Read our damp and mould report focusing on Awaab's Law

London Borough of Lambeth (202431586)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202431586

Lambeth Council

16 May 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 the resident’s reports of damp, mould, and the associated repairs.
  2. We have also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background.

  1. The resident is a tenant of the landlord, and it recorded him as vulnerable due to his age. Throughout the resident’s complaint both he and his daughter were in contact with the landlord. For clarity, this report refers to contact from both the resident, and his daughter, as ‘the resident’.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord and reported a concern about damp and mould in his bathroom. He reported “mushrooms” were growing in there and he was concerned the conditions posed a health hazard. The landlord attended and completed a mould wash on 13 January 2023.
  3. Following the resident raising further concerns about damp and mould, the landlord arranged for an independent surveyor to inspect the property. The surveyor issued the landlord with a report on 18 May 2023 and said:
    1. The walls were suffering from damp due to a lack of effective damp proof course.
    2. There was a lack of moisture extraction in the property.
    3. It recommended the following works:
      1. Drill and inject a chemical based damp proof course.
      2. Carry out re-rendering/plastering work to affected areas.
      3. Install extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom.
  4. It does not appear the landlord progressed with the works recommended in the above survey at the time. The resident contacted it to ask for an update on the proposed works in August 2023 and January 2024.
  5. The landlord unblocked a gutter on 27 April 2024. It completed another inspection at the property on 14 May 2024. Its notes indicate it was unable to install the extractor fan in the bathroom as a “window kit” was needed. The repair did not go ahead at the time.
  6. The resident made a complaint about the landlord’s handling of the repairs on 3 April 2024. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response on 17 July 2024 and said:
    1. It raised an inspection on 8 April 2024 to install an extractor fan. The work order was “closed” on 21 June 2024.
    2. Its contractor would be in touch to book the works recommended by the surveyor in May 2023.
    3. It “partially upheld” the complaint as it had carried out works but acknowledged it “could have kept [the resident]” up to date.
  7. The resident contacted the landlord on 17 July 2024 and said he was unhappy with its complaint response and its handling of the works related to the damp and mould. He said no works had taken place and it still had not fitted the extractor fans.
  8. The landlord sent the resident its stage 2 complaint response on 30 August 2024. It said works to install the extractor fan started on 29 August 2024. Its contractor advised it was “waiting for approval” to start the works. It would be in touch to book the recommended works from its May 2023 survey. It said it was “very sorry” for the delay in progressing the works an offered £360 in compensation.
  9. The resident contacted us on 18 November 2024 and asked us to investigate his complaint. He said the mould growth “continued to worsen” and the landlord not taken the appropriate action. He raised a concern about the impact on his health due to the conditions in the property.

Events after the complaints process

  1. The resident chased the repairs again in February 2025. On 27 February 2025, the landlord raised a work order with its contractor to complete the recommended works from the 2023 survey.
  2. The landlord contacted us on 16 April 2025, and it had spoken to the resident that day who had confirmed “none of the work” had started.
  3. The landlord told us in, May 2025, it had raised a new survey which was due to take place on 12 May 2025. The resident confirmed he had also been told this. We have not been told whether the survey has taken place on 12 May 2025 as planned.

Assessment and findings

Scope of our investigation

  1. When the resident asked us to investigate his complaint he raised a concern the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould issue had impacted on his health. We acknowledge the serious nature of this issue and the resident’s comments. However, this aspect of the resident’s complaint ultimately requires a determination of liability for personal injury.
  2. Claims of personal injury, including damage to health, can be considered via a landlord’s public liability insurance, or in a court of law. Such claims will take into consideration medical evidence and allegations of negligence. These matters fall outside of our remit. The resident may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim, if he considers that his health has been affected by any action or lack thereof by the landlord. However, it is widely accepted that damp and mould can pose a risk to health. We have considered this general risk, rather than any specific impact on health and any distress and inconvenience the resident may have experienced as a result of errors by the landlord. We have also considered the way in which the landlord responded to the resident’s concerns about health.
  3. Our Scheme sets out that we may not investigate matters that were not brought to the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period. This is normally 12 months of matters arising. The evidence shows the landlord was on notice about the concerns about damp and mould from November 2022. There is clear evidence the matter was outstanding for a significant period without the landlord taking appropriate action. We therefore consider it reasonable in the circumstances to take into account the landlord’s actions from November 2022 onwards. Considering the approach set out in our Scheme, we have given greater weight to the landlord actions in the 12 months preceding the resident’s formal complaint of April 2024.
  4. The landlord sent its final complaint response in August 2024. At the time, the substantive issues in the case were outstanding. For fairness, this Service has increased the scope of the investigation beyond the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response to fully consider the landlord’s handling of the substantive issues raised in the complaint.

Policies and procedures

  1. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 obliges the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the property and keep in repair and proper working order the installations for the supply of water and sanitation
  2. Landlords are required to consider the condition of properties using a risk assessment approach called the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). HHSRS does not specify any minimum standards, but it is concerned with avoiding, or minimising potential health hazards. Damp and mould are potential hazards that fall within the scope of HHSRS. Landlords should be aware of their obligations under HHSRS. Where potential hazards are identified, improvement works are typically the starting point and additional monitoring is expected.
  3. The landlord’s repairs and damp policy, which came into force in August 2023, says it attends to routine repairs within 7 or 28 days depending on the priority of the repairs. It states it attends to “planned” repairs within 90 days. The policy describes planned repairs as plasterwork, clearing gutters and “non urgent work to prevent problems arising in the future”. The policy says it is committed to remove mould and treat it within 7 days of reporting. It states it will then arrange an inspection to diagnose the cause within 28 days. It will then agree and write an action plan, including timeframes, of what works it will do to resolve the issue.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould

  1. When the resident reported damp and mould in November 2022, the landlord attended to remove and treat the mould in January 2023. The actions the landlord took at that time were appropriate, however it attended outside of its target repair timeframes. Although the delay was not excessive, it would have caused some inconvenience to the resident.
  2. When it became apparent the issue with damp and mould was persisting, the landlord arranged for an independent damp and mould inspection, in May 2023. This was appropriate in the circumstances and evidence the landlord sought to identify what was causing the issue.
  3. We have not seen any evidence the landlord followed up on the recommendations of the May 2023 survey. It was not proactive in booking the repairs. This was a failing in its handling of the matter. The resident was inconvenienced by the need to chase the landlord about the repairs in August 2023. The landlord’s records from that time show it could not “see anything being raised on the system” when it discussed the repairs with the resident. This supports the conclusion the landlord failed to follow up on the report. The resident was evidently distressed at the conditions in his property. The landlord’s failure to progress with the repairs may have increased the distress he experienced.
  4. The resident was further inconvenienced by the need to chase the landlord about the repairs in January 2024, 5 months later. It was a significant failing the landlord did not follow up on the repairs despite being made aware its contractor had not progressed with matters. The evidence shows the landlord failed to have the appropriate oversight over the contractor working on its behalf. It did not learn from its earlier errors.
  5. The landlord attempted to install an extractor fan in May 2024. This was a year after the inspection recommended doing so. This was an unreasonable delay that inconvenienced the resident. It was unable to install the fan as a “window kit” was needed. We acknowledge the repair was more complex than first thought. However, there is no evidence the landlord followed up on the repair at the time. This was a further failing in its handling of the matter.
  6. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response only addressed its repair visit of May 2024. It did not acknowledge the matter was outstanding for much longer than that. This was unreasonable and lacked transparency. It failed to acknowledge it had been aware of recommended works to resolve the damp and mould for over a year. It was also unreasonable that it did not offer compensation despite accepting errors in its communication about the repairs. The tone of the complaint response was inappropriate and offered no real assessment of its handling of the repairs. It was inappropriate to say the extractor fan repair was closed in June 2023 without acknowledging it had not actually completed the repair.
  7. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response did little to put right the shortcomings of its stage 1 complaint response. Again, it gave an inaccurate description of the extractor fan repair by stating works had started. We have seen evidence of the landlord’s own notes from September 2024 that say there were “currently no fan[s] in [the] kitchen or bathroom”. It was also inappropriate that it did not say when it hoped to start the repairs recommended in the May 2023 survey. The resident was inconvenienced by the lack of detail included about the upcoming repairs. It missed an opportunity to reassure the resident it was taking the matter seriously. It also failed to adhere to its own damp and mould policy of providing an action plan, with timeframes, for the damp and mould works.
  8. We welcome the fact it used its stage 2 complaint response to offer the resident a sincere apology and compensation to try and put right its evident failings. Considering it had not started any of the works at this point, the £340 in compensation it offered did not fully put things right for the resident.
  9. The evidence shows the landlord did not learn from its accepted failings following its stage 2 complaint response. It acknowledged it had not approved the quote from the contractor so the works could start, in its stage 2 complaint response. We have seen an internal email from January 2025 that it did not approve the quote until November 2024. This was a further 3 months delay. The further delay inconvenienced the resident and may have increased the distress he experienced.
  10. The information provided for this investigation shows the landlord inspected the exterior brickwork in February 2025 and did some plastering work in the kitchen in March 2025. However, it told us in April 2025 the works recommended in the survey had not started. This is an unacceptable delay of nearly 2 years. This caused a significant detriment to the resident. It is particularly concerning considering the landlord’s records reflect it recorded the resident as vulnerable due to his age. The impact of damp and mould is likely to be greater for someone who is elderly.
  11. There was a significant failure to progress with the recommended works in a timely manner. Therefore, instructing a more up to date survey in May 2025 was appropriate. We acknowledge another survey increases the already significant inconvenience the resident has experienced up to this point. However, we agree it is appropriate to have up to date picture of what works are needed. Considering the significant delays up to May 2025, the landlord must start the works recommended in its survey within 6 weeks of the date of this decision.
  12. The evidence shows that the landlord did not appropriately oversee repairs being carried out on its behalf by contractors. The repair records lack detail, and there is very little in the way of recorded outcomes. We recommend the landlord completes a case review with a focus on its record keeping, to help it prevent similar failings happening in the future.
  13. We have decided there was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of this matter. Our remedies guidance sets out that for findings of severe maladministration an order of compensation over £1,000 may be appropriate to put things right for the resident. Particularly where failures accumulated over a significant period of time that had a seriously detrimental impact on the resident. For the reasons set out above we have determined an order for a further £1,000 in compensation for distress and inconvenience is appropriate in the circumstances of this case. This is in addition to the £340 the landlord has already offered.
  14. We also order the landlord to provide financial redress for loss of amenity. This is because the resident did not have full enjoyment of the property for a substantial period due to the various repairs. A 10% amenity loss calculation has therefore been applied covering from the damp and mould inspection in May 2023 up to the conclusion of this investigation.
  15. During the above period, the resident was paying £153.49 per week in rent. We have calculated 10% of the rent for the 103 week period covering up to our investigation was £1,580.95. We have ordered the landlord to pay that amount in recognition of the loss of amenity. While we acknowledge this is not a precise calculation, this is considered to a be a fair and reasonable amount of compensation taking all of the circumstances into account.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord operates a 2 stage complaints procedure. The timeframes in its procedure mirror that of our Complaint Handling Code (the Code), which sets out our Service’s expectations of a landlord’s complaint handling practices. The Code states landlord must send stage 1 complaint within 10 working days, and stage 2 complaint responses within 20 working days.
  2. The landlord sent the resident its stage 1 complaint response 73 working days after he complained. This was well outside of the timeframes required by its policy and our Code, and a failing in its complaint handling. The resident was inconvenienced by a protracted complaints process. It was unreasonable the landlord did not apologise or offer compensation for the delay. The landlord missed an opportunity to show learning and put things right for the resident.
  3. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response 32 working days after the resident expressed dissatisfaction with the stage 1 decision. This was outside of the timeframes set out in its complaint policy, and the Code. It was inappropriate the landlord did not acknowledge the delay in its complaint response was. It is worth noting any delay would have caused some level of inconvenience to the resident, overall, the delay was not excessive.
  4. Considering the above delays, and lack of apology or learning shown, we have decided there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling. Our remedies guidance says up to £100 may be appropriate to put right errors where there was a minor failure by the landlord. This is when there were errors in the service it provided and it did not appropriately acknowledge these and/or fully put them right. We have therefore ordered the landlord to pay £100 in compensation for errors in its complaint handling.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was:
    1. Severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
    2. Service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of this decision the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Instruct a senior member of staff, at director level or above within its organisation to apologise, in person or by telephone according to the resident’s preference, for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £3,020.95 in compensation. Its offer of £340 in compensation should be deducted from this total if already paid. The compensation is broken down as follows:
      1. £1,340 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by errors in its handling of the damp and mould issue.
      2. £1,580.95 in recognition of the loss of amenity caused by errors in its handling of the damp and mould issue.
      3. £100 in recognition of the inconvenience caused by errors in its complaint handling.
  2. Within 6 weeks of this decision the landlord is ordered to start the works recommended in the damp and mould survey of May 2025.

Recommendations

  1. We recommend the landlord completes a review into its handling of the repairs in this case. It should include a consideration of the failings identified in this report, and how it can reduce the risk of similar failings happening again.