London Borough of Hackney (202522014)

Decision
Case ID	202522014
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London Borough of Hackney
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	29 January 2026

Background

The resident complained about the quality of repair work carried out by the landlord following her reports of damp and mould. The landlord is aware the resident has health issues.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of damp and mould and associated repair work.
2. Complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of damp and mould and associated repair work.
2. Complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

Reports of damp and mould and associated repair work

The landlord completed repair work outside of its policy timescales. It failed to acknowledge this in its complaint responses.

Complaint handling

There were delays in the landlord’s handling of the complaint which it did not acknowledge, apologise, or offer redress for.

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 27 February 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £225 made up as follows: £125 offered in its complaint responses. This can be deducted if already paid an additional £50 for time, trouble, distress and inconvenience for the further identified failings in its handling of the reports of damp and mould and associated repair work £50 for inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures	No later than 27 February 2026

Order

What the landlord must do

Due date

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

27 February 2026

Compensation order

The landlord must pay the resident £225 made up as follows:

£125 offered in its complaint responses. This can be deducted if already paid
an additional £50 for time, trouble, distress and inconvenience for the further identified failings in its handling of the reports of damp and mould and associated repair work
£50 for inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures

No later than

27 February 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We recommend the landlord contact the resident to clarify its position on repair work to the kitchen sink if it has not already done so.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
July 2024	The resident told the landlord damp and mould was present throughout the property. It completed repair work at the time to address the issue.
15 May 2025	The resident told the landlord damp and mould had returned in the kitchen and bathroom.
16 June 2025	The resident complained to the landlord about its response to her reports of damp and mould. She said it had not completed quality repair work and this had resulted in the issue re-occurring. She said she was concerned the damp and mould was affecting her health.
7 July 2025	The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response. It said it had inspected the damp and mould and raised repair work in line with its policy. It apologised for the distress caused by the issue returning and awarded £75 compensation comprising: £50 for distress and inconvenience £25 due to the resident’s vulnerabilities
7 July 2025	The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2. She was unhappy with the landlord’s compensation offer. She said it was inadequate given the severity of the issue and its longstanding nature.
11 August 2025	The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response. It said it had addressed the damp and mould within appropriate timescales and in line with its policy. It apologised for inconvenience caused by missed repair appointments it had highlighted as part of its investigation. It offered a further £50 compensation. This brought its total compensation offer to £125.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s final response and brought the complaint to us. She wanted the landlord to identify the root cause of the damp and increase its compensation offer.

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	Reports of damp and mould and associated repair work
Finding	Service failure

What we did not investigate

The resident said she had been reporting issues with damp and mould since 2021 which she wanted the landlord to consider in its response. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlord when problems happen or within a reasonable time, usually within 12 months. Therefore, we have focused our investigation on the 12-month period leading up to the complaint in June 2025 and the related responses.
The resident raised concerns about the affect of the damp and mould on her health. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a claim for any illness caused via the courts. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any illness and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can, however, decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.

What we did investigate

The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould (published October 2021) recommends that landlords should ensure that their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue. Landlords should consider appropriate timescales for their responses to reflect the urgency of the case and set these out clearly for residents to manage their expectations. They should also ensure that they clearly and regularly communicate with residents on actions taken to resolve damp and mould.
The landlord’s initial response to the resident’s report of damp and mould on 9 July 2024 was timely. It inspected the property within its published timescales. It completed repair work including mould washes and plastering works, within the timescales set out in its repairs guide.
We have not seen evidence of any further reports of damp and mould until 15 May 2025. The resident told the landlord that the issue had returned in the kitchen and bathroom. While we acknowledge the recurrence of damp was likely frustrating for the resident, issues with damp and mould are often complex and can take time to identify the root cause. The landlord subsequently inspected the issue within 5 working days, in line with its published timescales.
That said, the evidence shows there was a delay in the landlord raising the required repair work identified in its inspection. It did so on 16 June 2025, over 3 weeks later. It subsequently completed repair work to extractor fans 4 working days outside of its 21 working day timescale. Mould washes and a leak from the kitchen sink were responded to 15 working days outside of this timescale.
In the landlord’s stage 1 response it apologised for the inconvenience caused by the re-occurrence of the damp and mould. It summarised the repair work it had arranged and said it found no fault in its handling of this. It offered £75 compensation with consideration of the resident’s vulnerabilities for distress and inconvenience.
The landlord’s compensation offer was in line with the range of awards set out in our remedies guidance for when there have been delays such as those present in this case. However, it did not acknowledge that delays in raising the repairs after inspection caused responses to fall outside its policy timescales.
The landlord took proportionate action as part of its stage 2 complaint investigation including confirming with the resident that it had adequately completed repair work to address the damp and mould. The resident confirmed that although it had responded to the repair to her kitchen sink, it had not resolved the leak. She told the landlord it had completed all other repair work raised in response to the damp and mould.
The landlord’s final response said that although it had addressed the damp and mould in line with its policy, it had identified occurrences where it missed 2 repair appointments without explanation. Due to this it awarded a further £50 compensation and apologised for the inconvenience. This brought its total compensation offer to £125. It said it was investigating if it needed to carry out further work to the kitchen sink leak as it was noted the resident had fitted her own sink. It said it would provide a further update to the resident once it had clarified this.
In summary the landlord’s overall response to the reports of damp and mould was proportionate. Its compensation offer was in line with our remedies guidance for the failings identified. However, as it failed to acknowledge its delayed repair responses through its complaint process, we have ordered it to apologise and pay additional compensation.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints process. It acknowledges complaints within 5 working days. It responds to stage 1 and 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days respectively. This is compliant with the Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
There is no evidence that the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint at stage 1. This was not in line with its policy.
The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response 13 working days outside of its published timescales. It did not acknowledge its delay, apologise or offer redress to the resident in its subsequent response. We have made an order for it to apologise and pay compensation.
In both of its complaint responses the landlord explained that it was only able to investigate issues that had occurred in the 12 months leading up to the resident’s complaint. This was reasonable and in line with its policy and the Code.London Borough of Hackney

Learning

The landlord should ensure that it monitors repairs in line with its repairs policy timescales and effectively communicates any delays.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

The landlord should consider reviewing its record keeping arrangements for complaints and repairs to ensure that these are robust. This is to ensure that accurate and accessible records are kept and collated, both of actions completed and of resident contact. It may wish to refer to the Ombudsman’s spotlight report on knowledge and information management.

Communication

The landlord failed to communicate delays throughout the complaint process with the resident. It is important that it effectively manages residents’ expectations about how it intends to respond to concerns and that it keeps them informed of any delays and how it intends to mitigate the impact of these.