London Borough of Islington (202334444)

Decision
Case ID	202334444
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London Borough of Islington
Landlord type	Local Authority
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	27 February 2026

Background

1. The resident lives with her adult son who has severe eczema affected by mould, which she told the landlord about during her complaint. It inspected the property in June 2022 following the resident’s reports of damp and mould, and it completed repairs in May 2023. The resident complained in August 2023 about delays with the works and said the problems had been ongoing for 6 years. She also said one of the bedrooms had been without heating throughout this time.

 

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of:
   1. Damp and mould.
   2. Heating repair issues.
3. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

 

Our decision (determination)

4. We found:
   1. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of:
      1. Damp and mould.
      2. Heating repair issues.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

We have made an order for the landlord to put things right.

 

Summary of reasons

Damp and mould, and heating issues

5. The landlord completed the damp and mould works, and it logged the heating issue with its repairs team appropriately. The landlord recognised gaps in its repair records and offered fair compensation for the delays it identified.

Complaint handling

6. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaint within the timescales of its complaints policy or our Complaint Handling Code (the 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	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £100 for the delay in its complaint responses. It must pay this directly to the resident and provide evidence of this by the target date.	No later than 27 March 2026

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
20 June 2022	The landlord inspected the property as the resident had reported a leak, and mould to the ceilings. It found various repair needs throughout the property, mainly to damaged plasterwork.
9 and 22 May 2023	The landlord conducted a second damp and mould survey as the resident had made further reports. It returned later that month when it completed the recommended works in full.
25 August 2023	The resident complained about the time the landlord had taken to address the problem and complete the repairs. She also said the heating did not work in one of the bedrooms. The resident said both issues had been ongoing for 6 years.
29 December 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 response, in which it apologised for the delays and offered £75 in compensation. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint about the heating, as it said she had not reported this before. The resident escalated her complaint the same day as she was unhappy with the landlord’s findings and level of compensation.
30 January 2024	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It repeated its apology but recognised further delays, and it offered £2,700 in compensation for both matters.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident referred her complaint to us as she said the mould had returned, so she felt the landlord had failed to resolve the problem.

 

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	Damp and mould
Finding	Reasonable redress

 

What we have not investigated

7. The resident said she was worried about the effect of the mould on her son’s health. Since her complaint, she said her son had been hospitalised and diagnosed with a mould allergy. If the resident believes the landlord’s actions or inaction have affected his health it would be fairer, more reasonable, and more effective to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. It is best for the courts to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice. We have therefore not investigated this further.
8. The resident also said the problems had been ongoing for 6 years, however, there is no evidence that she referred any previous complaints to us. We may not consider matters which took place over 12 months before a resident complained to the landlord, so we will not look at historical issues here.
9. The resident told us the mould has returned since her complaint. We will not consider events that happened after the period of this complaint, as the landlord must have the opportunity to respond to new issues under its internal complaints procedure first.
10. This investigation will therefore consider events from the landlord’s inspection in June 2022 to its final response of 30 January 2024. However, we have instructed the landlord to decide whether it needs to take any other action at this stage, under Awaab’s law.

What we have investigated

11. The landlord has explained that a third party looked after its housing repairs under a private contract until April 2022, when it brought its repairs management back ‘in-house’. It said it did not have clear repair records prior to that point. The landlord inspected the property on 20 June 2022. Its recommendations included repairs to plasterwork, and mould treatments to the walls. However, there is no evidence of it taking any further action until 14 March 2023 when it conducted a pre-works asbestos check. This was far beyond the 20-working day timescale in its repairs policy.
12. The landlord’s contractor attended on 29 March 2023, 9 months after its damp and mould inspection. It found the repairs were more extensive than expected, so did not start the works as planned. It completed a further survey on 9 May which was appropriate, however it would have been good practice to have done so prior to its attendance in March, given the time that had elapsed. It is also unclear why it did not carry out the second survey until over a month later. The landlord ultimately completed the recommended repairs and mould treatments on 22 May. However, this was almost a full year since it initially inspected and raised the works.
13. The resident complained on 25 August 2023 to say she was unhappy with the time taken to address the problem and complete the works. In the landlord’s stage 1 response of 29 December 2023, it apologised for the delay and offered £75 in compensation. The resident escalated her complaint that day as she said the compensation did not reflect the severity of the problem, which she said had significantly affected her son’s health.
14. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 30 January 2024. It said it had records of a leak inspection in December 2019, but there was then a gap in the repair logs. The landlord said this indicated significant delays and increased its compensation offer to £2,395. It credited this to the resident’s rent account on 14 June 2024 to offset against rent arrears, which its compensation policy allowed for. The landlord empathised with the resident’s concerns about her son and directed her to make a personal injury claim under its own insurance, and it said part of its compensation was due to the resident’s distress.
15. It is not clear how serious the problem was, and it was appropriate for the landlord to consider the lack of records in its compensation offer. This was in the upper scales of its policy and our remedies guidance, for situations where a serious failing has had a severe and long-term impact. It credited the compensation to the resident’s rent account in line with its policy.
16. The lack of records means it is not possible to assess the reasonableness of the landlord’s actions prior to the resident’s complaint. However, its response was transparent, it completed the repairs, and it offered fair compensation in recognition of its failures.

Complaint	Heating issues
Finding	Reasonable redress

17. When the resident complained, she also said one of the bedrooms had been without heating for 6 years. In its stage 1 response, the landlord said it had completed emergency boiler repairs in the previous 12 months, but these had affected the whole property. It said it had no records of a specific issue with the bedroom, or any reports of other ongoing heating problems. The landlord therefore logged this as a new repair.
18. When the resident escalated her complaint, she said she had reported the problem to the third-party company. There is no evidence to show whether she reported this to the landlord directly since it brought its repairs management back in-house in April 2022. In its stage 2 response, the landlord said it had found a heating repair record from 13 December 2022, which it attended to on 24 January 2023. It said its notes were unclear about the nature of the repair so, on this basis, it offered £305 in compensation for that 41-day period.
19. In the circumstances of this case, and based on the evidence available, the landlord’s response was fair. It recognised that it could not rule out a possible service failure specific to the bedroom heating issue between December 2022 and January 2023. Its compensation was within our remedies guidance for failures that have adversely affected a resident but had no permanent impact. The landlord also appropriately logged the repair on the resident’s behalf and its response reasonably resolved the complaint.

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

20. The landlord’s housing complaints policy, which applied at the time, stated it would acknowledge complaints within 5 working days and respond at stage 1 within a further 10 working days. It stated it would respond to escalation requests within 20 working days. This aligned with the Code.
21. It is important to note that, although the landlord is part of the local authority, its functions as a social housing provider are separate to the wider council. The resident emailed her complaint of August 2023 to a different area of the council who did not forward this to the landlord until 3 November 2023. The landlord was not otherwise aware of the resident’s complaint, so this initial delay was not a failing on its part. However, it did not then issue its stage 1 response until 29 December 2023, 38 working days later. This was far outside the timeframes of its policy and the Code.
22. The landlord missed its stage 2 response deadline by one working day, but this did not affect the overall outcome as it had completed the repairs 6 months earlier. However, it did not acknowledge the initial problem at stage 1 or recognise its own delays. This is likely to have added to the resident’s existing frustration. As such, we find service failure and have ordered compensation in line with our remedies guidance for this.

 

Learning

23. The landlord has explained that, since this case, the wider council has created a central complaints team. This is clear from the council’s website. The landlord also now ensures that its stage 1 complaint responses go through a 2-stage quality control process. This is positive and will help it to provide accurate and timely responses to future complaints.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

24. The landlord would benefit from reviewing its record keeping, as it was unclear on the nature of the heating repairs reported in December 2022. It was fair for the landlord to err on the side of caution, however keeping robust repair notes may help it to be clearer on its actions in future.