London Borough of Camden Council (202452256)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202452256

London Borough of Camden Council

17 September 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

The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of damp in the property.
We have also assessed the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. Her tenancy at the property began in 2012. The property is a 1 bedroom ground floor flat within a converted house. It shares a communal hallway with the flat above. The resident’s adult daughter lives at the property with her. The resident and her daughter have a medical condition which affects their bones and joints. She says this is aggravated by cold and damp conditions. Her daughter is also asthmatic.
On 20 November 2023, the landlord raised a works order after the resident reported damp in the property. The landlord sent a plumber to the property on 7 December 2023. They found no plumbing issues but identified that external brickwork needed repointing and the window in the bedroom needed resealing. On 15 January 2024, the landlord completed repairs to the pointing.
The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 6 September 2024. She said that:
1. There was a “significant damp issue” in the property which had been ongoing since 2012.
2. The repair of 15 January 2024 had not resolved the damp. There was still water coming through the communal hallway wall when it rained.
3. Her and her daughter’s health was worsening due to the damp.
4. The window at the back of the property was letting in cold air and needed replacing.
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 22 October 2024. It said that:
1. It had removed a section of the hallway wall plaster affected by damp on 1 October 2024 and suspected the damp was due to a leaking pipe.
2. A plumber was scheduled to attend on 30 October 2024 to investigate this further.
3. It had raised a works order to inspect the windows at the property. This was scheduled for 11 November 2024.
4. It apologised for its “failure to resolve the issue in a timely manner”. It offered the resident £180 compensation for this.
An advocacy service contacted the landlord on the resident’s behalf on 17 December 2024. It asked to escalate the complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s process. It said the landlord had failed to progress the necessary repairs or communicate with the resident about this.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 18 March 2025. It said that its plumber had attended as scheduled and found no issues. It had returned on 4 November 2024 to replaster the wall but recorded that the resident “refused the work to be done”. It said it had also visited to inspect the windows, but the resident had told it she did not want these repaired, only replaced. Therefore, it had closed the works orders. The landlord said it disagreed that it had failed to progress the repairs, as the resident had “refused the repair work offered”.

Events since the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response

The resident referred her complaint to us on 24 March 2025. She disputed the contents of the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response. She said that she had not refused repairs, and it had not informed her it had closed the works orders. On 17 September 2025, the resident told us she had not been in contact with the landlord, and the repairs had not progressed since its stage 2 complaint response.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

In her complaint, the resident said that the damp issue had been ongoing since 2012. The landlord’s complaints policy says that residents should submit a complaint within 12 months of an incident. This is in keeping with the requirements of our Complaint Handling Code.
In its complaint responses, the landlord examined events dating back to October 2023 – 12 months before the resident made her complaint. This investigation will mirror that timeframe.
The resident also said that her and her daughter’s health was “worsening” due to the damp. We are unable to establish legal liability or whether a landlord’s actions or lack of action have had a detrimental impact on health. Nor can we calculate or award damages. We are therefore unable to consider this aspect of the resident’s complaint. These matters are likely better suited to consideration by a court or via a personal injury claim.

Damp

The landlord introduced a damp and mould policy on 20 February 2024. While we will assess the landlord’s actions after that date against the policy, it is important to note that its handling of matters prior to it were not subject to this policy.
In her complaint, the resident said that an advocate had contacted the landlord on 31 October 2023 about the damp in the property on her behalf. Whilst the landlord mentioned this claim in its stage 1 response, it did not confirm or dispute it. We have not seen any record of the advocates contact to be able to fairly assess this.
The landlord’s records do show that it raised a works order on 29 November 2023 for a plumber to inspect the property. It is unclear why the landlord raised this to a plumber when there was no indication that the damp was due to a plumbing leak. It would have been more appropriate for the landlord to send a surveyor to investigate the cause of the damp and produce a report.
The plumber attended the property on 7 December 2023. They determined that the damp was not caused by a plumbing issue. They told the landlord that there were issues with the brickwork, which needed repointing. The landlord completed repairs to the pointing on 15 January 2024. This was 24 working days from when the plumber identified the issue. This was slightly outside of the landlord’s 20 working day target for routine repairs but is mitigated by the scale of the work and need for a further pre inspection, completed on 18 December 2023.
The landlord’s plumber also identified issues with the rear window in the property which they said needed resealing. We have seen no evidence that the landlord appropriately followed up on this at that time. This issue would have been less likely to have been missed had an appropriate inspection report been produced.
On 27 February 2024, the resident reported damp in the communal hallway of the building. The landlord raised a works order to inspect this and scheduled an appointment for 14 March 2024. This met its 20 working day target to inspect ‘low risk’ cases, contained in its damp and mould policy.
The landlord’s damp and mould policy says that “During the initial tenant report and visit, any negative impact on the health of the resident or anyone living in the household will be considered, and a standardised assessment survey checklist will be completed and shared with the resident.” The landlord has not provided any evidence that it completed this assessment during the initial report or subsequent visit. It therefore missed the opportunity to identify the household’s health conditions which may have affected its assessment of the risk posed by the damp.
Following the inspection of 14 March 2024, the landlord confirmed there were damp issues in the communal hallway. It wrote that it needed “to find out who is responsible for work required”. This was possibly due to the fact the property above the resident’s is a leasehold flat, which is required to contribute to maintenance of the communal areas through a service charge.
However, the landlord has not shown that it took steps to establish this, or progress matters, prior to the resident making her complaint almost 6 months later. Its damp and mould policy says that “If a repair cannot be completed due to unforeseen circumstances or a complication, the resident should be kept informed”. We have seen no evidence that the landlord followed this approach.
On 24 September 2024, the landlord raised a works order to remove plaster from the communal hallway. It attended and did this on 1 October 2024. It recorded that it suspected the damp was due to a leaking pipe within the wall which needed further investigation.
In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord confirmed it had arranged for a plumber to attend on 30 October 2024 and inspect the wall. It also told the resident it had raised a works order to inspect the “draughty windows” in the property, which it had failed to investigate previously.
The landlord acknowledged the “nine month delay” in resolving the damp issues and that this was “unacceptable”. It offered the resident £180 compensation for this. This was in keeping with its remedies policy which says that it will offer £20 per month for “delay”.
The landlord’s records show that its plumber attended as scheduled. They found there were no pipes in the wall, so a plumbing issue could not be causing the damp. The landlord arranged for a plasterer to reinstate the removed plaster on 4 November 2024. However, it had still not identified or resolved the underlying cause of the damp.
In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord said that the resident had “refused the work to be done”. The resident has disputed this, saying that the landlord’s plasterer left to get equipment and never returned. We are unable to confirm either party’s version of events based on the information available.
However, considering the wall was within the communal area the landlord did not require the resident’s consent to access or carry out works to it. It would therefore have been appropriate for it to proceed with the plastering regardless. The resident told us that, at the time of writing, it has still not done so.
In its stage 1 complaint response, the landlord said it would inspect the windows in the property on 11 November 2024. It actually attended on 12 November 2024, the reasons for this are unclear.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord said that the resident had told it not to “touch the windows for repairs but insisted on replacement”. It said it had explained this was unlikely and “the job was closed”. The resident disputes this.
The resident has told us that the landlord told her this visit was an ‘inspection’ of the windows. This is reflected in its stage 1 complaint response. However, the landlord has not provided any evidence that it appropriately assessed the windows and provided a position on renewing them, only that it told her it was “unlikely”.
When escalating the complaint, the resident’s advocate wrote that she “was told to expect email advice on the action/work planned to follow-up these survey visits with remedial work.” It is therefore apparent that the landlord had not appropriately updated the resident following its visits – and given her the opportunity to dispute the reports made by its operatives. Instead, it simply closed the works orders leaving the issues unresolved.
In summary, the landlord made an offer of compensation, in keeping with its policy, for its delays in addressing the damp issues as part of its stage 1 complaint response. It also appropriately attended the appointments it had scheduled to progress the matter.
However, it failed to engage with the resident about the outcome of these visits, despite her disputing them. Consequently, the landlord has still failed to identify the root cause of the damp in the communal hallway, or to resolve the issues with the windows in the property – which its plumber first made it aware of in December 2023. Due to this we make a finding of maladministration.

Complaint handling

The resident made her complaint to the landlord on 6 September 2024. However, the landlord’s records show that it did not log her complaint until 8 October 2024. The landlord recorded that the complaint “was initially logged without an address” and the resident did not provide her address details until 8 October 2024.
The landlord has provided us with a copy of an automated acknowledgement. This was sent to the resident on 6 September 2024 when she initially made her complaint. This acknowledgement includes both the resident’s full name and email address. It is unclear why the landlord could not establish the address of the property from its records based upon these. Or why it took a further month to do so.
The landlord did not address this matter in its stage 1 complaint response or provide an explanation for its delay in logging the resident’s complaint. Due to this we make a finding of service failure.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, we order the landlord to:
1. Pay the resident compensation of £480 composed of:
  1. The £180 offered in its stage 1 complaint response, if not already paid.
  2. A further £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused to her by its handling of the damp.
  3. A further £50 for the service failure in its handling of her complaint.
2. Write to the resident apologising for its maladministration identified by this investigation.
3. Have a suitably qualified individual conduct a damp and mould inspection of the property and the communal hallway. The landlord should provide the resident with a copy of the inspection report, details of any remedial works identified and its anticipated timescales to complete these.
4. Inspect the windows in the property to assess whether they require renewing. The landlord should write to the resident with the outcome of this inspection.
The landlord should provide evidence of compliance with these orders to us.