London Borough of Hackney (202340830)

Background

1. The resident lives in a 1-bedroom flat. She reported damp and mould to the landlord in August 2021. The landlord inspected the resident’s home and completed a structural survey. The resident was dissatisfied with the time the landlord took to complete the repairs recommend by the structural survey and told us the works remained outstanding.  The works were eventually completed in October 2024.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s:
   1. Reports of damp and mould.
   2. Associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Maladministration in the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s handling of the association complaint

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

Summary of reasons

Damp and mould

4. The landlord’s offer of compensation was a significant attempt to put things right. However, our investigation has found further failings and delays in completing repairs. As such, the landlord could not demonstrate that it used the complaint process effectively and learned from it. Its offer was not proportionate to the overall impact to the resident by its delays and failures.

Complaint handling

5. The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint within its published timescales. The landlord did acknowledge some failings, and it made attempts to put things right by offering compensation for its delays at stage 2. However, our investigation has found further failings that the landlord did not address. Therefore, its offer was not proportionate to the overall impact to the resident.

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.

 Our investigation

The complaint procedure

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.

6. The resident first reported damp and mould to the landlord on 9 August 2021 but it took no action until its surveyor attended to complete an inspection on 18 November 2021. This was an unreasonable delay. The landlord failed to keep a record of its surveyor’s report and incorrectly closed the works order. The landlord attempted to find out more information regarding this inspection but only after the resident chased it for an update in March 2022 and having taken no action in the meantime. It did not receive a response from internal communications and delayed raising a new inspection. It eventually did so on 25 July 2022, 4 months after the resident chased it for an update and nearly a year after her initial report of damp and mould.
7. The landlord completed the second damp and mould inspection on 1 August 2022, and its surveyor recommended it carry out a structural survey. It delayed completing this structural survey, doing so 5 months later on 6 December 2022. This was inappropriate. The structural survey report recommended additional works and advised the landlord that it would likely need to re-house the resident whilst the works were completed.
8. The landlord did not begin making arrangement for the additional works until the resident contacted it on 1 September 2023. This was a significant delay of nearly 9 months since the survey’s recommendations. On 15 September 2023, the landlord told the resident it had instructed a contractor to carry out the works and that they would be in touch with her. The resident then chased the landlord for an update repeatedly in September, November and December 2023 and in January 2024 as she had not been contacted by its contractor. It appears the landlord failed to instruct the works to its contractor at the time as the landlord eventually chased the contractor in January 2024, only to be told they had not received the works. This was a failure by the landlord to manage the works effectively and to progress them in a timely manner.
9. The landlord’s project manager who was overseeing the works agreed to meet with the resident in person on 4 March 2024. This was rescheduled to 5 April 2024 due to a prior appointment running over. The landlord apologised to the resident and paid her £25 compensation. This was in keeping with the landlord’s compensation policy which states it can offer £25 for missed appointments.
10. During the meeting on 5 April 2024, the resident agreed for the works to begin in the last week of May 2024 and told her she would need to be temporarily re-housed for the duration of the works. It also re-iterated this in its stage 2 response in April 2024. As the works remained outstanding after the landlord’s final response, we have increased the scope of our investigation up until the point it completed the works.
11. The resident repeatedly contacted the landlord for updates after it had issued her with its final response, but it failed to respond in a timely manner. It also failed to start the works in the last week of May 2024 and did not communicate this delay with the resident appropriately. The landlord did not provide evidence it had sent the inspection report either. As it agreed to do so as part of its stage 2 response, we have made the above order for it to send the resident a copy of the inspection report.
12. The landlord then told the resident it would need to instruct a removal company to store her belongings for the duration of the works. The resident had to chase the landlord for an update, and it did not arrange for the removal company to attend until 27 August 2024. However, it notified her of this on 19 August 2024. This inappropriate as the resident had told it she needed advanced warning. The landlord repeated this failure as it rescheduled the appointment to 27 September 2024 but only told her on 24 September 2024. This demonstrated the landlord failed to listen to the resident and make reasonable adjustments or learn from previous mistakes. However, it did reschedule the appointment to 4 October 2024 which was suitable. During this time, the resident said she had personal belongings packed up which caused her added inconvenience.
13. The resident had to chase the landlord again on 2 October 2024 as she had not heard back from it about temporary accommodation which it said it would discuss with her after it had organised for the removal company to attend. The landlord’s records lack detail after this time, but it appears accommodation was sourced. The works were then completed as of 21 October 2024. Overall, the landlord took 3 years to complete works to resolve the resident’s damp and mould reports. This was a significant delay, much of which was due to the landlord’s failure to progress the works in a timely manner.
14. Our remedies guidance sets out that payments of over £1000 are appropriate where there have been serious failings by the landlord. The landlord’s offer of £1225 (inclusive of the £25 offered for the missed appointment) in April 2024 was therefore a significant attempt by it to put things right. However, in ordering £1425 compensation (inclusive of the £1225 already offered by the landlord), we have considered the ongoing detriment caused the resident by further delays after April 2024 until it completed the works in October 2024.

15. The landlord’s complaint policy sets out a 2-stage process. It aims to acknowledge both stages within 5 working days. It says the resident should then receive a formal response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days of the complaint acknowledgement. If an extension is required, it will write to the resident and explain the reasons for this. This approach is consistent with our Complaint Handling Code (The Code).
16. The landlord issued its stage 1 response 10 working days from the resident’s initial complaint. This was in keeping with its published timescales.
17. The landlord delayed acknowledging the resident’s stage 2 complaint as it did not properly identify her contact on 16 November 2023 as an escalation request. This is despite its own complaint handling staff referring to it as an escalation request in internal communications the next day. The landlord acknowledged the stage 2 complaint on 10 January 2024, 36 working days after the resident’s escalation request. This was not in keeping with its published timescales for acknowledging stage 2 complaints.
18. The landlord agreed an extension of the stage 2 complaint on 29 January 2024 and said it would respond by 9 February 2024. It failed to do so and told the resident it could not respond as it did not have a date for the damp and mould works. This was inappropriate as a complaint response must be provided when the answer to the complaint is known, not when the outstanding actions required to address the issue are completed. The landlord should have tracked any outstanding actions after it issued its stage 2 response.
19. The landlord delayed issuing the resident’s stage 2 complaint by 69 working days from the date it acknowledged it, and 105 working days from the resident’s escalation request. This was inappropriate. However, the landlord did communicate with the resident during this time, giving her updates on her complaint and responding promptly to her contact up until the point it issued the stage 2 response. Therefore, the level of distress and inconvenience caused to the resident due to this delay was somewhat reduced.
20. The landlord only addressed the delay after it acknowledged the complaint on 10 January 2024. It offered £100 compensation which would have been reasonable had it not delayed its acknowledgement. The landlord’s compensation policy states that it will offer £20 for each week it is delayed in responding to a complaint. In ordering the landlord to pay £240 (inclusive of the £100 it already offered), we have considered the landlord’s failure to acknowledge the resident’s escalation request on 16 November 2023 which it did not identify itself. This is also in line with our remedies guidance. The total amount of £240 includes £140 calculated based on the 7-week delay from 16 November 2023 to 10 January 2024.

Learning

21. The landlord should proactively monitor repairs and assess the ongoing detriment to the resident up until it fully resolves the issue. Had it done so in this case, we would have considered how proportionate any further offers of redress were (given they are not prompted by our involvement) and this might have affected our overall finding of its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

22. The landlord’s poor record keeping contributed to the initial delay in resolving the resident’s reports of damp and mould as it failed to keep the surveyor’s report. It should consider whether it currently has practices in place to ensure such records are kept on its systems and are easily accessible to relevant staff.

Communication

23. The landlord’s complaint handling staff kept the resident updated and often responded promptly to her contacts. However, their responses were often lacking detail due poor internal communication. The landlord might wish to consider strengthening internal communication, so that its complaint handling staff receive timely updates from colleagues regarding the details of complaints.