Ipswich Borough Council (202325687)

Decision
Case ID	202325687
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	Ipswich Borough Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	17 December 2025

Background

1. The resident was the tenant of a decant 2- bedroom prefabricated bungalow between May 2022 to May 2023. The resident reported damp and mould in the property and made a complaint to the landlord in December 2022. The resident lives with her two children. Her son has epilepsy, autism, ADHD, and each member of the household has asthma. The resident no longer lives at the property.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about:
   1. The landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
   2. The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found that:
   1. There was maladministration in relation to the landlord’s response to damp and mould at the decant property.
   2. There was service failure in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Response to the residents reports of damp and mould

4. The landlord acknowledged it was initially slow to respond to the resident’s reports of damp and mould. It apologised for the delay and once an inspection identified minor mould, it completed repairs within two-months. This was an unreasonable delay given what it knew about the vulnerability of the occupants. The landlord did not demonstrate that it considered the household vulnerabilities and the distress and inconvenience caused. It did not offer appropriate redress or demonstrate that it had learnt lessons.

The handling of the complaint

5. The landlord’s complaint policy had a 3-stage complaints process. It has since updated its policy to align with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code). However, the complaint responses did not meet the timescales set out in its policy and this delayed its response to the complaint.

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.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is provided by the head of service. The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 14 January 2026
	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £450 made up as follows: £350 for the maladministration in relation to the damp and mould repairs, reflective of the resident’s distress and inconvenience, time and effort. £100 for the service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. The landlord may deduct from the total figure any payments it has already paid.	No later than 14 January 2026

 

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
We have recommended the landlord reviews its response to the residents reports of damp and mould and identify how it could have intervened within a reasonable timescale in view of the resident’s vulnerabilities to improve its future practice.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
09 December 2022	The resident made a complaint to the local authority’s environmental health team. She said: There was damp and mould at the decant property. The resident said she found it impossible to keep the home ventilated and warm. She said the humidity levels were high and there was condensation to the windows and the bedroom wall. The resident reported black mould in the bathroom and a leak to the kitchen ceiling when it rained. The landlord had decanted the tenant to a similar property on the same road while it completed damp and mould repairs at her previous address. She said the bungalows were known to have problems and she was experiencing the same issues. She had a disabled son who has asthma. She and her family had been unwell, and they all had respiratory issues.
28 December 2022	The resident received a stage 2 response to a separate complaint about her original property. Within this response, the landlord referred to the decant property and said it would: Send a caretaker to clean the mould. Fit a larger radiator in the bathroom. Remove tiles and black mould in bathroom. Fill exterior holes and fix roof above kitchen. Inspect for mould and damp. Provide a dehumidifier.
10 January 2023	The landlord issued its stage 1 response in which it said it would need to further investigate to identify the cause of the damp and mould issues at the property. It said that its attempts to make an appointment to survey the property were unsuccessful. It said it had offered a clean from its caretaking team and a dehumidifier, but the resident declined. It offered to make an appointment and provided the relevant contact details. The resident escalated her complaint on the same date. She said: She had not declined the survey. A surveyor attended in November and drafted a report. She had cancelled the surveyor appointment for 14 December 2022 as she had to attend hospital. She accepted a dehumidifier on 24 December 2022.
11 January 2023	The resident submitted a complaint to the local authority’s environmental health team in which she said she had moved into the decant property but had experienced damp and mould at both properties. She explained the effects on her and her children’s health, as set out above and reported no improvement in her family’s health since moving to the decant property, in fact, she felt their health had worsened. The resident said she had been told these bungalows all had a problem with the roofs. She believed the council were not listening to her and said she was scared about the welfare of her family. She also said she had exceeded the agreed stay at the decant property of 6 months.
28 February 2023	The landlord issued its stage 2 response. It apologised to the resident for her need to complain and concluded the following: It completed a survey on 18 January 2023. It acknowledged a misunderstanding in its stage 1 response in relation to the declined appointment. It explained the survey’s findings and set out what action it would take to resolve the damp and mould issues, it said it would: –       Install Positive Internal Pressure Unit (PIV). –       Service extractor fans to bathroom and kitchen. –       Open blocked air vents in living room and bedrooms and install hit and miss cover. –       Decorate areas with mould staining that cannot be removed by cleaning using fungicidal emulsion and stain blocker. It provided information to assist the resident, including the tenant handbook with advice on preventing damp, mould, and condensation. It set out the steps the resident should take to prevent further mould from appearing.
1 March 2023	The resident escalated her complaint. She believed the landlord had failed to deal with its lack of urgency and understanding. She said she followed the council’s advice but the poor ventilation at the property and fans not working meant it was impossible to keep warm and dry. She said she felt the council were not listening to her and her health and that of her children had deteriorated due to the time taken to resolve the matters. Amongst other things, the resident said that the council promoted its guidelines but gave no consideration to whether the resident does follow them instead suggesting the issues were due to lifestyle.
16 March 2023	The landlord issued its stage 3 response. It upheld the resident’s complaint about the decant property. It apologised for the residents need to complain and for its initial slow response. It acknowledged her health concerns and assured her it took her complaints seriously. It said a principal manager would visit to agree all outstanding repairs and to ensure the resident was satisfied with the proposed action. It said it had completed 2 of 5 repairs and it would complete all other repairs by 24 March 2023. It said it would then measure humidity with damp probes to ensure it was at acceptable levels. It noted the resident had reported that the measures had started to be effective and humidity levels had dropped. It provided assurance that it was listening to the resident. It concluded that it had responded within a reasonable time to make improvements to the home and given the residents’ concerns about the type of property, had allocated a 3-bed traditional build property.
Referral to the Ombudsman	On 23 February 2024, the resident asked us to consider her complaint because of the high humidity levels she experienced at the decant property. The resident told us that the damp and mould in the bathroom impacted her health. She asked for compensation and wished for the landlord to update its internal process.

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	Reports of damp and mould.
Finding	Maladministration

The resident’s reports of damp and mould

6. The resident moved to the decant property in May 2022 while the landlord completed damp and mould repairs at her original address, which was a similar prefabricated bungalow. We have previously investigated the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s response to damp and mould at her original property for which our case reference 202213290 refers. In December 2023, we found maladministration. Our previous investigation covered matters about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s move to the decant property and the allocation of an alternate property, therefore, we will not revisit those matters here. In May 2023, the resident moved to a traditional build 3-bedroom home. The scope of this investigation relates only to the resident’s reports of damp and mould at the decant property between May 2022 and May 2023.
7. The Landlord and Tenants Act 1985 requires landlords to keep the structure and exterior of their properties in good repair and ensure defects (including damp and mould) do not cause them to be unfit for human habitation.
8. The landlord’s tenancy agreement said it would complete repairs in a reasonable timeframe according to how urgent the repair is. It outlined that it was not responsible for damage caused by condensation if it has resulted due to a resident’s lack of use of the heating and ventilation it provides. Further, it set out that residents experiencing damp and mould should follow its advice on preventative steps before it will arrange an appointment.
9. In its submission to us, the landlord provided its updated damp and mould policy for 2024/2025. This post-dates the landlord’s internal complaint process. We are unsure if a damp and mould policy was in place for the period under investigation. The policy clarifies its responsibility to assess hazards within its properties, including damp and mould under the Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). It said following an inspection, it will carry out repairs as quickly as possible. The policy is reflective of the zero-tolerance approach to damp and mould following recommendations we made in our Spotlight report that was published in December 2021.
10. There were delays in the landlord’s response to carry out a timely inspection following the resident’s initial reports of damp and mould. It also should have acted sooner to carry out the identified repairs within a reasonable timescale. The resident told us she initially raised a concern in May 2022 about holes to the exterior of the property. There is no evidence that the landlord took action to respond to the resident’s concerns until January 2023, which is unacceptable.The resident reported damp and mouldto a housing officer on 14 November 2022. The landlord raised a job for an inspection, but we have seen no evidence that this took place.
11. In its stage 1 response, the landlord said it needed to investigate the required repairs further and it would arrange an inspection. The landlord completed its inspection survey on 18 January 2023, this was 65 days after the resident’s initial report. This was an unacceptable delay, and the landlord has not provided a valid reason. The landlord did suggest in its first stage 1 response that there were difficulties with contacting the resident to make an appointment, but the resident disputed this in her request to escalate her complaint. There was a cancelled appointment for 14 December 2022 which the resident notified the landlord about. Given the resident’s issues with damp and mould at her original home, it is understandable that the delays in repairs were likely to have caused further upset and frustration to the resident.
12. On 18 January 2023, the landlord’s inspection confirmed high humidity at the property, minor mould in the bathroom and damp to the kitchen ceiling. The surveyor recommended the council should complete several repairs, which included an inspection of the loft and cavity to external walls, install a positive internal pressure unit (PIV), service kitchen and bathroom fans and to open closed air vents and install vent covers in living spaces.
13. The landlord issued its stage 2 response in February 2023. The landlord set out what it proposed to do to alleviate the damp and mould issues. Its response aligned with the 3 areas it had set out in its damp and mould policy – to discuss with the tenant how it can make improvements to the property to resolve the issues, to provide information to the resident to understand how damp and mould arises, and to discuss with the tenant what steps they can take to stop it from re-appearing. In March 2023, the landlord upheld the resident’s complaint at stage 3. It apologised for the initial slow responses. It completed the repairs in March 2023, about 2 months after the resident’s report.
14. It is encouraging that the landlord had demonstrated that it had applied its damp and mould policy at stage 2, and upheld the complaint at stage 3, but it did not act quickly enough to conduct its inspection or to progress the repairs following the resident’s initial reports.
15. The resident has told us there was a lack of communications by the landlord. At the same time, the landlord was handling a separate complaint about delays to repairs to the original property. It did not update the resident about the progress of the repairs at the original property. Therefore, the resident did not know how long she would be at the decant property. The landlord also confused matters when it referred to planned repairs for the decant property in its responses to the resident’s former complaint. The landlord did not effectively manage the resident’s expectations, which left the resident with uncertainty about how long she would be at the decant property, which was unreasonable.
16. The resident made her complaints to the local authority’s environmental health department in December 2022 and January 2023 who forwarded the complaints to the landlord services. She wished to highlight to environmental health that the bungalows were not suitable for habitation due to the similar damp and mould living conditions she experienced at both properties. It was appropriate for the environmental health department to forward the complaints to the landlord to consider in line with expected process so it could act to put things right in accordance with its tenancy obligations.
17. The resident said the landlord told her she would be at the decant property for up to 6 months. After 6 months had passed,no repair works had started at the original property. The resident was seeking a larger property due to over-crowding. In November 2022, the landlord agreed that the resident should stay at the decant property as a secure tenant until another property could be allocated. The resident did not know how long she would be living at the decant property. The lack of updates was unacceptable given what the landlord knew about the inconvenience the resident had already experienced.
18. The resident said that the landlord failed to acknowledge the ongoing impact on her and her family’s health due to the high humidity in the decant property. Landlords must ensure that it considers the risk of harm to the health and safety of its residents, particularly those with vulnerabilities. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have had regard to HHSRS and to have completed a risk assessment but there is no evidence it did this. We acknowledge the resident’s comments about her health, but it is beyond our remit to consider any causal link between the landlord’s actions and the residents health which only a court can determine. We can consider a remedy for general distress and inconvenience.
19. The landlord has not demonstrated that it has maintained clear and accurate records. This contributed to the delay in action it took to address the reported damp and mould. The resident told us that a surveyor had attended the property in November 2022. The landlord’s repairs log reflects it completed an inspection on 17 November 2022, but no further information is available about the inspection. In its response to the resident in December 2022 the landlord provided a list of repair works it had planned for the decant property. In the absence of records, we are unsure whether an inspection had taken place before 18 January 2023.
20. In March 2023, the landlord met with the resident to ensure she was satisfied with the progress and quality of the repairs completed. It committed to completing all the repairs by the end of the month. It was good practice for the landlord to meet the resident to provide assurances, and it is evident that it had taken some action to complete the repairs. However, it did not act quickly enough to put things right at the outset.
21. Ultimately, the landlord allocated a 3-bed traditional build property for the resident to move into 12 months after her stay at the decant property. The landlord said this demonstrated it had listened to the resident’s concerns. However, we consider the landlord did not demonstrate that it acted in accordance with our dispute resolution principles throughout – to act fairly, to put things right and to learn.
22. The landlord did not act fairly to address the resident’s concerns at the outset about the lack of updates, the suitability of the decant property, and there were unreasonable delays in its inspection and repair works. While it acknowledged it was slow to respond to the repairs, it did not show that it had considered the vulnerability of the occupants, which was unfair. The landlord also did not demonstrate that it had reflected and learnt lessons. It attempted to put things right at stage 2 and 3, but it did not do enough to rectify the issues in a timely way. In its final complaint response, it did not go far enough to offer appropriate redress for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident and her children.
23. Therefore, we find maladministration in the landlord’s response to the substantive repairs.
24. We have made an order for the landlord to provide an apology to the resident for its failure to consider vulnerability and to act quickly in response to her damp and mould concerns at the decant property.
25. We have made a compensation order for the landlord to pay £350 made up as follows:
    1. £300 to account for the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident during her time at the decant property.
    2. £50 to account for the resident’s time and effort in contacting the landlord to repeatedly explain her living conditions and the impact on her and her children.
26. We have also recommended the landlord reviews its response to the residents reports of damp and mould and identify how it could have intervened within a reasonable timescale in view of the resident’s vulnerabilities and how it can improve its practices.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

27. The landlord’s complaint handling policy in effect at the time had a 3-stage process. It would respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days, with an extension to 10 working days with prior notice. It would respond to stage 3 complaints within 20 working days.
28. The landlord issued its stage 1 response in 19 working days which was outside the timescale set out in its policy. It issued its stage 2 response in 35 working days and did not indicate that it gave a reason for an extension within its timescales. It provided its stage 3 respond in 11 working days which fell within its timescales.
29. The landlord’s complaint handling process is an essential part of its service delivery. We expect an effective process to respond to service delivery issues in a timely manner. The complaints process was unduly long and there was a failure in the landlord to follow its own procedure. While the landlord apologised for its initial slow response, it is unclear if this was in reference to its complaint handling or the repair matter.
30. The landlord did set out how it planned to provide a remedy in relation to the repairs. It said it had listened to the resident and that she had been allocated a traditional build 3-bed property. However, it did not acknowledge the complaint handling delays, its failure to apply its own policy, or the distress and inconvenience to the resident.
31. Therefore, there was service failure in relation to the landlord’s complaint handling. We have made a compensation order for the landlord to pay £100 for the distress and inconvenience.

Learning

32. We recognise the landlord has since changed its policy on damp and mould to adopt a zero-tolerance approach and be proactive in line with expectations set out in our Spotlight report on damp and mould in December 2021. The landlord’s policy acknowledged the importance of maintaining a safe environment for its tenant and the government proposals for the introduction of Awaab’s law that requires it to make repairs within strict timescales. We note it committed to implementing this in its 24/25 damp and mould policy.
33. The landlord should ensure that it assesses the suitability of a decant property in view of a resident’s vulnerability and their needs.
34. The resident reported feeling that the landlord had dismissed her commitments to following the advice to prevent damp and mould. She said she did not feel listened to because the landlord had told her several times the issue was due to lifestyle despite damp and mould persisting after she had taken preventative measures. The landlord should always ensure that it identifies hazards quickly, and that the resident’s never feels like the problem is due to lifestyle.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

35. The landlord has not provided us with details of the survey its repairs log stated was completed in November 2022. There was also no record of the resident’s reports of holes to the external walls in May 2022. The importance of maintaining accurate records and recording repairs is highlighted in the findings of our Spotlight report on knowledge and information management (KIM). It is vital that records are accurate and consistently maintained for the safety of the resident and maintenance of the property.

Communication

36. The resident repeatedly stated she felt she was not listened to by the landlord and communication was poor. Effective communication is key to maintaining good relationships between landlords and residents and building trust.