Our Business Plan 2026-27 consultation is now open. 

Take part in the consultation

London Borough of Brent (202226957)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202226957

London Borough of Brent

11 June 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 a leak, damp, and mould in the resident’s property and the level of compensation offered to her.
  2. The Ombudsman has also investigated the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord at the property, which is a one-bedroom flat. The landlord has no recorded vulnerabilities for the resident, but the resident has told us that she has multiple health conditions and provided evidence from her GP.
  2. The landlord’s records show that the resident’s property has been affected by damp since at least 2017. The landlord arranged surveys in 2019, 2021, and 2022. A specialist damp contractor recommended works to address the damp and prevent its reoccurrence, including tanking to the property’s hallway, investigation of an external pipe and clearance of the gutters. The landlord arranged a drainage survey in September 2022, but it did not complete any works to address these issues.
  3. On 3 February 2023, the resident contacted us to report that the landlord had not remedied the damp and mould in her property or addressed a leak from the property above. We wrote to the landlord on the resident’s behalf, asking it to log a complaint and provide a stage 1 complaint response by 24 February 2023.
  4. The landlord completed a survey of the property on 28 February 2023 and wrote to the resident with the outcome of the stage 1 complaint on 9 March 2023. It said:
    1. There had been service failure, including a delay in progressing the repairs and poor communication with the resident. The landlord apologised for the inconvenience.
    2. The recommendations of a survey completed in 2021 had not been carried out due to “internal concerns”, which led to it rejecting the quotes. The landlord’s contractor had experienced difficulties engaging a new damp specialist. It had now restarted the process and the survey report from the damp specialist would be available by 10 March 2023, following which it would expedite any required actions.
    3. The landlord had reminded all involved of their customer relations standards and the need to maintain contact with residents and meet expectations in a timely manner.
    4. The landlord offered £150 compensation in recognition of the service failure and time and trouble the resident had expended in seeking a resolution.
  5. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s offer of compensation and on 21 April 2023 she asked it to escalate her complaint. She said that she wanted the landlord to complete all outstanding repairs, resolve the leak, treat the damp and mould, and review its compensation offer.
  6. The landlord provided a response at the final stage of its complaints process on 11 August 2023:
    1. The landlord provided a timeline of the actions taken between 22 February 2021 and 9 March 2023 in relation to the leak, mould, and damp. It apologised for the length of time it had taken to begin the works, accepting that it should not take over 2 years to start works.
    2. The landlord had provided feedback to its contractor about the failure to progress the works or to communicate the delays to the resident.
    3. It asked the resident to confirm her telephone number and to make sure she was available to provide access so works could progress. It confirmed that its subcontractor would attend to complete works between 21 August 2023 and 25 August 2023.
    4. The landlord offered £300 compensation to recognise the unreasonable delay and the landlord’s poor communication.
  7. After the landlord’s final complaint response, a specialist damp subcontractor attended and began works at the property between 23 August 2023 and 26 August 2023. The landlord’s contractor returned between 8 January 2024 and 14 January 2024 to complete remedial works and redecoration. The landlord and the resident confirmed that all works were completed to the required standard at that time, although the resident has told us that the damp has now reoccurred in some areas.
  8. The landlord discussed the level of compensation with the resident after the works were completed. The landlord indicated in a telephone call with the resident that it may be willing to increase its offer of compensation to a total of £1,600, including the £100 contribution it had made to her electricity bill. The resident did not feel that this adequately compensated her for the length of time she had spent living with damp and mould, the impact on her health, and damage to her personal possessions.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. The resident has told us that there has been damp and mould in her property for over 10 years. It is clear from the landlord’s records that some of the issues have been present, and that the landlord has been aware of them, since at least 2017. We recognise that living with damp and mould over a significant period of time hasbeen very difficult for the resident, and that she has been frustrated by the time it has taken for the landlord to resolve the issues.
  2. The landlord limited its investigation into the resident’s reports of damp and mould to events from 2021 onwards. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaints Handling Code (the Code) provides that it is reasonable for landlords to limit the scope of their complaint investigations to issues arising no more than 12 months previously. The landlord used its discretion reasonably in this case to consider events over a longer period, since 22 February 2021, when a surveyor visited the property to inspect the damp and mould. Our investigation has therefore considered the landlord’s actions since that date, focusing on what it did to put things right when it received the resident’s complaint on 3 February 2023.
  3. The resident has also told us that the damp and mould has affected her health and worsened her existing medical conditions. Matters of personal injury or damage to health, their investigation and compensation, are not part of the complaints process, and are more appropriately addressed by way of the courts or the landlord’s liability insurer as a personal injury claim. The resident has the option to seek legal advice if she wishes to pursue these matters.

Handling of reports of leaks, damp, and mould

  1. The landlord is required by section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property, including drains, gutters, and external pipes.
  2. In 2021, the Housing Ombudsman published its Spotlight Report on Damp and Mould, which is available on our website. The report sets out our expectations for how landlords should deal with reports of damp and mould in their properties. The landlord has conducted a self-assessment and made changes to its approach to damp and mould in line with the report. The landlord commits to carry out an inspection within 48 hours in severe cases, and within 28 calendar days in all other cases. It will look into the cause and create a plan to fix the issue as quickly as possible. The landlord commits to communicate effectively with residents throughout the process, and it will follow up with full redecoration of any affected rooms.
  3. When the landlord received the resident’s complaint on 3 February 2023, it arranged a survey of the property and its subcontractor completed this on 27 February 2023. This was within the 28-calendar-day timeframe for investigating non-severe cases of damp and mould. The landlord’s records do not evidence that it took steps to find out about the extent of the issue, or any household vulnerabilities, which it should have done to establish whether the damp was severe and warranted an inspection within 48 hours.
  4. During the complaint investigation, the landlord established that there had been a delay in engaging a specialist subcontractor following a previous survey on 25 May 2021. As part of the resolution to the complaint, in the stage 1 response of 9 March 2023, the landlord committed to expedite the works and to maintain regular contact with the resident.
  5. The specialist subcontractor provided its report on 8 March 2023. It recommended works to address the damp, and follow-up works that would need to be completed by another party. After it received the report, the landlord did not raise a works order until 14 June 2023. It did not contact its contractor to request additional information until 21 March 2023. Its contractor provided this on 13 April 2023. On 9 May 2023, it asked its contractor to look into quotes that needed approval. The landlord did not do enough to expedite the works as promised. It also failed to update the resident on progress. The delay of 3 months between receiving the survey report and raising the works order is unexplained and, in our view, unreasonable. Because the landlord failed to follow through on its commitments, the resident had to escalate her complaint.
  6. According to the stage 2 response of 11 August 2023, the landlord’s contractor tried to contact the resident on 21 July 2023 to confirm it had booked the works in with its subcontractor for 21 August 2023 to 25 August 2023. The evidence provided to us does not show any attempt by the contractor to contact the resident. There was a further unnecessary delay of 2 months between the landlord raising the works order on 14 June 2023 and confirming the appointment dates with the resident in the stage 2 complaint response of 11 August 2023.
  7. It is the landlord’s responsibility to manage its contractors and to make sure that works are progressing in a timely manner. Having committed in its stage 1 complaint response to improve its communication with the resident, it then failed to communicate effectively with its contractor and the resident to arrange the works. This contributed to further, avoidable delays, and increased the resident’s frustration.
  8. The specialist subcontractor completed works between 23 August 2023 and 26 August 2023. The resident said that these works did not include works to the overflow pipe of a neighbouring property that was leaking onto her patio. She was also unhappy that the subcontractor had not arrived for the appointment on 21 August 2023 and it had moved the start date to 23 August 2023 on the day works were due to begin. The landlord investigated this with its contractor and accepted evidence from the resident that contradicted the subcontractor’s version of events. It decided to provide £100 compensation for a missed appointment, which was reasonable in the circumstances and in line with its damp and mould policy.
  9. The landlord removed a radiator at the property on 25 August 2023, and the resident expressed concern at being without adequate heating during the colder months. In response, the landlord provided 3 blow heaters and arranged for a £100 contribution to the resident’s electricity costs. This was appropriate in the circumstances to mitigate the adverse effect on the resident of being without a radiator.
  10. The survey report of 8 March 2023 said that the landlord should leave 3 weeks between replastering and redecoration, so the soonest it could begin completing remedial works was 16 September 2023. A post-inspection took place on 7 September 2023, but the remedial works did not begin until 4 months later. The post-inspection report noted that remedial works to some damp affected areas could not begin until the overflow pipe was fixed.
  11. The landlord has told us that the leaking overflow pipe belonged to a neighbouring property that was leaseholder owned. It has told us that this hindered its ability to complete the remedial works in a timely manner due to access issues. The landlord has not provided evidence of its attempts to communicate with the leaseholder to progress these works, or any communications with the resident about the delay. It is not clear when these works were finished, so we cannot assess when the landlord could reasonably have started the remedial works. We expect landlords to maintain full and accurate records of all actions undertaken in relation to a repair.
  12. The resident has told us that the landlord’s contractor completed another survey on 11 October 2023, following which subcontractors attended on 17 November 2023 but she was unhappy with the operative’s behaviour and not all works were completed at this time. The operative disputed the resident’s version of events, which the landlord says caused an additional delay, as the operative would not return to the property. The landlord’s records from the time of these events do not contain adequate explanation of what happened, or what action it took in response. This again highlights deficiencies in the landlord’s record keeping that have limited our ability to investigate.
  13. The landlord did not return to complete the remaining remedial works until 8 January 2024. This was 11 months after the resident made her complaint. The overall length of the delay was unreasonable and for the most part avoidable.
  14. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of a leak, damp, and mould. The landlord identified that it had failed to take action following the survey in 2021, and the action it took to progress the works following the resident’s complaint was inadequate. The landlord could have communicated better with the resident about the repairs and made greater efforts to co-ordinate with its contractor and sub-contractor. The survey report, dated 8 March 2023, provided sufficient detail about the required works and follow-up works for the landlord to produce a plan of action, in line with the requirements of its damp and mould policies, and to communicate this to the resident.
  15. The landlord offered £600 at stage 2 of its complaints process and verbally indicated that it might increase this to £1,600. The offer of £600 was not sufficient to recognise the adverse effect on the resident of the landlord’s failure to complete the works within a reasonable time. The amount of compensation offered by the landlord during its complaints process should have taken into account both the service failure since the date of the complaint and the unreasonable delay in progressing the works following the survey on 22 February 2021, as that was the period the landlord investigated.
  16. The Ombudsman considers that £1,750 compensation is reasonable in all the circumstances. We have calculated this sum at a rate of £50 a month for 32 months, which was the approximate length of the delay in completing the works between the survey of 22 February 2021 and the completion date of 14 January 2024, assuming works would generally be completed within 90 calendar days.
  17. The resident has asked us to calculate compensation for the length of time that the damp was present, which she states was at least 10 years. The Ombudsman is unable to backdate compensation in this way to a period before the formal complaint that we have investigated. However, the sum of £1,750 reflects the significant adverse effect on the resident of the landlord’s failure to progress the works after 21 February 2023, taking into account the difficulty she experienced living with damp and mould in the property since 2017. This is in line with our remedies guidance. This recommends compensation from £100 to recognise maladministration that adversely affected the resident. The landlord’s indication that it would offer £1,600 was proportionate to recognise its failures over a significant period of time under our guidance but was unreasonably only after she complained to us.
  18. The landlord’s internal emails show that it decided compensation of £100 was appropriate to recognise the subcontractor’s missed appointment on 21 August 2023, but it is not clear whether the landlord paid this to her. The landlord is ordered to pay this sum to the resident if it has not already done so.
  19. The resident has also told us that, following the completion of the landlord’s complaints process, she submitted both medical evidence and evidence of damage to her possessions to the landlord’s insurance team. She says she has not received a response. It is recommended that the landlord contact the resident to discuss her claims, and that it provides a response to her in line with the terms of its policies and procedures. No further learning orders or recommendations have been made for this complaint because of the landlord’s self-assessment and changes to its approach to damp and mould.

Complaints Handling

  1. The landlord’s Complaints Policy states that it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days at stages 1 and 2. Where possible, it will respond to complaints falling under the Code within 10 working days at stage 1 and 20 working days at stage 2.
  2. We asked the landlord to respond to the resident’s complaint by 24 February 2023. When it acknowledged the complaint, it said it aimed to respond by 17 February 2023, but it provided the stage 1 complaint response 9 working days later than we asked on 9 March 2023. We would expect the landlord to communicate the need for an extension to the resident and there is no evidence that it did so. This likely increased the resident’s frustration with the landlord’s lack of communication.
  3. The landlord took some action to address the resident’s concerns in the period before providing a response, including arranging a survey. This showed that it wanted to put things right for the resident. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response referred to “internal concerns” about the quotes provided after the previous survey in 2021. The evidence provided to us does not explain what the landlord’s concerns were or demonstrate that it had difficulty finding another suitable subcontractor. Without this information, we are unable to assess whether the landlord acted reasonably. It did, however, acknowledge and apologise for the delay and that it had not communicated this to the resident, which was appropriate in the circumstances.
  4. The landlord’s complaints team failed to follow up to ensure that it completed the actions identified as a resolution to the complaint in a timely manner. This meant that the resident had to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 21 April 2023. The landlord’s poor communication with the resident continued following the 57-working-day late stage 2 response on 11 August 2023 and it again failed to meet the promises made to the resident to improve communication and progress the works.
  5. There was service failure in the landlord’s complaints handling and it is ordered to pay the resident £100 to recognise the adverse effect caused by its poor communication and the time and trouble she took to pursue her complaint. This is line with our remedies guidance’s recommendation of up to £100 compensation to recognise such failures in getting matters resolved. No further learning orders or recommendations have been made for the landlord’s complaints handling because the landlord’s above self-assessment also describes how it will follow its Complaints Policy and the Code in the future.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of a leak, damp, and mould and the level of compensation offered.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52. of the Scheme, there was service failure by the landlord in its complaints handling.

Orders and recommendation

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident £1,750 compensation to recognise the effect on the resident of the failings identified in its response to her reports of a leak, damp, and mould.
    2. Pay the resident £100 for the missed appointment on 21 August 2023, if it has not already done so.
    3. Pay the resident £100 to recognise the effect of its poor complaints handling and the stress and inconvenience caused.
    4. Contact the resident to discuss her vulnerabilities and make sure that these are recorded on its systems.
  2. The landlord must confirm to the Ombudsman that it has complied with the above orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.

Recommendation

  1. It is recommended that the landlord contact the resident to discuss her claims for personal injury and damage to her possessions and provide a response in line with the requirements of its policies and procedures.