London Borough of Camden Council (202327461)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202327461

Camden Council

3 April 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 the resident’s reports of drainage problems.
  2. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaints handling.

Background

  1. The resident is the secure tenant of the property which is owned by the local authority landlord. The property is a flat in a fairly recently built block (the block). The landlord owns and is responsible for the maintenance of the block including the drains. The resident is an “enhanced living” tenant who receives extra support. He has health problems including incontinence which means he frequently needs to use his washing machine.
  2. The resident first reported a problem with the drainage from his washing machine in April 2023. He said water had leaked all over his kitchen. A contractor attended but was unable to gain entry. The resident raised the issue again in June 2023 and the landlord raised an order to address the problem.
  3. The resident complained formally about the landlord’s lack of action on 31 July 2023. He said he was an enhanced tenant who needed his washing machine and he wanted the drain fixed as soon as possible. The landlord attended on several occasions over the next few months and took various actions which failed to solve the problem.
  4. In the landlord’s stage 1 response of 20 October 2023 it said it had not failed the resident. It said it had arranged for works to solve the problem and “all appointments were attended and correct procedure followed.”
  5. The resident escalated the complaint on 23 October 2023, saying the drain was still not fixed. He said the property was getting damp and his clothes had not been washed for 5 months. He said flies were breeding there and the smell was affecting his health.
  6. In the landlord’s stage 2 response of 7 November 2023, it accepted there had been some delay in its response to the reports of problems with the drains. It apologised and offered £100 compensation. The resident then asked it to carry out the works immediately.
  7. In the landlord’s stage 2 response of 7 November 2023 it accepted that it had been responsible for delay between the resident’s first contact in April 2023 and raising the first works order in June 2023. It said there had been further delay between mid-September and November 2023. It apologised and offered £100 compensation.
  8. On 14 November 2023 the landlord’s contractors attended and carried out works which solved the problem. In his referral to us the resident said the level of compensation offered was too low considering the length of time taken to carry out the repairs.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has said the drainage problems had an impact on his health. We cannot consider whether this was the case. We are not able to establish a link between health issues and the landlord’s actions. The resident may wish to seek legal advice about this, as a personal injury claim may be a better way of dealing with this aspect of his complaint. However, we have considered the general distress and inconvenience which these events clearly caused.

Response to reports of drainage problems

  1. From the resident’s first report in April 2023 the landlord was aware he was an enhanced living tenant who used a wheelchair. He advised that he particularly needed his washing machine due to his incontinence. The landlord was not to blame for the fact the resident failed to admit its contractor in April 2023. However, it was on notice that a vulnerable resident’s washing machine was out-of-use and it should have done more at that time to make contact with the resident and attempt access again.
  2. Instead, the landlord took no further action to address the problem until the resident raised it again in June 2023. While he could have done more to chase the landlord in the intervening weeks, the landlord accepted in its stage 2 response that the delay of more than a month to raise a works order was unacceptable. The resident has told us that he contacted the landlord about the problem during this period but we have seen no evidence to support this claim so we cannot reach a conclusion on this.
  3. The landlord did not, on the evidence, access the property until the day of the resident’s formal complaint, 31 July 2023, 3 months after the initial report. On this occasion, an operative managed to partially unblock the drain but said they would need a bigger cable to clean it properly and prevent further floods if the machine was used. The contractor returned the next day but the resident was in hospital. Again, this was beyond the landlord’s control.
  4. When the contractor next attended on 9 August 2023 they found that they did not have the correct equipment and passed the job to a drains specialist. The specialist attended 2 days later but found they could not clear the blockage and recommended a CCTV survey of the drain.
  5. When the CCTV survey occurred on 15 September 2023 the landlord discovered that the washing machine drain was not connected to the main drain. As a result there was no effective drainage. It therefore approved a further job to connect the waste pipe to the drainage system. This took place on 14 November 2023 and successfully solved the problem.
  6. In its stage 1 response of 20 October 2023 the landlord said it, “sincerely apologise[d] for any inconvenience caused”. However, it said it was unable to uphold the complaint as “all appointments were attended to and the correct procedure followed”. This undermined the sincerity of the apology. At this point, nearly 7 months had passed since the resident first reported the problem. We accept that the issue was unusual and this is why we have made no recommendations for system improvements.
  7. Once it began to address the problem in August 2023, the landlord was proactive in trying different approaches to resolve the problem. This was a complex repair that reasonably necessitated various inspections and it arranged next steps relatively quickly at this time. However, it did not carry out the CCTV survey until mid-September 2023, which represents an unacceptable delay of a month. In the circumstances, the landlord should have dealt with this as an urgent matter. The resident was an enhanced living tenant for whom a washing machine was extremely important. This delay therefore constituted a severe failure in its service.
  8. The delay had serious consequences. In October 2023, the resident reported that the property had become damp and mould was growing on the walls. We have seen no evidence that he reported this problem before then. The landlord sent an operative to wash the walls and paint them with mould wash on 12 October 2023, which it believed solved the problem. This was an appropriate response to the resident’s reports. It could not have responded sooner as he did not report the problem earlier. While the resident says the mould wash has not solved the problem, we have seen no evidence that he told the landlord of these concerns. We have therefore recommended that the landlord should inspect the property again to see if further treatment is required.
  9. In its stage 2 response of November 2023 the landlord acknowledged 2 distinct periods of delay between April and June 2023 and September and November 2023. While the landlord took reasonable steps to investigate the problem in the summer of 2023, there were certainly unreasonable delays prior to that and following the CCTV survey. Once it became clear that there was, essentially, no drainage from the washing machine, it still took 2 months to install a drain. This was a serious delay which constitutes maladministration.
  10. Taking into account the periods of delay, and the resident’s specific needs which exacerbated the impact of the disrepair, the landlord’s offer of £100 was wholly inadequate. We have therefore ordered it to pay the resident £500 (inclusive of the £100 originally offered) for this protracted failure. This finding is based on the fact that, throughout the entire period covered by this investigation, the resident, a disabled person, was left with no washing machine which he badly needed. We have seen no evidence that the landlord considered offering any assistance with his washing or temporarily moving him to alternative accommodation.
  11. This sum is in line with our guidance on remedies which says awards for maladministration may generally be between £100 and £600. This places this case at the upper end of the scale. The award also complies with the landlord’s remedies policy which says awards for distress may go up to £1,000.
  12. Between April and November 2023 the resident was caused great inconvenience and expense. His carer took some clothes to the launderette for him but he could not afford to do this often. He had to place many clothes in bags which became infested with flies and he ultimately had to throw many of them away. The resident did not mention his clothes in his original complaint but, in his escalation request, he said, “My house is getting damp with all the clothes that have not been washed for 5 months and flies. It’s affecting my health as I have bad asthma and health condition”
  13. The landlord did not acknowledge this part of the escalation and has made no apology or offered compensation in that regard. This was a thoroughly inadequate response to the resident’s reports. It showed little consideration of his situation as an enhanced living tenant or the difficulties its delays had caused him. We have therefore ordered the landlord to ask the resident for evidence of expenditure on clothes and launderette costs and either put the matter in the hands of its insurer or repay him reasonable expenses. It must recognise that residents often do not keep receipts of all domestic expenses when deciding on the level of an offer of compensation which we have ordered it to make.
  14. We also note that the landlord referred to this payment as “a gesture of good will” but this does not accurately reflect its function. Instead, it was a recognition of a service failure which was due to the resident. We have recommended that the landlord should remove this phrase from future complaint responses in circumstances such as this, where failings have been identified and are being addressed with compensation.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy says it will acknowledge a complaint within 2 workings days and provide a response within 10 working days. In this case, we have not seen a complaint acknowledgment and it provided the complaint response on 20 October 2023, 59 days later. This was a severe failure.
  2. The landlord apologised for the lateness of the response and said this was due to the complexity of the case. However, given the length of the delay, this was not enough. It should have offered compensation or said it would review its complaint handling systems or both. It did neither and this compounded the failure.
  3. The resident escalated his complaint on 23 October 2023. The landlord provided its stage 2 response on 7 November 2023, in line with its policy which required it to respond within 25 days.
  4. We have found maladministration and ordered the landlord to pay the resident £100. This is in line with our remedies guidance which recommends payments of between £100 and £600 for maladministration. We generally award sums at the lower end of that range for complaint handling failures.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of drainage problems.
    2. Associated formal complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must send us evidence to show that it has:
    1. Sent a letter of apology for the failures identified in this report to the resident.
    2. Paid the resident £600 (inclusive of the £100 already paid) comprising:
      1. £500 for its handling of the resident’s reports of drainage problems.
      2. £100 for its handling of the formal complaint.
    3. Discussed compensation for launderette costs and destroyed clothing with the resident and either paid him compensation for these or put the matter in the hands of its insurers.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord is recommended to:
    1. Reconsider its use of the term “gestures of good will” where financial redress is being offered in recognition of an established failure in service.
    2. Inspect the property to see if further mould treatment is required.