London Borough of Lewisham (202405712)

Back to Top

 

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202405712

Lewisham Council

28 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 

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and her request to replace the shower.
  1. The landlord’s handling of the complaint has also been considered.

Background 

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, living in a flat. The shower is the only washing facility in the property. She lives in the property with her 3 children.
  1. The resident said she reported damp and mould on 2 August 2023. The landlord booked an appointment for 16 August 2023, but the contractor had to leave after 10 minutes due to an emergency. The resident chased the follow-on appointment on 24 August 2023 and 22 September 2023.
  1. The resident complained on 4 October 2023 as the landlord had not attended an appointment on 22 September 2023 to complete a mould wash and inspect the shower. She said the contractor confirmed in August that the landlord needed to remove the shower as the sealant and door had mould, which she could not clean. She was concerned about the impact on her family’s health and her mental health.
  1. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 6 November 2023. It apologised for the delay in addressing the damp and mould and the communication issues. It re-scheduled the damp and mould treatment for 10 November 2023. It completed repairs to the shower unit in September 2023 and renewed it on 12 October 2023. It offered £100 compensation for its failings.
  1. The resident escalated the complaint on 19 May 2024 as the mould issues were unresolved. The landlord inspected the black mould in the shower on 18 January 2024 but had not contacted her since. The shower door also did not close properly causing a leak.
  1. In its stage 2 response on 19 June 2024, the landlord apologised for the delay in completing the damp and mould works found in the January 2024 inspection. It said a backlog in repairs caused the delay. It explained it would prioritise the works and monitor them to completion. It offered £80 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay.
  1. The resident referred the complaint to the Service as she wanted the landlord to resolve the damp and mould, replace the shower, and pay further compensation. She also said she wanted to move due to the repair issues in the property. She said her children were constantly coughing. Her daughter’s school had also raised concerns about the suitability of the property and impact on her wellbeing. She did not think the landlord had shown any empathy.

Assessment and findings 

Scope of investigation  

  1. The Ombudsman notes the resident’s report that the landlord’s handling of this case has negatively impacted her family’s health. While the Ombudsman is sorry to hear this, it is beyond the expertise of the Service to determine a causal link between the landlord’s actions (or lack thereof) and the impact on health. Often, when there is a dispute over whether someone has been injured or a health condition has been made worse, the courts are better equipped to access and assess all the relevant evidence that can provide an expert opinion of the cause of any injury or deterioration of a condition. This would be a more appropriate and effective means of considering such an allegation and so should the resident wish to pursue this matter, she should do so via this route. This investigation will only consider whether the landlord acted in line with its policy / its legal obligations, and fairly in the circumstances.
  1. It is understood that the resident’s desired outcome is to be moved from the property. The Ombudsman understands the resident’s reasons for wanting to move, however, this is not an action that the Ombudsman would require the landlord to take. This is because we do not have access to information regarding the availability of suitable vacant properties or details of any other prospective tenants or applicants that may have higher priority for rehousing. Nonetheless, the Service will consider the landlord’s handling of the repairs, which are the main reason for the resident’s request to move.
  1. The resident has also raised concerns about a leak in the property from September 2024. The landlord has responded to this under a separate complaint response. This element of the complaint will be considered under complaint reference 202450744. This investigation will focus on the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould and shower repairs.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and request to replace the shower  

  1. The tenancy agreement states that the landlord must keep the structure of the property and installations for sanitation in good repair. Additionally, under Section 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord must ensure that the property is fit for human habitation during the term of the tenancy. The repairs policy says it will complete routine repairs within 20 working days.
  1. The landlord’s damp mould and leaks policy dated January 2024 outlines that it will treat all reports of leaks, damp, and mould seriously and will take a solution, focused, holistic approach whenever it can. It adds it will communicate clearly and keep residents informed of what action it will take, why it is taking it and when it will do this. Where it is unable to take immediate action, it may offer an interim solution and support to limit the impact. The Ombudsman recognises that this policy was not available at the time of the resident’s initial damp and mould reports but is referenced to as a sensible guide.
  1. The resident said she initially reported damp and mould on 2 August 2023. The landlord’s repair records do not show when she first raised the issue. It is vital that landlords have clear, accurate records to provide an audit trail and timeline. Nonetheless, it scheduled an appointment for 16 August 2023, which was within its 20-working day timeframe. The contractor had to leave the appointment after 10 minutes due to an emergency. This would have caused inconvenience to the resident. However, there are circumstances in which it can be reasonable to reallocate contractors to provide an appropriate service to all residents.
  1. The landlord failed to promptly reschedule the appointment to avoid causing a detrimental impact to the resident. This led the resident to chase the landlord on 16 August 2023, 24 August 2023, and 22 September 2023, causing her additional time and effort. The landlord apologised for the delay in its stage 1 response and rescheduled the appointment for a mould wash to 10 November 2023. As a result, the landlord did not take any meaningful action to treat or remedy the mould for over 3 months, which was an unreasonable delay.
  1. In her complaint, the resident said in August 2023 the contractor agreed to remove the shower. She said there was mould in the fixtures and fittings, which she was unable to clean. While we do not doubt the resident’s account of the events, there is no repair record to confirm the outcome of such appointment. Nonetheless, the landlord raised a work order on 5 September 2023 to replace the shower unit and a further work order to remedy a shower fault on 12 September 2023. In its stage 1 response, the landlord said it renewed the shower unit on 12 October 2023. However, the landlord’s repair records do not support this finding. The resident also subsequently reported that the issue was unresolved and sent photos of the shower unit. Again, this demonstrates the importance of accurate repair records so the landlord can properly monitor repairs.
  1. A contractor inspected the property on 18 January 2024. The landlord has not provided a copy of the inspection report. The resident chased the matter on 27 March 2024 and 19 May 2024 as the landlord had not completed the works within 1 month of the inspection as agreed. In its stage 2 response on 19 June 2024, the landlord said it would prioritise the works and monitor it to completion. The delay was due to a backlog. It was unreasonable that the landlord did not update the resident and advise her of the reason for the delay at an earlier date, to better manage her expectations.
  1. The recommended works were:
  1. Replace the kitchen and bathroom extractor fans.
  1. Renew the shower screen.
  1. Supply an installation of replacement white rock wall cladding.
  1. Installation of aqua board in place of the splash-back tile course within the shower cubical recess.
  1. On 12 November 2024, the contractor said they put the job on hold. It called the resident on 18 June 2024 and 25 June 2024, but she did not answer. It also cold called the property but only her child was there, so it left a calling card. It emailed the landlord to request all the resident’s contact details. It appears the contractor initially took all reasonable steps to arrange the works. However, there is no evidence from the time, including repair records, and the landlord has relied on the contractor’s account of events at a later date. The resident told the Service she chased the repairs with the contractor on 1 August 2024 and 13 August 2024, but they said they had no record of the repair. This may have been a missed opportunity to resume the repairs. Again, we have not seen evidence of this, but this may be due to the identified record keeping issues.
  1. The contractor completed an emergency mould treatment on 13 November 2024 as the resident reported on 8 November 2024 that the damp and mould had spread. Mould washes are often a reasonable interim step to reduce the impact of mould while arranging the necessary repairs. However, in this case the resident raised concerns that the repeated mould washes were ineffective as the mould was embedded in the fixtures and fittings.
  1. The landlord raised a work order on 23 December 2024 to repair the wet room shower doors, shower tray, and the fixtures and fittings as they were all rotten. An appointment date was scheduled for 21 January 2025, but the work order has not been marked as completed so it is unclear whether the issue has now been resolved in full. The landlord also told the Service that it scheduled a damp and mould inspection on 20 February 2025. We have not seen the outcome of the inspection. An order has been made for the landlord to complete the works to the shower, provide a copy of the damp and mould inspection report, and complete any other necessary repairs. It should also ensure it has replaced the extractor fans.
  1. In conclusion, the damp and mould and shower repairs have been outstanding for a prolonged period. Although there appear to be delays due to access issues, the landlord’s overall handling of the repairs showed a lack of urgency. The resident was concerned about the impact of the damp and mould on her family’s health as the shower was the only washing facility in the property, so could not be avoided. She expended time and was inconvenienced by having to chase the repairs, particularly with several inspections and mould washes which did not meaningfully progress the repairs.
  1. The resident did not think the landlord’s approach demonstrated empathy or recognised her lived experience. She said the landlord often only provided enough information to keep her temporarily appeased without actually progressing the repairs. It is evident that the handling of the matter had a detrimental impact on the landlord-tenant relationship. The Service’s spotlight report on damp and mould recommends “Landlords should ensure they treat residents reporting damp and mould with respect and empathy. The distress and inconvenience experienced by residents in this area is some of the most profound we have seen, and this needs to be reflected in the tone and approach of the complaint handling.” If the landlord’s approach reflected the good practice identified in the spotlight report it could have avoided the identified failings. The landlord should apologise to the resident and consider how it can improve its service in light of her concerns. This may include additional staff training regarding an empathetic approach and additional resources to support staff.
  1. In its complaint responses, the landlord recognised delays in completing the necessary works and offered £180 compensation. Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the redress offered by the landlord put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this the Ombudsman assesses whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles: be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  1. The compensation offered did not go far enough to put things right. In line with the Service’s remedies guidance, awards of £100-£600 are appropriate in cases where the landlord’s failure has adversely affected the resident, and it has attempted to put things right, but the offer was not proportionate to the failings identified. As the issue has been ongoing for over 18 months, the landlord should pay the resident an additional £600 compensation.
  1. In this investigation, failures have been identified in the landlord’s handling of its repairs and record-keeping – similar to those identified in case 202124577. We have not, however, made any further orders for the landlord to improve this. This is because a wider order was made as part of case 202124577 which the landlord has now complied with. We expect the landlord to take forward the lessons and improvements it shared with the Service following the wider order and will monitor the progress of this.
  1. Moreover, the Ombudsman is currently undertaking a special investigation into the landlord. This is conducted under paragraph 49 of the Scheme and allows the Ombudsman to investigate beyond an individual complaint to establish whether there is evidence of systemic failings. The findings of this report will therefore contribute to the outcome and action needed following the completion of the investigation.

Complaint handling  

  1. The landlord’s complaint handling policy states it will respond to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days and stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The resident initially complained on 4 October 2023 and the landlord issued its stage 1 response on 6 November 2023. This exceeded its response timeframe by 13 working days. However, the landlord recognised the delay in acknowledging the complaint on 23 October 2023, which it said was due to an IT system transition. It therefore took steps to manage the resident’s expectations.
  1. On 15 December 2023, the resident told the landlord that the complaint was not resolved. The Service’s complaint handling code states “If all or part of the complaint is not resolved to the resident’s satisfaction at stage 1, it must be progressed to stage 2 of the landlord’s procedure.” The landlord did not recognise this as a stage 2 request, which was unreasonable given her correspondence met the criteria for a complaint escalation. At a minimum the landlord should have explained how the resident could have formally progressed the issue through the complaint process if it required further information, to ensure she was aware of the available options. As it failed to do so, there was a delay in the resident exhausting the complaint process.
  1. The resident continued to chase the substantive complaint issue and asked to escalate the complaint on 19 May 2024. The landlord issued a stage 2 response on 19 June 2024, within 21 working days. However, had the landlord recognised the earlier email in December 2023 as a complaint escalation, it could have completed the complaint process 5 months earlier. This caused the resident additional time and effort pursuing the matter.
  1. The landlord has not recognised the identified failings within its complaint responses, or taken steps to redress the matter, so it remains unresolved. In line with the Service’s remedies guidance, £100 is therefore a proportionate remedy as there was a service failure which did not significantly affect the overall outcome for the resident but delayed getting matters resolved.

Determination 

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and request to replace the shower.
  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in the way the landlord handled the complaint.

Orders  

  1. In addition to the £180 offered in its complaint responses, the landlord must pay the resident:
  1. £600 for its failures in its handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould and request to replace the shower.
  1. £100 for its complaint handling failures.
  1. The landlord should provide evidence to the Service of the total payment of £880.
  1. The landlord must provide a copy of the damp and mould inspection report completed on 20 February 2025 with us and the resident. It must complete any recommended repairs to the shower and must seek to resolve the damp and mould in full, including replacing the extractor fans. It should provide the Service with a copy of its works record to confirm it has completed the works.
  1. The landlord should send a written apology to the resident for its handling of the repairs. It should share a copy with the Service.
  1. The landlord must provide evidence that it has complied with the orders within 4 weeks of the date of this report.