Southwark Council (202333717)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202333717

Southwark Council

11 September 2025

 

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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of:
    1. Leaks, damp, and mould at the property.
    2. Repairs to windows.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

 

Background

  1. The resident lives in a 3-bedroom house owned by the landlord. This is on a secure tenancy that began in 2013. The resident has vulnerabilities that include physical disabilities. Her daughters have asthma and other health issues.
  2. Part of the investigation relates to 2 separate leaks; 1 from the roof and 1 initially reported to be under the property. The leaks contributed to damp and mould, however, the landlord’s assessment revealed other issues including ‘cold bridging’, masonry repairs and external issues with a path. The damp and mould affected 3 bedrooms, bathroom, and lounge.
  3. The landlord’s repairs history of 14 November 2022 refers to an inspection of damp and mould. It noted the resident was vulnerable. It also referred to various issues throughout the property and follow on works orders, however, it did not expand on the details.
  4. On 9 February 2023 the resident complained about delays in completing repairs. She stated the issues were impacting on her and her family’s health, all the bedrooms were affected by damp and mould mites were present. She said her youngest daughter had to sleep on the sofa, and her other daughter was sleeping in her bedroom with her granddaughter. She was also concerned about an ongoing issue with the bedroom and living room windows which she said were rotten.
  5. The landlord’s records refer to 2 inspections of 11 February 2023 and 8 March 2023. Its first inspection did not note any resident vulnerabilities. It recorded various issues of ‘cold bridging’ to bedroom 1, defective single timber windows, a ventilation and heat issue, external rainwater pooling on a path, water penetration to masonry and defective loft insulation. It arranged various remedial work during March 2023; however, some appointments were unsuccessful.
  6. The landlord sent the resident its stage 1 complaint response on 23 March 2023. It told her the following work was reported on 1 July 2022:
    1. Roof repairs – It completed work on 14 February 2023. It raised additional work for the insulation and a gutter board to be resolved.
    2. Damp – It had sent her a damp leaflet. It explained that it had set up a damp and mould team in November 2022 to be proactive in managing issues. It said it did not treat mould mites, but it had contacted pest control for advice for which they had replied that the mites would be resolved once the mould was treated. It had treated the mould in the bathroom and lounge on 8 February 2023 and 3 bedrooms on 28 February 2023.
    3. It arranged a further inspection of the mould and ordered the following works:
      1. Resolve cold bridging issue in rear bedroom and repaint.
      2. Repaint bedroom 2.
    4. It had received a report on 10 March 2023 to trace and repair a leak below the floor. It arranged a CCTV camera survey, and it said it would let the resident know the results and what remedial work was required.
    5. Bedroom window – The resident said she had difficulty opening the window, it was noisy during windy weather and there was suspected rain penetration. It had called to agree an appointment in July 2022 and September 2022 but was unsuccessful. It arranged another works order on 30 November 2022. It said the resident had refused repair work; however, it could arrange to inspect the windows and carry out repairs.
    6. It upheld her complaint based on the delay in resolving the roof works and completing damp work. It offered her £390 compensation for the period 1 August 2022 to the end of April 2023.
  7. The landlord’s records refer to a damp and mould inspection that was arranged on 17 May 2023. It does not give any further details.
  8. The resident escalated her complaint on 26 May 2023. She disputed some of the landlord’s findings relating to the windows. The resident stated the operatives had “lied” to the landlord about the findings. She was worried about safety issues of the windows. She also stated its inspector had not visited the property. The resident did not believe the compensation was enough and felt that the landlord should pay damages for personal health and her affected possessions because of the damp and mould.
  9. The landlord carried out a condensation assessment on 3 October 2023. It recorded no vulnerabilities. Its notes stated all mould had been removed. The work to resolve ‘cold bridging’ was outstanding and it recommended thermal boarding.
  10. The landlord stated it resolved the leak on the ground floor on 6 October 2023. It was found to be a leak on the kitchen sink which the landlord said had contributed to damp in the property. There is some conflicting information as the resident recently told us it was the water board who had to fix the leak after the landlord’s failure to complete work.
  11. The resident had to contact the landlord about a missed appointment on 26 October 2023 to inspect damp and outstanding works. She said it was the second non-attendance. She had to chase the landlord for a response to her complaint a number of times in October 2023 and January 2024.
  12. The resident had to contact our Service in January 2024. The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 13 March 2024. It apologised it had not updated her about the delay in responding to the complaint. It said it could not investigate the alleged “lie” relating to operative comments about the windows as it did not have any records. It increased its compensation offer to £1750 that comprised of £1500 due to 18 months delay in resolving repairs (July 2022 to February 2024) and £250 time and trouble in pursuing a resolution to the complaint. It did not breakdown how it apportioned the compensation to each element of repair.
  13. The resident recently told us roof work was completed in August 2025, however, this recent work does not appear to be related to this complaint timeline and was because of a 2nd storm. The resident said work remains outstanding to the windows, and the damp and mould issues persisted. She acknowledged the landlord’s attempts to resolve the damp and mould through mould washes; however, she told us the damp and mould recurs. The landlord has recently confirmed it does not have any work planned at the property.

 

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident refers to her and her family’s health deteriorating due to damp and mould at the property. This Service is unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impact on health and wellbeing. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim.
  2. The resident is seeking compensation for damage to belongings which she said is as a result of damp and mould at the property. The resident should complete the landlord’s liability insurance claim form which was sent to her. This matter will then be progressed through the landlord’s insurance process. The insurance process is a separate matter that will not be investigated through this complaint. However, the landlord should ensure it keeps the resident informed of progress with the claim.
  3. The landlord’s records refer to a roof leak from December 2017, damp and mould from March 2018 and window repairs from 2019. In the interest of fairness and in alignment with the landlord’s complaints policy to investigate issues 1 year prior to the complaint, our investigation will start from July 2022. This date is consistent with the complaint timeline.
  4. The landlord has not provided a breakdown of its £1750 compensation offer for us to be clear what elements of failure it apportioned to each of the issues. From its complaint correspondence we have therefore calculated this to be £1200 in relation to the leaks, damp, and mould, £300 window repairs and £250 complaint handling. Our assessment will reflect this level of compensation.

Leaks, damp, and mould

Roof leak

  1. The landlord’s records refer to the resident’s report of roof issues at the beginning of July 2022. The evidence suggests a roof inspection was conducted in mid-August 2022, however, within the landlord’s stage 2 complaints response it referred to a delayed inspection of mid-August 2023 suggesting the date of August 2022 may be wrong. Nevertheless, the landlord recognised a delay in completing full work to the roof of 18 months.
  2. The landlord was under a duty to repair the roof within a reasonable time of being given notice of an issue. This is set out in the written tenancy agreement and the implied terms in section 11(1)(c) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
  3. What is a reasonable time will depend on all the circumstances of a case. The landlord’s repairs guide includes a requirement to attend emergency issues within 24 hours and non-urgent issues within 20 working days.
  4. It is reasonable to suggest the landlord should have focused on making the property safe as a priority i.e. attending within 24 hours to assess and ensure ‘make safe’ works were completed before assessing how to fully resolve the issues. In any case the landlord has acknowledged that there was a delay of 18 months and this ties in with the timeline detailed in the stage 2 response. The landlord therefore failed to comply with its repairs policy timeline. The landlord’s inactions were inappropriate causing delays in resolving the roof leak, damp, and mould at the property as well as additional distress and inconvenience caused to the resident.
  5. The resident raised a complaint on 9 February 2023. She was concerned about the outstanding issues and impact on her and her family’s health. She had reported mould mites and said 2 of the bedrooms could not be used. The landlord assessed the property 2 days later. It did not note any resident vulnerabilities; however, it identified remedial work in bedroom 1 and external work to remedy rain penetration, a footpath issue and defective insulation. It then arranged a mould wash of the affected areas the same month. The landlord followed up with remedial work in March 2023 however there were access issues which meant the work was not completed.
  6. The Ombudsman expects landlords to consider the individual circumstances of residents, including any vulnerabilities, when responding to reports of damp and mould. This includes assessing whether a decant is appropriate and ensuring timely communication throughout the process.
  7. Landlords are also required to consider the condition of properties using a risk assessment approach called the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). HHSRS does not specify any minimum standards, but it is concerned with avoiding or minimising potential health hazards.
  8. The evidence suggests the landlord assessed the property within a reasonable timeframe of 2 days and identified remedial work,  however, there was no indication that it considered the resident and her family’s individual circumstances. In fact, it is of concern that it had recorded no vulnerabilities during its inspection when the resident clearly stated she was struggling and could not use 2 of the bedrooms. In line with HHSRS requirements, the landlord’s lack of consideration of the resident’s individual circumstances and risk assessment was inappropriate. The landlord did not have an action plan of works to reassure her of what it intended to do about her reports of not being able to use the bedrooms. This no doubt added to the resident’s distress.
  9. Additionally, poor communications is a recurring theme in this complaint which contributed to the landlord’s delays in completing work. It is essential that landlords keep tenants informed of the plan of action, dates of inspections and outcomes from these inspections and that this is by their preferred contact method. Follow up visits and after care should be scheduled to confirm the resident’s individual needs have been supported and to satisfy itself issues have been resolved. We have not seen any evidence that this happened, in fact the onus was put on the resident to chase up works which was unreasonable. This contributed to the delays in completing work and caused the resident additional distress, time, and trouble.
  10. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response towards the end of March 2023. It acknowledged its delay in resolving the roof leak, damp and mould and offered her £390 compensation. It had treated the mould in February 2023 and said it did not treat mould mites; however, it had obtained advice from pest control who said the mould mites would be eradicated once the mould treatment was complete.
  11. The resident escalated her complaint towards the end of May 2023. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 13 March 2024 after intervention by our Service. It was positive that it recognised its failures and increased its compensation offer in recognition of the 18-month delay in completing works.

Ground floor leak

  1. The water board alerted the resident to an issue with a leak around March 2023. The landlord carried out investigation work that involved a CCTV camera survey. Within its stage 1 complaint response towards the end of March 2023 it committed to let the resident know the outcome.
  2. The landlord arranged a damp and mould inspection in mid-May 2023, however, the landlord’s lack of records mean we cannot establish what was found.
  3. The landlord stated the leak was traced to the kitchen sink and this had contributed to damp at the property. It said it resolved the leak at the beginning of October 2023. However, the resident gave a different version of events and told us it was the water board who resolved the leak. Nevertheless, we have established that the leak has been resolved.
  4. The evidence suggests the landlord delayed in resolving the leak by 6 months. This was a prolonged timescale that did not comply with the landlord’s repair target of 20 working days. We understand detailed investigation works are required where the source of a leak cannot be identified. However, 6 months was an excessive duration to resolve a leak given there were indications it was contributing to damp at the property. The landlord’s inactions were therefore inappropriate causing additional distress and inconvenience to the resident.
  5. It was positive that the landlord recognised its failures in its stage 2 complaint response in March 2024. It increased its offer of compensation to reflect its delays in completing full works including the ground floor leak.
  6. Where the landlord has attempted to put things right for the resident, we consider our Dispute Resolution Principles of:
    1. Be fair.
    2. Put things right.
    3. Learn from outcomes.
  7. Where there are failures over a significant period that affect the resident’s use of the property, the landlord’s compensation policy states it will offer the resident £20 per week. Based on 78 weeks delay at £20 per week, the compensation figure would be £1560. We also expect the landlord to reflect on the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and offer her additional compensation of £400. In total the amount of compensation we expect the landlord to pay the resident is £1960. The landlord’s compensation figure for this aspect of the complaint (calculated at £1200) therefore falls short of what we expect to see for such significant failures and impact on the resident. For these reasons, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of leaks, damp, and mould at the property.
  8. We have no evidence of what, if anything, the landlord did to ensure that its actions had fully resolved the issues at the property. It has confirmed that it has no further works scheduled at the property. However, the resident has told us that damp and mould issues have persisted following the works completed by the landlord. To provide reassurance to the resident we have included an order for the landlord to revisit the property to conduct a full inspection, including a risk assessment that takes account of her individual household needs. It should report its findings to the resident and us. This should include its action plan and communication plan on how it intends to resolve any outstanding issues for the resident.

Repairs to windows

  1. At the beginning of July 2022, the resident reported the bedroom window would not open, it was noisy and there was possible rain penetration. The landlord contacted the resident later in July 2022 and also in September 2022 to arrange an appointment without success. At the end of November 2022 it arranged a repair appointment, however its records show it did not attend until the beginning of February 2023. It appears some work was completed to adjust the window; however, it noted the resident had refused repairs because she wanted new windows.
  2. The landlord is obliged, in accordance with section 11(1)(c) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to repair the windows. While the landlord demonstrated it had made attempts to contact the resident initially within a reasonable timeframe, there is no indication it had followed up on its unsuccessful contact and tried alternative means of contact such as by letter. The landlord’s inactions no doubt added to delays in resolving the window issue.
  3. The resident complained about a bedroom and living room window on 9 February 2023 stating they were rotten. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response towards the end of March 2023. It said the resident had refused repairs. It gave her the option to arrange an inspection of the windows. There is no indication that this inspection went ahead.
  4. The resident escalated the complaint towards the end of May 2023. She said the landlord had “lied” about its version of events when it had visited her. She was also worried about the safety of the windows. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response in March 2024. It said it could not investigate her allegation due to having no records. It told her it had attended a window in February 2024 and left the window in working order. It offered to arrange a full inspection of the windows.
  5. Landlords are required to consider the condition of properties using a risk assessment approach called the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). The HHSRS covers 29 hazards including excess heat and excess cold and falls between levels for example falls out of windows. It does not specify any minimum standards, but it is concerned with avoiding or minimising potential health hazards.
  6. Given the resident had reported safety concerns with the windows, we would expect the landlord to arrange to risk assess the windows in line with HHSRS requirements. The landlord delayed by 18 months in repairing a window and there is no indication it fully assessed the windows. Given the previous unsuccessful appointments and confusion around the resident’s refusal of work, it would have been reasonable to expect the landlord to be proactive in contact with the resident instead of putting the onus back on her to arrange an appointment. The landlord should refer to our recent report: learning from window complaints (August 2025) for best practice.
  7. In conclusion, the landlord delayed in completing work to a window by 18 months. There were mitigating circumstances in relation to access issues and the landlord’s report that the resident had refused remedial works. However, we are not satisfied the landlord did enough to resolve the issues. This is because it did not demonstrate it had been proactive in arranging an appointment with the resident to ensure an inspection of the windows went ahead. Further, the landlord has not satisfied us that it investigated the reports that the resident had refused works with its contractor. The landlord should have robust records to support an effective repairs service. Even if there were no records in this case, we would expect the landlord to contact its contractor to investigate this issue and provide the resident with a thorough response to this aspect of the complaint.
  8. It was positive that the landlord recognised its delays and offered the resident compensation for its failures. As detailed above, this investigation has apportioned £300 of the landlord’s compensation offer towards its acknowledged failures in relation to this aspect of the complaint. However, this sum is not considered proportionate to the landlord’s failures here. In addition to the acknowledged delays, there is no evidence the landlord has resolved the resident’s concerns about the condition of the windows or conducted an inspection to assess their condition.
  9. We have therefore found maladministration in the landlord’s handling of window repairs. The order for the landlord to inspect the property (as detailed above) includes a requirement that the windows are also inspected. Following this inspection, the landlord is to provide the outcome, including how it intends to resolve any issues. The landlord should also compensate the resident a total of £500 in recognition of its failures on this aspect of the complaint. This amount of compensation is aligned to our remedies guidance where there has been adverse impact on the resident.

Complaint handling

  1. The resident complained to the landlord on 9 February 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 22 February 2023 and sent its stage 1 complaint response on 23 March 2023.
  2. Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code – April 2022) states landlords must respond to the complaint within 10 working days of the complaint being logged. Exceptionally, landlords may provide an explanation to the resident containing a clear timeframe for when the response will be received. This should not exceed a further 10 days without good reason. If an extension beyond 20 working days is required to enable the landlord to respond to the complaint fully, this should be agreed by both parties.
  3. The landlord responded to the resident 6 weeks later. There is no evidence the landlord communicated its delay to the resident. It was inappropriate that the landlord therefore did not comply with the Code.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint to the landlord on 26 May 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 27 July 2023 and provided its stage 2 complaint response on 13 March 2024.
  5. Our Code states that landlord’s must respond to the stage 2 complaint within 20 working days of the complaint being escalated. Exceptionally, landlords may provide an explanation to the resident containing a clear timeframe for when the response will be received. This should not exceed a further 10 days without good reason. If an extension beyond 10 working days is required to enable the landlord to respond to the complaint fully, this should be agreed by both parties.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response 10 months later. It therefore failed to comply with the timeframe for a stage 2 complaint response and there is no evidence it agreed an extension of time with the resident. The landlord’s prolonged delayed response was inappropriate. This delay caused the resident additional frustrations, avoidable time, and trouble in chase ups to the landlord.
  7. While it was positive that the landlord recognised its complaint handling failures, it was unhelpful that it was not transparent in its calculation of compensation. We expect landlords to be clear on how it reached a figure of compensation for each element of complaint.
  8. In conclusion, we are satisfied the landlord recognised its complaint handling failures and put things right for the resident through its apology and compensation offer of £250. The sum offered is at the higher end of what we expect to see where there have been significant failures relating to a landlord’s handling of a complaint. We have therefore found reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling. However, we have recommended the landlord reviews its complaint handling in relation to transparency of its compensation offers.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of leaks, damp, and mould at the property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of window repairs.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 53b of the Scheme there was reasonable redress in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord is to pay the resident £2360 (including £1500 it has already offered the resident) as follows:
    1. £1960 for its failures in handling the leaks, damp, and mould.
    2. £400 for its failures in handling window repairs.
  2. Within 6 weeks of this report, the landlord should arrange an inspection in relation to both damp/mould and the windows at the property. It should risk assess the property in line with HHSRS requirements and the resident’s individual needs. This will include its action plan including timescales of how it intends to resolve any issues identified during the inspection. The inspection outcome, including the action plan, is to be provided to both the resident and this Service.
  3. The landlord is to reply to our Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should confirm it has paid the resident £250 compensation in relation to its complaint handling.
  2. The landlord should review its complaint handling in relation to its transparency on compensation offers. It should inform us how it will learn from the complaint to make sure it complies with the Code.
  3. The landlord should confirm its position on the recommendations.