy which was in place at the time of the resident’s complaint or know if there was one. However the landlord has assessed itself against the recommendations made in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould dated October 2021. This assessment refers to a damp and mould action plan made in December 2022 which is available on the landlord’s website. We have therefore referred to the action plan and assessment in this report. The action plan says the landlord will inspect reports of damp and mould within 5 days. The assessment says it will risk assess new reports of damp and mould to take account of the severity, proportion of property affected and the household occupancy. This would include any risk factors such as age and health of the residents.
We can see the landlord arranged to inspect the property for damp and mould on 2 May 2024, which it then cancelled. The evidence indicates this was because there was confusion between teams as to the reason for the inspection. As outlined above, the surveyor had attended on 22 April 2024 to inspect the windows for repair and had cancelled the damp and mould inspection because it thought the landlord had raised the window inspection again.
The landlord has separate teams who deal with responsive repairs, planned works and, damp and mould. This is a common approach but landlords must ensure that teams work together to ensure it routes repairs and inspections to the correct teams to ensure it meets its repair obligations. In this case, the landlord was required to complete 2 inspections, one for the window repairs and the other for the damp and mould. The landlord failed to inspect the property for damp and mould within its 5-day timeframe which was a failure. It also failed to assess the risk at this time. Had it done so it would have identified there were vulnerable household members and considered if there was anything it needed to do to mitigate the impact on them.
The landlord called the resident on 16 May 2024 and arranged to complete the damp and mould inspection on 18 May 2024. The landlord attended on this date but the resident was out. The repair notes show that the landlord telephoned the resident whilst it was on site, which was consistent with its repair guide, but the resident did not answer. The landlord’s repair guide states that where it is unable to contact the resident it will leave a card saying what time it visited and it is the resident’s responsibility to rearrange the appointment. While we cannot say that the landlord was wrong in expecting the resident to rearrange the appointment, because this is what its policy says, we have not seen any evidence that the landlord left a card on this occasion. Had it done so, this would have prompted the resident to contact the landlord to rearrange the appointment. This was a failure which contributed to the overall delay.
Following receipt of the stage 1 complaint response the resident contacted the landlord on 5 August 2024 and expressed her disappointment at the landlord’s lack of action in relation to the damp and mould. She said the mould was unsightly and posed a significant health risk, especially to her daughter who was asthmatic and slept in one of the affected bedrooms.
The landlord rearranged the damp and mould inspection for 9 August 2024. The inspection report shows the landlord observed mould in the walls, ceiling and window soffits of all 3 bedrooms, bathroom, and toilet. It also observed a water stain to the ceiling in bedroom 3 due to a leak. The landlord arranged the identified works to address the damp and mould in the property.
Having seen the landlord’s damp and mould inspection report from 9 August 2024, it did not record any health issues which it needed to consider. This is especially concerning because the landlord was clearly on notice at this time that at least 2 household members had health conditions which damp and mould in the property could aggravate. This was a failure.
In its stage 2 complaint response the landlord said it had logged the damp and mould works and made an appointment for a pre-inspection on 16 October 2024. However, this appointment did not go ahead due to contractor availability. The landlord instructed another contractor in November 2024 and it arranged to start the works on 6 January 2025. The landlord rearranged the appointment because it was not convenient for the resident. The landlord’s records indicate it completed the internal damp and mould works on 31 January 2025.
We have considered the mitigating factors surrounding the resident’s lack of availability to provide access and the issues the landlord faced with its contractor. However, this does not absolve the landlord of its responsibility to take proactive measures to resolve the damp and mould issue which remained outstanding for 10 months. This delay exceeds what could be excused by the resident’s availability.
In summary, we have identified maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould for the following reasons:
1. It failed to complete an inspection within its 5-day timeframe.
2. It failed to complete a risk assessment which would have identified the household vulnerabilities.
3. It unreasonably delayed in completing the damp and mould works.
We have ordered the landlord to compensate the resident for failing to resolve the damp and mould that affected her living conditions and well-being within a timely manner. We have considered that the landlord has said it experienced difficulties arranging appointments, but this does not negate the landlord’s responsibilities.

Compensation

In summary, the landlord:
1. Failed to repair or replace the resident’s bedroom windows within a timely manner.
2. Failed to consider any risks to the household in relation to the window repairs.
3. Failed to log repairs in line with its repair policy.
4. Failed to repair the resident’s banister.
5. Failed to inspect the reports of damp and mould within its 5-day timeframe.
6. Failed to assess the risk associated with the damp and mould, specifically around the individual circumstances of the household.
7. Delayed in completing the damp and mould works.
8. Failed to manage communications with the resident about the progress and timescales associated with the repairs which resulted in the resident having to chase the landlord for updates.
When there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, the Ombudsman will consider whether the redress offered by the landlord (apology, repairs and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, the Ombudsman considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
We also recognise that some of our residents’ circumstances mean that they are more affected by landlords’ actions or inactions than others. This might be due to their particular circumstances, or as a result of a vulnerability. Consideration of any aggravating factors (such as a health condition of a member of the household) may justify an increased award to reflect the specific impact on the resident.
The landlord acted fairly by it apologising for the inconvenience caused to the resident due to the delays in completing the repairs and the damp and mould works.
The landlord did not demonstrate any learning from this complaint. We have therefore made an order that it complete a full review of this case to identify what learning it can take from it.
The landlord showed its attempt to put things right by arranging inspections of the windows and the damp and mould, assessing the windows to see if there were any remedial works it could complete, completing the damp and mould works, and by offering the resident compensation of £2,146.19.
Having considered the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, which is available online, a fairer level of compensation would be £3,626.19. This appropriately recognises the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures in this case. We have broken this down as follows:
1. £2,400 (£80 per month for the 30 month delay in the window replacement)
2. £400 for the damp and mould
3. £200 for the banister repair
4. £626.19 rent refund previously awarded by the landlord
This sum also reflects our remedies guidance which says that such a sum would be payable where there has been a significant impact on the household. It also reflects the vulnerabilities of the household which meant the delays to repairs and window replacements and the landlord’s handling of it would have had a more severe effect on them compared to other residents in the same position without their vulnerabilities.
The Ombudsman’s special investigation report in May 2025 into the landlord found it responsible for a series of significant systemic failings impacting residents including oversight of its damp and mould cases, its handling of KIM, and complaint handling. We made recommendations to the landlord as part of the report. As the events of the current complaint took place before and during the time of our special investigation, no orders or recommendations have been made in addition to those made in the special investigation report.

Complaint handling

The landlord operates a 2-stage complaint process. At stage 1, the landlord will acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days and will provide its response within 10 working days of being acknowledged. At stage 2, the landlord will acknowledge escalation of the complaint within 5 working days and provide its response within 20 working days of being acknowledged.
The resident made her initial complaint on 19 March 2024 which the landlord acknowledged the following day. The landlord contacted the resident on 10 April 2024 to inform her that it was unable to meet its 10-day deadline due to a high volume of workload and said it would provide its response by 24 April 2024. While it was right that the landlord informed the resident that it needed more time to respond to her complaint, it should have done so sooner.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 16 May 2024, which was 16 working days after its new timeframe. This was a failure because it was not in line with paragraph 6.4 of the Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
The landlord appropriately incorporated the resident’s additional repairs to the banister and the front door within its stage 1 complaint response. However, it then failed to track the repairs or refer to them in its stage 2 complaint response. This was despite it speaking to the resident on 14 May 2024 and her informing the landlord that the banister repair was outstanding.
The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 7 August 2024. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 14 August 2024, which was one day outside its 5-day timeframe and was therefore a failure.
The landlord’s failure to respond to the resident’s initial complaint in line with its complaint’s procedure meant it missed an opportunity to address her concerns sooner and left the resident waiting for a resolution to her concerns. It also prevented her from progressing her complaint through the landlord’s complaint process. The landlord should have conducted a timely and appropriate investigation and response to the resident’s concerns.
Due to its delay at stage 1, delay in acknowledging the complaint at stage 2, and the failure to respond to all points of the resident’s complaint there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. This caused the resident additional time and trouble.
The landlord acknowledged the delay at stage 1 but failed to acknowledge the failure at stage 2. It offered £30 compensation. Having considered the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, which is available online, a fairer level of compensation would be £100. This appropriately recognises the distress and inconvenience caused by the failures in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the window repairs.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the banister repair.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the damp and mould.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

The landlord must, within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
1. Provide the resident with a full written apology for the errors identified in this report. The apology must have come from a manager.
2. pay the resident compensation of £3,726.19 which is comprised of:
  1. £2,400 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the window repairs.
  2. £200 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the banister repair.
  3. £400 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould.
  4. £626.19 rent refund previously awarded by the landlord.
  5. £100 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.
3. This award replaces any offer made to date by the landlord through its internal complaints process. The landlord is entitled to offset against this sum any payments already made to the resident. All payments must be paid directly to the resident and not credited to the rent account unless otherwise agreed by the resident.
4. Complete the repair to the banister.
5. Complete a full review of this case to identify what went wrong and what learning it can take from it. The landlord must share a copy of the review with this Service and the resident.
Within 12 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must replace the 2 affected bedroom windows.
The landlord must provide the Ombudsman with evidence of how it has complied with the above orders within 12 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

It is recommended the landlord update its systems to reflect the resident’s household’s vulnerabilities, subject to the resident agreeing.