Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council (202306765)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202306765

Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council

11 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:
1. the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property’s living room.
2. repairs to the resident’s boiler condensate pipe, bathroom flooring, external gutters and downpipe.
3. the resident’s reports of a bee infestation at the property.
The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord at the property, which is a 2-bedroom house. The landlord has told us it has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident. The resident has told us that he has mental health conditions.
On 24 April 2019, a job was raised for a leak from a boiler condensate pipe. On 9 March 2020, works were raised to repair the living room ceiling as a result of the leak. The resident reported black marks on the walls of the living room in June 2021. On 10 January 2023, the landlord raised an urgent repair for a leaking condensate pipe, which was marked as completed on 2 March 2023. On 7 November 2023, the resident made a formal complaint to the landlord. He said that he had not been able to use his sitting room for many years due to delays in the landlord completing repairs. He believed the landlord was trying to evict him from the property because he had complained.
The landlord provided an initial complaint response to the complaint on 26 January 2024. It said:
1. It had booked in planned works for 4 to 10 April 2024 on the recommendation of the inspector. The internal works would be to repair the bathroom floor, and complete damp works to the affected corner of the living room. The landlord would also carry out external works to the guttering.
2. Works were first highlighted in July 2018, and the kitchen ceiling renewal was completed in March 2020. The landlord was under pressure at that time due to COVID-19, but it apologised that works were not completed sooner.
3. It considered the resident’s living room habitable, although it was aware that the ongoing plastering works were causing the residents stress.
4. In response to the complaint about the presence of bees, the landlord advised that the resident contact his housing officer and the council’s pest control team.
5. The resident would not be facing eviction due to his complaint and the timing of any notices was likely coincidental. His housing officer could provide further details of any action for breach of tenancy.
6. The landlord offered the resident £150 compensation to recognise the delay in completing the repairs and the stress and inconvenience he had experienced.
The resident escalated his complaint on 26 January 2024. He said that when the inspector attended, repairs were already in progress, and the repair was to the living room ceiling not the kitchen. The inspector said that the property was habitable after some works had been done but the resident had been living with a hole in his ceiling and 2 leaks for many years. He said COVID-19 was not the cause of the delay in completing the repairs, which predated the pandemic. The resident had already reported the bees and was told to contact a beekeeper. He believed it was the landlord’s responsibility to deal with this. He did not think £150 was adequate compensation for the lengthy delay in completing all the necessary works.
The landlord provided its final complaint response on 22 February 2024. It apologised for the errors in the stage 1 response. It outlined the works to be completed between 4 and 10 April 2024, which were to complete damp works to plaster in the living room, renew the flooring and install an extractor fan in the bathroom, clear the gutters at the property, and extend the external downpipe. The landlord considered it safe for the resident to remain in the property while the works were completed, although it understood that the resident felt unable to use his living room. The landlord provided advice about the nesting habits of bees and said its maintenance team would only remove the bees if they were preventing the completion of works. The landlord increased its offer of compensation to £500.
When the resident referred his complaint to us, he said that he wanted the landlord to complete all remaining works, to resolve the bee infestation, and to adequately compensate him for the length of time that the works had been outstanding, and the stress and inconvenience caused.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

In the complaint responses and their correspondence with us, the landlord and the resident have referred to issues dating back to 2018. We expect residents to raise a formal complaint with the landlord within 12 months of the issues complained about arising. In this report, we have referred to past events for context, but our investigation has focused on what the landlord did to put things right following the formal complaint of 7 November 2023, as the resident did not raise a formal complaint until that time. We have taken into account the overall length of time that the issues were outstanding when considering whether the action taken by the landlord was appropriate and whether the level of redress it offered during the formal complaints process was reasonable.

Damp in the living room

The landlord’s Repairs Policy from the time of the complaint says that it will respond to a report of damp and mould and provide a thorough clean of the affected areas within 3 working days. It will arrange an inspection to assess the type of damp, potential causes, and whether any works are required. If necessary, it will install extractor fans to improve airflow and reduce moisture.
The landlord has also provided a copy of a report, dated 6 April 2023, titled, ‘Ensuring Cross Tenure Damp & Mould Compliance’. This says that once it has diagnosed the cause of damp and mould, any recommended works will be placed on a 40 working day priority order.
The landlord has told us that the issues with damp and mould were first identified at an inspection, although it did not say which inspection it was referring to. The landlord’s records show that on 4 December 2019, it conducted a desk-based damp and mould inspection and requested that an officer attend to complete a condensation inspection. It is not clear whether this took place. The resident next reported black marks on an area of the living room walls in 2020. The landlord attended on 6 March 2020, but the operative recorded that no mould was visible, as the resident had cleaned it away. On 14 June 2021, the resident reported that mould was still present in the area and the landlord raised a request for an inspection. There is no record that this was completed.
The landlord has provided a summary of the resident’s complaint, which does not refer to damp and mould. When it received the formal complaint, it raised an order for a damp and mould assessment, so it is reasonable to assume that it was made aware of ongoing issues. As we have not seen evidence showing that the damp and mould had been investigated and resolved prior to the date of the complaint, we would expect the landlord to take prompt action, in line with its Repairs Policy.
An inspection was completed on 15 November 2023, which was 6 working days after the formal complaint was received. This was 3 working days more than the 3 working day target for attending to apply a mould wash. It is not known whether visible damp and mould was present at the time, and we do not consider that this short delay adversely affected the resident in the circumstances.
The landlord has told us that a damp specialist attended and produced a scope of works on 5 December 2023. We would therefore expect the landlord to complete the required works within 40 working days, in line with its repairs policy. The works were completed on 17 April 2024. This was 92 working days after the inspection. There was therefore a delay of 52 working days in completing works to address the damp and mould. The landlord has not provided evidence of the reason for the delay and so we are unable to conclude that it was reasonable in the circumstances.
In its final complaint response of 22 February 2024, the landlord offered the resident £500 “for the delay in getting the damp works booked in and because the repairs are not yet complete”. We consider that this was an appropriate sum to offer to recognise its failure to adequately investigate the issue and to complete the repairs required to resolve the issue to the date of the final complaint response. This sum takes into account that the adverse effect on the resident was increased because the issue had persisted for many years and there was no evidence that the landlord had taken sufficient action to resolve it prior to the formal complaint. The Ombudsman believes an additional sum of £100 is appropriate, to recognise the further period of delay from 22 February 2024 to 17 April 2024.
There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould. The landlord is ordered to pay the resident £600 compensation. This amount is in line with our remedies guidance, which indicates that such sums are appropriate where a resident has been adversely affected by maladministration.
This order for compensation made in this report replaces the £500 offered at the final stage of the landlord’s complaints process. Any compensation already paid to the resident in respect of this complaint may be deducted from the total amount of compensation ordered in this report.

Repairs to the bathroom, external gutters and downpipe

In line with the resident’s tenancy conditions, the landlord is responsible for maintaining the structure and exterior of the property, including the structure of internal floors and external rainwater pipes. The landlord’s Repairs Policy from the time of the complaint says that it will complete routing repairs within 20 working days, although it will attend and contain a leaking pipe within 3 working days. Planned repairs will be completed within 90 working days.
The resident has told us that the bathroom floor was damaged because the landlord failed to effectively repair a leaking boiler condensate pipe over a period of 5 years. He says that the works it carried out were inappropriate and ineffective. He said it had taken the landlord 5 years to complete an effective repair to the condensate pipe, resulting in an ongoing leak that had caused damage to the bathroom floor.
According to the information provided to us, the landlord first raised a repair to address a leaking boiler condensate pipe on 24 April 2019. Its records show that works were completed on 1 May 2019, and on 22 May 2019 and 9 March 2020 remedial work was completed to the living room ceiling, which was affected by the leak. The next recorded report of a leaking bathroom condensate pipe was on 10 January 2023 and on 12 January 2023 the landlord raised a job to install a pump and repair pipework. This job was marked as complete on 2 March 2023. A further repair was raised on 1 September 2023 to reroute the condensate pipe, and this work was completed on 28 September 2023. A job was raised on 28 November 2023 to clear a blocked waste pipe in the bathroom, which the resident says was the result of the landlord rerouting the condensate pipe into the bathroom waste.
The records that the landlord has provided to our investigation do not adequately capture the events in relation to the boiler condensate pipe and this has prevented us from effectively investigating this aspect of the complaint. The landlord is required to keep sufficiently detailed records of all repair’s appointments and communications with the resident and third parties. In this case, it has been difficult to establish what works were identified or completed, and on what dates, as the notes contained in the landlord’s repairs records are minimal and we have not been provided with copies of email communications between the parties.
The information provided suggests that the landlord did complete some works in 2019 and that the issue was next reported on 10 January 2023. In the absence of evidence showing that the resident reported an ongoing issue during this period, it is reasonable to conclude that the landlord believed the issue had been resolved and that no further action was required.
In total, it took the landlord over 15 months to complete an effective repair, from 10 January 2023 when the issue was next reported, until 17 April 2024 when the flooring works were completed. The length of the delay is unexplained by the evidence provided. Works raised on 12 January 2023 were completed on 2 March 2023, which was outside of the landlord’s 20 working day timescale for routine repairs. No explanation is provided for the delay, and it is not known whether the leak was contained during this time. The landlord’s records suggest a post-inspection was booked in for 6 March 2023, but it is not clear whether this went ahead or what the outcome was. More works to the condensate pipe were raised on 1 September 2023 and this job was marked as complete on 28 September 2023. There were then further issues in November 2023 leading to the bath waste becoming blocked.
Where a landlord has carried out works to address an issue and it has reoccurred, we would usually conclude that the landlord was entitled to rely on the advice of its operatives to determine what works were appropriate. However, in the absence of sufficiently detailed records, we are unable to conclude that the landlord acted appropriately, or that the delay was reasonable in the circumstances. We therefore consider that there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of these repairs.
Repairs to the property’s guttering and downpipe were identified at the inspection on 5 December 2023. These works were booked in and completed with the rest of the planned works on 17 April 2024. This was only 2 working days outside of the landlord’s ordinary planned works target of 90 working days and we do not consider that this adversely affected the resident in the circumstances.
While the £500 offered at stage 2 was appropriate to recognise the effect of the delay in addressing the damp and mould, an additional sum of compensation is appropriate to recognise the effect of the delay in completing the other repairs. Taking into account that the landlord’s records show some works were completed, and that there were large gaps where the resident did not report further issues, the landlord is ordered to pay the resident £300 to recognise the stress and inconvenience he experienced as a result of its failure to carry out an effective repair within a reasonable time. This amount is in line with the recommendations in our remedies guidance, which says such sums are appropriate where the landlord’s failings have had an adverse effect on the resident.
The landlord is also ordered to review its repairs record keeping policies and procedures, to ensure that repairs information is captured on its systems in sufficient detail, and that all events and communications are recorded and easily accessible.

Bee infestation

The resident’s tenancy terms and conditions do not say who is responsible for dealing with pests, although they say residents must reports pests within the property. The landlord’s Repairs Policy says that tenants must report the presence of pests within their property to the council. The Repairs Policy says that a pest control officer will attend, and the repairs and maintenance service will then liaise with the pest control team to ensure any recommendations are carried out. The policy states that the repairs and maintenance service will only initiate contact with pest control if pests are preventing works from going ahead. It then says, “we will arrange for the pests to be cleared at no cost to you. The policy states, “some pest control issues are the responsibility of the tenant” and notes that some pests, including bees, may be protected, delaying repair timescales.
We asked the landlord to provide copies of any correspondence with the resident about the presence of bees. It has referred us to the complaint correspondence. The landlord is again reminded of the need to preserve its records of communications with residents, as its failure to provide this information has affected our ability to investigate.
The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response advised the resident to contact the council’s pest control team, which was in line with the requirements of its Repairs Policy. The resident confirmed in his complaint escalation that he had already reported the bees, and we have not seen any evidence that the repairs team then liaised with pest control as required under its policy. The final response that the repairs team would only look to remove the bees if it prevented works being completed does not align with the landlord’s policy. There may have been additional repairs that could have been completed to prevent bees entering the property, but the landlord failed to assess this.
The landlord has not explained to the resident why it believes he is responsible for the cost of removing the bees. As the tenancy agreement appears to be silent on responsibilities for managing pests, the landlord should write to the resident to confirm on what basis it provided this advice. We would expect a landlord to proactively assist a resident to manage pests within a property and the onus should not be placed on the resident to resolve it.
The landlord has not provided sufficient evidence to our investigation to demonstrate that it took reasonable and appropriate action in response to the resident’s reports of bees, in line with its policies and procedures. There was maladministration in its response to this aspect of the complaint and the landlord is ordered to contact the resident to confirm the basis of its respective obligations and to discuss what assistance it can provide to resolve this issue.
The landlord is also ordered to pay the resident £150 to recognise the time and trouble he went to in order to pursue this aspect of his complaint. This amount is in line with the recommendations made in our remedies guidance, which says such sums are appropriate where maladministration has adversely affected a resident.

Complaints handling

At the time of the resident’s complaint, the landlord operated a 3-stage complaints process, which included an informal resolution stage, a formal investigation stage, and a review. The landlord acknowledged complaints and complaint escalations within 5 working days. At investigation and review stages, it responded within 20 working days. The landlord has since amended its policy to comply with the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code), and it now operates a 2-stage process according to the timescales required by the Code.
The landlord received the resident’s complaint on 7 November 2023. There is no evidence that it acknowledged the complaint, and it did not provide a response until 26 January 2024, which was 55 working days later. The response did not acknowledge or apologise for the delay, and no compensation was offered. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response contained several inaccuracies, which it apologised for at stage 2. This no doubt increased the resident’s frustration and further damaged the landlord tenant relationship.
The resident escalated his complaint on 26 January 2024, and the landlord responded at the review stage on 22 February 2024, which was within its 20-working day timescale.
The resident complained that his living room was uninhabitable as a result of the damp and mould, the landlord’s failure to carry out the repairs, and the presence of bees. The landlord’s complaint responses confirmed it had concluded that the property was habitable. As there is no evidence that loss of use of the room was raised with the landlord prior to the formal complaint, the landlord was only able to assess this retrospectively. In the circumstances, and in the absence of further evidence to the contrary, we consider that its conclusions were reasonable. However, we acknowledge the stress and inconvenience that the resident experienced as a result of the unresolved issues.
There was service failure in the landlord’s complaints handling. It failed to follow its Complaints Policy to provide timely and accurate responses, or to keep the resident updated about any delays. The landlord is ordered to apologise to the resident and to pay £100 compensation to him. This amount is in line with the recommendations of our remedies guidance, which says such sums are appropriate where service failure has adversely affected a resident.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould at the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs to the property’s boiler condensate pipe and bathroom flooring.
In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of a bee infestation at the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaints handling.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
2. Pay the resident £1,150 compensation, made up of:
  1. £600 to recognise the adverse effect of the delays in addressing damp and mould within the property. Any compensation already paid to the resident may be deducted from this sum.
  2. £300 compensation to recognise the adverse effect of the delay in completing repairs to the property’s boiler condensate pipe and bathroom flooring.
  3. £150 compensation to recognise the adverse effect of the landlord’s failure to adequately respond to his reports of bees.
  4. £100 compensation to recognise the adverse effect of its poor handling of his complaint.
3. Contact the resident to confirm the basis of its respective obligations in relation to the control of bees and discuss what support the landlord can offer to resolve this issue.
4. Review its record keeping policies and procedures to ensure that sufficiently detailed repairs records are maintained, and that correspondence with residents and third parties is retained and easily accessible within the landlord’s systems.