Haringey London Borough Council (202346245)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202346245

Haringey London Borough Council

12 September 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1.        Damp and mould in the resident’s property.
    2.        A leak in the resident’s kitchen and subsequent loss of hot water.
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The property is a 2-bed ground floor flat within a block of flats.
  2. The resident reported a leak on 16 January 2023. She said the kitchen, bathroom, and corridor were in need of repair as a result, and that the leak was coming from outside the property. She made a complaint about the landlord’s handling of her reports on 19 May 2023. She said she had repeatedly tried to contact the landlord about repairs and received no responses. She said a roofer and emergency plumber attended on 7 March 2023 and turned her hot water off, but the landlord had done nothing since.
  3. The landlord issued a stage 1 response on 4 December 2023. It said it had planned to arrange an inspection by a team leader, but had been unable to do so because the team leader was too busy. It said it had booked 2 operatives to inspect on 14 December 2023, and would then arrange any follow-on works.
  4. The resident sought to escalate her complaint on 7 February 2024, 28 February 2024, and 1 March 2024. The landlord incorrectly told the resident that it could not escalate the complaint as there had been no stage 1 response. It did not escalate the complaint until 24 April 2024, when the Ombudsman contacted it on the resident’s behalf.
  5. The landlord issued a stage 2 response on 13 May 2024. It said the repair job for the kitchen was closed when the resident refused access as she wanted a renewal rather than repairs. It said it had no open works for the bathroom, but accepted that it had never addressed the reports of damp and mould. It said the damp and mould was caused by a leak, and it would carry out any damp and mould works once the leak was resolved. It offered £500 compensation for its poor communication and poor handling of repairs.
  6. The resident was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response, so referred her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident has reported that there have been persistent issues with leaks and mould in the property going back to 2020. Paragraph 42(c) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme says the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints which were not brought to a landlord as a complaint within a reasonable time (usually within 12 months). As such, this investigation will only consider events from May 2022 (12 months before the resident’s complaint) up to the landlord’s stage 2 response.

Policies and procedures

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 places a statutory obligation on the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the property in repair, as well as installations such as pipework. When a resident reports issues which fall under the landlord’s repair obligations, it is required to carry out the repairs within a reasonable timeframe.
  2. Under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, the landlord must ensure the dwelling is fit for human habitation throughout the tenancy. The landlord must also ensure that the homes it provides meet the Decent Homes Standard. Section 5 of the Decent Homes Standard says the landlord should ensure that its properties are free from category 1 hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Damp and mould is listed as a potential category 1 hazard.
  3. The landlord’s repairs policy says it will complete repairs within the following timescales:
    1. Emergency repairs will be completed within 24 hours.
    2. Routine repairs, where everything can be completed within a single visit, will be completed within 28 days.
    3. Planned repairs, where works need pre-inspection and repairs will take multiple days, will be inspected within 28 days, and the landlord will inform residents at the time of the inspection when the works will be carried out.
  4. The landlord’s damp and mould policy says it will respond to all reports of damp and mould within 5 working days. The timescales for resolving the damp and mould would then depend on the severity. However, in all cases the landlord must arrange for an inspection within 5 working days.
  5. The landlord’s compensation policy says that where there is a loss of hot water which lasts more than 3 consecutive days, it will offer compensation at a rate of £7.50 for each day the loss continues, with a 25% uplift to the compensation for a 2-bed property. It says it will also pay an additional £7.50 per week after the first 3 consecutive weeks, to reflect the resident’s time and trouble. The policy says it will also offer £10 compensation for each occasion an operative fails to attend an appointment with less than 24 hours’ notice.

Damp and mould

  1. The resident reported a leak on 16 January 2023. She said it had caused damp and mould in the property. The landlord asked for more information on 1 February 2023, which the resident provided around a week later. The landlord then booked an appointment for 7 March 2023. The appointment was for a roofer to repair guttering, rather than any inspection to confirm the cause of damp or mould. The job was then passed to a plumber when the roofer identified a leaking hot water pipe. The plumber told the landlord there was damp and mould it needed to investigate, and that follow on works were required.
  2. The first repairs appointment was almost 2 months after the resident’s report, which was not within the timescales set out in the landlord’s policy. It did not arrange for any surveyor to inspect the cause of the damp and mould. It then failed to book any follow-on works after that repair appointment until the resident made a complaint 3 months later. This was unreasonable.
  3. After passing the repair to its damp and mould team for a joint inspection on 9 June 2023, the landlord then took no action to resolve the damp and mould, despite the resident repeatedly chasing for updates. In October 2023 it told her it would arrange for a team leader to inspect the property, and then told her in its stage 1 response that its team leader had been too busy to inspect, so it would send 2 operatives on 14 December 2023. It has provided no evidence of any inspection on that date.
  4. The landlord’s stage 2 response referred to an appointment on 9 January 2024, which it failed to attend, and there is reference in an email from the resident to the landlord to an appointment on 7 February 2024, which the landlord also failed to attend. There is no reference to any such appointments in the landlord’s repair records, and as such it is unclear whether the appointments related to the damp and mould or to other repairs. The landlord said in its stage 2 response that it cancelled the January appointment due to capacity issues, but failed to tell the resident. This was unreasonable. It is apparent from the information in the landlord’s stage 2 response that the repair records provided to the Ombudsman are incomplete, and this has hampered the Ombudsman’s investigation into this complaint.
  5. The Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on damp and mould sets out what the Ombudsman expects from landlords where damp and mould are concerned. It says landlords should take a zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould, carry out proactive intervention, communicate effectively with residents, and, where significant works may be required, it should consider whether the resident should be moved from the property at an early stage. The landlord has provided no evidence to show it took any of those steps.
  6. What the records do show is that the landlord had been aware of damp and mould in the property since at least January 2023, and by May 2024 had taken no action to resolve it. It then did not carry out an inspection until June 2024, a month after its stage 2 response, demonstrating that it did not take the opportunity to learn from the complaint. That inspection identified that the damp and mould was caused by water penetration from the chimney stack, which would fall under the landlord’s repair obligations.
  7. Following that inspection, the landlord booked various works to take place throughout July 2024. It is unclear whether any of those works went ahead. The resident has advised that, as of 11 August 2024, the landlord had yet to resolve the damp and mould in her property.
  8. There was no sense of urgency on the part of the landlord to resolve the issues, despite damp and mould being a potential category 1 hazard in accordance with the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). By the time of the stage 2 response, the landlord had left the resident living with a potential category 1 hazard for 1 year and 4 months, and the photos in the June 2024 inspection report, as well as those provided by the resident in March 2024, show clear and significant water damage and black mould in the bathroom and kitchen. This would inevitably cause significant distress and inconvenience, as would the need to repeatedly chase the landlord for action for more than a year.
  9. Landlords are expected to be proactive when responding to reports of repair issues, and to carry out repairs within a reasonable timescale. The landlord did not do so, and its records do not demonstrate that it took the reports of damp and mould seriously. When providing information to assist this Service’s investigation, it said the delays were the result of a high demand for its repairs service. However, a high demand does not change the landlord’s repair obligations. It is for the landlord to ensure it has adequate resources to meet its repair obligations, and to source additional contractors or surveyors if necessary.
  10. The landlord recognised there were failings on its part, and offered the resident compensation as part of its complaints process. However, it failed to carry out repairs as it promised in the complaint response, and the £500 compensation offered does not adequately address the detriment the landlord’s inaction caused the resident. The Ombudsman considers that the landlord’s poor handling of damp and mould amounts to severe maladministration.
  11. Having considered all of the circumstances of this case, the Ombudsman considers that the landlord should pay the resident £1,000 compensation for its poor handling of damp and mould. This is inclusive of the £500 already offered. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for serious failings which have an significant impact on a resident.
  12. The failings identified in this report are also indicative of wider issues within the landlord’s repairs service and record keeping processes which are likely to negatively affect other residents if not addressed. The Ombudsman has therefore made an order for a senior management review of this case, in accordance with paragraph 54(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme.

Kitchen leak

  1. The landlord was put on notice of a leaking hot water pipe in the resident’s kitchen on 7 March 2023. It sent an emergency plumber on the same day, which was a reasonable first step. However, while the plumber disconnected the hot water, they did not complete the repair, and told the landlord that follow-on works were required. Despite the landlord being aware that further works were needed and the resident having no hot water in the meantime, it took no further action prior to her making a complaint in May 2023. This was inappropriate.
  2. Following the resident’s complaint, the landlord arranged for a plumber to attend on 6 June 2023. The plumber did not complete the repair, as they incorrectly told the resident to call her gas provider to carry out the repair. The landlord then told the resident on 9 June 2023 that it had escalated the issue and asked the plumber to carry out the works. However, no further action was taken until 26 July 2023, when the landlord completed the repair and reinstated the hot water. This was in response to a further report from the resident that day, rather than any pro-active action being taken by the landlord in response to the previous 4 months of reports. This was an unreasonable delay, for which the landlord has provided no explanation.
  3. The resident noted that the leak had caused damage to the kitchen as a result of the landlord’s delays, and asked it to repair this. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s request, and then failed to take any action for more than 2 months. This meant that, after the landlord’s initial failings in leaving the resident without hot water for over 4 months, she then had to continue chasing repairs to resolve the damage the leak caused. The landlord told her on 2 October 2023 that it would arrange for a team leader to visit and inspect the damage, and that it would confirm the inspection date that day. It then failed to do so, leaving the resident having to chase responses again. It took no further action prior to issuing its stage 1 response 2 months later, which was inappropriate and unreasonable.
  4. When the landlord issued its stage 1 response, it told the resident that it had tried to arrange for a team leader to inspect the property, but that the team leaders had been too busy. The landlord’s response does not give any indication that it had properly investigated or considered the length of the delays or the total loss of hot water in the property for 4 months, demonstrating that it did not fully grasp the nature of the complaint or the level of its failings. It also failed to offer compensation in accordance with its compensation policy (which includes compensation for loss of hot water), and failed to attend the appointments booked between the stage 1 and stage 2 responses, leaving the resident having to chase action again. In its stage 2 response, it said there were no open jobs because the resident had refused repairs. This is unsupported by evidence. 
  5. The resident said the landlord arranged an inspection on 17 May 2024, identified that major works were needed, and left the property without booking any works in. The landlord has provided no evidence of that inspection. It carried out a survey in June 2024 which identified various works to be done, and booked repairs to take place throughout July and August 2024. However, the resident told the Ombudsman that the landlord failed to attend most of the appointments, and that the repairs are now back to square one. The landlord has provided no update on the current repairs, despite the Ombudsman asking it to provide that information. In the absence of further information, the Ombudsman can only reasonably conclude that the repairs have not been carried out to date.
  6. Taking into account all of the above, the Ombudsman finds that the landlord’s poor handling of the kitchen leak amounts to severe maladministration. It has therefore considered what the landlord needs to do to put things right.
  7. The resident was without hot water in the property for a total of 141 days. The landlord’s compensation policy says the landlord will provide compensation at a rate of £7.50 per day a resident is without hot water, with a 25% uplift for 2-bed properties. The policy also says where the loss is longer than 3 weeks, a further £7.50 per week in compensation should be added for each subsequent week. The total compensation payable under the policy is therefore £1,449.38, which the landlord must pay to the resident within 4 weeks.
  8. Having considered all of the circumstances of this case, the Ombudsman also considers that the landlord should pay the resident £700 compensation for its poor handling of the kitchen leak. This is in addition to the compensation ordered for its poor handling of damp and mould set out above. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for failings which have a significant impact on a resident.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord is required, in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, to issue a stage 1 response to a complaint within 10 working days, and to issue a stage 2 response within 20 working days of an escalation request. The resident made a complaint on 19 May 2023, and the landlord did not issue a stage 1 response until 4 December 2023, more than 6 months later. The resident attempted to escalate the complaint on 7 and 28 February 2024. In response, the landlord incorrectly told the resident that no stage 1 response had been issued (despite it having been issued almost 3 months prior) and that it could not therefore escalate the complaint to stage 2. It is therefore apparent that the landlord’s poor record keeping has affected its complaint handling in addition to its repairs service.
  2. When the resident asked the landlord how long it would take to issue a complaint response, it failed to respond. It was only after the Ombudsman contacted the landlord on the resident’s behalf and instructed it to issue a stage 2 response, and later told the landlord we would issue a Complaint Handling Failure Order if it did not do so, that the landlord escalated the complaint and issued the stage 2 response.
  3. The landlord’s inaction meant that the complaints process took just under a year. This left the resident having to repeatedly chase for a response, and delayed her bringing her complaint to the Ombudsman. The landlord’s complaint handling was not in line with its complaints policy or the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code, and amounts to maladministration.
  4. The Ombudsman considers that the landlord should pay the resident a further £200 compensation for the inconvenience caused by its poor complaint handling. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for failings which adversely affect a resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there has been severe maladministration with regard to the landlord’s handling of damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there has been severe maladministration with regard to the landlord’s handling of a leak in the resident’s kitchen and subsequent loss of hot water.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there has been maladministration with regard to the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 2 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to write to the resident to set out its plan of action for the remaining works. This must include the following as a minimum:
    1. A list of all outstanding repairs.
    2. When it intends to complete each repair, and how long it anticipates the repairs will take.
    3. Whether the resident can remain in the property for the duration of the works, or if it will be arranging temporary alternative accommodation for her while the works are completed.
    4. Whether it needs any further information from the resident to enable it to carry out the repairs and, if so, what information it needs.
    5. The direct contact details for a single point of contact who will oversee the repairs.
  2. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Issue a written apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report. The apology must come from a member of the landlord’s senior management team. 
    2. Pay the resident £1,900 compensation for the failings identified in this report. This is inclusive of the £500 offered in its stage 2 response, and is broken down as follows:
      1. £1,000 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its poor handling of damp and mould.
      2. £700 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its poor handling of the kitchen leak and loss of hot water.
      3. £200 for the inconvenience caused by its poor complaint handling.
    3. Pay the resident £1,449.38 compensation for the loss of hot water in her property, in line with its compensation policy.
  3. In accordance with paragraph 54(g) of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord is ordered to carry out a senior management review of this case to determine how it will prevent a recurrence of the failings identified in this report in future. The landlord must complete the review within 8 weeks of the date of this report, and provide the Ombudsman with a copy of its review and resulting action plan. The review must include (but is not limited to) consideration of the following:
    1. The processes and resources it has in place for responding to reports of repairs, including identifying and resolving the underlying causes of damp and mould, and ensuring that repairs are completed within a reasonable timescale.
    2. The processes and resources it has in place to ensure adequate oversight and management of repairs, including contractor performance.
    3. The processes and resources it has in place to support accurate record keeping, including reports of repair issues, all actions taken in response, inspection notes, survey reports, and details of any repairs carried out.
    4. The training needs of all staff who handle reports of repairs, including knowledge of its repair obligations and repairs policy.
    5. The training needs of all staff who handle complaints, and whether it has adequate resources in place to respond to complaints in line with the Complaint Handling Code.
    6. Identification of the underlying causes of the failings identified in this report, the steps it intends to take to prevent them recurring in future, and when it will take those steps.
  4. The landlord is to provide this Service with evidence of compliance with the above orders within the timescales set out above.