Camden Council (202344520)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202344520

Camden Council

24 October 2024


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 response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Background

  1. The resident has lived in the 2-bedroom flat with her 2 daughters since 2015. One child has a severe learning disability and the other has asthma and is currently being assessed for autism.
  2. The landlord previously attended the property for damp and mould issues in 2018, in January 2023, and March 2023. The resident emailed the landlord to raise a report of damp and mould on 4 December 2023. She said that since the landlord’s last visit the mould in the bathroom had come back worse, and she had a hole in the rotten window frame. The resident continued to say that she had decorated her daughter’s bedroom, but the mould had come back worse. The walls were wet and with ice on them. The new set of chest of drawers in her daughter’s bedroom was covered in mould. The resident said her daughter could not sleep in the room due to her asthma.
  3. The landlord completed a home inspection on 6 December 2023. The report stated there was severe black mould present. The report commented that previous mould washes had not worked. It noted the daughter was asthmatic and both daughters were sleeping in the resident’s bedroom. The resident advised the landlord she had been to the doctor regarding health concerns. The landlord identified possible contributory factors as being condensation and humidity build up, pointing, the kitchen sink leak, and the bathroom extractor fan not working. The landlord noted down repairs to resolve.
  4. The landlord completed a mould wash on 14 December 2023, with additional mould wash and stain block to the bathroom ceiling on 28 December 2023. On 9 January 2024, the resident telephoned the landlord to report she thought the leak into the communal hallway was coming from the condensation under her kitchen sink. The landlord lagged the pipe, identified, and resolved a leak from a cracked condenser boiler pipe.
  5. The resident called the landlord on 12 January 2024, after trying different methods of communication to try to get an update on the damp and mould repairs. The resident then raised her complaint with the landlord on 16 January 2024. The complaint concerned the lack of contact from the landlord, the lack of progression with the repairs as the landlord had completed the mould wash and anti-fungal paint, but nothing else. The resident did not believe her daughter’s bedroom was habitable and wanted a rent reduction until it was.
  6. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 2 February 2024, it partially upheld the complaint. The landlord upheld the part concerning delays in progressing repairs. In the response it raised these repairs, but did not explicitly make mention to the window locks nor the repair to the bathroom window. It instead raised an inspection. The landlord did not uphold the resident’s request for a rent reduction as it believed the daughter’s bedroom was habitable. It said the daughters were sharing a bedroom and the resident and her partner were sleeping in the living room. The resident escalated her complaint on the same day. She believed her daughter’s bedroom was uninhabitable and the landlord should offer a rent reduction because of this. Also, she said the landlord had incorrectly stated she had a partner and they both slept in the lounge.
  7. The landlord provided its final resolution response on 5 March 2024. This agreed with the stage 1 findings of partially upholding the resident’s complaint due to the repair delays. From the information the resident provided, the landlord could see the mould issue was still ongoing. The landlord apologised for the misunderstanding in stating she had a partner and was sleeping in the lounge. It reminded her about the upcoming dates for the pointing and window inspections. It offered the resident £200 for the distress and £60 for her time and trouble. The resident accepted this compensation and provided the landlord with her bank account details. The resident told the Ombudsman she only accepted the compensation to redecorate and replace her daughter’s chest of drawers, but she did not receive any money.
  8. The landlord reattended the resident’s property on 9 May 2024 to mould wash and anti-fungal paint the daughter’s bedroom. The resident advised the Ombudsman the mould started off as a problem in the corner of the bedroom and has spread higher and across the room along the chimney breast. The resident remains dissatisfied and as a resolution she would like the landlord to identify and resolve the root cause of the damp and mould.

Assessment and findings

  1. When investigating a complaint, the Ombudsman applies its Dispute Resolution Principles. These are high-level good practice guidance developed from the Ombudsman’s experience of resolving disputes, for use by everyone involved in the complaints process. There are 3 principles driving effective dispute resolution:
  1. Be fair – treat people fairly and follow fair processes.
  2. Put things right.
  3. Learn from outcomes.
  1. The Ombudsman must first consider whether a failing on the part of the landlord occurred, and if so, whether this led to any adverse effect or detriment to the resident. If it is found that a failing did lead to an adverse effect, the investigation will then consider whether the landlord has taken enough action to ‘put things right’ and ‘learn from outcomes’.

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident explained that the damp and mould affected the health and wellbeing of her family. While the Ombudsman is sorry to hear this, it is beyond the expertise of this Service to determine a causal link between the landlord’s actions (or lack of action) and any adverse impact on the resident’s family’s health.
  2. Often, where there are allegations made about a deterioration in health and liability for this, a court will call for expert evidence. This enables it to lean on a more reliable opinion of the cause of any injury or adverse health. In the Ombudsman’s view, this is a more appropriate and effective means of considering such an allegation and so should the resident wish to pursue this matter, she should do so via this route.
  3. This investigation will only consider the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould and its complaint handling.

The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 requires the landlord, to maintain the installations, exterior, and structure of the property.
  2. The landlord has a responsibility under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), introduced by the Housing Act 2004, to assess hazards and risks within its rented properties. Damp and mould growth are a potential hazard and therefore the landlord must consider whether any mould problems in its properties amount to a hazard that may require remedy. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under HHSRS and are expected to conduct additional monitoring of a property where potential hazards are identified.
  3. The Ombudsman published a spotlight report on damp and mould in October 2021. This stated that landlords should adopt a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould interventions. Landlords should evaluate what mitigations they can put in place to support residents in cases where structural interventions are not appropriate and satisfy themselves, they are taking all reasonable steps. The landlords should ensure their responses to reports of damp and mould are timely and reflect the urgency of the issue.
  4. The landlord’s policy states it will attend to an emergency repair in 2 hours if it is out of office hours, or by 8pm if it is within them. These are repairs where there is a danger to people or property. It will complete urgent repairs within 5 working days, these are repairs which would cause significant nuisance if not completed. The landlord will complete non-emergency or urgent repairs in 20 working days. There is an additional category for complex repairs which the landlord will complete within an agreed timeframe.
  5. The landlord completed the damp and mould inspection within 2 days of the resident notifying it. The landlord wrote thorough notes about the resident’s situation. It identified repairs that it needed to investigate or resolve, as well as possible factors contributing to the mould. The repairs were:
    1. A mould wash and anti-fungal paint needed. The landlord said it scheduled this as an emergency repair, however it visited to complete the mould wash and anti-fungal paint on the 6th working day.
    2. The installation of window locks. The landlord should have completed this in 20 working days. The landlord said it would fit window locks due to her daughter’s severe learning difficulty, however the resident advised the Ombudsman the landlord did not fit them. This will form an order of this report.
    3. To fix or replace the bathroom extractor fan. The landlord should have completed this in 20 working days. The landlord attended on 23 February 2024 and installed a new fan on 14 March 2024. This was completed 48 working days late.
    4. A “major” leak from under the kitchen sink going into the communal hallway. The landlord should have completed this in 5 working days. The resident raised the repair on 9 January 2024, which the landlord attended and resolved on 25 January 2024. Therefore, this was completed 28 working days late.
    5. The bathroom window required wood care and an inspection of 6 single glazed sash windows. The landlord should have completed this in 20 working days. The landlord attended on 14 March 2024, but was unable to complete it, so it arranged to go back on 8 May 2024. This meant that it took the landlord 104 working days before the repair was complete. The resident reported to the Ombudsman the landlord fitted a new piece of wood in the bathroom window frame and applied a solution to the kitchen window but there is a hole in the wooden frame. The landlord conducted the window inspection, but the resident said there was conflicting advice given by the landlord. The resident does not believe the landlord will replace her windows.
    6. An inspection was needed to check the pointing on the wall outside the bedroom. The landlord should have completed this in 20 working days. The landlord arranged to do this on 8 March 2024. This was 44 working days late. The resident told the Ombudsman when the landlord came it took some photos, but as the resident’s property is not on the ground floor, she believed they could not adequately see, and they did not have a ladder. The resident said she did not hear anything following the visit.
  6. The landlord initially gave a prompt response. However, the necessary repairs were not progressed in line with the landlord’s policy. Aside from the mould wash and anti-fungal paint, it took the stage 1 complaint response to trigger raising the repairs.
  7. In the 3 months from the resident’s report to the landlord’s final resolution letter, it completed a mould wash and anti-fungal paint, resolved the leak into the communal hallway, assessed the bathroom fan, and scheduled to inspect the windows and the pointing. The landlord took some steps to address the damp and mould, but it did not fully investigate or resolve the underlying issue. The landlord did not meet its obligations under the HHSRS or act in accordance with the recommendations set out in the spotlight report to deal with damp and mould in a timely manner.
  8. It was reasonable that the landlord initially completed mould washes, however, this did not resolve the issue. If repeated attempts fail to resolve an issue, the landlord should consider alternative action to identify the root cause of the problem. The landlord was aware previous mould washes had failed and as such it should have prioritised investigations into alternative solutions.
  9. The landlord did not provide the Ombudsman with reports regarding the window inspection or the pointing inspection, therefore we are unable to see what works, if any, the landlord thinks are necessary. The resident does not believe the landlord will carry out any further work to her windows and did not hear back following the landlord’s visit regarding the pointing. This will form an order of this report.
  10. It was positive to hear the resident confirmed the landlord provided her with advice about managing condensation, which it was concerned might be a contributory factor for the mould.
  11. The resident requested a rent reduction as she believed her daughter’s bedroom was uninhabitable. It is important to note that it is outside the Ombudsman’s role to establish whether the room was habitable or not.
  12. The Ombudsman has seen evidence the landlord took steps to seriously consider the resident’s request, and it is entitled to rely on its employee’s opinions concerning these matters. The landlord took the decision the room was habitable. However, the resident did not think this and took reasonable action to keep her daughter safe. The resident told the Ombudsman both children remain sleeping in her bedroom as her daughter saw how bad the mould was and does not want to return to her room. The resident described how difficult this has been for her.
  13. The Ombudsman heard a recording of the resident’s telephone call to the landlord to chase the repairs. The resident said she had tried the dedicated phone number and left messages, but no one had got back to her. Also, the dedicated email address to contact the damp and mould team was not in use. The landlord told her because it was an existing case, she had to try that dedicated phone number. If she tried between 12-2pm she would be certain to get someone to respond. The operator said he would pass a message on to the team. He said the damp and mould team would call her, if she had not heard from anyone by 2pm on the Monday she was to call back. The difficulty in communicating with the landlord was likely to have added to any existing frustration the resident was feeling for the slow progress of the repairs. Especially as she was having to share a bedroom with both her daughters each night without knowing an end date.
  14. The resident told the Ombudsman she accepted the landlord’s compensation offer of £260 to be able to redecorate and purchase a new chest of drawers for her daughter. The landlord provided evidence it progressed the compensation payment internally, however the resident stated she has not received any payment. This would be likely to compound any loss of confidence in the landlord the resident may have felt. The landlord should pay this if it has not already.
  15. The Ombudsman acknowledges that the resident did not feel able to let her daughter use the bedroom. Whilst it is appreciated that damp and mould would have impacted on the resident, the landlord confirmed that the room remained habitable. The landlord acknowledged some of the inconvenience and distress caused, however it failed to acknowledge the full impact of this. Where the landlord made steps to deal with the damp and mould, this was outside of its repair policy time frames and the Ombudsman has not seen evidence it identified or resolved the root cause of the issue. In addition, the contact details it gave the resident did not enable her to communicate with it. The landlord was likely to have added to the resident’s disappointment by not communicating the outcomes of the window and pointing investigations, not fitting window locks, and by not receiving the compensation.
  16. In summary the Ombudsman finds there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould. As such the redress offered (£260) did not sufficiently address the significant distress and inconvenience caused to the household. This Service has concluded that compensation of £800 is reasonable to acknowledge the impact of the failings on the resident (this includes the landlord’s offer of £260). The compensation ordered by this Service is in line with the Housing Ombudsman remedies guidance for maladministration where a failure by the landlord has had a significant detrimental impact on the resident over a period of time.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. The landlord is to issue a written apology to the resident for the failings found in this report.
  2. The landlord is to pay the resident compensation totalling £800. This is inclusive of the £260 compensation award previously made.
  3. The landlord is to provide the resident and Ombudsman with a summary of the pointing and window survey. If the landlord does not have one, one is to be undertaken and any work needed or carried out is to be highlighted, and the dates this was done or will be done to be included.
  4. The landlord is to provide dates to the resident and Ombudsman of when it will fit windows locks in the resident’s property.
  5. The landlord is to confirm compliance with these orders to the Ombudsman within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord is to ensure the dedicated contact details, email, and telephone number, for the damp and mould team are current and responded to in line with its guidance.
  2. The landlord can provide its insurance information to the resident if it believes she may be able to make a claim for the damaged belongings.