London Borough of Islington (202329894)

Background

1. The resident lives in a flat within a block owned and managed by the landlord. She reported damp and mould in her son’s bedroom in December 2022. The landlord carried out an inspection and then completed a damp and mould treatment in July 2023, but the problem persisted. The resident said she had to keep chasing the landlord for updates and faced poor communication throughout. As the damp worsened, she raised a complaint.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of damp and mould.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of damp and mould.

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

Reasons

4. The resident first reported damp and mould in her son’s bedroom on 12 December 2022. The landlord visited the home on 28 April 2023 to carry out a damp and mould check. During the visit, the landlord found damp and mould in both the bedroom and the kitchen. Mould was also visible in the boiler cupboard. Outside, the landlord found defective brickwork on the rear wall of the block. It determined that water was entering the kitchen and bedroom because rainwater pipes were blocked. Overall, the landlord assessed the home as affected by both condensation and penetrating damp.
5. The inspection recommended several external repairs. These included putting up scaffolding, clearing the blocked pipes, checking the rainwater drainage system and the cast‑iron fixings, and repairing the damaged brickwork at the rear of the block. Inside the home, the landlord said it needed to remove plaster and re‑plaster part of the kitchen wall, redecorate, treat mould in the boiler cupboard ceiling, and treat mould and add thermal boards to the external bedroom wall and window reveals. The report stated that the external repairs should be completed before any internal works took place.
6. The landlord’s Damp and Mould Procedure says that when a new inspection is needed, and no damp has been reported in the previous six months, the landlord must complete the inspection within 20 working days. In this case, the landlord did not meet this target. It carried out the inspection more than three months after the resident’s report. This delay was unreasonable, and there is no evidence that the landlord updated the resident or explained the delay.
7. The procedure also requires the landlord to raise remedial works within three working days of the inspection. The landlord raised repair jobs for the internal works on 4 May 2023, which was one working day late. It raised another repair job for the external works on 11 May 2023, six working days late.
8. The repair logs show that the external repairs, raised in May 2023, were not completed until 22 September 2023. The works order for the internal works, raised on 4 May 2023, were completed on 25 July 2023. The landlord returned on 27 July 2023 to carry out further internal works, but these had already been completed during the previous visit, leading to a wasted visit. This caused the resident further frustration. These issues show poor internal processes and checking of repair records by the landlord.
9. The landlord’s Damp and Mould Procedure says that less urgent repairs should be completed within 20 working days. The landlord did not meet this deadline for any of the repairs raised in May 2023. We have not seen any evidence that the landlord gave the resident updates or explanations for the delays.
10. As detailed above, the landlord also completed the internal works to the resident’s property almost 2 months prior to the external ones. This went against the advice of its damp and mould inspector. As the underlying cause, the external issues, had not been resolved this meant the property continued to be affected by damp and mould. This was evident in the resident’s complaint of 17 September 2024, in which she said “the wall is still damp” despite the internal works carried out by the landlord.
11. On 13 July 2023, the landlord raised a separate job to inspect a nearby balcony. The repair logs show that this issue related to another flat in the block, not the resident’s home. The balcony inspection took place on 17 July 2023 and showed that asphalt works were needed. These repairs were finished in September 2023. The resident confirmed that this balcony was not above her son’s bedroom and was next to her kitchen. Based on the records, it is unclear if the balcony problem had any link to the damp and mould in her home. The landlord also acknowledged this in its stage 1 response. The initial inspection in April 2023 did not mention the balcony at all. This suggests the issue was discovered later and may not have been related.
12. Between September and December 2023, the landlord raised further external repairs, including work to roof pipework and rainwater drainage. These repairs were logged several months after the April 2023 inspection, and none of them appeared in that inspection report. As a result, it is unclear when these issues were first identified. We have no evidence to suggest that they were present at the time of the landlord’s April 2023 inspection or should have been detected at that point.
13. In its stage 1 response, dated 24 October 2023, the landlord partly upheld the complaint. It noted that it completed the internal works in July 2023 but accepted that the damp had not gone away. The landlord said it had not yet identified a clear repairs failure, but it agreed that the issue should have been resolved. It apologised and said its repairs team would carry out further investigations to find the cause of the ongoing damp.
14. The landlord’s stage 1 response did not properly acknowledge the delays in progressing the external repairs or the missed procedural timeframes. Although the landlord referred to the July 2023 internal works, it did not address the long delay between the resident’s first report and the landlord’s inspection, or the further delays in raising and completing the necessary works. Instead of accepting these failures, the landlord said it was unsure whether the external issues were linked to the returned damp. It then said it would pass the case back to the repairs team for either plumbing checks or a diagnostic survey. This showed that the landlord did not fully understand the cause of the problem and had not reviewed its own repair history. As a result, the stage 1 response did not give the resident a clear or accurate explanation, nor did it acknowledge the landlord’s poor handling of the repairs.
15. The resident disagreed with the landlord’s claim that the damp had “returned.” She said the damp and mould had been present since her first report. After she asked to escalate the complaint, the landlord issued its stage 2 response on 20 November 2023. It reviewed the history and noted that the damp remained unresolved, even after the July 2023 internal works. The landlord acknowledged delays, missed appointments, poor communication, and worsening damp conditions. Although it pointed to earlier works and planned investigations, it accepted that the resident had experienced inconvenience for a long time. It upheld the complaint and offered £350 in compensation: £200 for inconvenience, trouble and upset, and £150 for distress.
16. We recognise that landlords cannot always complete repairs before giving a final complaint response. When repairs remain outstanding, the landlord should set out what it is doing next, and the landlord did this. It confirmed that a surveyor would visit on 23 November 2023 to assess the worsening damp. While the landlord expressed hope that this visit would clarify the problem and offered compensation for the inconvenience, it did not take ownership for monitoring the repairs to completion. This lack of follow‑through caused more delays and left the resident uncertain about when the issues would finally be resolved.
17. The assessment on 23 November 2023 confirmed that the worsening damp in the bedroom was caused by ongoing external water ingress, as the rear wall remained saturated. The areas to which it had carried out internal repairs showed signs of deterioration including bubbling and flaking paint.
18. Externally, the assessment identified a leaking downpipe with staining and moss growth, which, together with possible defects to the flat roof above, was likely contributing to the internal damp issues. The survey concluded that external repairs were required first, before any internal works could be completed. The works were discussed and agreed with the resident.
19. Following the reassessment, the landlord attended a few days later, on 27 November 2023 to carry out repairs to pipework. It then attempted to book a job shortly after, to carry out redecoration of the bedroom and kitchen. The resident refused this and explained that the external leaks had to be rectified first.
20. In December 2023, the landlord attended again to check pipes for leaks, including on the roof. On 2 January 2024, the repairs records show that the landlord attended to unblock the hopper and check joints. The resident had further unannounced visits from contractors around this time, therefore refused access and re-affirmed her need to have appointments booked in advance. Further visits from January to March 2024 dealt with removing old plastering, skimming of the bedroom wall and the wall being prepped and ready to be redecorated. A further damp reassessment in the boiler cupboard was carried out in May 2025, and remedial works completed the same month. The resident has told us that this provided a lasting resolution to the issues.
21. Overall, the landlord did not provide adequate communication or updates to the resident during this second phase of the prolonged period in which the damp and mould remained unresolved. The evidence shows delays of several months between key repair stages with no record of the landlord informing the resident of the reasons for those delays or giving revised timescales. The resident reported repeatedly having to chase for progress updates and stated that appointments booked at unsuitable times, despite her request for morning visits. This lack of clear, timely and proactive communication would have caused uncertainty and additional inconvenience. Overall, the landlord did not meet the timescales expected under its own policies and procedures.
22. In summary, there were several failings by the landlord in its handling of the damp and mould, including failing to have systems and procedures in place to manage the repairs in line with its inspector’s recommendations or its policy. There was also poor communication with the resident regarding what repairs it would be completing and when. As a result, the resident was left with damp and mould within the property for an unreasonable length of time with no clear idea of how and when the landlord intended to resolve this. The landlord acknowledged some of its failings and offered the resident compensation. However, its handling of repairs did not improve after the complaint, which caused further distress and inconvenience to the resident.
23. This amounts to a finding of maladministration, and we have ordered the landlord to apologise to the resident and pay her £600 compensation, inclusive of the £350 it previously offered. This is in line with our remedies guidance for failings which adversely affected the resident and where the landlord’s proposed remedy was not proportionate to the detriment caused. We have also made an order for the landlord to carry out a case review of this complaint to identify the cause of the failings and how it can prevent repeats of these.

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.