London Borough of Lambeth (202344999)

Background

1. The resident reported damp and mould in November 2022. She complained about the landlord’s handling of damp, mould and repairs in December 2023. The resident sought legal representation in March 2024 and agreed a pre-court action settlement with the landlord in June 2024.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Damp, mould, and repairs.
   2. The resident’s complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We found:
   1. Reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of damp, mould and repairs.
   2. Service failure in relation to the resident’s complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The landlord’s handling of damp, mould and repairs

4. The landlord did not carry out the damp and mould repairs in line with its policy timescales. The landlord apologised for the delay, and subsequently carried out repairs to address damp and mould. The compensation it paid the resident to resolve her complaint and settle her pre-court action disrepair claim was proportionate to our findings.

The landlord’s complaint handling

5. The landlord did not respond to the resident’s complaint in line with the timescales in its policy and our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). It did not apologise for the delay.

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.

Recommendations

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

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.

What we have not investigated

6. The resident told us the damp, mould and repairs issues affected her health and wellbeing. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury or illness caused. We have not investigated this as it is better for the courts to resolve this type of dispute and consider any associated financial losses, such as loss of earnings. The courts would have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last.

What we have investigated

7. The resident said she has complained of damp and mould since 2018. However, we have not seen evidence of a formal complaint exhausting the landlord’s complaints process until February 2024. In the interests of fairness, and taking into account the availability of evidence, this investigation is focused on events from November 2022 onwards, which were addressed in both stages of the complaint process.
8. The resident reported damp and mould on 30 November 2022, and the landlord arranged a mould wash, which took place on 22 December 2022, 22 days later. This was 15 days longer than the landlord’s 7-day timescale for completing an initial mould wash, as set out in its repairs and damp policy.
9. The contractor who did the mould wash suggested there may be a problem with the external brickwork because the mould was on the outside walls. The landlord arranged a damp and mould inspection for 16 February 2023, but its records show it was unable to access the property. The resident said she waited in all day, and nobody arrived. Following the missed appointment, the landlord did not inspect the brickwork until 24 April 2023. This was 83 days after the contractor raised the concern, which was 55 working days longer than the landlord’s 28-working day timescale for routine repairs set out in its repairs and damp policy.
10. After the landlord’s inspection on 24 April 2023, it arranged for a scaffolder to attend on 3 May 2023 to measure for scaffolding. Neither the landlord nor the contractor contacted the resident after this visit to arrange the works over the summer. The resident contacted the landlord in August and November 2023 to ask for an update, before raising a formal complaint about the delay in completing damp and mould repairs on 11 December 2023.
11. In its stage 1 complaint response on 9 January 2024, the landlord apologised for the delay in resolving the issue. It said it would arrange for its surveyor to inspect the property on 10 January 2024, to assess the brickwork. It said it would update the resident after the visit about what it needed to do next.
12. The resident said the landlord did not attend the inspection on 10 January 2024. She escalated her complaint and said she had waited in all day for the surveyor.
13. In its stage 2 response on 16 February 2024, the landlord said its surveyor had completed an external inspection on 10 January 2024, and a further inspection on 18 January 2024. It apologised for its delay in carrying out the repairs, and said it planned to complete a mould wash and install thermal board by 27 February 2024. This work was completed on 18 June 2024.
14. After the stage 2 complaint response, the resident instructed solicitors to begin the pre-action protocol for disrepair claims. The solicitors issued a letter of claim outlining the problems with damp and mould and outstanding repairs at the property, and arranged a joint inspection.
15. Following the inspection, the resident and landlord reached a settlement on 3 June 2024. The landlord agreed to pay compensation, legal costs, and complete the works set out in the joint inspection report. The landlord completed the works, which included a damp and mould wash, overhauling and installing extractor fans, and repairing render and brickwork. The works were completed by 26 September 2024, in line with the terms of the agreement.
16. There were failings in the landlord’s handling of the damp, mould and repairs. It delayed inspecting the damp and mould and completing the necessary repairs. The impact of the damp and mould on the resident was significant, and she made the landlord aware that there were vulnerable people in the household. The resident also spent time and effort contacting the landlord to ask it to complete the works.
17. In its stage 2 response, the landlord apologised for the delay, and offered £150 compensation. It also paid the resident £500 in full and final settlement of her pre-action disrepair claim. After the settlement, the landlord carried out the repairs it agreed to do in its stage 2 response, and the additional repairs it agreed to do in settlement of the disrepair claim.
18. The resident was legally represented in her disrepair claim, so we assume she was given competent legal advice about the settlement offer made, the effects of accepting the offer, and her legal rights and prospects of success if rejecting it. The total sum of £650 compensation, made up of £150 offered during the complaint process, and £500 in settlement of the legal claim, aligns with our compensation guidance for cases where there were failings which had a significant impact on the resident. In view of this, we find the landlord offered reasonable redress for the failures in its handling of damp, mould and repairs.

19. At the time of the complaint, the landlord had a 2-stage complaints policy. It said it would acknowledge complaints at stage 1 within 5 working days and respond within 10 working days of its acknowledgement. At stage 2, it said it would provide its response within 20 working days of the resident’s request to escalate. The landlord’s definition of a complaint and response timescales were in line with the 2022 version of our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) which applied at the time.
20. The resident complained on 11 December 2023. The landlord did not acknowledge the complaint within 5 working days. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 9 January 2024. This was 8 working days late.
21. The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint on 11 January 2024. The landlord sent its response on 16 February 2024. This was 6 working days late.
22. The delays at both stages were short, and caused minimal delay overall in the resident bringing her complaint. However, the landlord failed to acknowledge and apologise for the delays, and therefore failed to put things right.
23. Overall, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. We have ordered the landlord to apologise for the failures identified in its complaint handling. This is in line with our guidance for cases where the delay in providing responses was short, and did not affect the overall outcome for the resident.

Learning

24. The landlord should consider how it monitors repairs to ensure they are completed within its policy timeframes.
25. The landlord should monitor complaints to ensure it complies with the timescales set out in the Code.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

26. The landlord’s records of its communications with the resident were limited. The landlord should improve its record keeping which will enable it to monitor recurring issues and provide a more efficient service.

Communication

27. Communication with the resident in this case was poor. The landlord took too long to respond to the resident’s complaint and her questions and concerns about the damp, mould and repairs. The landlord should learn from this complaint and consider how it communicates with residents about repairs and complaints. It should ensure it provides prompt, correct, and meaningful updates.