London Borough of Lambeth (202405340)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202405340

London Borough of Lambeth

9 October 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:
    1. Works required to the resident’s bathroom.
    2. The formal complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local council. The property is a 1-bedroom, first-floor flat. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for the resident but he reported the outstanding repairs have caused him stress.
  2. The resident reported issues with his bathroom, which was a wet room, dating back to 6 January 2022. He said there was a leak from his shower and the shower pump was blocked. The pump assisted in water drainage. The landlord attended on 14 January 2022 and unblocked the pump. It also inspected the flooring on 8 February 2022 and raised a job to renew this.
  3. The resident chased the landlord for an update throughout February 2022 to June 2022. On 20 April 2022 he asked the landlord to inspect his bathroom again. He raised concerns about his bathroom tiles and explained that water was penetrating below his vinyl flooring.
  4. The landlord’s contractor attended on 7 June 2022 and said a full bathroom renovation was required. It said the tiles were loose, the floor was damaged and uneven, and it could not access the pipework for the pump as it ran under the floor. It said water was running out of the shower room and would soon affect the property below.
  5. On 21 June 2022 the resident complained to the landlord. He said he was still waiting for it to complete works to his bathroom.
  6. The landlord responded at stage 1 of its process on 29 December 2022. It acknowledged it had not renewed the resident’s floor despite him continuously chasing it. It offered him £250 compensation for the delays and said its contractor would attend on 5 January 2023.
  7. The resident cancelled this appointment and the landlord did not complete any works between January and August 2024. On 4 August 2023 the resident made a further complaint about the landlord’s handling of the outstanding repairs. He said the toilet was leaking, the tiles had been hanging off the walls for a year, and the bathroom needed complete renewal. He followed up with an email on 10 August 2023 in which he explained the bathroom smelt damp and the broken tiles had ruined the lino floor. He asked that it complete repairs and compensate him.
  8. The landlord responded at stage 1 of its complaints process on 4 October 2023. It said:
    1. It had raised jobs and allocated these to its contractor. It acknowledged that despite this, and the resident chasing, its contractor has not undertaken works.
    2. Its contractor had reinspected in September 2023 and raised a new work order to repair the shower, fit the wall tiles, repair the door, lay flooring, and complete a mould wash. It said it would complete these jobs by 13 November 2023.
    3. It apologised for the delays and the inconvenience, time, and trouble it had caused, and offered the resident £610 in compensation.
  9. The resident escalated his complaint on 9 November 2023. He said it had not progressed the works and asked for clarity on when it would start so he could plan around his work schedule.
  10. The landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaints process on 28 December 2023. It apologised for its delay in responding which it said was due to staff absence. It explained that technical issues in allocating the work had caused delays. It said it had now resolved this and had generated a purchase order so works could commence. It offered £50 for the further delay.
  11. The landlord commenced works in January 2025 and completed these in May 2025. This included retiling, repairs to the floor, laying new flooring, installing a new shower, shower tray and screen, and repairing the leaking toilet pipe.
  12. The resident is seeking compensation for the stress caused due to the length of time it took the landlord to complete the works. He explained that when he used the shower, water penetrated through the floor to the property below. As such, he felt unable to use the shower from early 2024 until the landlord resolved the issues. He said he had to wash in the sink or use his neighbour’s shower.
  13. The resident also explained that the poor condition of the tiles allowed water penetration through the bathroom wall. This caused damp and mould and damaged possessions in a cupboard against an adjoining wall in the hall. He is also seeking compensation as reimbursement for items which were ruined.

Assessment and findings

Handling of works

  1. Under the terms of tenancy and section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, the landlord is responsible for the structure and exterior of the property. This includes installations for the supply of water and sanitation such as sinks, baths and toilets. The structure also includes the subfloor. The landlord accepted responsibility for the bathroom repairs the resident reported.
  2. The landlord’s repairs manual says it will respond to, and fix, routine repairs within 28 days. It will resolve repairs which qualify under the government’s ‘Right to Repair’ regulations with prescribed timeframes of between 1 and 7 days. It will also complete ‘planned’ repairs within 90 days.
  3. The landlord provided repair records which include the resident’s reports about bathroom repairs and its response to these. The records do not contain full details about the landlord’s actions. This indicates poor record keeping and has affected our ability to accurately assess the timeline of events.
  4. The landlord was on notice of the bathroom repairs from January 2022. It responded promptly by attending and unblocking the shower pump within 7 working days. It also assessed the floor after 24 working days and raised a follow-on job to renew the vinyl flooring. Given this was specialist work which it outsourced to a contractor, it was reasonable that it did not complete this with the 28-day timeframe. Overall, its initial response was reasonable in line with its policy timeframes.
  5. However, it did not progress repairs to the floor following this. The resident raised further concerns in April 2022 about water penetrating under his vinyl flooring. The landlord’s contractor attended in June 2022 and said the bathroom should be fully renewed. They expressed concerns about the condition of the room, but this did not prompt action. The landlord’s records show the resident chased it multiple times between February 2022 and June 2022, when he complained about the lack of progress.
  6. The landlord did not respond to the complaint for 6 months, in which time the repairs remained outstanding. In its response it acknowledged its poor communication and its failure to renew the flooring but did not identify the full scope of the bathroom works. This was a missed opportunity to learn and put things right for the resident. It should have considered the cause of the delays, looked holistically at the status of the works, and devised a plan to resolve the issues.
  7. The landlord instructed its contractor to attend on 5 January 2023 to renew the floor. The job notes suggest the resident declined the visit and requested its supervisor attend to inspect the bathroom. There is no evidence the landlord sent its supervisor or otherwise progressed the repair until June 2023 when it raised a job to renew the floor and tiles. It did not attend in response to this which ultimately led to the resident’s complaint in August 2023.
  8. The records demonstrate the landlord was aware of the repairs and its obligation to act. It had acknowledged it had not progressed the repairs in its complaint response of December 2022. It reiterated this position in its response of October 2023. That it did not act despite multiple opportunities, and time and effort on the resident’s part, was unacceptable. The resident had to endure unreasonable living conditions, and the lack of communication and progression caused him frustration, stress, and a lack of confidence the landlord.
  9. As part of his complaint the resident had raised concerns about his toilet leaking. The resident explained to this Service there was a drip from the waste pipe. We appreciate the leak was containable and the resident did not clearly state that this was a waste pipe leak. However, given there were concerns about sanitation and hygiene, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to have explored this with the resident and addressed the issue in a more urgent timeframe. The government sets a response time of 1 working day for leaks from toilets under the ‘Right to Repair’ scheme.
  10. Given the resident’s concerns the landlord responded reasonably by completing a survey of the property on 5 September 2023. This was to enable it to gain a full understanding of the issues and it was a sensible intervention
  11. Following the survey, the resident chased the landlord for an update on 21 and 29 September 2023. The landlord’s internal notes suggest the works were still waiting approval due to costs above standard limits. It is not clear if the landlord updated the resident of this. It should have communicated proactively with the resident and managed his expectations about the timeline for repairs. This would have prevented further time and trouble on his part.
  12. In its complaint response the landlord updated the resident it had raised a new work order and notified him of the target completion date of 13 November 2023. The resident expressed satisfaction with the landlord’s response.
  13. However, the landlord did not schedule the works prior to this date. The records show the resident chased the landlord in October and November 2023 asking what was happening so he could coordinate with his work schedule. It logged this as an escalation of his complaint to stage 2, but there is no evidence it updated him about the status of the works and the delay. The landlord’s poor communication exacerbated the situation and caused the resident additional distress.
  14. The landlord explained the cause of the delay in its stage 2 response and assured the resident it had resolved the technical error. However, it did not clarify when works would commence or its target date for completion which was unreasonable.
  15. It did not commence works to the bathroom throughout 2024. Its contractor attended in February 2024 to renew the floor but reported they could not do this before plumbing and tiling. In March 2024 the landlord’s records note the job had “evolved” to full bathroom renewal. The resident continued to chase it throughout this time. In response to the resident’s request for information in August 2024, it explained it no longer had contact with the contractor so was unaware of the status of the repairs. The landlord was responsible for the work of its operative and this demonstrated poor oversight.
  16. The repair records show the landlord re-raised jobs to re-tile the room, lay flooring, fit a shower tray, and complete a mould wash between September and November 2024. The records suggest it completed the mould wash in September 2024 but it did not progress the bathroom repairs throughout this time. The landlord attended on 16 January 2025, from which date it commenced works to the bathroom.
  17. The repairs records suggest there were complexities with the work which protracted the process from this point. Because of this, we have not found fault with the landlord’s handling of the repairs from January 2025 onwards. The landlord had to remove the concrete subfloor to access pipework and operatives burst a water pipe resulting in a leak. There were leaks into the neighbouring property which it also had to resolve. The records suggest the landlord ultimately completed the work in May 2025.
  18. However, it took the landlord a significant and unacceptable number of months to resolve the bathroom repairs for the resident. Despite acknowledging in its complaint responses that it had let the resident down, it continued to do so by failing to progress the repairs throughout 2024. There was a lack of effective project management and oversight. It did not have a clear understanding of what work was needed and did not coordinate this. It issued works to its contractor but did not take reasonable action in response to their feedback. This meant it took ineffective action or did nothing at all. It lost sight of the status of the repairs to the ongoing detriment of the resident who had to endure unreasonable and worsening living conditions, including being unable to shower.
  19. Given the length of time it took the landlord to put things right, and considering the impact on the resident, we have found severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of works required to the bathroom. The landlord should apologise to the resident in writing for the significant failings identified in this report.
  20. While we acknowledge it offered the resident a total of £910 compensation, this is insufficient. It should pay the resident a total of £2,250. This is inclusive of:
    1. £1,800 comprised of a monthly payment of £50 for distress and inconvenience for 36 months between January 2022, when the resident reported concerns, to January 2025 when the landlord commenced works.
    2. £450 for time and trouble chasing the landlord over the 36-month period.
  21. The resident seeks reimbursement for items which were damaged by mould because of the landlord’s inaction. The landlord had been aware there was mould because of water penetration at the time of the resident’s complaint and it was slow to act on this and complete a mould treatment. It is not clear whether the resident raised a request for reimbursement with the landlord. The landlord must invite the resident to make a claim via its public liability insurer or otherwise provide a position on compensating him for his losses.
  22. The resident has also shared outstanding concerns about the bathroom works relating to the sealant at the edge of the tiles. We have recommended that the landlord complete a post-works inspection and resolve any outstanding issues.
  23. In February 2022, we issued a special report about the landlord, highlighting concerns with its complaint handling. In October 2023 we conducted an inspection to find out the reasons for its ongoing failures in complaint handling and we issued a report setting out further findings for service improvement in January 2024.
  24. While the focus of our investigation was the landlord’s complaint handling, we found a clear link between the landlord’s approach to repairs and its complaint handling performance. As a result of an analysis undertaken by the landlord, it restructured its approach to responsive repairs. It has moved repairs into its neighbourhood teams to increase resident access. Complaints staff and repairs now meet with contractors on a weekly basis to discuss issues and plan solutions. It has also created a new ‘Housing Improvement Group’ which meets weekly to track complaint and repair performance. The ‘Housing Improvement Board’ meets monthly to monitor progress and hold the Group to account.
  25. We note there were failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s repairs following the improvements enacted by the landlord. While we appreciate it takes time to embed change, the landlord must consider whether it has adequate measures and systems in place to track repairs though to completion. It must undertake a review and update this Service with any measures it has, or will, put in place to prevent the failings seen in this case.

Complaint handling

  1. Our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) requires landlords to acknowledge a complaint within 5 days. Landlords should respond to stage 1 and stage 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days, respectively. A landlord should not exceed these timescales without good reason and must first agree any extension with the resident. These timescales are outlined in versions of our Code from April 2022.
  2. At the time of the resident’s complaint, the landlord allowed 20-working days for a stage 1 response and 25 days for a stage 2 response. Neither of these timescales were compliant with the Code. The landlord has since updated its complaints policy to reflect the timescales in the Code.
  3. The resident first complained on 21 June 2022. The landlord responded on 29 December 2022 after 134 working days. This was significant delay. In its response the landlord apologised for the delay and explained this was due to a “backlog of cases”. There is no evidence it kept him updated about the delay and it did not compensate him for the inconvenience and frustration caused.
  4. The resident complained again on 4 August 2023. The landlord responded on 4 October 2023, after 43 working days. Again, the response was delayed. It apologised but offered no explanation or compensation for the delay.
  5. The resident initially expressed satisfaction with the landlord’s response, but the landlord did not progress the repairs. The landlord logged an escalation of the complaint on this basis on 17 November 2023. It responded at stage 2 of its process on 28 December 2022, which was 28 working days. It updated the resident that its response would be delayed because it was awaiting information. On the basis this was a short delay, and it updated the resident, the landlord’s actions were reasonable.
  6. However, the significant delays in the landlord’s stage 1 responses were unreasonable. The resident was inconvenienced by a protracted complaints process. For this reason, we have found maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling. The landlord should compensate the resident £200 for its delays. This is in line with our remedies guidance which states figures of this amount are appropriate where the landlord’s failures have had an adverse impact on the resident.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of works required to the resident’s bathroom.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks from the date of this report the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the significant failings identified in this report. This should be from the chief executive or other member of the senior leadership team.
    2. Pay the resident £2,450 compensation. If it has already paid the £910 it offered through its complaints process it can deduct this from the total. This is comprised of:
      1. £1,800 for distress and inconvenience caused by delays and poor communication in the landlord’s handling of the works.
      2. £450 for time and trouble in chasing the repairs.
      3. £200 for inconvenience caused by delays in its complaint handling
    3. Provide the resident with details of its public liability insurer so he can pursue a claim. Alternatively, it should provide a position on whether it can consider a reimbursement as compensation.
  2. Within 8 weeks of this report, the landlord must undertake a review of its repairs process and consider whether it has adequate measures and systems in place to track repairs through to completion. It should assess the adequacy of any measures it has put in place since our special investigation. It should identify areas for improvement along with a plan of action.
  3. The landlord must provide evidence it has complied with these orders in writing.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should:
    1. Contact the resident to discuss any outstanding concerns he has with the bathroom works. It should complete a post-works inspection and resolve any outstanding issues.
    2. Review this Service’s spotlight report on Knowledge and Information Management. Going forward it should ensure it keeps complete and auditable records of the action it takes in relation to repairs as well as its communications with residents.