Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council (202500561)

Decision
Case ID	202500561
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	30 January 2026

Background

The resident is elderly, has health issues, and has been represented by a representative in correspondence with his landlord and us. He complained about the landlord’s handling of damp and mould, remains concerned that root causes have not been resolved, and believes the landlord should arrange an inspection by a suitably qualified independent damp surveyor.

What the complaint is about

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
1. Reports of damp, mould and a leaking roof.
2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould
There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The reports of damp, mould and a leaking roof

The landlord’s actions and compensation reasonably remedied the service issues and impact.

Complaint handling

The landlord did not acknowledge that its stage 2 response was delayed by around a week, but its overall response and compensation reasonably remedied this and any impact.

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.

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
The landlord is recommended to re-offer the resident the £800 it awarded, as our findings are on the basis this is paid to the resident.
The landlord is recommended to inspect the resident’s concerns about ongoing condensation on the toilet cistern, review any advice or further action, and inform him of the outcome to this.
The landlord is recommended to: Review a 30 October 2024 damp inspection recommendation to install a passyfier vent in the front bedroom to the right side of window. Consider whether this has been or needs to be done, and inform the resident of the outcome.
The landlord is recommended to liaise with the resident and ensure it has recorded details of all the individuals he authorises to contact the landlord on his behalf.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
17 October 2024	The resident complained via his representative: He said he had suffered from a lung condition for many years and was currently recovering in hospital from an infection. He complained about the landlord’s handling of repairs for damp and mould, which impacted his breathing and health, and said it had breached its legal duties to keep the property free from hazards. He raised concerns about returning to the property with the damp and mould still present and asked it to complete repairs to remove it before he was discharged.
4 November 2024	The landlord responded at stage 1: It noted that the resident complained about repairs delays and its communication. It said it had reviewed repairs information and noted that after a November 2023 report, it had completed some January 2024 works, then received no further reports until 17 October 2024. It said it had arranged a 30 October 2024 damp specialist inspection and said their report had found no damp and mould in internal areas. It had identified only minor works and detailed appointments on 7, 11 and 25 November 2024 for works to install cladding behind a toilet area, install double glazing to kitchen and bedroom windows, replace some tiles, and clear gutters. It offered £250, which comprised £150 for the distress and experience the repairs had caused, and £100 for the time it was taking to repair the windows.
15 November 2024	The resident escalated his complaint via his representative: He expressed dissatisfaction with the landlord’s approach to damp and mould and said its handling of issues had put his health at serious risk. He raised concerns that the response and the priority that was given to the repairs were not proportionate to the delays for repairs such as the windows and a roof leaking for 12 months. He said he lacked confidence that the landlord had sufficiently investigated the issues and requested an independent inspection.
30 December 2024	The landlord responded at stage 2: It provided explanation about its approach to damp and mould. It noted that after the November 2023 reports, it had identified some roof repairs, but a works order was completed in error and no repairs for this were carried out. It noted the resident had also reported window condensation in March 2024, but it had not raised a repair or made further attempts to contact him. It noted that it had recently inspected and completed works in response to the complaint. It said it was satisfied with the findings, that there were no outstanding repairs, and that it would not engage an independent surveyor. It said it had not left the resident’s home in an unsafe condition, but it acknowledged that it had delayed in repairing the roof and windows and should have done this work sooner. It increased its offer to £800, which comprised the £250 it previously offered, £150 for the window repair delays, £250 for the roof repair delays, and £150 for any additional distress and inconvenience.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate. He raises dissatisfaction with repairs delays despite him and a GP raising concerns about the impact on his health. He raises dissatisfaction that the landlord decided not to arrange an independent damp inspection. He raises concerns that the landlord does not have a damp and mould policy that prioritises repairs for vulnerable residents. He lacks confidence the issues have been addressed and is concerned that damp and mould will reappear, putting him at risk of further lung infections. He says his toilet cistern is continuously covered in condensation despite using a fan, suspects water is trapped in wall cavities, and feels the landlord has hidden issues behind bathroom cladding rather than resolved them. He is seeking for the landlord to ensure his home is free from the risk of damp and mould. He is also seeking to be awarded compensation to recognise the actual harm caused him by living in a property not free from hazards.

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	The landlord’s handling of reports of damp, mould and a leaking roof
Finding	Reasonable redress

The resident complains about repairs delays, lacks confidence causes of damp and mould have been resolved, and seeks an inspection by an independent surveyor.
The landlord received reports of damp and mould in November 2023 and it arranged a mould wash and inspection, which identified works that included the bathroom flooring and the roof. The landlord completed bathroom works in January 2024, but the roof works were not completed due to weather conditions and staff availability.
The resident’s representative chased in March 2024 about the roof works, raised concerns about the impact of damp and mould on the resident, and supplied photos that showed windows misted with condensation. The landlord responded that it was unable to share information with the representative, but it would contact the resident to discuss repairs. Following this the representative said they had the resident’s consent.
The representative then complained on 17 October 2024. He said the resident was recovering in hospital from a lung infection, and said the landlord had breached its duties to keep the property free from hazards. He asked it to complete outstanding repairs before the resident’s return home.
The landlord arranged an inspection on 30 October 2024. This found the roof was watertight but recommended some preventative roof verge, felt and gutter works. This also found no issues with damp and mould but recommended some works for windows with condensation, bathroom cladding, and a bedroom passyfier vent. The landlord subsequently completed bathroom cladding works on 7 November 2024, roof works on 25 November 2024, and windows works on 3 December 2024.
In its complaint responses, the landlord explained its approach to damp and mould, detailed its actions in response to the inspection, and said it would not engage an independent surveyor as it was satisfied with the inspection’s findings. It also said that it had not left the property in an unsafe condition. However, it acknowledged and apologised that there had been issues with its handling, which included delays for the roof and window repairs, and awarded £800 for this.
The resident raises concerns about the landlord’s handling given his lung condition, lacks confidence that damp and mould is resolved, and seeks an independent inspection. We understand the resident’s concerns, including about the impact on his health, but the landlord’s response was reasonably proportionate to the available evidence.
The October 2024 inspection said the roof was watertight, but identified preventative works the landlord went on to complete in a timely manner from the inspection. It is not clear that water ingress affected the property, including since November 2023 when roof works were first recommended. However, the landlord appropriately acknowledged failings and delays for the roof works since these took a year.
The October 2024 inspection found no presence of damp and mould, but it identified works for bathroom cladding and windows, which the landlord also went on to complete in a timely manner from the inspection. However, the landlord was appropriate to acknowledge failings and delays for the windows works since these took 8 months.
The resident raises concerns that the landlord has hidden damp and mould issues behind the bathroom cladding. The October 2024 inspection found no damp and mould in the bathroom, but cladding is understood to have been recommended to cover the bathroom wall due to splashback from the shower. This shows that the action to install bathroom cladding was reasonable action to protect the wall.
The resident requested an independent inspection due to a lack of confidence damp and mould issues were resolved. The landlord is entitled to rely on the professional opinion of its staff in its decision-making, unless information suggests otherwise which is not evident here. We also expect landlord to be pro-active for damp and mould, particularly where this involves vulnerable residents, but we may take into account the evidence for the nature and frequency of reports about damp and mould.
The October 2024 inspection did not report any significant issues with damp and mould, found the roof to be watertight, and found the damp proof course to be in good condition. We understand damp and mould has not been reported to the landlord in the 13 months since the works completed after the October 2024 complaint and inspection.
The landlord meets its day-to-day repairs obligations through responsive repairs after a resident has reported. The absence of reports since December 2024 provides limited evidence that the repairs have not been effective, and limited basis for an independent inspection. The resident has the option to report further damp and mould issues to the landlord to give it the opportunity to investigate these and take any appropriate action. He also has the option to explore commissioning his own independent inspection if he believes this is necessary.
The resident raised concerns about the landlord’s handling given his health conditions, and the landlord’s response and actions reasonably addressed these in line with our approach. The landlord had regard for his vulnerabilities, assigned a single point of contact, considered if he needed temporary accommodation, and completed the identified repairs in a timeframe that reasonably reflects its policies.
The resident is unhappy with the compensation offered by the landlord and said he is seeking compensation that recognises the actual harm caused by living in a hazardous property. We do not make decisions about cause and liability for the impact on health, and award damages for this like the courts. The resident has the option to seek legal advice about this. We can consider whether a landlord appropriately acknowledged and remedied any service failings and their impact.
The resident supplies a 30 October 2024 GP letter, that supports the addressing of mould issues to help manage his lung condition and prevent complications, and which the landlord acted after. The letter does not show any clear causal links and the landlord disputes the property has been left in an unsafe condition.
This is not unreasonable since the October 2024 inspection found the roof to be watertight, found there was no damp and mould, and identified what were considered minor issues. However, the resident will have been caused distress, inconvenience and frustration by aspects such as the delays in the roof and window repairs.
The landlord appropriately acknowledged this and awarded £800 to recognise this. This is in line with amounts our remedies guidance says are applicable where there has been maladministration or severe maladministration, and a significant impact, including physical. This is reasonably proportionate to any evident failings and impact and is in line with what we may have awarded.
While the above is the case, we note the October 2024 inspection recommended for a passyfier vent to be installed in a front bedroom. It is not evident this was progressed and if not, why. It is not clear this will have had a significant impact, as the front bedroom is not the resident’s main bedroom and no damp and mould was found in the property. However, we have recommended for the landlord to review the status of this, along with a condensation issue the resident says he experiences on his toilet cistern.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

The landlord has a 2-stage complaint process. It aims to acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It then aims to provide a formal response within 10 working days at stage 1, and within 20 working days at stage 2.
The landlord’s stage 1 acknowledgement and response were in line with this. However, it is not evident if and when the stage 2 was acknowledged, and the stage 2 response was also delayed. The stage 2 response exceeded the 20-working day timescale set out in its policy and our Complaint Handling Code, by a week if allowing for 5 working days to acknowledge the complaint.
The landlord did not acknowledge this. However, the delay and impact was not significant, and the compensation it offered reasonably remedies any evident failings and impact in respect to its complaint handling.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping) and communication

The resident’s representative contacted the landlord in March 2024, and while they said they had the resident’s consent, the landlord refused to engage with them due to data protection
The landlord could reflect on record keeping and communication issues that led to the roof and window repairs delays, and how to try to avoid similar issues in future. This could include whether any further action could have been taken, such as the following of a process to obtain the resident’s consent for the representative to discuss his repairs on his behalf, or signposting to the resident about this.