Read our new Spotlight report on repairs and maintenance – repairing trust.

Lewes District Council (202329611)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202329611

Lewes District Council

28 January 2025

 

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 handling of:
    1. A leak and damp and mould at the resident’s property.
    2. The associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder of the property, and the landlord is the freeholder.
  2. The resident has stated she first reported the damp issue in January 2022. However, the landlord has provided no records in relation to this report.
  3. On 30 June 2022, the landlord’s surveyor inspected the resident’s property following a report of damp. The surveyor identified poor repointing of the flat located above the resident’s and stated that there could be a potential leak. He also stated that there had been some shift in the foundations and floor.
  4. On 17 October 2022, the resident submitted her complaint to the landlord. She explained she had some issues regarding damp and subsidence within her property. The resident explained she had requested a copy of the surveyor’s report on multiple occasions but had still not received a copy. She stated she would like the landlord to provide her with a copy of the surveyor’s report and explain what action it would take to resolve the repair issues at her property.
  5. On 11 November 2022, the landlord provided the resident with a copy of the surveyor’s report. However, it did not provide a stage 1 complaint response to the resident. The landlord has also confirmed with the Ombudsman that it did not issue a stage 1 complaint response to the resident.
  6. On 25 April 2023, the resident contacted the landlord and asked for her complaint to be escalated to the next stage of the landlord’s complaints process. Following this, the landlord responded to the resident and asked for her complaint points which she wanted to be considered.
  7. On 22 May 2023, the resident provided the landlord with her complaint points to be considered. She explained that she first reported the issue nearly 18 months ago. She stated there had been a lack of communication from the landlord about the inspection completed by the drainage contractor. The resident explained after the cavity wall insulation installation, wet patches appeared and excess moisture. Due to this, the resident purchased a dehumidifier, and she explained her electricity bill had increased from running the dehumidifier and her heating bills had increased from needing to have the heating on more because of the issues within the property. The resident also explained the damp and mould were impacting her mental health and she was worried about her daughter’s general health.
  8. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 11 July 2023. It explained that its surveyor recently completed an inspection at the resident’s property. The inspection identified that condensation may have been contributing to the issues experienced, and the resident’s extractor fan she had at the time was not adequate. The landlord explained that this would not fall within the responsibility of the landlord to replace. In addition, the landlord confirmed it had requested a further cavity wall survey and raised a job for the bedroom windows to be overhauled.
  9. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman. She stated her desired outcome was for the landlord to provide an explanation of how it would improve its service. She also stated that she would like compensation for her dehumidifier and the running of it. In addition, the resident also explained she would like compensation for her heating costs.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

  1. The resident has mentioned as part of the complaint that the damp and mould has impacted her mental health and may have impacted her daughter health. It is outside the Ombudsman’s role to determine whether there is a direct link between the landlord’s actions or inaction and any specific impact on the resident and her daughter’s health. It would be more appropriately suited for a court or liability insurer to investigate this as a personal injury claim. Courts can award damages in a different way to the Ombudsman and review medical evidence. However, it is generally accepted that damp and mould can pose a significant health risk. This service can consider the general risk, and distress and inconvenience caused by any errors by the landlord as well as the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about her and her daughter’s health.

Policies and Procedures and lease agreement.

  1. The resident’s lease agreement states that the landlord is responsible for repairing the structure and the exterior of the building, including the drains, gutters, and external pipes. It also states that the landlord is responsible for rebuilding and reinstating the property and the building in case of destruction or damage against insured risks.
  2. The landlord’s repair priorities document explains it will respond to an emergency repair within 24 hours, an urgent repair within 7 days and a routine repair within 28 days.
  3. The landlord’s damp and mould procedure explains when a resident reports damp and mould issues within their property, the landlord will arrange for a trained operative or a surveyor to inspect the resident’s property depending on the severity of the damp and mould. In addition, the procedure states following the inspection, a job will be raised for the necessary works.

A leak and damp and mould at the resident’s property.

  1. In June 2022, the landlord’s surveyor inspected the resident’s property following a report of damp at the property. The resident mentioned as part of her complaint sent to the landlord, she initially reported the damp issue prior to this. However, the records provided by the landlord do not evidence a report of damp prior to June 2022. Therefore, this report will investigate the damp issues from June 2022 onwards.
  2. During the surveyor’s visit in June 2022, the surveyor identified poor repointing to the flat located above the resident’s property. He also explained that there had been a shift in the foundations and floor and stated that there could be a possible leak. The surveyor recommended for the drain to be inspected for a possible leak, sealant to be replaced on the rear bedroom window, remedial treatment to the cavity wall and repointing to the flat above the resident’s property.
  3. Following the surveyor’s inspection, there was a delay in the landlord completing the recommended repairs. Due to the delay, the resident submitted a complaint to the landlord in October 2022. She explained she had requested a copy of the surveyor’s inspection report on several occasions. In addition, the resident stated one room with the issues was for her 11-month-old daughter. She also explained that she would like the landlord to confirm the action which would be taken to rectify the repair issues.
  4. In December 2022, the landlord’s contractor attended the resident’s property and completed cavity wall repairs. However, following the repair, the resident contacted the landlord and explained that there was still an issue with water getting into the wall. She also stated that the damp patches had moved to a different location on the wall. Because of the damp issues still being present in the property, the resident purchased her own dehumidifier at the end of December 2022 to help manage the dampness. The landlord acted appropriately by completing the repairs to the cavity wall, as recommended by the surveyor. However, it took several months for the repair to be completed, and the repair did not resolve the damp at the resident’s property.
  5. Shortly after, the landlord’s contractor completed cavity wall repairs. The landlord’s drainage contractor carried out a CCTV survey of the drain in January 2023. Following the survey, the drainage contractor recommended repairs to drains, including a drainage patch linear to seal the pipe work. Also, they recommended all the guttering to be cleared, and downpipes to be checked to ground level. The landlord took reasonable steps by completing the drain survey as recommended by its surveyor.
  6. Although the landlord completed a drainage CCTV survey, there was a delay in the contractor completing the recommended repairs to the drain. Due to this, the resident contacted the landlord in February 2023, asking for an update on the outstanding repairs. The landlord emailed the resident with an update in March 2023 and apologised for the delay and explained that it had raised a work order for its drainage contractor to complete the recommended repairs. It confirmed that the contractor would contact her directly to arrange an appointment. The delay in the landlord completing the drain repairs was unreasonable and resulted in the resident and her baby daughter living in damp conditions for longer than necessary.
  7. On 20 March 2023, the landlord contacted the resident and asked her to confirm the length of time she had been using the dehumidifier, so it could consider possible compensation. The resident responded to the landlord’s query on the same day and confirmed that she had been using it 24/7 since she purchased it at the end of December 2022. In addition, the resident mentioned that drain repairs were still outstanding, and the drainage contractor was due to attend on 21 March 2023 to carry out repairs. It was a positive step that the landlord planned to consider compensation for the dehumidifier usage. However, the resident has confirmed with the Ombudsman that the landlord did not reimburse her for the purchase of the dehumidifier or provide compensation for the usage. This was unreasonable, particularly as the resident purchased the dehumidifier to help manage the damp conditions in the property whilst there were delays in the landlord completing the necessary repairs.
  8. The resident has provided the Ombudsman with a copy of the receipt for the dehumidifier she purchased, which shows a cost to the resident of £188.95. There was a considerable delay in the landlord resolving the leak and damp and mould, and the resident was living in the property with her baby daughter. Therefore, the Ombudsman recognises why she purchased the dehumidifier. It would be appropriate for the landlord to reimburse the dehumidifier costs of £188.95. The Ombudsman will send the landlord a copy of the receipt the resident has provided for its records. In addition, the landlord should pay the resident additional compensation for any increased electricity usage she would have incurred for using the dehumidifier. The resident also mentioned as part of her complaint that she had to increase her heating usage because of the damp issues within the property. Therefore, the landlord should also pay the resident compensation for the increased heating usage. The compensation should cover the period the repairs were outstanding, and the resident should provide the landlord with copies of her electricity and gas bills for the period when the dehumidifier was running and the same period the previous year, so the landlord can calculate the compensation.
  9. In March 2023, the landlord informed the resident that a further surveyor visit would be required to assess the conditions inside the property and assess whether compensation would be appropriate. There was a delay in the landlord arranging the surveyor inspection and due to this, the resident chased the landlord in May 2023. The surveyor’s appointment ended up taking place on 31 May 2023. The Ombudsman would have expected the landlord to arrange the additional surveyor’s inspection much sooner than it did, considering the damp and mould had been an issue for nearly a year. The delay by the landlord was unreasonable.
  10. The surveyor inspection from 31 May 2023 recommended a cavity insulation survey to be completed to help confirm if there were issues with the cavity. In addition, it recommended for one of the bedroom windows to be overhauled and also suggested that the resident upgrade her extractor fan. The landlord correctly confirmed the resident would be responsible for the extractor fan, as she was a leaseholder. The landlord acted appropriately in completing the further survey inspection to help identify the cause of the damp and mould. However, there was a delay in the landlord taking steps to complete the recommendations.
  11. The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 11 July 2023. It explained that following the surveyor inspection, it had requested a cavity wall survey and raised a work order for the bedroom window to be overhauled. The landlord failed to apologise for the delay in resolving the damp and mould at the resident’s property. In addition, it also did not offer the resident any compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience she would have experienced from the ongoing repairs.
  12. In July 2023, the landlord’s cavity specialist surveyor carried out an inspection at the resident’s property. The surveyor recommended a full extraction of the existing insulation material, repairs to the brickwork and the application of storm dry water-repellent to all affected areas.
  13. There was a further delay by the landlord in completing the works recommended as part of the cavity survey and the landlord failed to complete the works prior to June 2023. The landlord’s records show the landlord took no further action until February 2024, which is when its contractor attended to inspect the condition of the building and inspect a leak identified from the chimney. The length of time taken for the landlord to respond to the repair issues was unreasonable and resulted in the resident and her baby daughter living in damp and mould conditions for a long period of time.
  14. In addition, on 20 March 2024, the landlord’s contractor completed an inspection of the roof as the condition of the roof was possibly contributing to the damp and mould repair issues at the resident’s property. The roofing contractor recommended for the felt and battens to be renewed and for the roof tiles to be reinstalled. The contactor confirmed that scaffolding would need to be erected for the works to be carried out. The landlord acted reasonably by carrying out a roof inspection. The Ombudsman recognises sometimes it can take a while to identify the cause of leak or damp and mould. However, considering the issue had been ongoing since June 2022, it would have been reasonable for a roof inspection to be carried out sooner than it was.
  15. The landlord has confirmed that all the recommended works following the cavity surveyor inspection were completed on 9 April 2024. In addition, the works to the roof were completed on 19 April 2024. In January 2025, the resident confirmed to the Ombudsman that she had no further issues since the completion of the repairs in April 2024. If the resident experiences any further issues in the future, she will need to report this to the landlord so it can investigate the new report in line with the timescales referenced in its repairs policy.
  16. Overall, there was a significant delay in the landlord resolving the damp and mould issues at the resident’s property. It took the landlord nearly 2 years to resolve the issue, which was unreasonable and would have been distressing for the resident and her family. The landlord failed to offer the resident any compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. Therefore, it would be appropriate for the landlord to offer the resident £600 compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the delays in resolving the leak, and damp and mould. The compensation awarded is in line with the Ombudsman’s approach to compensation, which is set out in our remedies guidance (published on our website). The remedies guidance suggests awards of £100 to £600 where there has been a failure by the landlord, which adversely affected the resident, but there may be no permanent impact. In this case, there was no permanent impact as the repairs to resolve the leak and damp and mould were eventually completed, although there was distress and inconvenience for the resident before the repairs were completed.

The associated complaint.

  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) sets out the Ombudsman’s expectations for landlords’ complaint handling practices. The code states that a stage 1 response should be provided within 10 working days of the complaint. It also explains that a stage 2 response should be provided within 20 working days from the request to escalate the complaint. The landlord’s complaints policy includes the same timescales referenced in the Code.
  2. The Code also states that a landlord must accept a complaint unless there is a valid reason not to do so. In addition, it explains when a complaint is made, it must be acknowledged and logged at stage 1 of the landlord’s complaint procedure within 5 days of receipt.
  3. The landlord’s complaints policy explains that it has a 2-stage process for complaints to ensure its customers have the opportunity to challenge its decisions and for these to be reviewed. The Code also states that a landlord must only escalate a complaint to stage 2 once it has completed stage 1 and this must be at the request of the resident.
  4. The resident contacted the landlord on 17 October 2022, expressing dissatisfaction with the landlord’s handling of the leak and, damp and mould at her property. In addition, she stated that she was unhappy that she had not been provided with a copy of the surveyor’s report she had requested multiple times.
  5. The landlord failed to log the resident’s correspondence as a formal complaint. This was unreasonable. The resident expressed dissatisfaction and provided valid complaint points for her correspondence to be considered as a formal complaint. Therefore, we would have expected the landlord to consider it as a complaint and issue a stage 1 complaint response in this instance. However, instead, the landlord provided the resident with a copy of the requested surveyor’s report on 11 November 2022 but failed to investigate the resident’s complaint and provide a stage 1 complaint response. The landlord did not comply with its own complaints policy and the Code when it failed to log the resident’s correspondence as a complaint and delayed the resident from bringing her complaint to the Ombudsman.
  6. The landlord acknowledged and logged the resident’s correspondence dated 25 April 2023 and 16 May 2023 as a complaint. However, instead of following the 2-stage complaint process, it issued the resident with a stage 2 complaint response on 11 July 2023 instead of a stage 1 response. Its failure to do this has resulted in the landlord not complying with its own complaints policy or the Code. It also resulted in the resident not having the opportunity to challenge the landlord’s complaints decision and request a review. The stage 2 response was also late and outside the 20-working day timescale.
  7. The landlord informed the Ombudsman in January 2025 that the resident’s complaint should have been considered as a stage 1 formal complaint instead of a stage 2 complaint. It confirmed that it had implemented case management to prevent the same error from happening in the future. It is positive that the landlord has taken learning from this complaint. Therefore, the Ombudsman will not make any orders for the landlord to improve its practices in this area.
  8. However, considering the landlord’s complaint handling errors, there has been maladministration by the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint. It would be appropriate for the landlord to pay the resident £150 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. This amount is compliant with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance as referenced above.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of a leak and damp and mould at the resident’s property.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

  1. The landlord is ordered to:
  2. Pay the resident £600 compensation for its handling of a leak and damp and mould at the resident’s property.
  3. Pay the resident £150 compensation for its complaint handling errors.
  4. Reimburse the resident £188.95 for the dehumidifier she purchased. The Ombudsman will provide the landlord with a copy of the invoice/receipt for the resident’s dehumidifier purchase.
  5. The landlord must comply with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this determination.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord reimburse the resident for her increased electricity and gas usage for the period she used the dehumidifier and increased her heating usage, upon receiving a copy of the resident’s electric and gas bills. The resident should provide the landlord with a copy of her electric and gas bills covering the period she used the dehumidifier and increased her heating usage and for the same period for the previous year before the resident started using the dehumidifier and increasing her heating usage. This will enable the landlord to identify any increased usage during the period when the repairs were ongoing.
  2. It is recommended that the landlord review the resident’s case and identify any areas for improvement. It is suggested that the landlord drafts a report on its findings and provide a copy of the report to this service and the resident.