London Borough of Redbridge (202447036)

Decision
Case ID	202447036
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	London Borough of Redbridge
Landlord type	Local Authority
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	28 November 2025

Background

1. The resident occupies a 2-bedroom ground-floor flat in a block. She lives there with her mother and 3 young children. The resident has health conditions, including cancer and fibromyalgia. She reported problems with damp and mould, which the landlord inspected. A damp and mould survey in October 2023 recommended works that would require the household to be temporarily moved. During the repairs and complaints process, the resident’s mother also communicated with the landlord. We have referred to both as “the resident” in this report. 

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould.
3. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Our decision (determination)

4. There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to reports of damp and mould.
5. There was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Summary of reasons

Damp and mould

6. While a survey identified works that required a temporary move, the landlord did not offer a property until almost one year later and did not effectively communicate with the resident during this time.

Complaint handling

7. There was a delay in issuing the final stage 2 response. Although the landlord apologised, this remedy alone was insufficient to put right the detriment caused by the delay.

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	Compensation order   The landlord must pay the resident £375 made up of: £300 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay in offering a temporary move to another property £75 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its complaint handling   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

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
20 February 2025	We contacted the landlord after the resident told us there was mould throughout her property and that she wanted to move. She was concerned about the household’s health and said personal belongings had been damaged by mould. The landlord treated this as a complaint.
6 March 2025	The landlord issued its stage 1 response. It partially upheld the complaint, apologising for poor service and communication. It outlined the timeline of damp and mould reports and confirmed a mould survey on 9 October 2023 recommended works requiring a temporary move. 2 alternative properties were offered, but they were refused. It confirmed moving costs would be covered if she agreed to be temporarily moved, but repairs could not proceed until the property was vacated.
10 March 2025	We asked the landlord to provide its final stage 2 response, which it acknowledged the next day.
14 July 2025	The landlord issued its final stage 2 response and did not uphold the complaint. It confirmed that works were needed to resolve damp and mould issues in the property, which required the household to be temporarily moved. It explained that delays occurred because the resident declined the properties offered. It stressed that the temporary move was essential to protect the household’s health and safety and asked the resident to contact her housing officer to discuss available options.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s final response. She explained that she had delayed cancer treatment given the situation and believed the proposed works would not fix the damp and mould, and wanted a permanent move.

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	Reports of damp and mould
Finding	Maladministration

What we’ve not investigated

8. The resident told us the household’s health was affected by the damp and mould. It would be fairer, more reasonable and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We’ve not investigated this further. We can however decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
9. The evidence shows the resident first reported damp and mould in September 2022 but did not raise a formal complaint until February 2025. It would have been reasonable for the resident to pursue the matter sooner. The significant delay affects our ability to reliably assess the circumstances surrounding the earlier events. Therefore, this investigation will focus on events from the October 2023 survey up to the landlord’s final response in July 2025.

What we’ve investigated

10. The resident reported damp and mould in her property, saying her personal belongings had been damaged. She wanted to move because of overcrowding and said she had been told she would be charged if she did not remove her items.
11. The October 2023 survey recommended extensive works, including lining walls with a damp-proof membrane, installing thermal boards and adding air vents.
12. There was no follow-up after the October 2023 survey, and the landlord did not explain the findings, its decant process, or what to expect, leaving the resident uninformed for most of 2024. A temporary property was not offered until around November 2024. This lack of communication caused uncertainty about the landlord’s plans.
13. A suitable property offered in November 2024 was refused by the resident because of safety concerns. Another property offered in May 2025 was declined as the resident wanted a permanent move.
14. After the formal complaint, the landlord consistently explained that a permanent move was not possible but signposted options and gave advice on how to facilitate a move. While the landlord was initially slow to offer a suitable property, her repeated refusals were a mitigating factor.
15. On 14 April 2025, the resident said overcrowding worsened conditions and affected her health and wellbeing. She noted upcoming cancer treatment and asked for urgent help to move furniture, clarity on works, compensation, and support during treatment.
16. The landlord acknowledged her health concerns, offered assistance, and allowed time before proposing another temporary property a month later. This was reasonable given her ongoing complaints and health issues. The evidence shows the landlord engaged with other departments in the local council and worked with the resident to explore options for a move. Indeed, in May 2025, internal emails show the landlord considered the resident’s need for a larger property and sought medical details to present to a panel, indicating willingness to assist.
17. In its formal responses, the landlord explained that extensive works were required and the property needed to be vacant. It proposed a temporary move, but the resident refused all offers and insisted on a permanent move. It warned that legal action might be taken so the works could proceed. It confirmed she would not be charged for moving items and provided an insurance claim form for damaged belongings, and also offered to cover moving, removal, and storage costs, in line with its decant procedure.
18. In her referral to us, the resident told us that she felt threatened the landlord was considering taking legal action against her. While we recognise this would be distressing, it was reasonable and proportionate for the landlord to state it may consider legal action in its final response given her health concerns and reluctance to accept offered properties. This was in line with its decant procedure.
19. The landlord delayed acting on survey recommendations and failed to respond with the urgency required, despite young children living in the property. For most of 2024, it managed expectations poorly, often taking action only when prompted, leaving the resident frustrated and unaware of progress. Its final response did not acknowledge these delays or offer any remedy.
20. Although this did not change the overall outcome, the landlord required the household to move temporarily, which the resident declined. We have ordered compensation to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s inaction and poor communication following the October 2023 survey.

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Service failure

21. The landlord issued its stage 1 response within 10 working days, in line with its complaints policy and our Complaint Handling Code. On 10 March 2025, we asked the landlord for its stage 2 response by 14 April 2025.
22. However, the landlord missed this deadline. It eventually issued its final stage 2 response on 14 July 2025 – over 80 working days later and far beyond its policy timescale of 20 working days. This was an unreasonable delay and likely frustrated the resident who felt her concerns were being ignored.
23. During this period, it did not communicate any delays to the resident contrary to its complaints procedure which says residents must be informed with a clear explanation for the reasons for the delay and when the landlord would respond by.
24. Although the landlord apologised for the delay in its final response, the apology alone was not enough given the length of the delay. To reflect the frustration caused by these complaint handling failures, we have made an order of compensation.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

25. In this case, the landlord’s record keeping was satisfactory.

Communication

26. The landlord should ensure timely progress updates and maintain regular communication with residents throughout its decant process to prevent uncertainty and distress.
27. The landlord must adhere to its published response times. If delays are unavoidable, it should clearly explain the reasons and provide a revised response date to manage expectations and maintain trust.