Birmingham City Council (202509190)

Decision
Case ID	202509190
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Birmingham City Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	9 December 2025

Background

The resident wanted a new smart meter installed at her property. Her energy supplier told her the building network operator was the landlord and the landlord therefore needed to complete a “neutral block” installation. She advised the landlord of this. She also put it on notice regarding damp and mould that she was experiencing in her storeroom.

What the complaint is about

The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of her:
1. Concerns about various works required as a building network operator.
2. Reports of damp and mould.
We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

The complaint about the landlord’s handling the resident’s concerns about various works required as a building network operator is outside our jurisdiction.
There was maladministration in the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s handling of her reports of damp and mould.
There was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Reports of damp and mould

The landlord did not take ownership of potential repairs required to address the damp and mould issues. It placed the onus on the resident, and did not effectively use its information management systems to monitor repairs. While some of its attendances to the property were prompt, it failed to acknowledge all of its errors and put things right.

Complaint handling

The landlord did not follow its policies and complaint handling procedures. It took away the opportunity for the resident to have a 2-stage complaints procedure regarding her damp and mould reports.

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 15 January 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £430 in compensation made up as follows: £350 for distress, inconvenience, time, and trouble caused by its handling of her reports of damp and mould. £80 (inclusive of the £30 previously awarded) for the inconvenience caused by its complaint handling. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 15 January 2026
3	Inspection order The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: Inspects the structure and exterior of the property (including the brickwork, as well as the storeroom) and produces a written report with photographs The survey report must set out: Whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards The most likely cause of the damp and mould affecting the resident’s storeroom. Whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue together with reasons where it is not responsible A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective repair to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) The likely timescales to commence and complete the work Whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works	No later than 06 February 2026

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
Between 9 and 24 September 2024	On 9 September 2024 the resident wrote to the landlord about her energy bills and her energy supplier wanting to install a smart meter. The energy supplier had told her the landlord was the building network operator and the landlord needed to complete works, including a neutral block installation. On 24 September 2024 the resident expressed dissatisfaction that her email of 9 September 2024 was not responded to. She said the delay with the landlord sorting out the problem was “unacceptable”.
15 October 2024	The landlord sent the resident its stage 1 complaint response and said it was awaiting internal approval of works regarding the energy distribution and infrastructure.
12 January 2025	The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint as: Issues with the neutral block installation were unresolved. Her storeroom had a recurring damp issue and the last time it visited, it treated the area, but she had not heard back from the repairs team.
Between 13 January 2025 and 6 February 2025	On 13 January 2025 the landlord said it had logged her concerns at stage 2 of its complaints process. It sent her a formal stage 2 complaint acknowledgement on 23 January 2025 and apologised for the delay.
13 March 2025	The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response which stated: That the building network operator was setup to ensure electricity was safely distributed throughout the block and did not impact her energy bills. It did not uphold this aspect of her complaint. She reported damp and mould on 23 August 2024 and it booked a contractor visit for 28 August 2024 but it was unable to gain access. A damp and mould inspection was scheduled for 4 September 2024 but it cancelled the visit due to a technical error. It acknowledged the inconvenience caused. It inspected the property on 6 September 2024 and found no damp and mould. In an inspection on 1 October 2024 it found a small patch of mould and treated the area, its contractor suggested she raise brickwork repairs to help damp proof the property. It said it had not received this request from her. She reported damp and mould again on 6 January 2025. A contractor attended the property on 22 January 2025 but there was no access. No further damp and mould reports were raised and when she spoke to the contactors on 22 January 2025 by phone, she said she wanted to cancel the inspection. It would arrange an inspection for damp and mould, but it did not uphold this aspect of her complaint. It offered £30 in compensation for the inconvenience caused by the delay in responding at stage 2.
Referral to the Ombudsman	By 23 June 2025 the resident had asked us to investigate her concerns because she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. She wanted increased compensation and for the landlord to undertake works.

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	Concerns about various works required as a building network operator
Finding	Outside jurisdiction

We can only investigate complaints about councils where they are acting as the landlord under a licence, lease or a social housing tenancy. In this case, the council was not acting in this capacity because it was acting as a building network operator. The resident wanted improved energy efficiency via a “neutral block” installation. As such, we have no power to investigate the complaint about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s concerns about various works required as a building network operator. The resident may be able to complain to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

Complaint	Reports of damp and mould
Finding	Maladministration

Under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 the landlord is to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair. This is echoed in the resident’s tenancy agreement.
The landlord also has responsibilities under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord is required to consider this and if it requires remedying.
The landlord’s repairs policy says routine repairs are to be completed in 30 days. As above, the landlord was aware the resident was experiencing damp and mould issues from 23 August 2024. Its 3 visits (1 was no access) between then and 1 October 2024 inclusive were in line with its repairs policy target timescales.
Although in the 1 October 2024 inspection the landlord’s contractor treated the mould, it placed the onus on the resident to take further action. The landlord should have been aware of the issues raised from this visit by its contractor. This repair would be to the exterior and structure of the building, which the landlord was responsible for.
There was no evidence the landlord explained to the resident its position on why it would or would not undertake brickwork repairs, to damp proof the property. There was also no evidence the landlord reviewed its own systems and considered whether it needed to survey the property. By not doing so, the landlord has not effectively communicated with its contractors or considered the relevant information on its records. Also, the landlord caused the resident distress and inconvenience, and she reported further damp and mould issues on 6 January 2025. In any event, it should have known that the suggested brickwork repairs were overdue as of 31 October 2024.
The landlord’s attempted property visit on 22 January 2025 was in line with the target timescales in its repairs policy. The resident was required to provide the landlord access to the property in line with her tenancy agreement.
However, the landlord’s position was that the mould visit was cancelled based on the resident’s request in a phone call with its contractors (not recorded). The resident disputed the landlord’s position. At that stage brickwork repairs were overdue, and the resident had raised a formal complaint about damp and mould issues. The landlord should have communicated clearly with her and confirmed if she felt the issue was resolved. By not doing so, this caused her further inconvenience.
In the landlord’s final response it committed to re-inspecting the property for damp and mould. There was no evidence it did so, and the resident had to contact it again on 22 May 2025 where it then raised a repair visit. This was completed on 11 June 2025 where it treated mould and there were no follow-on orders, but this should have been completed by 12 April 2025 (30-day target from 13 March 2025). This was a failure by the landlord, and it is clear the resident expended time and trouble chasing it to take action.
Having considered the above events, our remedies guidance suggests payments in excess of £100. This is for when the landlord has failed to acknowledge its failings, and has made no attempt to put things right. The resident experienced distress and inconvenience as a result of overdue repairs from 31 October 2024 which remain unresolved. The resident told us she is still experiencing issues with damp and mould. As above, she expended further time and trouble after 13 March 2025 until 11 June 2025.
Given the length of time (14 months) that brickwork issues may have been present and the detriment experienced by the resident, we have ordered £350 in compensation. This level of compensation is proportionate to the failings, and we have considered the extent of the mould found was isolated to the storeroom.

Complaint	The landlord’s complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

The landlord has a comments, compliments and complaints policy (complaints policy). This states it operates a 2-stage complaints process, at stage 1 it will respond in 10 working days and at stage 2 in 20 working days. These response timescales mirror our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). The Code also specifies complaints are acknowledged at both stages within 5 working days. If extensions are required, it must clearly explain this to the resident.
Further, the Code states additional complaints raised by residents during a landlord’s investigation after it had sent a stage 1 response, must be logged as a new complaint.
The resident first complained about damp and mould issues on 12 January 2025. While the landlord acknowledged the complaint the following day, it acknowledged the complaint again on 6 February 2025. The landlord’s formal response at stage 2 would have been due by 10 February 2025. The acknowledgement letter said it would take a further 20 working days for the landlord to send its stage 2 response. Although it apologised for a delay, it did not explain any reasons. This was not in line with our Code.
The landlord’s response at stage 2 was 23 working days over target from 13 January 2025, and 5 working days over target from its correspondence of 6 February 2025. The landlord acknowledged this failure, but it had not acknowledged all of its failures.
Ultimately, the landlord should not have incorporated the resident’s complaint about reports of damp and mould into an already issued complaint. This prevented the resident accessing its 2-stage complaints procedure and she effectively only had a singular stage process about damp and mould. Under the Code, the landlord must have a 2-stage process and the resident has said her complaint remains unresolved. Therefore, the £30 it offered her was not proportionate to these failings. It has not adhered to the Code. We have awarded an additional £50 due to the inconvenience caused to the resident during her complaint journey.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping) and communication

In January 2023 we published a special investigation report into the landlord which made a number of recommendations. This included:
1. A framework for its record keeping standards, including the standards expected of contractors acting on its behalf.
2. An action plan for how it intends to embed the use of the framework to ensure staff have access to relevant information when needed.
3. Monitor and review repair progress with its contractors to ensure residents do not have to make repeated requests for repairs and take a proactive approach.
Had the landlord considered the above, it may have mitigated the detriment experienced by the resident in this case. Also, by the landlord making these errors in 2024 and 2025 demonstrates to us that it was not following the recommendations despite its learning statement in response to the special investigation report.
The landlord’s overall communication with the resident was poor, as above it had not clearly communicated to her about the damp and mould, as well as manage her expectations about repairs. These failings could have been avoided, and the landlord is reminded that our spotlight report on damp and mould said landlords should:
1. Avoid taking actions that solely place the onus on the resident.
2. Clearly and regularly communicate with residents regarding actions taken or otherwise to resolve reports of damp and mould.

Complaint handling

The Code is statutory, and the landlord must comply with the timescales and procedures set. In this case, it did not follow the process in the Code, which has resulted in an adverse finding.