London Borough of Lambeth (202507402)

Decision
Case ID	202507402
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London Borough of Lambeth
Landlord type	Local Authority / ALMO or TMO
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	28 November 2025

Background

The property is a 3-bedroom semi-detached house. The resident has lived there since 2017 and currently lives with two of her children, one of whom is autistic. She stated she had experienced damp and mould leading to this complaint.

What the complaint is about

The resident’s complaint is about:
1. the landlord’s response to the damp and mould in the property.
2. How the landlord responded to the complaint.

What we have not considered

The resident raised a complaint about the landlord’s response to her reports of pest infestation at stage 1 of the internal complaints process. She did not request escalation of this aspect of the complaint to stage 2. When she brought the complaint to our service she also did not repeat this part of the complaint. We therefore have not looked into this matter as the landlord has not had an opportunity to provide a final response on it.

Our decision (determination)

We have found that:
1. There was severe maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the reports of damp and mould.
2. There was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the subsequent complaint.

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

Summary of reasons

The handling of the damp and mould

The landlord did not carry out an inspection of the property promptly in line with its policy even when the resident reported persistent and recurring damp and mould. It did not form an appropriate plan of action and did not address the resident’s related concerns about insulation and draughts. It should have taken more timely and effective action given the effect the damp and mould could have had on the resident’s household which includes vulnerable children.

The complaint handling

The landlord delayed responding to the complaint in line with its policies.

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 a senior member of staff. 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 07 January 2026
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £1,150 made up as follows: £1,100 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by failing to take appropriate and timely action to respond to the resident’s reports of damp and mould. £50 in recognition of the distress ad inconvenience caused by failing to respond to the resident’s complaint in a timely manner. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 07 January 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 an externally appointed independent damp and mould specialist surveyor with no prior involvement in the case. 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 property for damp and mould covering the kitchen, bathroom, living room and bedroom areas, and produces a written report with photographs The survey report must set out: 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.	No later than 14 January 2026
4	Completing the works The landlord must take all steps to ensure the work as identified in the damp and mould survey from the previous order (Order number 3) is completed promptly and in any event by the due date. If the landlord cannot complete the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date: Why it cannot complete the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will finish the works; or Explain the steps it has taken to ensure the works were completed and provide supporting evidence. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot. Whether suitable alternative accommodation is necessary and will be made available to the resident until the work is completed.	No later than 11 February 2026

d is incorrect. I had a look at changing the margin left spacing but can’t resolve it. Anyone else able to tak e al

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
The landlord should contact the resident to ask her to provide information about the vulnerabilities in the household, including any reasonable adjustments that she or her children may require, which it should then keep on file.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
1 May 2024	The resident raised a complaint about damp and mould in the bedroom, living room and bathroom. She described that: A survey in March 2024 had found problems with the insulation but there had been no follow-up action. While the landlord had done a mould wash previously, the mould had returned and the situation had not improved.
28 May 2024	The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response to say it would ‘aim to’ complete a mould wash in the relevant areas on 31 July 2024.
16 Jul 2024	The resident requested an escalation of her complaint.
20 Aug 2024	The landlord issued a stage 2 complaint response as below: It acknowledged a survey in the kitchen had found a ‘structural defect’ causing draughts. It would do a mould wash and re-decorate the affected area. It did not provide any specific date for this but stated that its contractor would contact the resident by the end of the next week.
26 May 2025	The resident referred the matter to our service. She explained she was experiencing severe and persistent damp and mould, with visible mould growth and a ‘cold, unhealthy atmosphere’. She sought compensation and an apology.

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	Handling the damp and mould
Finding	Maladministration

The landlord’s repairs and damp policy sets out key actions as follows:
1. 1. It prioritises the removal of mould with initial wash and treatment to be carried out within 7 days of a report.
2. It would arrange an inspection to diagnose the issue within 28 days or sooner in ‘emergency situations’.
3. It would agree an action plan including timeframes with the residents to resolve the damp.
4. In cases with persistent damp, it would assign a surveyor to act as the resident’s point of contact and stay in touch with the resident until all necessary work is done.
In this case, the resident made a first report of damp and mould on 22 January 2024. Records showed the landlord carried out a mould wash on 30 January 2024, which was in keeping with its commitment to carry out initial mould treatment within 7 days.
There is no dispute between the parties that the landlord later carried out a survey in March 2024. The landlord has not provided us with a copy of this survey report although it referred to it in its stage 2 complaint response. The resident informed us that this was an ‘all-round’ survey and the surveyor told her on that occasion that a mould wash would not resolve the root cause of the damp and mould. The parties have both said the key finding from this report was that there were ‘structural defects’ leading to draughts in the property.
There was no record of the landlord doing any follow-up action after this survey in March 2024. When the resident again reported recurring damp and mould on 1 May 2024 and chased for follow-up actions to the survey in March 2024, the landlord said it would ‘aim to’ carry out a mould wash 3 months later which was significantly outside of its timeframe for service delivery. It did not acknowledge that she was reporting a persistent damp issue.
At this point the landlord should have reviewed the survey findings and consider conducting an inspection specifically for the damp and mould, which was part of its own policy commitments, but it missed the opportunity to do so. It made no reply to the resident’s requests for follow-up action to the survey from March 2024, nor addressed her concerns about the lack of insulation or draughts being a potentially contributing factor to more damp and mould.
There was also no record that it later completed the mould wash in July or August 2024.
The resident has shared with us that while the landlord’s contractor did attempt to attend for mould washes, she did not have prior notice of the appointments and she turned the contractors away. She explained to us this was because her autistic child could become dysregulated when strangers came into the house, and also because she felt the mould washes were ineffective in addressing the root cause of the problem.
While we have not seen records that the resident expressly informed the landlord of her child’s needs, we find that the landlord still failed to communicate adequately with her and offer an inspection specifically for the damp and mould, or otherwise follow up with the general survey from March 2024. The landlord’s response was not in line with its commitment to carry out a damp and mould inspection within 28 days of identifying an issue.
At stage 2, the landlord had another opportunity to review its approach so far. The continued reports of persistent damp was an opportunity for the landlord to consider an escalated response, rather than continue with the same approach of repeating mould washes. However it did not offer any inspection, nor communicate any action plan to the resident other than offering another mould wash and re-decoration. It acknowledged there was a ‘structural defect’ causing draughts but again offered no explanation how it intended to address this problem.
Further, at stage 2, the landlord told the resident she should wait for the contractor to get in touch with her for the mould wash. We would have expected the landlord to facilitate communication and actively book in an appointment with the contractor for her, and then refer to this in its complaint response. This would have been the more customer-focused approach. Failing to do so indicated the landlord was passive and dismissive in its attitude to this issue.
The resident has told us she is still experiencing damp and mould issues. To date there has been no inspection specific to the damp and mould to diagnose what was causing it, nor any advice or support given to the resident such as improving ventilation. We have not seen evidence that the landlord took into account the vulnerabilities in the household nor offered any extra support such as scheduling appointments ahead of time around the children’s needs.
In summation, the landlord has not taken the appropriate action in a timely manner to address damp and mould. It was passive in its approach and did not carry out most of the actions it had committed to. It has not shown that it was aware of its own failings and it has offered no appropriate remedy to the resident. The resident has been left in this situation which has persisted from May 2024 till now for about 1.5 years without improvement.
Due to these reasons, we find severe maladministration in how the landlord handled the resident’s reports of damp and mould.
The resident explained to us that for 1.5 years she has continuously cleaned and managed the mould herself which covered the bedroom, living room and bathroom areas. She has young children living with her who have vulnerabilities. She explained to us she has had to discard a mattress of her son’s which had become mouldy on one side and she has experienced significant distress, inconvenience and worry about this situation. In recognition of this impact to her and her family, we consider the landlord should make a financial redress to the resident in line with our remedies guidance, which we have set out above in our orders.

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

The landlord received the resident’s complaint on 1 May 2024. It issued a stage 1 reply on 28 May 2024, which is outside of the response timeframe of 10 working days set out in the Complaint Handling Code. We cannot see records of any communication with the resident notifying her that there would be a delay in complaint response.
Similarly at stage 2, the resident requested escalation on 16 July 2024 and the landlord replied on 20 August 2024 which is a few days outside of the timeframe of 20 working days. Again we could not see records of the landlord informing the resident it needed an extension. Although the few days delay likely had only limited impact on the resident, under the circumstances we find it exacerbated the impact of inconvenience and worry to her as she has already been dealing with a lack of communication or acknowledgement from the landlord on the damp and mould issue.
Due to these reasons we find there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Learning

Knowledge and information management (record keeping)

We identified several issues with record keeping and information sharing during the investigation. These included:
1. On multiple occasions, the landlord’s repairs history records show the date of completion for certain works as being earlier than the date when the works were raised. There was no explanation for this recurring issue.

Although the resident has repeatedly referred to her children having vulnerabilities throughout the complaint, the landlord has told us it has no disabilities or vulnerabilities on record for her.
Although the landlord referred to a survey report from March 2024 reporting on draughts in the kitchen in its own stage 2 complaint response, it did not provide us with a copy of this report.
At the beginning the landlord sent us its repairs history for this property dating back to 2019 and including matters such as toilet blocks and total loss of heating and hot water, which are not relevant to this complaint. This was not helpful to the investigation.

Our Spotlight Report on Knowledge and information management (KIM) set out that landlords should ensure its databases are capable of adequately capturing information about residents (including vulnerabilities) and repairs. Staff should be able to easily access information they require as this is essential for evidence-based decision-making.
If the landlord has followed the recommendations set out in our Spotlight Report on KIM, it might have been able to better track its progress on damp and mould responses and understood better what was the scale of the impact to the resident from its failings.