Haringey London Borough Council (202330017)

Background

1. The resident lives in a house with 2 of her adult children, who are disabled and for whom she is their sole carer. She complained that, following a previous determination by us in May 2023, the landlord has not taken action to resolve damp and mould in the property.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
   1. Reports of leaks, damp and mould and the associated repairs.
   2. Associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
   1. Reports of leaks, damp and mould and the associated repairs.
   2. The associated complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

4. We have found that:

The landlord’s handling of leaks, damp and mould and the associated repairs

5. The landlord repeatedly failed to address repairs it had arranged following the previous determination by this Service in May 2023. It has not responded to or inspected a concern raised by the resident that a window is broken for around 29 months. It took approximately 7 and a half months to carry out mould treatment in the property and did not complete the follow-up work it agreed in its complaint responses. When she first reported in February 2024 the roof leak had returned following its repairs it did not inspect this for 5 months. It also did not inspect the roof again after July 2024 when she reported the leak was still present.

The landlord’s complaint handling

6. The landlord significantly delayed responding to the resident’s complaint at both stages. It did not define or discuss her complaint with her at either stage before issuing its responses. As a result, it did not respond to a significant part of her complaint despite her requesting it to address this 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.

What we have not investigated

7. The resident made a previous complaint to us that related to the landlord’s handling of leaks, damp and mould, its repair to the roof, window frames and windowpanes (our reference 202126874). We determined this complaint on 25 May 2023. In line with our Scheme we may not investigate matters we have already decided on. This investigation has focussed on events after 25 May 2023.
8. The resident told us that the landlord identified a number of issues with damp and mould due to the construction of the extension of the property (referred to as a ‘lean-to’) in an inspection of 16 June 2023 and she was unhappy with its response to these. Other than the repairs to the roof of the lean-to these findings were not part of our determination for 202126874 and the resident did not raise this in the complaint to the landlord we are considering. If she remains unhappy about its handling of the issues identified in the inspection, she should raise a separate complaint.
9. The resident also told us that the mould damaged some of her personal belongings. She said she has made a claim to the landlord’s insurer, which is ongoing and she has not received a response yet. We cannot make a binding decision on whether the landlord is liable for the claimed damage and cannot investigate the actions of an insurance company. We have, therefore, not investigated this further.

What we have investigated

10. Following our determination for 202126874 the landlord sent the resident a letter on 20 June 2023 outlining the actions it would take in response to our orders. It said it had arranged for a carpenter and glazier to inspect the windows of the property that day. It also said it had scheduled the roofing repairs for 25 July 2023.
11. The resident told the landlord on 21 June 2023 that the contractors who attended the previous day said 1 of the windows at the front of the property could not be fixed. She said that, as well as contributing to the damp and mould, this was a safety risk as the window could not be closed. Though the landlord told us it completed the window repairs on 7 November 2023 she wrote to it on the same day saying its operatives had only repaired the windows at the rear of the property. She asked the landlord in her email, and at both stages of her complaint, how it intended to resolve the broken window at the front.
12. There is no evidence that the landlord responded to the resident or arranged any further inspection, repairs, or replacement of the window from 21 June 2023 up until the date of this report. As such this has been outstanding for a prolonged period of approximately 2 and a half years. This substantially exceeds the timescales of its repair policy which says a reported repair of a window not closing is an emergency repair it will make safe within 24 hours.
13. For the repair to address the leak from the roof we saw the landlord attended on 25 July 2023 as stated in its letter of 20 June 2023, including moving the downpipe away from the lean-to of the property. It recorded that follow-on work was needed to fix a new drain cover to the guttering, which was not in stock. It fitted this and completed the repair on 25 August 2023, 66 calendar days after its letter setting out the planned repairs. This was within the timescales of its repair policy which says it will complete planned work, which includes repairs to roofs and guttering, within 80 calendar days.
14. The landlord said as part of its letter of 20 June 2023 it would arrange a mould wash for 10 and 11 August 2023 once it completed the repairs. We have seen no evidence this happened. It carried out a damp and mould inspection on 30 October 2023 which recorded 2 bedrooms required mould washes. It also noted that the bedrooms, bathroom and the lean-to needed redecoration. It scheduled and carried out this work on 7 February 2024, approximately 7 and a half months after its letter of 20 June 2023. This is not consistent with its damp and mould policy which says it will complete mould washes and repairs in line with its repair standard of 28 calendar days for routine repairs, regardless of the potential hazard.
15. In the resident’s email to the landlord of 7 November 2023 she said there were rotten roof timbers on the lean-to where the downpipe of the property had been moved from on 25 July 2023. She also said the scaffolding was still present at the property and it was blocking natural light. The landlord did not provide a response to either of these points. There is no record of when it removed the scaffolding and we have seen no explanation why it took at least 2 months to remove this from the property given it recorded completing the roofing repairs on 25 August 2023. We have also seen no response to her repair request regarding the roof timbers. This was outstanding for approximately 2 years up until the date of this report, since she first raised this. This substantially exceeds its 80-calendar day timescale for planned repairs.
16. As part of the landlord’s stage 1 response on 12 February 2024, it told the resident it had scheduled an appointment for 14 March 2024. This was to complete further follow-on works from the damp and mould inspection and to install an extractor fan. There is no evidence it attended on this date. It attended on 10 May 2024 but recorded she asked it to reschedule as the work would take more than the half-day it had allotted. It recorded that follow-on works were necessary but there is no evidence it arranged this to complete the repairs in line with its repair policy. She said she made arrangements herself to complete the redecoration of the property as she did not hear anything further from the landlord.  
17. In the resident’s escalation request on 12 February 2024, she sent the landlord evidence of an ongoing leak from the roof and asked it to carry out further repairs. It did not create a work order to inspect the roof and guttering until 22 March 2024 over a month later. It attempted to attend on 28 March 2024 but recorded no access as she had not been informed of the appointment. Though it told the resident in its stage 2 response it had scheduled this for 24 June 2024 this did not take place until 31 July 2024 and we have not seen any explanation was given to her for this further delay. As such it took 5 months to attend after she made the repair request. This significantly exceeded the timescales of its repair policy which said it should inspect and make safe repairs to roofs and gutters within 7 calendar days and complete any repairs in 80 calendar days.
18. The landlord’s repair record on 31 July 2024 said there was no evidence of a leak and closed the repair. The resident told us the leak from the roof has been ongoing from then for approximately 16 months up until the date of this report. She told us she phoned the landlord’s repair line following its attendance on 31 July 2024 to report the leak was continuing. Whilst we do not have evidence of this call from either party the landlord told us a repair request was created and it attempted to attend (on a date it did not specify) but was not able to gain access. There is no evidence it took further action to inspect the reported roof leak up until the date of this report, which greatly exceeds the 7 calendar day timescales of its repair policy.     
19. Throughout the events described above we have not seen evidence the landlord communicated with the resident about its handling of the repairs other than its formal complaint responses to her. There is no evidence the landlord recognised her caring responsibilities or the potential vulnerabilities of her children in its handling of these issues. There is also no evidence if it assessed whether they had priority needs in line with its repair policy or if they were at any raised risk from the damp and mould.

20. The landlord operates a 2-stage complaint process. It acknowledges complaints within 5 working days. It responds to stage 1 and 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days respectively. This is compliant with both versions of the Complaint Handling Code (the Code) which were in effect during the resident’s complaint.
21. The resident complained to the landlord on 9 November 2023. On 29 November 2023 she also forwarded her email from 7 November 2023, regarding repairs to the window and roof timbers, to add to her complaint. It did not acknowledge her complaint until 5 February 2024, 59 working days after her original complaint which greatly exceeded the timescales of its policy. There is also no evidence it defined her complaint at this time as it was required to do in line with the Code.
22. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 12 February 2024, 5 working days after its acknowledgement. Whilst this is in line with the timescales of its policy, in terms of the content of its response, it did not address the repairs to the window and roof timbers she had raised on 7 and 29 November 2023. This was not consistent with the Code which said any additional complaint raised during the investigation should be incorporated into the stage 1 response if this has not been issued.
23. The resident escalated her complaint on the same day as the stage 1 response. From the resident’s account of events, it appears the landlord acknowledged her escalation request at the time and said it would respond by 11 March 2024. She sent a follow-up email on 16 February 2024 clarifying she wanted it to respond to the repairs regarding the window and roof timbers. We have not seen evidence it logged this further email or clarified the definition of the complaint with her as it should have in line with the Code.  
24. The resident wrote to the landlord on 18 March 2024 to say she had not received a response by 11 March 2024 as it had advised. It replied the following day to say that due to staff absence it could not issue its response until 26 March 2024. This may not have been within the landlord’s control and the Code allows landlords to extend their response times. However, it should have informed her of this proactively before its previously agreed response date.
25. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 25 April 2024, 58 working days after her escalation request and its acknowledgement. This exceeded the timescale of its policy, and we have seen no explanation for its further delay in responding after 26 March 2024.
26. In terms of the content of the stage 2 response the landlord again did not respond to the resident’s complaint about the window and roof timbers. As such, despite her raising it at both stages of its complaint process it did not provide any answer to these aspects of her complaint. This was a significant failing which meant it did not adequately address and respond to the complaint as the Code required it to do.   

Learning

27. In light of the introduction of Awaab’s Law the landlord should ensure its damp and mould policy contains suitable guidance for its staff to meet the key requirements of this legislation, as highlighted in the Ombudsman’s recent ‘Learning from severe maladministration’ report. Its damp and mould policy should set out specifically how it will assess risk and resolve access issues.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

28. Though the landlord provided records for most repairs and said it completed these it should make sure details of the completed repairs or how it assessed that no repairs were needed are included within its records. These should also include any significant information given to the resident(s) in the appointment. It is important it keeps a robust record of contact, repairs, and services provided. This is because clear, accurate, and easily accessible records provide an audit trail and enhance landlords’ ability to identify and respond to problems when they arise.

Communication

29. There were significant delays in contacting the resident regarding her complaint. There was also minimal evidence to show it kept her updated about its planned repairs outside of its formal complaint responses or that it recognised the potential vulnerabilities she was reporting in relation to her children’s disabilities. It is important that the landlord effectively manages residents’ expectations about how intended to respond to their concerns and that they are kept informed of any delays and how it intends to mitigate the impact of these.