Anchor Hanover Group (202118379)

A picture containing font, text, graphics, logo

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202118379

Anchor Hanover Group

13 July 2023

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:
1. The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould at the property.
2. The landlord’s complaint management.

Background and summary of events

The resident holds an assured tenancy, which started on 10 April 2007. The property is a ground floor, one-bedroom flat, constructed in approximately 1967. The landlord is a housing association that provides housing and care for older people. It has said that the resident has health issues, but is mobile. The resident is elderly and has diabetes and sciatica.
There are historical issues with damp and mould at the property. In 2008, the resident was decanted in order for the landlord to carry out work to address damp and mould. Historical events are outside the scope of this investigation, but provide context and where relevant are referred to in this report. The follow references to such issues were noted in the evidence seen by this investigation:
1. The landlord’s records from 13 October 2017, refer to, “damp patches appearing on the corner of bedroom and lounge. Please investigate and report”.
2. Drawings dated 12 September 2017, depict a ‘proposed drainage layout’ for the Close on which the resident’s property is situated.
The landlord has said that it “does not hold the full information on the works completed and is unable to present the 2017 report due to its data retention policy”.

Relevant policies and procedures

The landlord has a repairing obligation under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to keep the structure and exterior of the dwelling house in good repair.
The Limitations Act 1980 sets out a minimum statutory retention period of six years for property maintenance records.
The landlord has a responsibility under Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by The Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider whether any mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard that may require remedy.
The ‘tenant handbook’ states:
1. “All our properties are supplied with heating and hot water”
2. “We aim to keep our properties between 21 and 24 degrees Celsius during the day and no lower than 19 degrees during at night. The stored water temperature remains at 60”.
3. “Due to the design and positioning of our buildings, there may be areas that are hot or cold spots. Where these occur, we will work with tenants to try to remedy these”.
The landlord’s website states that if a resident has concerns about the presence of damp, mould or condensation it should be reported online or the resident can speak to their local manager who will support them in logging the details. The landlord will then investigate and take the relevant steps, or provide the appropriate advice, to resolve the issue.
The landlord was asked for its policy on damp and mould. The landlord provided its ‘strategy for dealing with damp and mould complaints (DMC)’, which said:
1. Reports can be received from a range of sources and are logged by the landlord.
2. The landlord will visit the property and take photos. These are sent to the local property surveyor for investigation. The surveyor triages the report, visits the site to identify root causes and any remedial actions. If required, monitoring will be undertaken to establish temperatures and relative humidity within the dwelling.
3. Recommendations for remediation are passed to the location manager/repairs desk for logging with contractors for completion. Should there be an issue with temperature or humidity within the dwelling, surveyors provide advice and will request the location manager speak with the resident to establish if support is required from the ‘BeWise’ Team [landlord service offering money advice for residents]. The surveyor will continue to monitor the location until the cause of DMC has been identified and resolved.
4. All surveyors have received training from a specialist damp consultant.
5. The landlord has a communications plan to provide support and advice on damp and mould.
6. In the future, the landlord is developing a predictive data model, which utilises historical damp mould and condensation complaints, repairs data, EPC rating, age and construction of the building, that will enable us to proactively assess our locations and inspect for damp, mould and condensation utilising a risk based approach.
The landlord’s website sets out the target response times for repairs:
1. Emergency repairs: Between four and 24 hours, for the issue to be made safe or fixed.
2. Urgent repairs: Up to five working days.
3. Routine repairs: Up to 20 working days.
The landlord operates a two stage complaints process. Its complaints policy states the landlord will provide a stage one and stage two responses within 14 calendar days. If this is not possible, the landlord will provide an explanation and a date by when a response will be received. In the case of stage one complaints, “this will not be more than 20 working days total without good reason”.

Summary of events

On 23 March 2021, the resident submitted a formal complaint. The landlord’s record of the call states that:
1. It concerns black mould on the walls of the lounge, bedroom and storage cupboard in the resident’s flat.
2. The mould has been present for three years, since 2019.
3. In the bedroom, by the bottom of the bed there is a brown stain from the damp. In the corner of the bedroom white foam is visible.
4. The resident has taken photos of the mould for evidence.
5. The resident wants compensation for damage to the flat and her belongings.
On 14 April 2021, the landlord provided a stage one complaint response, noting:
1. An inspection took place on 26 March 2021. This suggested that the issue could be due to water penetration, “caused by a poor detail at the bottom of the external render and bridging issue”. It was agreed to “install French drains and channel drainage to stop the barrier being covered to stop water getting in”.
2. A ‘pre-start’ meeting with the contractor would take place to ensure the work resolved the issue.
3. The estate was currently having cavity wall insulation fitted and you will be updated on when this will take place.
The resident says she reported an issue with the shower tray on 15 May 2021.
On 19 May 2021, the resident’s local councillor contacted the landlord to ascertain when work would start. The councillor emphasised the resident’s health issues and the negative effect that her housing situation was having. The email said that the gutters were blocked and “water is pouring down, which isn’t helping the damp problem”. The landlord responded on 20 May 2021, saying it would liaise with the contractor to see what works were outstanding, as it believed a date had been agreed between the resident and contractor.
On 25 May 2021, the landlord confirmed to the councillor that:
1. Gutter cleaning, including down pipes was completed on 17 May 2021.
2. “Reducing the height of the tarmac in the rear communal area and installing aco drainage” was completed (date unspecified). The resident has advised the contractor that as a result, the hall cupboard is starting to dry out.
3. Work to remove plants around the boundary, reduce ground level and infill with pea shingle was completed on 17 May 2021.
4. Cutting render and fitting stainless steel drip bead was completed on 17 May 2021.
5. Old wet cavity wall insulation was removed and new insulation installed on 17 May 2021.
6. The walls will take time to dry out, therefore redecoration of the external wall to the bedroom, lounge and hall cupboard would be completed.
On 14 June 2021, the landlord received a letter from the resident, setting out the history of issues at the property and “asking for help”, it stated that:
1. The property had mould problems in 2008/09, at that time the landlord “decorated the flat and coated the walls with paint and a water sealant. The floor under the carpets were soaking wet and after a fight with the landlord the resident got new carpets”.
2. “Forward down the years, I had mould on the walls which, I cleaned with mould repellent”.
3. In May 2019, the landlord visited to look at the walls, “again damp and mould. They were doing soakaways outside my front door”, which the landlord said would solve the problem. The landlord never came back”. [Hanover]
4. On 14 April 2021, “the estate manager came and took photos of all the damp”.
5. Three surveyors had visited the property. “They said when the walls dry out they would decorate”.
6. Due to a lack of information the resident contacted her Councillor, who visited on 14 May 2021. The following day a French drain was installed, at the front of the property, covering the bedroom and lounge.
7. She had asked the landlord for compensation for the carpets and bed, “which is coloured brown with damp”. There is also a damp carpet in the lounge. No one is getting back to her.
8. The resident had said on several times that the damp proof course was compromised.
9. Photos of the bedroom and storage cupboard were enclosed.
The landlord provided a further stage one response on 23 June 2021, which stated that:
1. The repair surveyor who visited the property in April 2021, “believes she discussed with you that once enough time had passed to ensure the external wall was dry that the decorating could take place within the property”. She also advised you that “we would not be replacing the carpet but would be happy to have the carpet cleaned but you refused this offer”.
2. The landlord was sorry for “any misunderstanding [sic] about any follow up work to your property”. The surveyor will “arrange for a further visit in approximately four weeks to check the external wall is dry and then will arrange for the decorating to your lounge and bedroom”.
3. “It is your responsibility to make a claim under your contents insurance if you wish to replace your carpet or anything else in the property. However, we will be happy to arrange for your carpet to be cleaned or provide you with a cheque if you wish to arrange this yourself”.
The landlord visited the property on 1 July 2021, its note of the visit:
1. Summarises the historical issues at the property, which originated in 2008. At that time, “works completed to combat condensation mould including installation of Sempatap thermal insulation to the floors and anti fungicidal paint to the external walls in the bedroom and lounge. Letter sent to [the resident] advising that extraction in the bathroom and kitchen was found to be covered and that if this is not removed and fans used it will have a detrimental effect on the property and would affect how we reacted to any reoccurrence of issues”.
2. Refers to the resident’s 23 March 2021 complaint about “reoccurrence of damp and mould”. A surveyor visited and specified for the “removal of flowerbeds, clearance of debris in the cavity and installation of French drains”. When the work started, the surveyor “approved additional works to alter the external render details and carry out guttering repairs, although these have yet to be completed. Works also included reinsulating the block and clearing any debris from the cavity”.
3. A visual inspection of the external area was completed. This noted the works completed and identified the following:
  1. “one areas directly below the lounge window signs of splashing or debris build up 75mm above DPC”.
  2. “Property would benefit from shrubs being cleared away”.
  3. “Between the external wall of bedroom [sic] and communal under stairs electrical cupboard the external render was found to have breached the DPC. Directly above this area the gutter run looks to be back falling away from the running outlet”.
  4. “Guttering around the flat shows signs that many of the gutter joints are leaking”.
  5. “The installed French drain [sic] is ineffective. 10mm gravel has been install into a shallow trench and is still at risk of causing damp issue if left unresolved”.
4. The internal findings were noted as:
  1. The bedroom, airing cupboard and lounge were checked for dampness. The test used a ‘protimeter MMS’.
  2. “Damp area in the front LH corner of the property. Readings to the skirting board 26.2 percent and floor wet in the same area. As testing moved further away readings lessened. No other adverse readings found”.
5. The resident said she only used the heating in the hallway and lounge. The extraction systems are not used due to drafts and noise.
6. The following repairs were required:
  1. “Test guttering around the block and ensure joints are free from leaks and gutter is free flowing. Repair as needed”.
  2. “Remove render bridging the DPC to the external wall of the understairs electric room”.
  3. “Correct the gutter fall above the external wall of the electric room”.
  4. “Rectify poor French drain detail along the outside of the airing cupboard wall”.
7. It concluded that based on the findings, “the damp in the front corner in the bedroom was the result of a bridged cavity (now rectified) in combination with a leaking gutter caused by the back falling. The remaining issues indicate a condensation problem. Although condensation was not occurring during the inspection [sic] during October – March the property is only partially heated and no ventilation is taking place leading to condensation occurring”.
8. The resident is “to heat in all rooms in winter between 18-22 degrees and utilise the extractor fans installed. Advice has also been given for [the resident] to purchase a hygrometer to allow visual monitoring of the air temperature and humidity”.
On 5 July 2021, the landlord’s records state the resident called to say she had “received a letter from [the landlord surveyor who attended in March], however this does not mention the landlord’s visit last week. She also stated [the landlord] advised her regarding guttering, [the resident] believes this is the cause for the carpet going black in her property and not condensation as the landlord advised. She also advised [the surveyor] would be visiting but didn’t know if [the staff member handling the stage 2 complaint] had been advised. It looked like a follow-on visit to ensure the walls were dry”.
On 6 July 2021, a landlord internal email states it visited the resident the previous week and that it needs to issue a response to close the current complaint. To do this it asks:
1. For confirmation, “by the end of tomorrow ideally”, on where the orders are for the following works and when they will be completed. It believed “these have all been picked up before now so none of this should be new”:
  1. Test guttering around the block and ensure joints are free from leaks and gutter is free flowing. Repair as needed.
  2. Remove render bridging the DPC to the external wall of the under stairs electric room.
  3. Correct the gutter fall above the external wall of the electric room.
  4. Rectify poor French drain detail along the outside of the airing cupboard wall.
2. The letter to the resident to be sent once the information is obtained.
On 7 July 2021, a landlord internal email, sought an update as the resident had also mentioned her hot water cylinder was not working and that a contractor attended but she has not heard anything further.
On 8 July 2021, a landlord internal email states it had not “been able to establish when repairs are outstanding, or with who”. It had therefore instructed the works to be completed. “It was now ready to send out the latest response and close the complaint”.
On 8 July 2021, a landlord note states, “Open and closed at S2 due to [staff member] having further correspondences with the resident and Councillor”.
On 8 July 2021, the landlord issued its stage two complaint response. The response referenced the landlord’s visit to the property on 1 July 2021, it noted:
1. “The only damage to your property and belongings [the landlord] can associate to building failure is to the corner of the bedroom carpet. As such [the landlord has] offered £500 in compensation towards the cost of the carpet. Although property issues were found as shown within the inspection report, these cannot be linked to further damage within your property”.
2. “Your preference to only heat your property partially and not use the provided mechanical extraction will have directly led to condensation occurring during the winter months”.
3. Two jobs had been raised:
  1. Standard priority: “To correct render detail and gutter fall externally above the electric cupboard, to clean down condensation mould to walls in the airing cupboard. Check the guttering around the block and replace leaking joints”.
  2. Urgent priority: “Plumber to attend and rectify lack of hot water”.
4. “Once these remaining works have been carried out the property will be free from any issues that could contribute to the mould issues. If we can work together to help you with heating and ventilating we should be able to solve these issues”.
5. Accompanying the response was a letter sent to the resident in 2009 after the first damp works were completed and “a brief description” of the findings from the 1 July 2021 visit.

Events post-completion of the landlord’s internal complaints process

9 July 2021, a ‘routine’ repair was raised to “attend to internal walls and finishes”. The accompanying description says, “Attend site and complete work per [sic] instruction. Guttering, rendering, mould cleaning”. The work is recorded as completed on 26 July 2021.
On 24 August 2021, a ‘routine’ repair was raised to “attend to internal walls and finishes”. The accompanying description says, “Hire of dehumidifier for damp issues in flat”. The work is recorded as completed on 25 August 2021.
On 31 August 2021, an ‘urgent’ repair was raised to “attend to shower not electric”. The accompanying detail notes, “renew shower screen doors”. The repair is recorded as completed on 25 November 2021.
On 5 September 2021, a ‘routine’ repair was raised “to attend to external drainage”. The accompanying detail notes, “drain blockage outside block”. The repair is recorded as completed on 25 November 2021.
On 16 September 2021, an ‘urgent’ repair was raised to “attend to shower not electric”. The accompanying description says, “investigate possible leak under the shower tray”. The work is recorded as complete on 13 September 2022.
On 20 September 2021, an ‘urgent’ repair was raised to “attend to shower not electric”. The accompanying description says, “Replacing shower tray/tiles and pipework boxing. Authorised by [sic] repairs surveyor”. The repair is recorded as completed on 13 September 2022.
On 6 October 2021, an ‘urgent’ repair was raised to “attend to the shower not electric”. The accompanying description says, “Shower tray needs replacing small hole also needs investigating causing damp on wall and floor. The work is recorded as completed on 18 January 2021.
On 8 October 2021, an ‘urgent’ repair was raised to “attend to the shower not electric”. The accompanying description says, “Shower tray needs replacing small hole also needs investigating causing damp on wall and floor. The work is recorded as completed on 4 November 2021.
On 28 October 2021, the resident wrote to this Service stating that:
1. “I am not sure how much longer I can live [in the property] with damp and mould”.
2. “In 2009 I was moved out into a hotel and all my belongings put into storage for two weeks. The flat had mould on the wall in my bedroom and the floors were covered in water. They said the fault had been rectified and I moved back in”.
3. “Since then, I have had to put up with more damp and mould. My bedroom has damp and mould and my bed is stained brown with the damp. Enclosed are photos of my bedroom and the storage cupboard. My lounge carpet is also black by the window. [Sic] My landlord keeps telling me its condensation, but I think the damp course has been compromised around the flat”.
4. A councillor visited the property on 14 May 2021. Then a French drain was dug under my bedroom and lounge windows. A small piece of guttering was replaced, but the guttering needs replacing all-round the block, “as when it is raining it is like a waterfall”.
5. “I have asked for compensation for bed and carpets to no avail and nobody is telling me anything”.
6. The landlord found “a split shower tray and hole in the doors”. The landlord “put it out to two other firms to do the job” and now the original person is back in November.
7. “I have written to the complaints [department] but have not got any help or answers [sic] the flat is in a mess”.
8. “I also have a 90 gallon water tank which is furred up and they [the landlord] say its okay to use but it cost a fortune to heat up for just 2 taps. Been here since 1981. Also had four surveyors in, but nothing done”.
Following an inspection of the property by the public health and housing officer (PHHO), on 10 November 2021, the landlord was sent the necessary remedial actions and asked to contact the PHHO within 14 days with a completion schedule:
1. Damp and mould
  1. “Inspect the areas affected by the very high moisture level in the hot water cylinder cupboard and undertake repairs to remove the leak. Leave areas affected in good order.”
  2. “Inspect the WC pan/soil pipe join for a possible leak and, if necessary, repair and leave in good watertight order”.
  3. “Inspect the area of the sitting room where the carpet is affected by the damp patch and, if necessary, undertake repairs and leave the affected area in good order”.
  4. “Inspect the top end of the shower tray for leaks and, if necessary, undertake repairs to leave the tray in good watertight order”.
  5. “Inspect the gutters of the building and, if necessary, undertake work to ensure they can safely remove rainwater from the building”.
2. Excess cold
  1. “Inspect the extractor fan in the kitchen to ensure it is working correctly. Undertake any necessary repairs to ensure the fan is working correctly and to remove any uncontrolled draughts”.
  2. “Inspect the extractor fan in the bathroom to ensure it is working correctly. Undertake any necessary repairs to ensure the fan is working correctly and to remove any uncontrolled draughts”.
  3. “Inspect the wall mounted heater in the sitting room to ensure it is working correctly”.
3. Personal hygiene
  1. “Repair the handle of the WC cistern to ensure it is not loose and works correctly.”
4. Electrical hazards
  1. “Recommend you provide the occupier with a copy of the EIHC for the property”.
On 12 November 2021, an ‘urgent’ repair was raised to “attend to extractor fan”. The accompanying detail notes, “extractor fans in bathroom and kitchen and storage in lounge needs looking at”. The repair is recorded as complete on 18 January 2022.
On 12 November 2021, an ‘urgent’ repair was raised to “attend to toilet”. The accompanying detail notes, “loose handle and leak of WC”. The repair is recorded as completed on 18 January 2022.
On 12 November 2021, the landlord told the PHHO that:
1. “Some of the issues at the property have been investigated previously and repairs delivered. However the shower is a new item”.
2. Works to the bathroom, including shower repairs and the loose toilet handle are due to complete on 22 November 2021. We will also check the WC for leaks.
3. The electrical storage heater in the lounge and extractor fans in bathroom with be checked over next week, we will attempt to remove the tap, if the customer lets us and install gravity vents to the outside.
On 16 November 2021, an ‘urgent’ repair was raised to “attend to shower not electric”. The accompanying description says, “Renew shower try investigate leakage and damp issues w/c/11/32 ref: Anthony Richardson”. The work is recorded as complete on 30 June 2022.
On 23 November 2021, an ‘urgent’ repair was raised to “attend to bending valve”. The accompanying detail notes, “15 mil bleeding value need for shower to isolate water. [Landlord] on site sorting this morning”. The repair is recorded as completed on 18 January 2021.
On 16 December 2021, the landlord was contacted by this Service regarding the resident’s complaint. The landlord responded on 19 December 2021 asking for clarification of the resident’s identity. On 23 December 2021, the landlord advised the resident that her complaint had completed its internal complaints process (ICP) and on 29 December 2021 the landlord informed this Service that its ICP was complete.
On 30 December 2021, the resident contacted the landlord to advise that, although it had put in French drains and guttering there remained black mould in the property and her bed was brown with mould. The shower tray was still leaking, despite a new shower tray, the previous leak was going into the storage cupboard. She was unable to use the hot water, as the tank has to heat up 30 gallons. The damp walls were not caused by condensation as the landlord keeps advising, as she is heating her property and opening the windows. She would like compensation for the damage to her bed and carpets.
On 30 December 2021, a landlord internal email asks that before the “Ombudsman get back in touch with us [sic] could we do a pre-review of the complaint to ensure that there is nothing further we can do”.
On 31 December 2021, an internal landlord email states it has returned the resident’s call and told her it will arrange to visit “in the New Year” and provide an appointment next week. It did not know why there was a problem with the shower as it was only recently installed, but would raise an order it to be checked.
On 4 January 2022, an internal landlord email states that it has spoken with the resident and advised that:
1. “Order to check/repair new shower tray installed”.
2. The landlord would attend the property on 14 January 2022.
3. The resident was happy to have a ‘thermograph/monitor’ installed.
4. It had told the resident, “anything new to be raised in the normal way”.
5. “Painting still to be completed”.
6. “Discussed again heating/airing the property and [the resident] offered to show her bills”. She pays about £70 a month to heat the property.
7. The resident was convinced that “there was only a partial replacement of guttering [sic] and that this was causing a problem [sic] with the recent heavy rainfall it was pouring everywhere”.
8. It “didn’t mention the £500 [sic] as got distracted with the guttering issue and thought maybe it should be parked until we clarify if there is still a problem with the guttering still [sic] It looks like the guttering will need to be checked but let me know what you want to do about this”.
On 10 January 2022, the landlord wrote to the resident noting what was discussed in a call on 4 January 2022. A landlord internal email states that it has not mentioned the guttering as this was not mentioned in the original stage one complaint and only raised at stage two. The letter notes:
1. A repair order would be raised to check and repair the new shower tray.
2. A meeting was scheduled for 14 January 2022.
3. The resident was content for a thermograph monitor to be installed.
4. Repairs should be raised through the landlord’s repairs team.
5. The decorating at the property would be booked in to be completed.
6. The resident had offered to show the landlord the bills for heating/airing the property.
On 12 January 2022, the landlord wrote to this Service to since its previous email on 29 December 2021, “it had engaged with the resident further to support with these issues”.
On 14 January 2022, the landlord attended the property. An internal email on 19 January 2022 noted:
1. The thermograph is to be installed 24 January – 17 February.
2. The roofing contractor attended on 18 January and will send their report in the next day, or so.
3. The resident “will definitely be going back to the Ombudsman, as her focus now is compensation”.

Events following the complaint being duly made

Paragraph 35(a) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme states: “a complaint is duly made when it has been referred to the Ombudsman”. Paragraph 35(b) of the Scheme states: “a complaint is duly made when it has exhausted, or the Ombudsman has decided it has exhausted, the members internal process for considering complaints”. The complaint was duly made on 19 January 2022.
This Service asked the landlord to provide evidence to assist with its assessment and determination. The information provided contained evidence of activity that goes beyond the landlord’s stage two response, and therefore beyond the scope of this investigation.
It is, however, prudent for some elements of the additional evidence to be considered and referenced in the report. An overview of this activity is as follows:
1. On 25 January 2022, the landlord told the resident its said its inspection on 1 January 2022 resulted in:
  1. Recommendations for: A complete roof inspection, installation of a new fan in the kitchen and bathroom, repairing the shower leak, mould wash and paint affected walls, installation of a thermograph.
  2. The roof inspection found a blockage that had now been rectified.
  3. Restatement of the £500 compensation offered on 8 July 2021.
2. On 30 January 2022, an internal landlord email notes that the resident has contacted the Department of Levelling up, Housing and Communities in regard to damp issues at the property. The email goes on to ask, “did you get the external surveyors report in the end as I don’t think I saw a reply from it”.
3. On 19 April 2022, an external surveyor assessed the property for the “likely causes of the black mould”. It found:
  1. No excessive moisture levels, however moisture levels were likely to be higher in winter.
  2. The presence of mould in several areas. It was aware a membrane had been applied to the floor, “therefore there may be an element of the structure drying out, which would have seen the internal moisture levels decrease over time”.
  3. The performance of the thermal envelope was poor.
4. The external surveyor’s report recommended:
  1. All vents be switched on at all times and all blocked vents cleared.
  2. Thereafter, all areas of mould should be treated and cleaned.
  3. The guttering should be cleansed and overhauled. This was an ongoing maintenance issue.
  4. All poor and open joints to be adequately sealed.
  5. Investigation of the thermal performance of the wall and its surroundings.
  6. It was noted that the raised ground area around the property would likely involve relatively significant remedial works, therefore it may be prudent to carry out the above recommendations first and monitor for any ongoing issues regarding damp.
5. On 23 March 2023, an article entitled, ‘Residents at [sic] retirement apartments complain of persistent mould problems and negative impact on their health’, appeared in the local paper.
6. On 28 March 2023, the landlord visited this property.
7. On 3 April 2023, the landlord told the resident “more in-depth investigations were required”. It said:
  1. Core samples of the floor screed and slab would be analysed.
  2. A risk assessment will be completed prior to the work commencing.
  3. It anticipated being back in touch after Easter with more information.
8. On 2 May 2023, the resident told this Service that the issues of damp and mould remained. She also provided an update on her health, as she had recently had cataract surgery and had been referred for a chest x-ray due to a protracted cough.
9. On 26 June 2023, the resident told this Service that the landlord had informed her it needed to decant her from the property, but she did not know when this would take place, where she would be moved, or for how long.

Assessment and findings

Issues of damp and mould

The property has historical issues with damp dating back to 2008. The evidence seen by this investigation includes references from 2017 to a ‘proposed drainage layout’ and a work log note, asking for “damp patches in the corner of the bedroom and lounge” to be investigated and reported on. The 2008 work and 2017 reports are outside the scope of this investigation. They do however provide context to the problems the resident is still experiencing. The landlord told this Service that it was unable to supply a report from 2017 due to its data retention policy. The landlord did provide a letter sent to the resident in 2009 and subsequently resent in 2021, regarding the damp and mould and the landlord’s diagnosis that any residual issues were due to condensation. It is unclear why the landlord had information from 2009 and not 2017, and this suggests issues with recordkeeping and management, which are dealt with below.
On 14 April 2021, the landlord responded to the resident’s complaint about damp and mould in the property, by saying it had agreed to install French drains and channel drainage. The 2017 ‘proposed drainage layout’ and the results of these proposals could have been relevant to the work commissioned in 2021. The landlord should have accurate and complete records of the history of problems with damp and mould at the property. Clear recordkeeping and management (including appropriately applied data retention polices), is a core function of a repairs service and supports the landlord in fulfilling its repairs obligations. The landlord’s handling of historic data regarding the property did not support the effective and timely resolution of issues of damp and mould at the property.
Furthermore, the landlord has said that it is “developing a predictive data model, which utilises historical damp mould and condensation complaints, repairs data” and other information. This Service welcomes the landlord’s aspiration to develop a predicative model, indeed this is one of the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould. However, to achieve this the landlord must first ensure its recordkeeping and management support its current repair obligations.
The landlord’s responses to the resident’s complaints about damp and mould indicate it did the following:
1. It inspected the property on 23 March 2021 and agreed to install French drains and channel drainage.
2. A surveyor visited in April 2021.
3. On 17 May 2021, the gutters were cleaned, ground level reduced, render cut and steel drip bead fitted and cavity wall insulation replaced.
The investigation has not seen any correspondence (aside from the landlord’s complaint responses) to the resident regarding this work. The landlord should have written to the resident following each visit with a statement of its findings and details of any work that was specified and a timeline for completion.
It was not until the resident’s councillor contacted the landlord that it visited the property and communicated to the resident in a timely manner the findings of its visit. The landlord’s record of its visit on 1 July 2021, notes that ‘the property would benefit from shrubs being cleared away’. However, the note also states that a surveyor had visited [26 March 2021] and specified the removal of shrubs. Therefore 70 working days after the work was initially specified it remained outstanding. This was 50 days beyond the landlord’s target timeframe for routine repairs.
The 1 July 2021 visit note also states that work to ‘rectify poor French drain detail’ would be completed. The French drain was commissioned following the visit on 26 March 2021. It should not have taken a stage two complaint response for the faults in the work to be detected. This investigation has seen no evidence that the work specified on 23 March 2021 was checked prior to 1 July 2021. Had this been done, the problems with the French drain and lack of shrub clearage could have been identified sooner.
In addition to rectifying the French drain, work to correct and test the guttering, and remove render bridging the DPC was identified following the 1 July 2021 visit. Work to remove shrubs was not referenced despite twice being identified as beneficial. This investigation has seen no evidence to explain why the work was again missed.
Landlord internal correspondence states the work identified following 1 July 2021, “has all been picked up before now, so none of this should be new”. However, on 8 July 2021, a subsequent email states it has not “been able to establish when repairs are outstanding, or with who”. This again indicates failures of recordkeeping and management, as well as failures in the monitoring and oversight of repairs.
The 1 July 2021 inspection recorded damp “readings to the skirting board of 26.2 percent and floor wet in the same area”. The landlord should have scheduled an inspection after completion of the works and repeated the damp readings to ascertain if its diagnosis had been correct and if remedial work had resolved the issues. Instead, it advised the resident to purchase a hygrometer “to allow visual monitoring of the air temperature and humidity”. It was not until February 2022, after it had been contacted by this Service that the landlord arranged for a thermograph to be installed at the property. The landlord acted unreasonably in putting the responsibility on the resident to monitor the conditions in the property, instead it should have arranged for further damp readings to be taken in the property, particularly as it had said that the problem was likely to be more acute in winter.
In order to address the issues with the guttering, on 9 July, a repair was raised to “attend site and complete work per [sic] instruction. Guttering, rendering, mould cleaning”, this is noted as complete on 26 July 2021. However, subsequent records indicate the guttering issue was not resolved. Remedial actions arising from the PHHO’s inspection on 19 October 28 2021, included the instruction to, “inspect the gutters of the building and, if necessary, undertake work to ensure they can safely remove rainwater from the building”. The landlord did not reference the issue with the gutters when it spoke to the PHHO on 12 November 2021. Following contact from this Service, the landlord spoke with the resident on 4 January 2022, who told it she believed “there was only a partial replacement of guttering [sic] and that this was causing a problem [sic] with the recent heavy rainfall it was pouring everywhere”. The resident’s description echoed the information provided by the Councillor in July 2021. The guttering was a key element in the landlord’s diagnosis of what was causing the damp and mould issues, yet prior to being contacted by this Service, it made no effort to ascertain if the remedial work to the gutters had been successful and if it had resolved the issues at the property.
The landlord should have investigated if the fans required serving or replacing. The visit notes from 1 July 2021, state that “the extraction systems are not used due to drafts and noise”. The actions supplied to the landlord by the PHHO on 10 November 2021, included checks of the bathroom and kitchen extractor fans. It was only after the resident had contacted the Ombudsman, and the landlord visited the property on 14 January 2022 that it made the recommendation to, “fit new fan to kitchen and bathroom”. This investigation has not seen records indicating that this work was completed.
The landlord has not demonstrated that its recordkeeping and management practices were able to support its repair obligations. The landlord was unable or unwilling to consider the history of damp and mould at the property. It’s diagnosis of the causes of the damp and mould, as well as the prescribed solution placed too great a responsibility on the resident. Despite the fact that the resident was elderly and had health issues, it failed to monitor the remedial work that it said would resolve the issues. It’s communication with the resident was poor, it did not ascertain if remedial work had been successful. It displayed a lack of empathy and did not consider the resident’s vulnerabilities. It was only after the intervention of this Service that it reengaged with the issues in January 2022. As of June 2023, the resident still has damp and mould in her property. Taking all factors into consideration, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in her property.

Complaint management

The resident submitted a formal complaint on 23 March 2021, to which the landlord responded on 14 April 2021. The response did not resolve the issues raised by the resident, but did set out measures which the landlord said would provide a resolution. The response did not however, provide a timeline for when the work would begin. The resident was unable to find this out and therefore contacted her councillor, who sought to ascertain the information on her behalf. The landlord’s complaint response should have set out these timelines and the resident should not have had to chase this information.
The landlord responded to the councillor on 19 May 2021, to say it “believed a date had been agreed between the resident and contractor”, but it would seek to find out the information. The landlord’s communication with the resident was poor. From the evidence seen by this investigation, the landlord references conversations that took place when it visited the resident. These were not followed up in writing, but were cited by the landlord at points thereafter. This was confusing, inefficient and also lacks transparency.
On 14 June 2021, the resident wrote to the landlord asking for help. The landlord issued a further stage one response on 23 June 2021. The response refers to a visit by a surveyor to the property in April 2021, it references information about forthcoming work that the surveyor said they had told the resident. As before, this information had not been communicated in writing to the resident. The complaint response states that a visit would be arranged “in approximately four weeks”. The landlord should have sought to provide a definite date for the visit.
It is unclear why the landlord issued two stage one complaint responses. The resident’s letters refer to historic back issues with damp and mould at the property, as well as the overarching problems in how the landlord was dealing with, and communicating about the issues.A landlord note regarding its stage two response states, “open and closed at S2 due to [staff member] having further correspondence with the resident and the councillor”.
The landlord visited the property on 1 July 2021 2021. The visit did identify work, however according to the landlord’s records this had been raised before, but it was unable to ascertain what had happened to the jobs raised. As with its earlier complaint responses, the stage two response did not resolve the issues, but stated, “once these remaining works have been carried out the property will be free from any issues that could contribute to the mould issues”. If a landlord’s proposed resolution has not been affected by the time it issues its complaint response, it should include in that response mechanisms and timings when it will check if the remedial action has been successful. It is even more unreasonable that the landlord failed to do this given the jobs had been raised and not actioned previously.
In its stage two response, the landlord said the resident’s “preference to only heat your property partially and not use the provided mechanical extraction will have directly led to condensation occurring during the winter months”. The landlord’s lack of action regarding the extractor fans was addressed previously. However, its complaint response states that “if we can work together to help you with heating and ventilating we should be able to solve these issues”. This investigation has seen no evidence that the landlord sought to support the resident in these matters.
Accompanying its stage two complaint response, the landlord resent a letter from 29 March 2009, in which it said to the resident that “the extractor fans to your bathroom and kitchen were sealed up eternally with cling film”. The letter advised that “good quality air extraction can assist in eliminating condensation” and “if you ignore this advice [the landlord] may not be responsible for future condensation problems that may arise within your property”. It is unclear what value there was in resending this letter. Indeed it is contrary to the recommendation in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould that landlords should “ensure they avoid automatically apportioning blame or using language that leaves residents feeling blamed”.
In the complaint submitted on 23 March 2021, the resident asked for compensation for the damage to the property and her belongings. The landlord failed to address this in its response on 14 April 2021. In its complaint response issued on 23 June 2021, it refers to the surveyor having told the resident that “we would not be replacing the carpet but would be happy to have the carpet cleaned”. This was not offer was not formally communicated to the resident prior to the complaint response. As set out previously, this reflects serial communication failures by the landlord.
On 23 June 2021, the landlord told the resident that it was her “responsibility to make a claim under your contents insurance if you wish to replace your carpet or anything else in the property”. The landlord acted unreasonably in saying this to the resident. It had not effectively diagnosed or remedied the damp and mould issue, therefore it was conceivable that the appropriate route would be for the landlord to submit a claim to their insurer or at minimum to assist the resident to do so.
On 8 July 2021, the landlord offered “£500 in compensation towards the cost of the carpet”, stating that the “the only damage to your property and belongings I can associate with building failure, is to one corner of the floor in your bedroom”. This offer was restated on 25 January 2022, after this Service contacted the landlord about the resident’s complaint. The compensation offer failed to consider the damage to the resident’s bed, of which she had supplied photographs. More broadly, it failed to take into account the resident’s vulnerabilities, the length of time the situation had been ongoing and the cumulative impact on the resident in terms of the time and trouble involved in chasing the landlord and the disruption to her living environment. The £500 compensation offer was not commensurate with the resident’s circumstances.
The landlord’s complaint management did not provide a resolution to the issues of damp and mould at the property, which remain ongoing. It did not include any mechanism to ascertain if its proposed remedies were effective. It displayed no urgency or timeliness in resolving the issues, only in closing the complaint. Its communication was poor and its compensation offer inadequate. Taking all factors into consideration, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s complaint management.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 54 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was severe maladministration in relation to the landlord’s complaint management.

Reasons

The landlord has failed to provide a resolution to the issues of damp and mould in the property. It has displayed no sense of timeliness or urgency in its response, despite the resident being elderly and having health issues.
The landlord’s recordkeeping and management was inadequate and did not support its repair obligations.
The landlord’s complaint management had no mechanism for checking if its proposed remedies had resolved the issues of damp and mould.
The landlord’s communications with the resident were confusing and lacked transparency.
The landlord’s compensation offer was inadequate.

Orders and recommendations

Within 28 days of the date of this report:

The Chief Executive of the organisation must apologise in person to the resident for the organisation’s failings.
The landlord must pay the resident compensation of £3900, comprising:
1. £2700 for the distress and inconvenience arising from the landlord’s failures in addressing the reports of damp and mould.
2. £1200 for the time and trouble and also the distress and inconvenience incurred by the resident due to the failures in the landlord’s complaint management.

The compensation should be paid directly to the resident and not to the resident’s rent account.

The landlord must provide a permanent and lasting resolution to the issues of damp and mould in the resident’s property. The landlord should set out in writing how this will be affected. It should specify the diagnostic and remedial work it believes is necessary and provide a timeline for this that includes dates, not approximations. The landlord should supply a copy of this plan to the resident and to this Service.
The landlord must review its damp and mould complaints policy and write to this Service identifying where it’s current policy does not conform to the recommendations contained in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould. Within three months of date of this report, the landlord should write to this Service setting out how it will develop its policy on damp and mould complaints with clear reference to the positive practices set out in the Spotlight report and specify the date on which each change will take effect and become business as usual operationally.
The landlord must review its data retention policy and write to this Service identifying where its current policy does not conform to the recommendations contained in the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Knowledge and Information Management (KIM). Within three months of the date of this report, the landlord should write to this Service setting out how it will develop its data retention policy with clear reference to the positive practices set out in the Spotlight report and specify the date on which each change will take effect and become business as usual operationally.
The landlord should review the learning from this case and write to this Service setting out how it will:
1. Ensure information is provided to residents in writing and in a timely manner.
2. Provide a mechanism to verify any work specified in complaint responses has remedied the issue(s) it was designed to address.