Blackpool Borough Council (202428526)

Background

1. The resident lives at the property, a 1-bedroom flat, with his wife and small child. He is unhappy with the condition of the property, including issues with pests, cracks and damp and mould. He has also told the landlord that the property is too small for his family.

What the complaint is about

2. The landlord’s handling of:
   1. The resident’s reports of overcrowding.
   2. Damp and mould.
   3. Cracks in the internal walls.
   4. The resident’s reports of pest infestations.
3. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have found that:
   1. the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s handling of his reports of overcrowding is outside our jurisdiction
   2. there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould
   3. there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of cracks in the internal walls
   4. there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of pest infestations
   5. there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint

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

Summary of reasons

The resident’s reports of overcrowding

5. Complaints about the local authority’s housing allocation are outside of our remit. The resident would need to raise any concerns about his reports of overcrowding to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO).

Damp and mould

6. The landlord did not resolve the damp and mould issues reported by the resident within the timescale set out in its repairs policy. While there were some delays outside of its control, the 7-month period taken to resolve matters was not reasonable.

Cracks in the internal walls

7. The landlord carried out repairs in line with repairs policy.

Pest infestations

8. The landlord did not address the resident’s concerns about ants at stage 1 and missed the opportunity to advise him of his responsibility to resolve the issue and provide guidance on this.

Complaint handling

9. The landlord responded to the complaint in line with its complaints policy at both stages.

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.

10. On 30 November 2023 the resident told the landlord their property was overcrowded and he wanted to move. The landlord responded on 4 December 2023 to say that he had a live transfer application for a 2-bedroom property with priority C banding. When the resident raised his complaint on 10 July 2024, he again reiterated his family’s desire to move to a bigger property.
11. It is outside our remit to investigate complaints about the local authority’s housing scheme, its housing allocation, bidding, banding and the housing register. This is because these are processes administered by the local council and fall within the scope of the LGSCO.

12. In March 2024 the resident told the landlord there was mould around a window. The landlord booked an appointment for 1 May 2024 but the resident cancelled it, saying he longer needed it. In April 2024 the resident raised an issue with an extractor fan but again cancelled an appointment saying the fan was now working. In May 2024 the resident raised an issue with the lounge window leaking. The landlord raised a job, but the resident subsequently cancelled this. As the resident cancelled these appointments, saying the issues were resolved, it was not unreasonable that the landlord took no further action at these times.
13. In his complaint, raised on 10 July 2024, the resident said that the property was mouldy, and he could not get rid of it no matter how much he cleaned. The landlord carried out a survey on 22 July 2024 and identified elevated moisture readings but did not find any noticeable mould. The report noted that there was plaster bridging the damp course and an exposed front elevation in the lounge, both of which could have been contributing to cold and damp. It recommended the resident did not dry clothes in the bedroom and raised a job for required repairs.
14. In its stage 1 response of 24 July 2024, the landlord said that contractors would be in touch to arrange suitable appointments. It carried out the inspection within its repairs policy timescale of 28 days for routine repairs and this response was reasonable from the landlord.
15. The landlord wrote to the resident to notify him of an appointment on 27 August 2024. However, the landlord was unable to gain access to the property. The landlord asked the resident to contact it to rearrange the appointment. It also booked a damp and mould inspection booked for 27 August 2024. The landlord’s contractor attended on 30 August 2024 and serviced the extractor fans.
16. The contractor due to carry out the damp and mould survey was injured and the landlord had to rearrange the inspection for 2 October 2024. The landlord received the report on 15 October 2024 and raised remedial works on 17 October 2024. This included unblocking gullies and assessing and replacing defective rainwater goods. These works were identified in the July 2024 inspection but not completed until 4 November 2024. The landlord did not require access to the inside of the property for this, and we have seen no explanation for the delay in completing this, which was not reasonable.
17. The resident asked the landlord to move him and his family into temporary accommodation while it carried out work. On 5 November 2024 the landlord booked a hotel for the resident from 2 to 6 December 2024.
18. The landlord booked an appointment for a post–work inspection on 20 December 2024 but was unable to gain access. It rearranged this for 10 January 2025, where it found evidence of mould. It arranged for a dehumidifier to be delivered to the resident and provided energy vouchers to help with the heating and dehumidifier costs. The landlord inspected the property on 5 February 2025 and found the walls were dry. It completed redecoration of the property on 21 February 2025.
19. The landlord did face some challenges getting access, and the unforeseeable injury of a contractor delayed the damp inspection. It did not identify that temporary accommodation was needed in its inspections. It decided to approve this after taking the resident and his family’s circumstances into consideration, which was a reasonable step for it to take.
20. However, it took the landlord 7 months from the resident raising the issue of damp and mould until it resolved this. It did not manage to resolve the damp and mould issue with the work carried out while the resident was in temporary accommodation, and it had to carry out further remedial work. The unnecessary delay in carrying out external work is likely to have contributed to internal damp. Its actions were not in line with its repairs policy, as it did not resolve matters within 28 days and delays were unreasonable.
21. We have made an order for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £350. We have made this award with the landlord’s compensation policy in mind to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by delays in the landlord resolving the damp and mould issue.
22. The resident told us that they have lost belongings due to the mould and they do not have home insurance, so cannot claim for these. However, we have not seen any evidence that he raised this with the landlord. A recommendation has been made for the landlord to provide the resident with the details of its liability insurance so he can make a claim, should he wish to.

23. In his complaint of 10 July 2024, the resident said that there were ‘cracks everywhere’ in the property. In its stage 1 response of 24 July 2024, the landlord said it had booked an appointment for 22 July 2024, which was the first available appointment. This was in line with its repairs policy and was therefore reasonable.
24. The landlord’s inspection identified that it needed to renew a windowsill. There were no other remedial works relating to cracks noted or any indication of significant cracking to walls. The windowsill was renewed on 21 August 2024, which was reasonable. The landlord’s repair policy states the resident is responsible for repairing any minor cracks to wall or ceiling plaster.
25. We have seen no evidence of any outstanding repairs relating to cracks that are the landlord’s responsibility. It carried out an inspection and renewed the windowsill in line with its repairs policy and therefore acted reasonably.

What we did not consider

26. The resident raised a complaint about the landlord’s handling of a mice infestation in August 2023. We have seen no evidence the resident asked the landlord to escalate this complaint, and he did not raise this matter as part of his complaint in July 2024. He has since raised a further complaint about this issue, and the landlord sent a new stage 1 response in July 2025. As the resident’s complaint about mice has not completed the landlord’s internal complaints process, we have not considered this. The resident can ask the landlord to escalate his most recent complaint if he feels this matter is still outstanding.

The landlord’s handling of pest infestations

27. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out its responsibility in relation to pests. It says it is only responsible for pests in communal areas and where the point of entry has been proven to be as a result of design fault or damage to the exterior of the property. The resident is therefore responsible for ants within their home.
28. We have seen no evidence the resident reported a problem with ants to the landlord before he raised his complaint in July 2024. The landlord’s stage 1 response of 24 July 2024 did not refer to the ant issue, which was not appropriate. While the landlord’s position may have been that it was not its responsibility, it should have clearly explained this to the resident, but it did not do this.
29. During its stage 2 investigation the landlord met with the resident on 18 October 2024 to conduct a panel meeting. In its stage 2 response the landlord said that at this meeting the resident had said he was aware that ants were his responsibility to treat. It said he had been using filler to stop access and was aware that he could put down ant powder.
30. We have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the residents reports of pest infestations. It had missed the opportunity to resolve the resident’s concerns at stage 1 and provide guidance on how he could treat the problem. While it did later provide this information at stage 2, it should have done this at the earliest opportunity.
31. We have made an order for the landlord to pay the resident compensation of £50 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by its failure to provide the resident with clarity and guidance at the first opportunity.

32. As can be seen from above:
    1. the landlord acknowledged the complaint in writing and responded at stage 1 within 10 working days (10 July 2024 to 24 July 2024) – in line with its complaints policy
    2. the landlord acknowledged the escalation request and responded at stage 2 within 19 working days (27 September 2024 to 24 October 2024) – in line with its complaints policy

Learning

33. The landlord relied on the resident to rearrange no access appointments, with no evidence that it made further attempts to follow these up with the resident. Our Spotlight on Damp and Mould highlights that landlords should have processes in place to follow up with residents to rearrange such appointments promptly.