London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (202313990)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202313990

Hammersmith and Fulham Council

31 March 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 complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of repairs needed in the property. This includes:
1. Cracks within and outside of the property.
2. Window issues.
3. Front door issues.
4. Damp and mould.

Background

The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local authority. The tenancy commenced on 17 July 2015. The property is a 4-bedroom flat.
There are records of repairs being requested since the resident moved into the property. The resident sought the help of a solicitor, and on 7 July 2022 the solicitor wrote to the landlord about the ongoing repairs. The solicitor stated that, despite the resident reporting repairs since 2016 and numerous inspections, the landlord had failed to conduct any repairs. These were for:
1. Damp and mould.
2. Defective plasterwork.
3. Defective windows.
4. Defective external brickwork.
5. Inadequate downpipes and wastepipes.
6. Defective roof and guttering.
On 14 November 2022 a survey was completed to assess possible subsidence. It concluded:
1. There were visible cracks in the external front of the property. A recommendation was made to repair these.
2. A replaster was needed in the front room.
3. External rear required the gutter to be renewed.
4. The bathroom windowsill needed to be repaired.
5. Visible cracks in the bedroom required a plaster repair.
6. Bathroom required renewal of toilet and fan.
7. The kitchen window required a repair.
8. The fan in the kitchen also needed to be renewed.
9. The windows in the two other bedrooms needed to be overhauled.
During December 2022 the landlord asked its contractors to arrange an appointment with the resident. A series of appointments were confirmed for 4 January 2023, 20 February 2023 and 23 March 2023.
The resident contacted the landlord on 20 February 2023 stating that work was outstanding and said its operatives had only completed one job. The landlord then spoke to its contractors who informed it that the outstanding jobs were complex and would require future appointments.
During April 2023 and June 2023 the resident further contacted the landlord about the outstanding works and was unhappy with the delays.
On 5 July 2023 a further survey took place to assess the outstanding work.
During July 2023 the resident raised a complaint to the landlord about the delays. He was unhappy that appointments had not happened. He was also unhappy with the housing and case officers not responding to his email and text messages.
In July 2023, a carpenter attended the resident’s property, however had no access so the appointment was rescheduled.
The landlord issued its stage one response on 17 July 2023.
1. It confirmed that a work order had been raised for the damp repairs.
2. Work orders had been raised to repair the kitchen cupboards and floor. This was booked for 18 July 2023.
3. It apologised for the lack of communication from its housing officer and explained she was on annual leave.
On 22 August 2023 the resident’s complaint was escalated to stage two. The landlord advised it would provide a response by 20 September 2023. However it then wrote to the resident extending the timeframe to 4 October 2023.
The carpenter attended on 25 August 2023. They fixed all damaged units in the kitchen, replaced the hinges, and fixed the plinth.
Throughout September 2023 the resident explained to the landlord that the following was outstanding:
1. All windows needed to be changed as they were rotten.
2. Main door needed to be replaced as it did not close properly.
3. The landlord had said kitchen door would also be replaced.
4. The landlord did not complete kitchen flooring.
5. Crack underneath hallway stairs.
6. Garden bricks are “tilted casing a dent” and water to come into house.
7. Front yard has a dent.
8. Contractors did not paint or cement the wall.
9. Scaffolding in garden needed to be removed, but first the windows needed to be fixed.
The landlord proceeded to chase the repairs. It also informed the resident that, following an inspection, it would not be replacing the front door as it found it was not in disrepair.
A stage two response was issued on 4 October 2023. The landlord apologised for the delay in responding and said that:
1. It confirmed that all kitchen unit doors and plinths were fixed on 25 August 2023.
2. Regarding the outstanding work, its contractors were appointed to conduct repairs on 21 September 2023, but were awaiting the results of an asbestos survey before commencing any works.
3. After inspection, it did not agree that the flat entrance door needed a repair.
4. It had asked its contractors to conduct work to remedy the damp in the resident’s home.
5. The landlord apologised for the delays and acknowledged this would have caused the resident distress, frustration and inconvenience. In recognition of its service failures, it offered:
  1. £450 for distress and inconvenience caused.
  2. £200 for further delay in getting the works completed.
  3. £100 for delay in providing a stage two response.
On 4 October 2023 the resident emailed the landlord disagreeing with its decision. He explained the front door was faulty and would not close or open without force. He also explained there was no security hole and a gap between the floor and the door. He did not feel the door was safe as he had young children in the property. He further explained that in 2021 the landlord had agreed the door would be replaced if issues persisted, and said that the surveyor had also stated the front door would be replaced.
On 8 December 2023 the landlord spoke with the resident. It was confirmed that part of the works were completed, including the windows replacements. However the resident informed it of the outstanding cracks under the stairs and outside of the property. He also expressed concern with the front door.
On 14 December 2023 a further discussion took place between the landlord and the resident. The resident stated outstanding repairs were to the plinths in the kitchen, crack under stairs and kitchen ceiling. The landlord stated it would chase this with it repairs team.
On 19 April 2024 the resident contacted the landlord as he was unable to open the front door. His wife and child were stuck outside of the property. Operatives attended that day and entry was regained.
During April 2024 the resident brought his complaint to our service to investigate.
On 20 May 2024 the resident contacted the landlord again about issues including:
1. When it rains water collects in the garden and goes into the base of the house instead of the drain.
2. A gap in the front door which allowed wind.
3. A growing crack on the corridor ceiling and under stairs.
4. Cracks that collect water when it rains.
5. Cement fill needed to even out ground.
6. A crack on the internal wall.
We spoke with the resident on 12 March 2025. He explained that he considered the outstanding issues were:
1. Front door had not been fixed as the landlord stated the door was not in disrepair. He constantly has issues with it and every year operatives come to make a repair. He stated there is a gap which allows heat to escape and draught to enter.
2. The landlord replaced the window, however he was unhappy with the quality. He stated one of the windows fell out and the landlord made a repair. However it does not fit in the frame properly and this has resulted in draughts.
3. The cracks under the stairs had not been repaired, or the cracks outside the property and on some walls inside. When it rains, water sits on certain areas of the property.
4. He stated the damp and mould still returns. The landlord cleaned it in January, but it is returning. The room smells of damp.
The resident did not confirm if he had made the landlord aware of this damp reoccurring in March 2025. The landlord has not confirmed its position regarding the recent return of damp and mould.

Assessment and findings

During this investigation we have considered issues raised after the landlord’s internal complaint procedure. This is appropriate as these concerns are directly related to the original complaint and the landlord’s actions in response to this.

Repairs.

Section 5.1 of the landlord’s repairs policy states it is responsible for maintaining in a good state of repair the building and its components. This is also in accordance with The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
The key components of the building and exterior of property include the roof, walls, doors, windows, gutter and drains. Therefore, when the resident raised a report concerning these matters, the landlord was obliged to inspect and make a repair or replacement if necessary.
Section 5.6 of the landlord’s repairs policy sets out its response timeframes. These are:
1. Urgent repairs within 4 hours.
2. Emergency repairs within 24 hours.
3. Routine repairs within 20 working days.
4. Planned repairs within 60 working days.

Cracks within the property and outside of the property.

The resident reported the cracks under the stairs to the landlord in 2023. The records show that the first report of this was in September 2023. The evidence shows the landlord asked the resident to provide an image of this issue, however we have not seen that it conducted an inspection afterwards. In its stage two response it acknowledged the resident’s email however it did not respond to this specific issue.
The resident informed us the landlord has not addressed this, and the cracks remain. He also informed us the landlord only repaired the cracks in one bedroom. However the other cracks in the property have not been seen to. We have reviewed correspondence and the landlord’s position on the cracks is unclear.
The resident raised concerns about the cracks during the complaints procedure, however we have not seen that the landlord addressed this point. This left uncertainty and a lack of clarity for the resident.
With regards to the cracks on the outside of the property, we have reviewed the images the resident provided on 12 March 2025 and it shows cracks are present. The resident has not informed us of any newer cracks forming, he stated these are the same cracks which were previously reported and never attended to. The evidence shows the resident first raised these concerns on 28 October 2022 and in response a technical survey request was raised. Whilst we can see a survey took place on 14 November 2022, the issue was not addressed.
The resident has expressed this issue remains and we have not seen evidence to confirm that the landlord has addressed this or explained its position if it did not think any works were required internally or externally. We have therefore found service failure and will be making an order for the landlord to carry out a further inspection.

Windows.

The resident was unhappy with the windows in the property and explained this in 2022. We see that he chased the landlord to repair and during December 2023 the landlord agreed to have the windows replaced. We understand this repair would have taken longer than a planned repair, as it would have required surveys and the sourcing of materials. However it took around a year for the landlord to address the concern.
We also see the landlord acknowledged the delay in getting the works completed and compensated the resident fairly. However, the resident has informed us that, although the windows were replaced, he is unhappy with the quality. He stated that one of the windows fell out which resulted in the landlord having to make a repair. He also expressed the windows are not fixed correctly and letting in draughts.
Whilst this issue occurred after the internal complaints procedure, in the interests of supporting effective dispute resolution, we have made a recommendation that the landlord arranges a survey to determine if a further repair is necessary.

Front Door.

The resident expressed concern with safety, draughts and difficulties using the front door.
The evidence shows that when the resident first reported these concerns, the landlord arranged for an inspection and there was a recommendation for the door to be renewed. However, this decision was then changed and the landlord has decided not to renew the front door as it stated it is not in disrepair.
The resident has said that he is still experiencing issues with the door every year. He says that each year the landlord attends to the door and makes a repair but does not replace it. We have reviewed the landlord’s repair history and can see that the resident has repeatedly complained about the door since 2016. We also see that he informed the landlord that it lets in draughts.
The resident provided images to this service and we see there is a visible gap between the door and its frame. The size of the gap would likely mean that heat may escape, but we cannot confirm how much or to what extent.
Whilst we understand the landlord does not consider the door is in disrepair, the issue has repeatedly reoccurred despite the landlord making repairs. The landlord has responded appropriately and we did not find service failure in its responses to the resident’s concerns about the door. However, given the history of reports and attendances we have made a recommendation that the landlord should inspect the door and make a final decision as to whether it should be replaced to prevent the need for future repairs.

Damp and mould.

The landlord has sent us its process for dealing with damp and mould. This entails:
1. Checking the repairs history.
2. Determining the cause of damp via an inspection.
3. If required, it will raise a work order to remedy the issue.
The evidence shows the resident has had an issue with damp and mould within the property since 2016. We have reviewed the repairs history and can see that, in July 2023, following the resident’s report of damp and mould, the landlord raised works for repairs.
We have not seen a record to show this work was done at the time. The evidence shows that during September 2023 a further joint inspection was requested, however we have not seen the outcome of this. Subsequently in its stage two response the landlord stated it arranged for its contractors to conduct the required works to the home to address the mould. We understand there was a delay in doing this, as stated by the landlord in its stage two response. Whilst we recognise the landlord acknowledged its service failure, it is important that in future the landlord appropriately addresses reports in a timely manner as per its policies.
We spoke with the resident recently and he informed us that the issues concerning damp and mould are ongoing. We understand the landlord recently attended to do a mould wash in January 2025 however he stated it is now reappearing. He further stated that the room smells of damp.
We understand each time the resident has made a report the landlord has attended to do a mould wash and paint over the affected areas. At the time it acted in accordance with its repair obligations. However we see this has reoccurred after the internal complaints procedure. Therefore we have made a recommendation that the landlord consider a further investigation to determine the cause of the damp, and if needed put measures in place to help prevent this issue.

Compensation offered by landlord.

Section 5 of the landlord’s complaints policy sets out that where there is service failure it will apologise, put things right and may offer compensation. It does not state specific amounts. In this instance we see the landlord apologised to the resident, acknowledged its service failures, and considered its compensation policy. It offered the resident:
1. £450 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
2. £200 for the delays in getting works completed.
3. £100 for the delay in providing a stage two response.
At the time the amount of compensation offered was reasonable. However we are not satisfied that after the final complaint response, the landlord has appropriately resolved the issues and fully put matters right. Given the length of time that has passed and the landlord has not made its position clear on the cracks, we have found service failure.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of repairs within the property. This includes:
1. Cracks within and outside of the property.
2. Window issues.
3. Front door issues.
4. Damp and mould.

Orders and recommendations

Orders.

The landlord to arrange surveys within four weeks of the date of this letter. For the following:
1. Cracks within and outside of the property. It should conduct the required works as per the recommendations.
Should this take longer than four weeks, the landlord should explain its position to the resident and provide them within reasonable expected timeframes.
The landlord should compensate the resident a further £100 in recognition the distress and inconvenience caused to the resident by its failure to address the cracks to the property.

Recommendations.

The landlord to arrange surveys within four weeks of the date of this letter. For the following:
1. Windows to determine the cause of draught and if a repair is necessary.
2. The landlord should consider arranged a damp and mould survey to determine the cause of the reoccurring damp. Should any issues be identified, the landlord should seek to resolve the damp as per the recommendations. The landlord should also explain its findings to the resident and explain its position on what steps it will take to address the damp and mould.
The landlord should inspect the resident’s front door and make a decision on if it is to be replaced to prevent future repairs. It should ensuring no gaps are present and the resident can open and close the door without reoccurring issue. This should be completed within four weeks of the date of this letter.