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

London Borough of Newham (202415069)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202415069

London Borough of Newham

15 August 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 response to the resident’s report of:
    1. A roof leak and the handling of remedial repairs.
    2. Damage to personal property.
  2. The Ombudsman has also decided to investigate the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident has lived in the property as a secure tenant since March 2002. The property is a 3-bedroom house.
  2. The resident reported a leak from the roof, which affected a light fitting in her bedroom, on 8 November 2022. The landlord attended the same day and made the light safe. The landlord did repairs to the roof on 6 December 2022 and restored the light on 11 December 2022.
  3. The landlord investigated reports of a leak from the roof on 7 February and 3 May 2023.
  4. Following a further report of a leak, the landlord investigated on 1 December 2023 and found a hole in the roof. On 8 February 2024, the resident reported rainwater coming into her bedroom. The landlord did a survey of the roof on 22 February 2024, which set out the repairs it needed to do.
  5. The resident complained on 13 March 2024 about how the landlord had dealt with her reports. She said the landlord had fixed broken roof tiles, but this had not resolved the leak. She said the leaks had damaged a mattress and flooring. The resident wanted the leak fixed and compensation for the damage.
  6. In its complaint response on 20 March 2024 the landlord said it had inspected the roof and put the repairs needed on a planned repair programme. It said it was doing the repairs that day. On damaged property, it provided details of how to make an insurance claim. It offered £100 compensation for the time taken to fix the leak and apologised for inconvenience caused.
  7. The resident escalated her complaint on 7 May 2024. She said the compensation was not enough because of the damage caused.
  8. In its final response on 18 June 2024, the landlord said it had acted quickly after each report of a leak, but the leak reoccurred, leaving the resident to deal with the same issue. It said the resident needed to send it an insurance claim for the damaged items. It apologised for the delay in sending the stage 2 response. It offered £500 compensation for service failures.
  9. The resident escalated her complaint to the Ombudsman. She said the landlord had not fixed the leak. She wanted the landlord to complete the work and increase the compensation.

Assessment and findings

Scope of the investigation

  1. In her complaint, the resident said the leak damaged a mattress and flooring. She also said the landlord damaged a CCTV camera when it put up scaffolding.
  2. Although we can consider the impact the leak had on the resident and whether the landlord acted reasonably, in this case we cannot assess whether the landlord’s actions caused damage. These are legal aspects better suited to an insurance claim or court. While the Ombudsman is an alternative to the courts, in this case we are unable to prove legal liability or whether the landlord was responsible for damage. However, we will consider how the landlord responded to the concerns.

The landlord’s response to a roof leak and the handling of remedial repairs

  1. The landlord is responsible under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for repairing the structure and exterior of the property. This means the landlord has an obligation to repair external leaks. The occupancy agreement confirms the landlord’s responsibility. The landlord did not dispute it had responsibility for the repairs.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy sets out how it will deal with different types of repairs. It says emergency repairs are ones it needs to do to avoid danger to health and safety, or where failure to do the repair could cause extensive damage. It says it will complete these within 24 hours. Urgent repairs are those that may affect the resident’s comfort or cause damage. It will do these within 3 or 7 days, depending on the nature of the work needed. It says routine repairs are not urgent, although they may cause inconvenience. It will do these within 20 working days. It says it will do planned repairs within 42 working days.
  3. In investigating this complaint, the Ombudsman has not seen a full record of repair reports made by the resident. The landlord’s complaint responses give details of when the resident reported leaks and what it did in response. The Ombudsman has noted the resident did not dispute these dates. Because of this, the Ombudsman will use these dates.
  4. In its complaint response, the landlord said the resident first reported a leak from the roof on 8 November 2022. It attended the same day and disconnected the light in the bedroom. The landlord did follow-up repairs to the roof on 6 December 2022, and restored power to the light on 8 December 2022.
  5. The Ombudsman has found it was reasonable for the landlord to deal with the report of a leak affecting a light as an emergency. However, it is unclear why it then took the landlord a month to repair the roof, and whether the resident had another source of light in her bedroom. In the circumstances, the resident could have expected the landlord to treat the leak as an urgent repair. This is because the leak was affecting her comfort and causing damage to the property. Although there is a lack of evidence, it appears the landlord did not follow its repairs policy, and this caused inconvenience for the resident.
  6. The landlord said it did further investigations on 7 February and 3 May 2023, as there were reports of leaks affecting the light. The Ombudsman has not seen details of when the resident reported these leaks and whether the landlord did any repairs following its investigations. Because of this, the Ombudsman cannot comment on whether the landlord acted reasonably at this time.
  7. The next record of a leak was on 1 December 2023. The landlord’s records say it found a hole in the roof, which was letting squirrels into the loft. It is unclear from the records what action the landlord took following this, but on 19 December 2023 the resident reported rainwater leaking into the bedroom light. The landlord attended the same day and disconnected the light.
  8. The landlord’s records show the resident reported damage to the roof in “multiple areas” on 8 February 2024, which was letting in rainwater. The landlord did a survey of the roof on 22 February 2024. This found the roof covered in moss, which was causing blockages. It also found broken tiles and a gap in pointing on the ridge. It set out what repairs the landlord needed to do.
  9. Records provided by the landlord show it responded to reports of leaks before February 2024. However, it is unclear from the records provided what work it did to stop the leaks. The Ombudsman accepts that finding the cause of a leak from rainwater can be difficult. Because of the repeated leaks, it was reasonable for the landlord to arrange a survey. However, it did not arrange a survey for over a year after the first report, and there were further reports of leaks in February, May, and December 2023. It is the Ombudsman’s view that the landlord could have arranged a survey sooner. Had it done this, it could have found the cause sooner. In mitigation, there do not appear to have been any reports of a leak between May and December 2023.
  10. In her complaint on 13 March 2024 the resident said rainwater leaks had affected the bedroom for over a year. She said after the survey, the landlord had put up scaffolding and told her it would do repairs, but she was still waiting for the landlord to do them. She said it was unpleasant sleeping in a room with a leak, and she wanted the landlord to fix the leak.
  11. The landlord’s complaint response on 20 March 2024 said it had scheduled the work as a planned repair, and it was due to complete the work that day. It apologised for inconvenience caused and offered £100 compensation for the time taken to repair the roof.
  12. The Ombudsman has seen the landlord did the repairs a month after the survey. This was reasonable, as the landlord did the work as a planned repair, which it needed to do within 42 working days. However, the resident had reported leaks over a year before.
  13. In the time since the first report, the resident had experienced rainwater coming into the bedroom that affected the light. She also had to report the leak several times, which caused inconvenience. It is the Ombudsman’s view that the landlord could have done a survey sooner, and the failure to do this sooner caused inconvenience. It was reasonable for the landlord to apologise, but the compensation offered at this time was not sufficient considering the inconvenience caused.
  14. The resident escalated her complaint on 7 May 2024. She said the compensation was not enough. In its final response on 18 June 2024, the landlord said it acted quickly after each report. However, it accepted the leak came back, which meant the resident had to deal with the effect of the leak again. It accepted there had been failures and apologised for the distress and inconvenience these caused. It offered £450 compensation, which included:
    1. £150 for the inconvenience of having to report the leak more than once.
    2. £300 for the delay in fixing the roof correctly and the time taken between the first report and when the landlord completed the repairs.
  15. It is the Ombudsman’s view that it was reasonable for the landlord to acknowledge there had been failures in its final response. It is clear the landlord responded to individual reports of leaks and there is no evidence the leak was a continual problem. However, the leaks happened when it rained and there was a substantial delay in finding the cause. In August 2025 the resident told the Ombudsman the leaks caused her stress as the bedroom was not usable when it rained. She said she had to use buckets catch rainwater. She also said there was no light in the bedroom for long periods and a family member had to sleep in the living room because of the leaks.
  16. It is clear the landlord’s failures caused inconvenience for the resident. The landlord accepted the resident repeatedly had to report the leak and apologised for the inconvenience this caused. It offered £150 compensation for this. It accepted there had been a delay in doing the correct repairs and offered £300 compensation for this. It also apologised for the distress caused. However, it did not offer compensation for this.
  17. It is the Ombudsman’s view that there was service failure as the landlord did not do a survey in a reasonable time. This delay caused distress for the resident, as she had to deal with the effects of repeated leaks. Because of this, in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, the landlord must pay the resident a further £100 compensation for distress caused.

The landlord’s response to damage to personal property

  1. The landlord’s website sets out its position when a resident claims their possessions have been damaged. It says a resident may make an insurance claim but would need to prove the landlord was responsible for the damage. It says the resident needs to fill out an insurance form and send it to the landlord.
  2. In her complaint on 13 March 2024 the resident said the leak had damaged a mattress and flooring. She wanted compensation for the damage.
  3. In its complaint response on 20 March 2024 the landlord told the resident she could make an insurance claim and sent her details of how to do this.
  4. On 2 May 2024 the resident told the landlord that contractors had damaged a CCTV camera. The landlord responded on 3 May 2024 and said it was sorry to hear about the damage, and it had asked its contractor to arrange a visit. The resident responded and said the £100 compensation offered in the complaint response did not cover the damage caused to the mattress and flooring. The landlord replied and said it had awarded the £100 compensation for the delay to the repairs. It said it had told the resident to make a claim for damage through its insurance.
  5. The resident escalated his complaint on 3 May 2024 and said the compensation was not enough. In its final response on 18 June 2024 the landlord said the resident would need to make an insurance claim. It said it had previously sent him a form and gave him details of where to send it.
  6. The Ombudsman has found the landlord gave information to the resident 3 times between 20 March and 18 June 2024 on how to make an insurance claim. It is the Ombudsman’s view that the landlord acted reasonably. Because of this, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its response to a report of damage to personal items.

The landlord’s complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy says it will respond to a complaint in 10 working days. When a resident escalates their complaint, it will send a response in 20 working days. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
  2. The resident first complained about a leak affecting her home on 13 March 2024. The landlord sent a response on 20 March 2024, which was in line with the timescales in its policy.
  3. However, on 2 May 2024 the resident told the landlord she had not received a response. The landlord replied on 3 May 2024 and said it had already sent a response and sent the resident a copy. The landlord has provided the Ombudsman with a copy of a complaint response dated 20 March 2024. The Ombudsman has seen that the landlord sent the response to the email address the resident used when she complained. The Ombudsman has found it was reasonable for the landlord to use this email address.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint on 7 May 2024, and the landlord sent its final response on 18 June 2024. This was 30 working days later and outside the timescales in the landlord’s complaints policy.
  5. In its final response the landlord apologised for the delay in sending its final response and offered £50 compensation for the failure.
  6. The Ombudsman has found that this was a minor failure and the apology and offer of compensation were reasonable redress in the circumstances.

Determination

  1. In line with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was:
    1. Service failure by the landlord in its response to the resident’s report of a roof leak and the handling of remedial repairs.
    2. No maladministration by the landlord on its response to damage to personal property.
  2. In line with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord on its handling of the associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Order

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord must pay the resident £550 compensation for the failures in its response to a roof leak and the handling of remedial repairs. This is inclusive of the £450 compensation previously offered. It must pay compensation directly to the resident and not offset it against any arrears.

Recommendation

  1. The Ombudsman recommends the landlord reoffers the £50 previously offered for compliant handling failures if it has not already paid it to the resident.