London Borough of Camden Council (202513249)

Decision
Case ID	202513249
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London Borough of Camden Council
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	2 February 2026

Background

1. The resident lives in a maisonette with her children. Following a previous determination by this Service, the landlord carried out an independent inspection and committed to completing repairs. These repairs related to damp and mould, cracks and a faulty window. However, the resident was dissatisfied with how the landlord handled the repairs.

What the complaint is about

2. The landlord’s handling of:
   1. Repairs.
   2. The resident’s complaint.

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found:
   1. Severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of repairs.
   2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

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

Summary of reasons

Repairs

4. The landlord repeatedly failed to complete the repairs it committed to do, which had a significant impact on the resident and her family. It failed to communicate, apply its own policies, put things right and learn from outcomes.

Complaint handing

5. The landlord failed to acknowledge and offer suitable redress for its delay in acknowledging the complaint at stage 1, and its delay in responding to the complaint at stage 2.

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 Chief Executive 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 02 March 2026
2	Compensation The landlord must pay the resident £1100 made up as follows: £1000 to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings identified in its handling of the resident’s repairs £100 to recognise the inconvenience caused by its complaint handling failures 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 2 March 2026
3	Inspection order   The landlord must contact the resident to arrange an inspection. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by someone suitably qualified to complete an inspection of the type needed. If the landlord cannot gain access to complete the inspection, it must provide us with documentary evidence of its attempts to inspect the property no later than the due date.   What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the surveyor: inspects the damp, mould, cracks and faulty window in the property and produces a written report with photographs The survey report must set out: whether the property is fit for human habitation and whether there are any hazards the most likely cause of the damp and mould whether the landlord is responsible to repair or resolve the issue together with reasons where it is not responsible a full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue (if the landlord is responsible) the likely timescales to commence and complete the work whether temporary alternative accommodation is necessary either because of the condition of the property or during the works	No later than 2 March 2026
4	Communication order   The landlord must: maintain a single point of contact for the resident until it has completed any identified works confirm how often it will update her on the progress of works	No later than 2 March 2026

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
21 January 2025	The resident made a complaint to the landlord. She said: it had not completed repairs following a previous determination by this Service she wanted an explanation as to why it had not done the repairs and why she has had no communication
11 February 2025	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It explained that: its surveyor inspected the property on 30 May 2024. it shared the survey findings with its Repairs Team and the resident in June 2024. The findings recommended: A specialist contractor to check for leaks and assess the windows. A plumber to investigate possible internal leaks. Plastering once leak investigations were complete. A structural investigation. A post‑inspection after all work had been completed. A single point of contact to coordinate and communicate about the works. it completed a further inspection on 28 January 2025, which identified cracks in multiple areas, mould growth, and an insecure bedroom window. it scheduled a damp and mould survey and treatment for 24 February 2025. it booked a window repair appointment for 26 February 2025. The landlord upheld the complaint. It apologised for the delays and poor communication, and it offered £160 in recognition of the distress and disruption caused between June 2024 and January 2025.
25 March 2025	The resident requested escalation to stage 2. She said the stage 1 investigation had not resolved the issues. She wanted: an investigation and explanation why the landlord had not completed the works it to complete the window repair, cracks and resolve the returning damp and mould in the bathroom and kitchen
29 May 2025	The landlord responded at stage 2. It said: it completed stain block, and 2 coats of antifungal paint it could not gain access for the window repair on 26 February 2025 the repairs team should have proactively contacted the resident to book in the crack repairs it had not implemented the repairs identified so it would refer it to management to action the outstanding repairs it apologised the point of contact did not communicate and coordinate the case
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident asked us to investigate as the issue was still unresolved, and it was impacting her and her family’s health. She said the insecure bedroom window is a security risk to her home. She wanted the landlord to complete outstanding repairs including the reoccurring damp and mould in the kitchen. She also wanted adequate compensation.

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	Repairs
Finding	Severe maladministration

What we didn’t investigate

6. The resident complained to her landlord in 2023 about damp, mould and cracks in the walls and ceilings. We investigated that complaint (202311116) and reviewed events between September 2021 and April 2024. We found failures in the landlord’s handling of the repairs and ordered compensation and an independent survey. We can’t reconsider matters we have already investigated, and any reference to them is for context only. The resident also said she was unhappy with the landlord’s response to her complaint about aids, adaptations and structural safety. We have logged that issue under a separate case number, and it is waiting for allocation. This investigation focuses on the landlord’s response to the repair issues between May 2024 and May 2025.
7. During recent contact with us the resident said the landlord had temporarily moved her from the property due to damp and mould. She was unhappy with the lack of communication. In the interest of fairness, this investigation will look at the matters which completed the landlord’s internal complaints procedure between the dates set out above. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any reported dissatisfaction with its actions before the involvement of this Service.
8. The resident told us the damp and mould impacted her and her family’s health. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for an injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for the distress and inconvenience.

What we did investigate

9. When the independent surveyor visited on 30 May 2024, in line with our previous order in case 202311116, it was appropriate that the landlord reviewed the findings. It produced a report in June 2024. Sharing this report with the resident showed the landlord recognised the work required, and had a plan to keep her up to date.

Damp and mould

10. Following its June 2024 report, it was proportionate the landlord raised a job to investigate a possible leak affecting the kitchen and landing ceilings. It attended as an urgent repair in line with its repairs policy. After two no‑access visits, it found no leak in the resident’s property, and said it would investigate the top‑floor flat. The landlord has not provided further evidence regarding this investigation, but the resident confirmed it resolved the leak. This showed the resident it was following its commitments outlined in its report.
11. The landlord’s repairs policy confirms it is responsible for maintaining the structure of the building including roof and rainwater goods. Its report confirmed a specialist contractor would check the roof and external plumbing regarding dampness in the property. The landlord has not provided any evidence it completed this investigation and its complaint responses confirmed it had not completed all repairs set out in its report. This was not appropriate as it failed to fulfil its repairs obligation and follow up on its commitment. This caused frustration for the resident, and weakened the resident and landlord relationship.
12. The landlord raised a job on 23 January 2025 following the resident’s complaint including mould. Its damp and mould policy says it aims to visit moderate cases within 10 working days. The landlord’s stage 1 response said it visited on 28 January 2025. While we have not seen records confirming this, the resident did not dispute it. It was therefore appropriate that the landlord attended within the required timescale.
13. As a result of this visit, the landlord booked mould treatment for 24 February 2025. The damp and mould policy doesn’t define timescales for follow on work after damp and mould visits, but says residents will be advised of the estimated timescale for next steps. The resident was on the school run when the landlord attended on 24 February 2025, so it was reasonable the landlord revisited on 27 February 2025 to complete mould treatment and stain block.
14. The surveyor’s report in May 2024 recommended installing fans in the kitchen and bathroom to improve ventilation. The landlord has not shown that it assessed or responded to this advice. There are no records explaining why it did not include the recommendation in its June 2024 report. As this was specialist advice, the landlord would reasonably be expected to show how it considered it. Its failure to do so was unreasonable, particularly as the resident reported damp and mould in these rooms again in January 2025 and has continued to live with these issues.

Cracks

15. The landlord’s repairs policy says surface cracks to walls and ceilings are the resident’s responsibility. However, when the survey in May 2024 highlighted these, the landlord committed to check all plaster was secure on each wall and ceiling, including the underside of the staircase, and to replace plaster in the kitchen.
16. There is no evidence the landlord completed this work, which the landlord acknowledged in its stage 1 response. The lack of completion was not appropriate. It caused the resident further inconvenience and frustration, and she felt the landlord was dismissing the survey recommendations.
17. The landlord acknowledged, in stage 2, that it was unfair to ask the resident to raise a new repair request regarding the cracks, following the damp and mould job in February 2025. We agree that, given the resident’s previous experience and the information already available to the landlord, it should have proactively logged the repairs for the cracks once the survey findings were known. This added further delay to this repair being completed which was unfair.
18. While the stage 2 response generally acknowledged the landlord had not completed repairs, it lacked a specific action plan. This was a missed opportunity for the landlord, and left the resident unsure of its next steps, and what it would do about the cracks.

Window repair

19. The landlord’s repairs policy says repairs to windows are its responsibility. It deals with repairs to window frames as a routine repair, within 20 working days. The survey in May 2024, said the rear bedroom window frame was not securely fixed to the surrounding masonry. It recommended for the landlord to secure, and fill and seal the gap between the frame and brickwork. While the landlord’s June 2024 report said it would check windows via a specialist contractor there is no evidence this was actioned. The landlord confirmed this in its stage 1 response. This was not appropriate. This caused distress for the resident as she said she felt the window was not secure.
20. As part of its visit in January 2025, the landlord logged a repair for the faulty window for 26 February 2025. Although this met its routine repair timescale, there is no evidence the landlord considered the potential risk posed by an insecure window, which raises concern about why it did not treat the matter as an emergency.
21. The stage 2 response confirmed the resident did not provide access on 26 February 2025 and said no further action was taken. However, given the significant safety risk associated with an unsecured window, the lack of follow‑up, together with the resident’s recent confirmation that the window remains unrepaired, highlights a serious concern about the landlord’s handling of this issue.
22. It is concerning that the landlord has not shown how it considered any potential risk posed by the faulty window, either when managing the repair or when responding to the resident’s complaint. This caused distress and frustration for the resident as she continued to worry about the safety of the window, especially as she shared the property with her children. She told us recently, the landlord had still not completed the repair.

Communication

23. The landlord committed to a point of contact for the resident in its June 2024 report. It confirmed during its complaint investigation, that it had failed to communicate. It was positive that it apologised for the failed communication and coordination in her repairs.
24. The landlord’s communication and its overall handling of the repairs was largely reactive, as it usually acted only after the resident contacted it. The resident spent time and effort requesting updates and pursuing the outstanding repairs. This situation may have been avoided if the landlord had provided the agreed single point of contact, managed the repairs proactively, and completed a post‑inspection as it had committed to do. This caused unnecessary inconvenience for the resident.

Impact and redress

25. The landlord did not complete the actions it set out in its June 2024 report, so the resident has continued to have damp, mould, plastering problems and a window defect since June 2024. She had to keep raising the same issues, and the landlord failed to complete some of the follow‑on work. This caused frustration and reduced her confidence that it would resolve the repairs. The landlord did not act on the surveyor’s recommendations, including ventilation and securing the unsafe window. This meant these have been left unresolved.
26. The lack of a clear plan, poor follow‑up and lack of communication meant the resident had to spend extra time and effort chasing updates and repairs. Because the window remained insecure and the landlord did not act on known risks, this caused further distress. She also faced the inconvenience of escalating the issue to us for resolution. These failings show the landlord did not learn from the previous case, showing the landlord did not take steps to improve its service, and the impact on the resident has been significant.
27. In recognition of its failures the landlord offered £160 for the disruption and distress caused by the repair delays. This was in line with its Remedies Policy, which awards £20 per month for delay but does not show it considered further redress for distress, or time and trouble which its policy allows. The offer does not adequately recognise the full extent of the impact on the resident as described above. The resident is still waiting for a long-term solution to the damp and mould, and the window repair is still outstanding at the time of this report.
28. For the reasons explained above, we have found severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s repairs. Therefore, in line with our Remedies Guidance, we have ordered further compensation which acknowledges the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s failings.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Service failure

29. The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’) sets out when and how a landlord should respond to complaints. The relevant Code in this case is the 2024 edition (April 2024). Our findings are:
30. The landlord has a published complaints policy which complies with the terms of the Code in respect of timescales and definition of a complaint.
31. When the resident made her stage 1 complaint, the landlord acknowledged this 10 working days later. This was outside its policy timescales of 5 working days for an acknowledgement. It then provided its stage 1 response within 5 working days which was within its policy timescale of 10 working days. Overall, the delay in acknowledgement did not impact the overall response time to the resident.
32. The resident requested escalation on 25 March 2025, but the landlord has not provided its acknowledgement within its evidence. It provided its stage 2 response on 29 May 2025, which was 44 working days after the escalation request. This was not in line with its policy timescale of 20 working days. This would have caused frustration for the resident.
33. The landlord did not acknowledge or apologise for the delay in its response. Therefore, we have found service failure in its complaint handling. In line with our Remedies Guidance, we have ordered the landlord to pay the resident £100 compensation which acknowledges the time and trouble caused to the resident.

Learning

34. The landlord should have used our previous determination and orders to effectively drive service improvements in this case.
35. It is important for landlords to acknowledge and offer suitable redress for any failings in its complaint handling policy.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

36. The landlord should strengthen its record keeping so it can demonstrate how it considered inspection findings, tracked committed actions, and monitored repairs through to completion.

Communication

37. The landlord should improve its communication by proactively managing repairs, providing regular updates, and ensuring agreed points of contact understand and fulfil their role.